What do you think?
Rate this book
Sinema sanatının yirminci yüzyılı şekillendiren en önemli dinamiklerden biri olduğu artık tartışma konusu dahi edilmiyor. Esasen, film olgusu kendi varlık sınırlarını da aşarak devasa bir sanayi kolundan modern bir mitolojiye kadar birçok farklı kimliğe büründü...
Bu kılavuz metin, bir iletişim aracı olarak filmin oynadığı ağırlıklı rolü hep merkezde tutup, onun toplum üzerinde yarattığı etkiden bir sanat formu olarak kabul görmesinin mümkün olup olmadığına, oradan da dijital çağdaki akıbetine kadar kapsamlı bir soruşturmaya girişiyor. Olgular ve özgün örneklemelerle desteklenen, açıklayıcı ve özlü bir film çözümlemesi...
Bu kılavuz metin, bir iletişim aracı olarak filmin oynadığı ağırlıklı rolü hep merkezde tutup, onun toplum üzerinde yarattığı etkiden bir sanat formu olarak kabul görmesinin mümkün olup olmadığına, oradan da dijital çağdaki akıbetine kadar kapsamlı bir soruşturmaya girişiyor. Olgular ve özgün örneklemelerle desteklenen, açıklayıcı ve özlü bir film çözümlemesi...
186 pages, Paperback
First published January 26, 2012
33 people are currently reading
690 people want to read
About the author
Michael Wood
16 books41 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Michael Wood born in Lincoln, England, is the Charles Barnwell Straut Class of 1923 Professor of English and Professor of comparative literature at Princeton University. He is an alumnus of St John's College, Cambridge.
Prior to teaching to Princeton, he taught at Columbia University, and at the University of Exeter in Devon, England.
He was Director of the Gauss Seminars in Criticism at Princeton from 1995-2001, and chaired Princeton's English department from 1998 to 2004. He writes regularly for The New York Review of Books and on film for the London Review of Books.
Michael Wood born in Lincoln, England, is the Charles Barnwell Straut Class of 1923 Professor of English and Professor of comparative literature at Princeton University. He is an alumnus of St John's College, Cambridge.
Prior to teaching to Princeton, he taught at Columbia University, and at the University of Exeter in Devon, England.
He was Director of the Gauss Seminars in Criticism at Princeton from 1995-2001, and chaired Princeton's English department from 1998 to 2004. He writes regularly for The New York Review of Books and on film for the London Review of Books.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
December 23, 2016
It’s a challenge to write an introduction to the entire entirety of film in 115 small pages but still, this was no good. I was looking for an acknowledgement of the vastness of the film universe, from Sunrise (1927, F W Murnau) to A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Contemplating Existence (2014, Roy Andersson) to Transformers : Revenge of the Fallen (Michael Bay, 2011) to Tumbling Doll of Flesh (1998, Tamakichi Anaru) to Nude Nuns with Big Guns (2010, Joseph Guzman). But Michael Wood serves up a non-historical mimsy wibbly series of philosophical rambles asking such questions as – are all documentaries really fiction? What happened to the picture palace? Have dvds and streaming killed real cinema? And suchlike. For me the answer to all of these is I don’t give a flying flook. Also Michael Wood is a guy who is referring constantly to the hallowed magical pantheon of indisputable cinema masterpieces like The Passion of Joan of Arc, Land without Bread, Battleship Potemkin, you know, the usual suspects, a number of which I have inexplicably failed to see. Some movie critics go into a profound mystical glaze when they sit on their branches contemplating cinema, and M Wood does that here.
But hey, Michael, if you're reading this, Happy Christmas!
But hey, Michael, if you're reading this, Happy Christmas!
October 26, 2017
I really enjoy this series of books they are exactly as advertised, short and to the point introduction to the subject. This volume holds up to the series and points to some very good films and also books to followup with.
May 24, 2024
In preparation for creating a new course on theology and film, I’m looking at some entry-level books to see which of them (or which sections of them) might prove useful for students with little background in film studies. So why not begin with a book called Film: A Very Short Introduction, which, according to its title, is just what I’m looking for?
It’s very challenging to write 100-page introduction to a complex art form that has existed for over a century. Michael Wood’s approach is neither comprehensive nor systematic. The book is not quite just Wood’s opinions on aspects of film, but for long stretches of it (particularly the final chapter), it does become that. I found a lot of useful commentary in the opening chapter, which looks philosophically at what image and film are and what we do when we engage with them. Chapter 2 considers (very quickly!) ideas such as auteur theory, genre, national cinema, and early experimental films. The final chapter gives some interesting history of the cinema as a place (or palace), but then Wood concludes the chapter and book with opinions about digital technology and the supposed “death of film,” and I found this less useful for my students, especially as some of the technological changes Wood discusses have now retreated to the past in urgent importance.
Any introduction to film should invite me to watch films I haven’t heard of before, and this small book did that (Rene Clair’s Entr’acte, Richard Serra’s Hand Catching Lead, and Luis Buñuel’s Land without Bread, for example). Wood doesn’t get drawn in to talking about all the same-old Great Films that a lot of intro books focus on, though he does bring up some of those titles. This book intends to be more a commentary on some of the philosophies and social and technological trends in the history of film. I won’t use the whole book for class reading, but I may share some excerpts.
It’s very challenging to write 100-page introduction to a complex art form that has existed for over a century. Michael Wood’s approach is neither comprehensive nor systematic. The book is not quite just Wood’s opinions on aspects of film, but for long stretches of it (particularly the final chapter), it does become that. I found a lot of useful commentary in the opening chapter, which looks philosophically at what image and film are and what we do when we engage with them. Chapter 2 considers (very quickly!) ideas such as auteur theory, genre, national cinema, and early experimental films. The final chapter gives some interesting history of the cinema as a place (or palace), but then Wood concludes the chapter and book with opinions about digital technology and the supposed “death of film,” and I found this less useful for my students, especially as some of the technological changes Wood discusses have now retreated to the past in urgent importance.
Any introduction to film should invite me to watch films I haven’t heard of before, and this small book did that (Rene Clair’s Entr’acte, Richard Serra’s Hand Catching Lead, and Luis Buñuel’s Land without Bread, for example). Wood doesn’t get drawn in to talking about all the same-old Great Films that a lot of intro books focus on, though he does bring up some of those titles. This book intends to be more a commentary on some of the philosophies and social and technological trends in the history of film. I won’t use the whole book for class reading, but I may share some excerpts.
March 3, 2012
Film is my favorite art form, and I consider myself somewhat of a cinephile. I have a wide range of tastes, and I can enjoy a variety of genres – from the blockbuster action flicks, to cerebral art-house works. I am not a snob when it comes to watching films, and can appreciate a good film no matter what its intended audience may be. I fully believe that true artists can make art with almost any kind of constraints on their work. Hence I was really pleased to read “Film – A Very Short Introduction.” Michael Wood seems to share my own enthusiasm for Film in all of its forms, and has managed to convey much of this enthusiasm in this small book.
The topic of Film is so vast and heterogeneous that it is almost impossible to do it justice in such a little volume. Any such book would require significant cuts and exclusions, and a very judicious choice of material for inclusion. In my opinion, Wood has largely succeeded in achieving the right balance of covering as wide a collection of material as possible with this format, while managing to go in depth with several important and intriguing topic. The book heavily emphasizes the American, European, and to some extent Japanese cinemas, which is understandable considering that these cinemas have traditionally had the widest cultural impact. However, it would be interested in reading more about the “world” film, and I hope that OUP comes out with one such VSI volume in the near future. Wood also emphasizes the “classic” films, especially in the period up to the 1960s. There is a good reason for this, as many of those films have defined genres and the film language for the rest of the film history, but again, would have liked to see more discussion of the “modern” film in an upcoming VSI volume. However, Wood is not a film snob, and he mentions several of the interesting and/or important films from the past few decades.
The book alerted me to some classic films that I had not heard of before, and I immediately added them to my online queue. I think that we are fortunate to live in the age when an increasing variety of films from all eras and provenances are ever more accessible for our viewing. As a commercial for an internet provider form a few years ago implied, the day is coming when anyone will be able to watch any film ever made, anytime, anywhere. It will be interesting to see how this technological development impacts film and our lives.
One slight issue that I have with this book has to do with its style and the manner of presentation. The book is very discursive and almost philosophical, with a very strong humanities flavor. Wood is very imaginative, and he likes to indulge in deep introspection about the meaning and the nature of film. A reader who expects to find a straightforward historical/technical narrative about the history of film may be slightly disappointed. For the most part, though, I found Wood’s musings interesting and intellectually stimulating, especially since he focused so diligently on film in its artistic dimension. Unfortunately, a lot of what passes for film criticism today is so tainted with the political and societal commentary that true beauty of films as art gets obscured.
As an aside, I like reading books while listening to some nice instrumental music. While reading this book I listened to several different film soundtracks, and this combination added to my overall positive experience with this book. If you too like reading and listening to music at the same time, I’d recommend that you too try it.
This is a very nice short, fun, and informative look at the cinematic art. Would highly recommend it to all film lovers.
The topic of Film is so vast and heterogeneous that it is almost impossible to do it justice in such a little volume. Any such book would require significant cuts and exclusions, and a very judicious choice of material for inclusion. In my opinion, Wood has largely succeeded in achieving the right balance of covering as wide a collection of material as possible with this format, while managing to go in depth with several important and intriguing topic. The book heavily emphasizes the American, European, and to some extent Japanese cinemas, which is understandable considering that these cinemas have traditionally had the widest cultural impact. However, it would be interested in reading more about the “world” film, and I hope that OUP comes out with one such VSI volume in the near future. Wood also emphasizes the “classic” films, especially in the period up to the 1960s. There is a good reason for this, as many of those films have defined genres and the film language for the rest of the film history, but again, would have liked to see more discussion of the “modern” film in an upcoming VSI volume. However, Wood is not a film snob, and he mentions several of the interesting and/or important films from the past few decades.
The book alerted me to some classic films that I had not heard of before, and I immediately added them to my online queue. I think that we are fortunate to live in the age when an increasing variety of films from all eras and provenances are ever more accessible for our viewing. As a commercial for an internet provider form a few years ago implied, the day is coming when anyone will be able to watch any film ever made, anytime, anywhere. It will be interesting to see how this technological development impacts film and our lives.
One slight issue that I have with this book has to do with its style and the manner of presentation. The book is very discursive and almost philosophical, with a very strong humanities flavor. Wood is very imaginative, and he likes to indulge in deep introspection about the meaning and the nature of film. A reader who expects to find a straightforward historical/technical narrative about the history of film may be slightly disappointed. For the most part, though, I found Wood’s musings interesting and intellectually stimulating, especially since he focused so diligently on film in its artistic dimension. Unfortunately, a lot of what passes for film criticism today is so tainted with the political and societal commentary that true beauty of films as art gets obscured.
As an aside, I like reading books while listening to some nice instrumental music. While reading this book I listened to several different film soundtracks, and this combination added to my overall positive experience with this book. If you too like reading and listening to music at the same time, I’d recommend that you too try it.
This is a very nice short, fun, and informative look at the cinematic art. Would highly recommend it to all film lovers.
August 22, 2019
I very much enjoy the VSI series from OUP, but felt this wasn't as good as many others of the series. This book doesn't structure itself around a history or a clear thematic approach, instead it drifts from topic to topic.
September 23, 2017
Decent read, but it felt more like a summary of a handful of films than an introduction to film as a concept, which is what I had hoped to be the case
February 3, 2024
sinemayla barışmaya başladıkça kuramsal okumalara da daha hevesleniyorum. başlangıç için güzel bir kitap olmuş; bana daha önce yaptığım bazı okuma ve programları hatırlattı.
August 25, 2020
Before you start reading this book, please note that it is NOT an introduction.
The book has many international film references to exemplify the ideas, it has an excellent glossary of films by country and by director, and throughout the book you will find very interesting facts about film history, such as, for example, that in the 50's or 60's people went to the movies without choosing the film before and that's where the concept of moviegoers comes from, or that the production companies also owned the cinemas, which is why, in the first fifty years of the 20th century, the infrastructure of the cinemas was palatial
However, it does not have good explanation of concepts about cinematographic language, it seems more like an opinion essay than an introduction.
The book has many international film references to exemplify the ideas, it has an excellent glossary of films by country and by director, and throughout the book you will find very interesting facts about film history, such as, for example, that in the 50's or 60's people went to the movies without choosing the film before and that's where the concept of moviegoers comes from, or that the production companies also owned the cinemas, which is why, in the first fifty years of the 20th century, the infrastructure of the cinemas was palatial
However, it does not have good explanation of concepts about cinematographic language, it seems more like an opinion essay than an introduction.
December 18, 2016
Just goes to show the impossibility of writing about film at large in a condensed medium. Constantly, if not excessively rambling, Michael Wood comes off well-intended but frequently misguided in his teachings about 20th century film. A last-minute take-away could surmise film is some tangible yet not tangible cosmic force of nature to whom even, self-admittedly, a million and one words couldn't serve a proper ode to.
July 12, 2021
He's a quipper. Sometimes it pays off, but at other times it's confusing, even confused. I'm grateful for the idea that film (and photography) is less representation than trace, the discussion of film semantics, the catalogue of national movements, and the discussion of genre.
October 28, 2017
I have never really taken much interest in going to the cinema. I tend to go along when friends invite me, and I quite enjoy it, and I buy the occasional DVD that’s been recommended to me, but films have never had an impact on me in the way that books do. But from time to time cinematic style impinges on the books I read, so occasionally I have felt the need to find out more about this art form. I have a copy of The A List: The National Society of Film Critics’ 100 Essential Films and 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die both of which are dispiritingly full of films that I do not want to watch. I have a subscription to Quikflix, and I get foreign films from them once or twice a month but I often forget to watch them until Quikflix nags me about them. Perhaps Film, a Very Short Introduction might persuade me that I should invest more time in watching film?
The Contents consists of:
Before the titles – a brief introduction
Moving Pictures
Trusting the Image
The Colour of Money
References and Further reading
Around the world in 80 films (I’ve seen four of them: La Dolce Vita from Italy, Wild Strawberries from Sweden, and Brief Encounter and The Third Man from the UK.
It took a while for Wood to get to what I wanted: some explanation of why film matters, what’s good about it, and why I should watch it. In ‘Moving Pictures’ there’s stuff about the invention of film, and yes, I did hunt out some of them on You Tube: Lumière’s La Sortie de l’usine Lumiere à Lyon (Leaving the Factory), and L’arroseur arose (The Waterer Watered) and then there’s stuff about film techniques and editing so I watched the *yawn* six-and-a-half minute introduction to Orson Welles’ Touch of Evil. I came across some new vocabulary: ‘montage’, ‘shot transition’, ‘shot-countershot’, and its opposite – ‘parallel editing’ a.k.a. ‘cross-cutting’. And there was this:
(But none of this answered my question: is what the moviegoer gets out of it as worthwhile as what the reader gets? Does the viewer of The Grapes of Wrath become as sensitised to the issues raised by John Steinbeck’s book? And just exactly how does watching Terminator II (which I haven’t seen) or 42nd Street (which I have) count as anything other than ephemeral entertainment?)
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2017/10/28/f...
The Contents consists of:
Before the titles – a brief introduction
Moving Pictures
Trusting the Image
The Colour of Money
References and Further reading
Around the world in 80 films (I’ve seen four of them: La Dolce Vita from Italy, Wild Strawberries from Sweden, and Brief Encounter and The Third Man from the UK.
It took a while for Wood to get to what I wanted: some explanation of why film matters, what’s good about it, and why I should watch it. In ‘Moving Pictures’ there’s stuff about the invention of film, and yes, I did hunt out some of them on You Tube: Lumière’s La Sortie de l’usine Lumiere à Lyon (Leaving the Factory), and L’arroseur arose (The Waterer Watered) and then there’s stuff about film techniques and editing so I watched the *yawn* six-and-a-half minute introduction to Orson Welles’ Touch of Evil. I came across some new vocabulary: ‘montage’, ‘shot transition’, ‘shot-countershot’, and its opposite – ‘parallel editing’ a.k.a. ‘cross-cutting’. And there was this:
The moviegoer works less hard than the reader of books, in one sense, since so much is shown to her, pictured as complete. But she also works harder in another sense, since she has a whole surrounding world to create, and all the syntax is in her head rather than on the screen. (p.22)
(But none of this answered my question: is what the moviegoer gets out of it as worthwhile as what the reader gets? Does the viewer of The Grapes of Wrath become as sensitised to the issues raised by John Steinbeck’s book? And just exactly how does watching Terminator II (which I haven’t seen) or 42nd Street (which I have) count as anything other than ephemeral entertainment?)
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2017/10/28/f...
July 14, 2024
The more I read of Oxford's VSI series,the more I realise that it is a very patchy and uneven series. Some of the volumes offer great insights and are interesting and entertaining. Sadly, this is not one of those. Michael Wood has presented us with little more than an extended magazine essay seasoned with the odd smattering of jargon and dressed with gnomic utterances. Far too often does he slip into the realms on convoluted pretensions where style has replaced and sort of comprehensible substance. Large swathes of this book are little more than unvarnished personal opinions, while the final chapter rapidly descends into a name dropping exercise for the cognoscenti. While this purports to be an introduction to its subject, it is liable to serve as a barrier to it for many. Thankfully, I'd read Thomsons "The Big Screen," where similar discussions about the dynamic nature of film were better presented, as was the development of the idea of the auteur director.
