Film History 1
W51 101
Semester One 2009-2010
Convenor: Dr Paul Grainge
Co-tutor: Dr Ian Brookes
Level 1
University of Nottingham
School of American & Canadian Studies/Institute of Film & Television
Studies
Module Title:
Film History 1
Module Code:
W51 101
Credits:
20
Level:
1
Year:
2009-10
Semester:
Autumn
Tutor(s): Dr Paul Grainge (module convenor) - Office (Trent B75)
E-mail: paul.grainge@nottingham.ac.uk Tel. 951 4944
Dr Ian Brookes – Office (Trent B48)
E-mail: ian.brookes@nottingham.ac.uk Tel: 8466591
Office Hours:
See office doors for sign up times
Description of Module:
This module has two general goals. The first is to introduce students to some
aspects of the narrative history of cinema, from its origins in the 1890s to World
War II. This is a period of over 50 years, and a period of enormous
experimentation and innovation, with parts of “the story” taking place all over
the world. The module will look at the rise of Hollywood as the dominant filmproducing centre, but will also consider other regional developments and
alternative cinemas, from Soviet Montage and German Expressionism to French
surrealism and British documentary.
The second goal of the module is to introduce students to historical method and
the idea of historiography. To this end, the course will provide examples of
different critical approaches to film history. This will include examples of
aesthetic history, social history, national cinema history, exhibition history,
marketing history, censorship history, and technological history. In each case,
specific case examples and materials will be used to examine the various kinds of
evidence used by film historians and the particular forms of knowledge these
produce.
Learning Outcomes
By the end of the module students should be able to:



identify and critically analyse key developments in the history of film
between 1895 and 1945
demonstrate an awareness of the practice of film history, including the
use of different forms of evidence.
work with primary and secondary materials and readings
Timetable of lectures, seminars and screenings:
Lecture: Monday 10-11 (Clive Granger A39)
Screening: Monday 11-1(Clive Granger A39)
Seminars: see below
Seminar
Seminar
Seminar
Seminar
1
2
3
4
Tuesday 12-1 Trent A46
Tuesday 2-3 Trent B65
Wednesday 10-11 Trent B65
Wednesday 11-12 Trent B65
Teaching and Learning Methods:
Each week there will be a mixture of lectures, film showings, and seminar work.
You are required to have seen the film and to have done the required reading
before each seminar. Some background reading from the suggested further
reading is also essential to the module.
The seminars are integral to the module. You are required to participate in
seminars. If you fail to do so, you will not be able to achieve a pass in your
participation mark. However, so long as you take your responsibilities seriously,
you can only be rewarded for your contributions.
The 10% ‘participation’ mark is based upon your overall performance in the
seminars (see ‘mode of assessment’ guide at the back of this booklet). This
takes account of your general contribution to seminar discussion, but is also
based on a ‘seminar task’ where you will be required in a small group to lead
discussion on a particular kind of primary evidence related to the week’s topic
and reading. All students in the seminar will come prepared to offer thoughts on
the primary evidence in these weeks but the groups assigned will steer the
discussion. (Groups will comprise of 2-4 people. In this case, you may wish to
divide the extracts or sources between you in focusing the discussion).
School Attendance Policy:
The School operates a strict attendance policy which is enforced on ALL modules
across ALL year groups. Seminar attendance is compulsory in this School.
Failure to attend, without notifying the module tutor and giving a valid reason
(illness or exceptional personal circumstances) BEFORE the class, wherever
possible, may (if repeated) result in a mark of zero for the module. Mistaking the
time and venue of a seminar, deadlines for other modules, problems with
transport, and family holidays, are NOT valid excuses.
Our procedures are as follows:
1) Any student who fails to attend either 2 consecutive seminars or 3
seminars in total on any module, will be contacted by the module tutor
and asked to provide a valid reason and supporting documentation for
their absences.
2) Any student who fails to respond within 7 days or to provide a satisfatory
explanation with supporting evidence, will be asked to see the Senior
Tutor for a meeting. Failure to provide an explanation and supporting
evidence at this stage will merit a final warning that any further absences
will result in a zero for the module.
3) Any student who misses 5 classes in total without supporting
documentation will be awarded a mark of zero for the module for failing
to fulfil their commitments to the course. At this stage, a letter will be
sent to the student’s term-time and home addresses informing them of
the School’s decision. Students who wish to appeal the decision will have
14 days from the date of this letter to produce supporting documentation
for their absences. No other forms of appeal will be accepted.
The implications of receiving a mark
Students will NOT be offered a resit
required to resit with residence the
next stage of their degree (thus adding
of zero for a module are very serious.
in the September period. They will be
following year before progressing to the
another year to their degee).
PLEASE NOTE: Students will be contacted about attendance matters in the first
instance via email. Failure to check these messages is not an acceptable reason
for failing to respond. If students have missed classes and have email problems
then they must come into the School to see the module tutor.
Assessment Mode and Weightings
1 essay of 2,500 words – 50%
1 exam (2 hours) – 40%
Participation – 10%
For information on the School’s Essay Guidelines, see
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/american/ugdocs/American_Studies_Film_Studies_U
G_Essay_Guidelines_0809.doc
Another useful resource designed to help first year students with basic
questions
about
essay
writing,
exams,
seminars,
is
www.nottingham.ac.uk/pathways
Deadlines for Submission:

The essay is due in on Wednesday 11th November (the middle of
week 7).

The date of the exam will be communicated once the January
exam timetable has been finalised.
Guidelines for Submission:
All assessed coursework for the School of American & Canadian Studies must be
submitted in two ways:
1. By electronic submission, through Turnitin
2. ONE paper copy to be handed in, either at the School Office, during Office
opening hours or, in the case of core modules, in Trent B76, at designated
times, together with the Turnitin submission receipt and a completed
essay coversheet.
Both electronic and paper submission must take place by 12.00 noon on
the deadline date. The Turnitin receipt must be printed out and submitted with
the paper copy. The paper ID number from the receipt must be recorded on the
essay coversheet.
The paper copy will NOT be accepted without a copy of the Turnitin receipt.
Penalty for late submission:
The usual penalty for lateness (5 marks per working day) will be applied to all
coursework which is not submitted both electronically to Turnitin and in paper
form by the deadline. Emailed coursework is not acceptable.
NB. Computer failure is not a valid reason for late submission of coursework.
Plagiarism:
The University regards cheating and plagiarism as serious academic offences.
A mark of ZERO is immediately awarded for the assessed work in question, and
more serious consequences can follow, including formal disciplinary action, and
ultimately, dismissal from the University.
Plagiarism is clearly defined in the Undergraduate Handbook for American &
Canadian Studies as:
“The substantial unacknowledged use of other people's work and the
submission of that work as though it were your own is regarded as
plagiarism and will be penalised heavily (see Essay Guidelines). This does not
mean you cannot make legitimate use of other resources. Essays generally involve
the citation of passages from books, articles, or other sources, either published or
unpublished. But whenever such a passage is quoted or paraphrased,
acknowledgement must be made in an appropriate manner. Also, collaboration with
others must be acknowledged. You are required to sign a statement (cover sheet)
that you have acknowledged any assistance or substantial use of the work of
others when you submit all your written work.”
The “other sources” include websites and internet information. You should check
with module tutors as to which websites are appropriate for your research. Please
note that cutting and pasting passages from websites constitutes plagiarism.
The handbook text continues:
“Copying material from another student's essay (written in a previous year, for
instance) or copying from any of your other pieces of written work also constitutes
plagiarism/ self-plagiarism. Should this be discovered, both you and the person
who knowingly supplied the copy will be penalised. If the supplier of the copy has
already graduated, a note of her/his offence will be put on her/his permanent
record in the School.”
“If you are concerned about what to cite and how to go about doing so, see the
School’s Essay Guidelines or consult your module tutor.”
Disability & Dyslexia Support:
The University of Nottingham is committed to promoting access for students who
have a disability, dyslexia and/or a long-term medical condition. Services
provided aim to enable students to fulfil the inherent requirements of the course
as independently as possible.
The University’s Disability Plan for Students: 2007-09, Disability
Statement and [dis]Ability Directory, which lists all the provision available at
the University, can be accessed from the Disability Policy Advisory Unit:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/disability/
It is your responsibility to ensure that the University is aware of your individual
requirements. If you have a disability, specific learning difficulty (such as
dyslexia) or long-term medical condition, you are urged to inform the School’s
Disability Liaison Officer (DLO) and/or your personal tutor.
DLO contact details are:
Stephanie Lewthwaite (Semester 1)
Room B51 Trent Building
Tel: 0115 8466458
Email: stephanie.lewthwaite@nottingham.ac.uk
Robin Vandome (Semester 2)
Room B50 Trent Building
Tel: 0115 8468356
Email: robin.vandome@nottingham.ac.uk
The DLO or personal tutor may refer you to Academic Support (based in
Portland Building). Academic Support, in Student Services, includes the
Disability and Dyslexia Support teams, and offers a range of academic and
practical support for all students. It incorporates a recognised ASSESSMENT
Centre for those who wish to apply for Disabled Students’ Allowances, carrying
out the assessments required by your LEA or funding body. Academic Support is
also responsible for making recommendations for alternative arrangements such
as those required in assessments, exams and for timetabling. Assistance can
also be given with regard to queries about adapted accommodation and
University provision of accessible transport.
Contact details are:
Tel:
+44 (0) 115 951 3710
Fax:
Minicom:
email:
Web:
+44 (0) 115 951 4376
+44 (0) 115 951 4378
studentservices@nottingham.ac.uk
www.nottingham.ac.uk/as
Please remember that letting us know what you might need at an early stage will
help us to help you.
Religious Observance:
The University respects the rights and religious views of its students. Students
who are unable to take examinations on a particular day during the published
examination periods for reasons of religious observance should complete and
return a Religious Observance Form by the published deadlines.
Full information on the University’s protocol relating to absence from an
examination for reason of religious observance can be found at:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/courses-office/examinations/index.htm
Module Feedback:
Feedback on all modules in the School is an ongoing and two-way process.
Feedback from your tutor(s) will include:
 Informal feedback, advice and ideas in seminar discussions
 Individual feedback, advice and ideas during appointments in office hours
 Individual written feedback on coursework (normally within three weeks of
submission)
 Response to email enquiries (normally within seven days)
 Generic feedback on exam performance communicated via the portal
If there are questions or concerns – or things that you really like – about the
module you can raise these in the following ways:
 Contact the module convenor (if appropriate)
 Contact your personal tutor
 Contact the student ombudsman (John.Fagg@nottingham.ac.uk)
 Pass your concerns to your SSFC rep
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/american/ugdocs/Undergraduate_Staff_Stu
dent_Feedback_Committee.php
 The module may also be subject to SET/SEM evaluation, in which case
you will have the opportunity to complete a detailed, anonymous
evaluation at the end of the semester.
Module Resources:
Together with library stocks and the books on short-loan, there are a number of
resources that you may find useful during the course. These include:
Films/DVDS: A range of films from the course - and beyond - can be signed out
and watched in Hallward library (NB. watching films in Hallward does not replace
the need to attend the scheduled weekly films screenings, which are
compulsory).
Useful Journals: The following film journals all publish articles on aspects of film
history and may be particularly useful when writing essays: Cinema Journal, Film
Quarterly, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Screen, Sight and
Sound, Velvet Light Trap. Some of the above, such as Cinema Journal and Film
Quarterly, can be accessed through the e-library gateway, and are searchable by
subject and year. For example, you may wish to look at a recent special issue in
Cinema Journal that focused on film history. If so, go to the portal, launch the elibrary gateway, and then select journals. Type in ‘C’ and find Cinema Journal
among the list. This will allow you to search particular issues. If you type in
volume 44, issue no. 1, year 2004, you will be able to access the section ‘In
Focus: Film History, or a Baedeker Guide to the Historical Turn.’
Cinema Pressbooks (Hallward Library microfilm, top floor): a collection of the
marketing materials used by studios in the 1930s to promote their films.
Electronic Sources: Aside from more conventional print sources (i.e. books,
journals, magazines, newspapers, archived paper holdings, etc), there now exist
many academic and non-academic sources of information about films on the
Internet. These should be handled with care. Although some are excellent and
authoritative, others are less so. Similarly, electronic publishing is now an
accepted and valued forum for academic debate, but some of what is out there
does not conform to accepted scholarly standards. When assessing the value of
material found on the Internet, therefore, it is best to be discriminating and to
question the nature of its source and authority. See below for some useful sites.
Web-based sites
American Memory Online Collections/Library of Congress (Extensive collection of
early cinema footage and materials)
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/collections/finder.html
Some Enchanted Evening: American Picture Palaces
http://xroads.virginia.edu/%7ECAP/PALACE/home.html
Neighbourhood picture palaces
http://www.losttheatres.org/
History of Moviegoing, Exhibition and Reception
http://www.homerproject.org/
Internet Movie Database (General film database with wide range of info,
including poster and marketing materials)
http://www.imdb.com/
British Film Institute Screen Online (Guide to British film and TV history)
http://www.screenonline.org.uk/
David Bordwell’s ‘website on cinema’
http://www.davidbordwell.net/
film sound
http://www.filmsound.org/
Moving Image Archive (contains thousands of digital movies which range from
classic full-length films, to daily alternative news broadcasts, to videos of every
genre uploaded by Archive users. Most of these movies are available for
download.
http://www.archive.org/details/movies
The Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research
www.wcftr.commarts.wisc.edu
The British Film Institute has a YouTube channel of its own where examples of
early cinema (and much more besides) are available
http://www.youtube.com/bfifilms
Moving Image Source Research Guide
http://www.movingimagesource.us/research. There are many really useful links
to full-text / audio-visual material, especially the Full-Length and Short Films
Online and Online Archives, Collections, and Exhibitions categories.
Internet journals
All of the following journals are well established, and many of them include links
to other relevant Internet sites, both academic and non-academic
Bright Lights Film Journal. www.brightlightsfilm.com/
Images. www.imagesjournal.com/
Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies www.scope.nottingham.ac.uk/
Screening the Past www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthepast
Senses of Cinema. www.senseofcinema.com
Jump Cut www.ejumpcut.org/home.html
Study Programme
This course is structured around a single textbook that combines a narrative
history of film with classic pieces of historical research - Paul Grainge, Mark
Jancovich and Sharon Monteith (eds), Film Histories: An Introduction and
Reader (Edinburgh University Press, 2007). The book is available in the
University bookshop. You are strongly recommended to buy this book and
you will be required to have done the reading assigned from the text every
week. You will also be expected to ‘read around’ weekly topics. Lists of
suggested further reading are provided each week, but do not feel limited to
this reading; you should feel free to explore the library and the much wider
general bibliography provided in Film Histories. Other general film history
surveys include:
Geoffrey Nowell-Smith, Oxford History of World Cinema, Oxford University
Press, 1999
David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson, Film History: An Introduction, New `
York: McGraw-Hill, 2003
Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice, New `
York: McGraw-Hill, 1985
Week 1
28th September
Lecture: Early Cinema and the Cinema of Attractions: Aesthetic History
Film Showing: a selection of early actualite films – shown in lecture/seminar
Reading:
Film Histories (FH) - Chapter 1, ‘The Emergence of Cinema’, including Tom
Gunning ‘The Cinema of Attractions.’
Suggested further reading:
Vanessa Toulmin et al, The Lost World of Mitchell and Kenyon: Edwardian
Britain on Film, London: BFI, 2005
Lee Grieveson and Peter Kramer (eds), The Silent Cinema Reader London:
Routledge, 2004
Richard Abel, The Ciné Goes to Town: French Cinema 1896-1914, Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1991
Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice, Boston:
McGRaw-Hill, 1985 (chapter on aesthetic film history)
Leo Charney and Vanessa R. Schwartz, Cinema and the Invention of Modern
Life, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995
Thomas Elsaesser, (ed), Early Cinema: Space, Frame, Narrative, London:
BFI, 1990
Charles Musser, The Emergence of Cinema: The American Screen to 1907,
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990
Simon Popple, Joe Kember, Early Cinema, Wallflower 2004.
Week 2
5th October
Lecture: Regulating Cinema: Audiences and the Social History of Film
Film Showing: Silent Shakespeare (1908-1909) – shown in lecture (plus
demonstration of the Historical New York Times).
Reading:
FH: Chapter 2, ‘Organising Early Film Audiences,’ including Lee Grieveson,
‘Why the Audience Mattered in Chicago in 1907’.
Seminar task: Working with sources (discursive materials)
Go onto the webCT and find the ‘Nickel Theatre’ and ‘Report on Censorship’
documents. The first is a poem on ‘The Nickel Theatre’ published in The New
York Times in 1907, and the other is a ‘Report of Censorship of Motion
Pictures’ published in 1913. In light of your reading this week, compare the
two documents and consider the following:
i) What can we learn about early cinema from these documents?
ii) What assumptions are made about cinema and the cinemagoing audience?
Suggested further reading:
Lee Grieveson and Peter Kramer (eds), The Silent Cinema Reader London:
Routledge, 2004
Richard Maltby, Melvyn Stokes and Richard Allen, (eds) Going to the Movies:
The Social Experience of Cinema, Exeter: Exeter UP, 2007.
Eileen Bowser, The Transformation of Cinema, Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1990
Lee Grieveson, Policing Cinema: Movies and Censorship in Early TwenteithCentury America, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004
Charlie Keil and Shelley Stamp (eds) American Cinema’s Transitional Era,
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005
Annette Kuhn, Cinema, Censorship and Sexuality, 1909-1925, London:
Routledge, 1988
Melvyn Stokes and Richard Maltby (eds), American Movie Audiences: From
the Turn of the Century to the Early Sound Era, London: BFI, 1999
Miriam Hansen, Babel and Babylon: Spectatorship in American Silent Film,
Cambridge, Harvard UP, 1991
William Uricchio and Roberta Pearson, Reframing Culture: The Case of the
Vitagraph Quality Films, Princeton UP, 1993
Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice,
(chapter on social film history)
Kathy Peiss, Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-ofthe-Century New York, Philadelphia: Temple UP, 1987.
Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice, New `
York: McGraw-Hill, 1985 (see chapter on social history)
Richard Butsch, The Making of American Audiences: From Stage to
Television, 1750-1990 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000
Week 3
12th October
Lecture: The Development of Film Style: Aesthetic Norms
Film Showing: Broken Blossoms (1919)
Reading:
FH – Chapters 3 and 4, including Janet Staiger, ‘Mass-Produced Photoplays:
Economic and Signifying Practices in the First Years of Hollywood’
Suggested further reading:
David Bordwell, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson, The Classical Hollywood
Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960, London:
Routledge, 1985
David Bordwell, On the History of Film Style, Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1997
David Bordwell, Narration in the Fiction Film, London: Methuen, 1985
Douglas Gomery, The Hollywood Studio System, London: BFI, 2005
Lea Jacobs, ‘Belasco, DeMille and the Development of Lasky Lighting,’ Film
History 5 (4) 1993: pp. 405-18.
Paul Kerr, (ed), The Hollywood Film Industry, London: Routledge, 1986.
Henry Jenkins, “Historical Poetics” in Joanne Hollows and Mark Jancovich,
eds., Approaches to Popular Film, Manchester: Manchester UP, 1995.
Week 4
19th October
Lecture: The Dream Palace: Exhibition History
Film Showing: Safety Last (1923)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 5, The Age of the Dream Palace and the Rise of the Star
System, including Douglas Gomery, ‘The Rise of National Theatre Chains’
Seminar task: Working with sources (visual evidence)
Use the ‘Some Enchanted Evening: American Picture Palaces’ and
‘Neighbourhood Picture Palaces’ websites to compare different kinds of movie
theatre/experience in the 1910s/1920s (NB. In making a comparison, it may
be useful to concentrate on an aspect of the ‘palace tour’ in the Picture
Palace site and to choose one or a couple of theatres on the Somerville site).
In your comparison, you may wish to consider the following:
i) Do there seem to be architectural differences between big-city picture
palaces and local neighbourhood cinemas as illustrated by the two websites?
ii) Do cinemas address audiences in similar or different ways?
iii) What points or observations would you make in comparing some of the
visual evidence on offer about picture palaces and neighbourhood theatres?
Suggested further reading:
Richard Maltby, Melvyn Stokes and Richard Allen, eds) Going to the Movies:
The Social Experience of Cinema, Exeter: Exeter UP, 2007
Katherine Fuller-Seeler (ed), Hollywood in the Neighbourhood, Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2008
Douglas Gomery, Shared Pleasures: A History of Movie Presentation in the
United States, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992
Ina Rae Hark, Exhibition, The Film Reader, London: Routledge, 2002
Mark Jancovich and Lucy Faire with Sarah Stubbings, The Place of the
Audience: Cultural Geographies of Film Consumption, London: BFI,
2003
Gregory Waller, Main Street Amusements, Washington: Smithsonian, 1995
Gregory Waller, Movie Going in America, Oxford: Blackwell, 2001
Jane Gaines, ‘Dream/Factory,’ in Christine Gledhill and Linda Williams,
Reinventing Film Studies, London: Arnold, 2000
Stuart Hanson, From Silent Screen to Multi-Screen: A History of Cinema
Exhibition in Britain Since 1896, Manchester UP, 2007
Week 5
26th October
Lecture: Hollywood and its Alternatives 1
Film Showing: The Cabinet of Dr Caligari (1920)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 6, Competing with Hollywood: National Film Industries outside
Hollywood, including Thomas Elsaesser, ‘Social Mobility and the Fantastic:
German Silent Cinema’.
Suggested further reading:
Thomas Elsaesser, Weimar Cinema and After, London: Routledge, 2000.
Mike Budd (ed), The Cabinet of Dr Caligari: Texts, Contexts, New Brunswick:
Rutgers UP, 1990
James Donald (ed) Fantasy and the Cinema, London: BFI, 1990
Lotte Eisner, The Haunted Screen (1969)
Week 6
2nd November
Lecture: The Coming of Sound: Technological History
Film Showing: M (1931)
Reading:
FT – Chapter 7 – The Rise of the Studios and the Coming of Sound, including
Mark Jancovich and Lucy Faire, ‘Translating the Talkies: Diffusion, Reception
and Live Performance’
Seminar task: Working with sources (critical reception)
Go onto the webCT and find the ‘reception of sound’ document. This includes
three different extracts from essays published in Close Up, an Englishlanguage avant-garde cinema journal published out of Zurich, but backed
with British money. In light of your reading this week, compare the extracts
(two written extracts and one cartoon) and consider the following:
i) What do these different pieces of evidence suggest about European
responses to the coming of sound films?
ii) How do they help us think about the diffusion of film sound?
Suggested further reading:
Rick Altman, Silent Film Sound, New York: Columbia UP, 2004
Rick Altman, Sound Theory, Sound Practice, New York: Routledge, 1992
Donald Crafton, The Talkies: American Cinema’s Transition to Sound, 19261931, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997.
James Lastra, Sound Technology and the American Cinema, New York:
Columbia UP, 2000
Steve Neale, Cinema and Technology: Image, Sound, Colour, London:
Macmillan, 1985
Richard Abel and Charles Altman (eds.), “Global Experiments in Early
Synchronous Sound” (Special Issue of Film History: volume 11,
number 4, 1999).
Robert Allen and Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice,
(chapter on technological film history)
Week 7
9th November
Lecture: Documentary and Experimental Cinemas
Film Showing: Night Mail (1934), Un Chien Andalou (1929), À propos de
Nice (1930).
Reading:
FH – Chapter 8, Realism, Nationalism and ‘Film Culture’, including Haidee
Wasson, ‘Writing the Cinema into Daily Life: Iris Barry and the Emergence of
British Film Criticism in the 1920s’
Suggested further reading:
Ian Aitken (ed.), The Documentary Film Movement: an Anthology,
Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1998
Dana Polan, The Political Language of Film and the Avant-Garde
Brian Winston, Claiming the Real: the Griersonian Documentary and its
Legitimations, London: BFI, 1995
William Alexander, Film on the Left: American Documentary from 1931-1942
Scott McDonald, Avant-garde Film: Motion Studies, Cambridge: Cambridge
UP, 1993
James Donald et al, Close Up, 1927-1933: Cinema and Modernism, London:
Cassell, 1998.
Catherine Fowler (ed.) The European Cinema Reader London: Routledge,
2002.
Week 8
16th November
Lecture: Publicity and Promotion: Marketing History
Film Showing: King Kong (1933)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 9, Adjustment, Depression and Regulation, including Cynthia
Erb, ‘From Novelty to Romance: King Kong’s Promotional Campaign’
Seminar Task: Working with sources (marketing materials)
Use an electronic resource such as the Internet Movie Database to find a
piece of evidence that helps investigate the marketing and promotion of film
in the 1930s. Be prepared to display your example using the computer in the
seminar room and, in light of this week’s reading, comment on the following:
i) Why is your evidence useful?
ii) What questions does it ask?
iii) What does it reveal in industrial, aesthetic or cultural terms?
Suggested further reading:
Cynthia Erb, Tracking King Kong: A Hollywood Icon in World Culture,
Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1998
Rhona Berenstein, Attack of the Leading Ladies, New York: Columbia
University Press, 1995
Lisa Kernan, Coming Attractions: Reading American Movie Trailers, Austin:
University of Texas Press, 2004.
Jane Gaines, ‘Dream/Factory,’ in Christine Gledhill and Linda Williams (eds),
Reinventing Film Studies, London: Edward Arnold, 2000.
Mary Beth Haralovich, ‘Advertising Heterosexuality’ Screen 23 (2) 1982, pp.
50-60.
Richard Maltby, ‘Sticks, Hicks and Flaps: Classical Hollywood’s Generic
Conception of its Audiences,’ in Melvyn Stokes and Richard Maltby,
Identifying Hollywood’s Audiences: Cultural Identity and the Movies
London: BFI, 1999
Janet Staiger, ‘Announcing Wares, Winning Patrons, Voicing Ideals: Thinking
about the History and Theory of Film Advertising’, Cinema Journal, 29
(3) 1990: 3-31.
Week 9
23rd November
Lecture: Hollywood and its Alternatives 2
Film Showing: Battleship Potemkin (1925)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 10, Totalitarianism, Dictatorship and Propaganda, including
Richard Taylor, ‘Ideology as Mass Entertainment: Boris Shumyatsky and
Soviet Cinema in the 1930s’
Suggested further reading:
David Bordwell, The Cinema of Eiseinstein, Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1993.
Sergei Eiseinstein “The Cinematographic Principle and the Ideogram” in
Gerald Mast,, Marshall Cohen and Leo Braudy (eds.) Film Theory and
Criticism , 4th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992)
Jay Leyda, Kino: The History of Russian and Soviet Film, Princeton:
Princeton UP, 1983
R Taylor and I Christie (eds.), Inside the Film Factory: New Approaches to
Russian and Soviet Film, London: Routledge, 1988.
Judith Mayne, Kino and the Woman Question: Feminism and Soviet Silent
Film
Week 10
30th November
Lecture: The Business of Entertainment
Film Showing: Sullivan’s Travels (1941)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 11, The Common People, Historical Drama and Preparations for
War, including Tino Balio, ‘Columbia Pictures: The Making of a Major Motion
Picture, 1930-1943’
Suggested further reading:
Tino Balio, ed., The Grand Design: Hollywood as a Modern Business
Enterprise, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993
Ruth Vasey, The World According to Hollywood, 1918-1939, Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press, 1995
Kristin Thompson, Exporting Entertainment: America in the World Film
Market, 1907-1934, London: BFI, 1985
Thomas Schatz, The Genius of the System: Hollywood filmmaking in the
Studio era, London: Faber, 1988
Richard Maltby, Hollywood Cinema, Oxford: Blackwell, 2003, chapter 1 and
2.
