Informatronsphere’s Blog

Just another weblog


History of cinema, especially Hollywood cinema is often seen as linear.  Somewhere in the 1820’s Joseph Nicéphore Niépce took a first photograph. Then, the Lumiere Brothers shot the first “movie” in 1895. Then Hollywood appeared.  Fordistic style of production began. Creating movies like on assembly line, it created genres, rules of the game.

Today we go to the cinema, watch action movies, melodramas, romantic comedies like there’s nothing more to cinema than Armageddon or Titanic.

Those who are really passionate about the history of cinema will know that the most commonly used and mentioned history is not the only history.

The existence of movements such as Soviet Montage or French Avant-garde (Surrealism most notably) in the post WWI Europe proves the inherently ambiguous structure of any work of art. One cannot judge art by the number of “art history” books that he read, nor can he judge film production and diversity by the number of mediocre (at best) movies that end up in our local multiplexes.

Artistic diversity’s modus operandi is the constant re-shifting between the mainstream and the “obscure”, unpopular and popular.  In that sense, experimental faze of Man Ray or Bunuel will help me detect the way we talk about art.

My aim is to look at Lev Manovich’s project “Soft Cinema” today, and to compare it to other movements in the history of art. Thesis is that, despite the new technology and it’s advances, the aim of the artist remains pretty much the same. The only thing that changes is means of representation.


March 30, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment