The Sins of the Pioneers: Chapter Analysis from “Film as Film”
In Film as Film: Understanding and Judging Movies, V.F. Perkins offers a compelling critique of orthodox film theory, challenging its foundational assumptions and offering a more nuanced approach to film analysis. Perkins sees the traditional theorists’ definitions of film as art as fundamentally flawed, particularly in their tendency to prioritize form over content, or vice versa, in rigid, dogmatic ways.
The first chapter, The Sins of the Pioneers, is a scathing critique of orthodox film theory and its leading proponents. Perkins takes aim at figures like Sergei Eisenstein, Rudolph Arnheim, and André Bazin, whose ideas, while foundational, often result in narrow prescriptive views of cinema. He argues that there theories impose artificial constraints on film’s artistic possibilities, reducing its richness to mere formal techniques or ideological concerns. Arnheim, for example, insists that film must differentiate itself from reality to be considered art, dismissing its reproductive qualities as mere technical duplication. Perkins dismantles this binary by asserting that reproduction and production are not mutually exclusive; a film can be both a record of reality and an artistic creation.
In Twin Mystique, Perkins continues his critique, addressing the persistent myth of cinema as “pure” medium. He rejects the notion that a film’s value is determined solely by its adherence to a specific aesthetic philosophy—whether that be montage, realism, or authorship. He takes issue with the idea that montage, as championed by Eisenstein, is the ultimate artistic function of cinema, arguing that editing is only one component of a film’s overall effect. Similarly, he disputes the realist doctrine that prioritizes long takes and deep focus an inherently superior. Perkins advocates for a more holistic approach, one that evaluates film as an integrated artistic form rather than a collection of techniques.
Montage, in particular, serves as a battleground for Perkins’ argument. While acknowledging Eisenstein’s contributions, he criticizes the assumption that editing alone dictates a film’s meaning. A film’s power, he contends, does not arise from montage in isolation but from the interplay of all cinematic elements—performance, mise-en-scène, cinematography, and sound. Perkins points out that great films achieve their impact through the synthesis of these components, not merely through the intellectual or emotional effects of cutting.
Ultimately, Perkins’ thesis is that film must be understood and judged as a complete artistic entity rather than dissected into isolated techniques or theoretical absolutes. His argument pushes against the rigid frameworks of early film theorists, advocating instead for a critical approach that values nuance, context, and the dynamic relationship between form and content. By challenging the dogmas of montage, realism, and authorship, Perkins provides a more flexible and insightful way to engage with cinema.