Richard Dyer, Only Entertainment, London: Routledge, 1992
Week 11
7th December
Lecture: Censorship, Regulation and Propaganda
Film Showing: Casablanca (1942)
Reading:
FH – Chapter 12, Wartime, Unity and Alienation, including Clayton R. Koppes
and Gregory D. Black ‘What to Show the World: The Office of War
Information and Hollywood, 1942-1945’
Seminar task: Working with sources (censorship materials)
Go onto webCT and find the ‘Motion Picture Production Code’ document.
Consider this document and be prepared to comment on the following:
i) What elements or sections interest you in particular, and why?
ii) How might the Production Code have a bearing on film content, character
or narrative?
iii) What kind of consensus does the Production Code establish for
appropriate entertainment?
Suggested further reading:
Matthew Bernstein, Controlling Hollywood: Censorship and Regulation in the
Studio Era, New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 1999
Koppes, Clayton R, and Gregory D. Black, Hollywood Goes to War: How
Politics, Profits and Propaganda Shaped World War II Movies, New
York: Macmillan, 1987
Robert Fyne, The Hollywood propaganda of World War II, Lanham, Md.
: Scarecrow Press, 1997
Thomas Doherty, Projections of War: Hollywood, American culture, and World
War II, New York : Columbia University Press, c1993
The Hays Code:
Richard Maltby, “The Production Code and the Hays Office” in Tino Balio, ed.,
The Grand Design: Hollywood as a Modern Business Enterprise,
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993
Richard Maltby, “The King of Kings and the Czar of All the Rushes: The
Propriety of the Christ Story”, in Screen, 31 (2) 1990
Richard Maltby, “Baby Face or How Joe Breen Made Barbara Stanwyck Atone
for Causing the Wall Street Crash” in Screen, 27 (2), March-April 1986.
Lea Jacobs, The Wages of Sin: Censorship and the Fallen Woman Film, 19281942, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991
Essay questions
Answer ONE of the questions below with reference to a specific period within
the history of film prior to 1945.
1. ‘Early film is less a seed bed for later styles than a place of rupture, a
period that showed more dissimilarity than continuity with later film style’
(Tom Gunning, ‘Now you see it, now you don’t: the temporality of the cinema
of attractions’ in Lee Grieveson and Peter Kramer (eds), The Silent Cinema
Reader). Discuss the comment with reference to one of more examples of
early cinema.
2. To what degree can the moral panics surrounding the rise of the movies,
in particular the nickelodeons, be seen as an attempt to regulate and exert
social control over popular audiences?
3. It was natural and inevitable that narrative (“story”) films should have
come to dominate film production over other possible uses of the medium.
Discuss.
4. ‘The historical similarities between the movie palace and the department
store can be never stressed enough’ (Jane Gaines, ‘Dream/Factory,’ in
Christine Gledhill and Linda Williams, Reinventing Film Studies). Discuss
with reference to the development of film exhibition and the experience of
cinema-going in the 1910 and/or 1920s.
5. With reference to a specific case, assess the relationship between film and
the idea of national cinema.
6. To avoid falling into the trap of technological determinism in film history,
the diffusion of a technology is as important to consider as its innovation.
Discuss with reference to the 'coming of sound'.
The essay is due in on Wednesday 11th November (the middle of week
7).
SCHOOL OF AMERICAN AND CANADIAN STUDIES
SEMINAR ASSESSMENT
1
more than two unexplained absences
2
1-2 unexplained absences
3
1-2 unexplained absences and preparation
OR full attendance
4
1-2 unexplained absences, preparation and some contributions
OR full attendance and preparation
5
1-2 unexplained absences, preparation and regular contributions
OR full attendance, preparation and some contributions
6
1-2 unexplained absences, preparation and frequent contributions
OR full attendance, preparation, and regular contributions
7
1-2 unexplained absences, preparation, frequent contributions and an ability to enable other
students
OR full attendance, preparation and frequent contributions
8
1-2 unexplained absences, preparation, frequent contributions, an ability to enable other
students and active initiation of group discussions
OR full attendance, preparation and an ability to enable other students
9
1-2 unexplained absences and a continual and outstanding contribution to the seminar group
as a whole
OR full attendance, preparation, frequent contributions, an ability to enable other students
and active initiation of group discussions
10
full attendance, and a continual and outstanding contribution to the seminar group as a whole
SCHOOL OF AMERICAN & CANADIAN STUDIES GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR
BOTH COURSEWORK AND EXAMINATIONS
Learning
outcomes
85
Argument and understanding
Sources and evidence
Written communication
A work of genuine cogency and
originality
Insightful; perceptive; intellectual
vigour; considerable originality;
depth of understanding directly
addressed to the question; very
coherent synthesis of ideas; very
high level of subject mastery;
critical and thorough understanding
of key concepts
Insightful; perceptive; some
originality; depth of understanding
directly addressed to the question;
coherent synthesis of ideas; critical
and thorough understanding of key
concepts
Little additional research needed
to warrant publication
A very wide range of sources
consulted, demonstrating
excellent search skills; sources
used with discrimination;
excellent judgement shown in
assessment of evidence;
sophisticated use of examples;
independence of judgement
A wide range of sources
consulted; sources used with
discrimination; sound assessment
of evidence; sophisticated use of
examples
A rare combination of intellect and elegance
70
Well argued and well considered but
lacking orginality
65-69
Proficient
standard
Good understanding directly
addressed to the question; good
synthesis of ideas; good
understanding of key concepts
Well selected range of sources
with some signs of sophistication
in their selected use
Well selected range of sources
consulted; careful assessment of
evidence; good use of examples
60-64
This answer would develop a logical
argument with perception,
expository skill, balance, and a
degree of insight which lifts it above
the sound and competent level
which, in general, characterises a 2.2
answer.
This answer would show a good
ability to handle concepts as well
as a good range of sources
consulted but could be extended
further to provide evidence of
additional connections and
independent research.
Good typography and layout; in general,
good expression but there maybe some
unnecessary errors of grammar as well as
perhaps some inconsistencies with
structure. A good and thorough use of the
bibliography.
55-59
Majority at a
competent
standard
Competent understanding addressed
to the question; fair understanding
of key concepts; some weaknesses
of understanding and knowledge but
not in significant areas
A range of sources consulted;
some careful assessment of
evidence; some appropriate
examples
Adequate typography and layout;
expression such that the meaning is
generally understandable; few serious errors
of grammar; inconsistent citation and
bibliography with significant omissions
50-54
This answer would display a
satisfactory level of relevance and
knowledge but is often weakened by
a lack of focus.
Some good source material which
is not analysed in great depth and
with limited use of appropriate
examples
Acceotable typography and layout; some
grammatical errors and loose or wordy
expression.
80
Exemplary
standard
75 Excellent
standard
Exemplary typography and layout;
felicitous expression; no errors of grammar;
sophisticated vocabulary; structured
appropriately to the purposes of the
assignment; exemplary citation and
bibliography according to a standard
convention
Excellent typography and layout; lucid
expression; no errors of grammar;
sophisticated vocabulary; structured
appropriately to the purposes of the
assignment; exemplary citation and
bibliography according to a standard
convention
Good to excellent typography with some
stylistic infelicities; exemplary citation
practice
Good typography and layout; good
expression; few errors of grammar;
appropriate use of vocabulary; wellstructured; accurate and full citation and
bibliography
45-49
Acceptable
standard
Only partly addressed to the
question; lacking in synthesis of
ideas; tendency to description rather
than analysis; limited understanding
of key concepts
Restricted range of sources
consulted; only basic
understanding of evidence;
limited range of examples,
sometimes inappropriate ones
Poor typography and layout; considerable
number of grammatical errors; limited
vocabulary; inaccurate citation and
bibliography with significant omissions
This answer would adopt a
descriptive approach based on
superficial knowledge
Very limited use of sources
consulted; inconsistent
understanding of evidence;
inclusion of none to few
examples; some irrelevant
material
Minimal range of sources
consulted; very limited
understanding of evidence;
minimal range use of examples;
little use of sources beyond direct
paraphrase of lectures, easily
available texts or web pages
Highly derivative
Inadequate typography and layout; errors of
organisation so that the essay has very little
obvious focus or argument; ambiguously
written so its main area of discussion
remains unclear.
Little attempt to support any
assertions; no use of sources
beyond direct paraphrase of
lectures or easily available texts
or web pages;
No attempt to support assertions;
some plagiarism and/or
collusion*
Poor grammar and vocabulary makes it
difficult to decipher any intended meaning;
no citation; no relevant bibliography
Considerable plagiarism and/or
collusion*
Short answer; note form; mostly
incomprehensible
40-44
35 Marginal
Weak structure; largely irrelevant to
set question; considerable
misunderstanding of key concepts
30 Below
standard
Substandard and misconceived in its
approach
20-29 Well
below
passable
standard
Only marginally addresses the
question; fundamental
misunderstanding of key concepts;
mostly irrelevant; no line of
argument
Few relevant elements; only
fragmentary arguments; only slight
evidence of understanding of key
concepts
No evidence of learning anything
from the unit, although there may be
elements derived from general
knowledge
10-19 Very
few learning
outcomes
met
1-10 Far
from
meeting any
learning
outcome
0
Poor presentation; numerous and significant
grammatical errors; significantly restricted
vocabulary; inadequate citation and
bibliography
Poor presentation; significant grammatical
errors; highly restricted vocabulary; little or
no citation and incomplete bibliography
Poor grammar and vocabulary makes it very
difficult to understand the intended meaning
No work submitted or extensive plagiarism and/or collusion*