February 25, 2022
One of those books where you feel you have to go read up on any film which is mentioned if you don’t know it - which I hate doing and don’t plan on getting up from a comfortable seat to go over to my computer just to understand one reference and move into the next page.
Titled as an introduction to film, but it’s really not. As mentioned in another review, focused on lots of philosophical stuff rather than… an introduction to film? If this was an introduction to film philosophy it may have been better. An ok read but because I hadn’t seen a lot of the films mentioned and it was all philosophy of said unseen films, couldn’t really get into it.
Titled as an introduction to film, but it’s really not. As mentioned in another review, focused on lots of philosophical stuff rather than… an introduction to film? If this was an introduction to film philosophy it may have been better. An ok read but because I hadn’t seen a lot of the films mentioned and it was all philosophy of said unseen films, couldn’t really get into it.
October 30, 2024
I spent months reading this book due to personal issues, but I finally finished it and I'm glad. It's a great book for starters, specifically for people who know and have experienced cinema but want to step up the game by reading about it. I remember a critic saying that 'there's only one way to experience cinema: by watching' and although I -somewhat polemically- disagree, I agree that it is the most practical way to live it. Reading about film is more than just a complement, it's another way to experience it as a whole, and this book has a great and deep look to the philosophy and history of film.
December 27, 2018
Learned a lot from this book. I think it does stimulate a lot of interest in film and the different ways of thinking about film. I found the "Around the World in 80 Films" in the back a fascinating touch that I will surely follow up on.
I do think the organization and presentation is a bit scattered. I felt the author's thesis disappeared and reemerged at weird spots. It didn't feel like a thread that wove the the work together.
I enjoyed this book. It was a nice 115 page break from a lot of the theological tomes I have to read for school.
I do think the organization and presentation is a bit scattered. I felt the author's thesis disappeared and reemerged at weird spots. It didn't feel like a thread that wove the the work together.
I enjoyed this book. It was a nice 115 page break from a lot of the theological tomes I have to read for school.
September 1, 2019
ok, confession: i didn't actually finish this. about 40 pages in i gave up. i feel like there's some good points trying to be made here, but they're buried under the author talking himself in circles about his personal experiences with film instead of Introducing It Like He's Supposed To - plus it was telling me things i already know. there's some good quotes though, and a list of films from around the world at the back that i'd like to check out.
December 26, 2017
Useless pontificating
Unless you want to ponder the question, “what is film” and are the answer “it is death”satisfies you, give this book a miss. It’s a lot of metaphysical drivel that adds nothing to your understanding of film and relies heavily on name dropping. I’m planning to read a book on how film critics look at films next, hopefully that will be less pretentious.
Unless you want to ponder the question, “what is film” and are the answer “it is death”satisfies you, give this book a miss. It’s a lot of metaphysical drivel that adds nothing to your understanding of film and relies heavily on name dropping. I’m planning to read a book on how film critics look at films next, hopefully that will be less pretentious.
February 25, 2021
A smart, snappy, really artful pocket-sized tour of film history & theory. Much more than just a Wikipedia entry writ large, or a reference text: but an eminently pleasurable and stimulating extended essay on a vast and rich field of art. Plus, there’s enough film recommendations here to set me going for years.
April 25, 2023
This was the first Short Introduction I’ve read and I was pleasantly surprised by it. The book felt more poetic about the world and experience of film rather than it trying to explain every single facets. At times the description of things was too long to serve a minor point. But the others view point and his decision to elaborate on certain aspects was definitely worth the read
May 1, 2025
Pretentious, rambling, but interesting enough. It doesn't feel like an introduction to film as it assumes a familiarity with cinema's auteurs and classic films. For those who know the variety of films he talks about, I think this book will be interesting as Wood has some interesting philosophical opinions on cinema. It's not for the casual viewer/reader, but I enjoyed it.
September 13, 2018
A decent intro, but probably too short to be satisfying for anyone. Overall, well-written but I found a few sentences here and there to be impenetrable.
February 27, 2021
(3) It was fine. Some film thoughts and history in a short book. Uses lots of classic examples
May 11, 2021
warren beatty did you sleep with 12,775 women
October 2, 2022
Should be renamed into Philosophy of Film at least, it's really about film in such a sense that only those that are academically versed in humanities will find relevant.
December 13, 2023
Honestly, I didn’t finish it.
Read less than 50% of it and felt bored. The language was easy though, but the whole book is not what I expected it to be.
Read less than 50% of it and felt bored. The language was easy though, but the whole book is not what I expected it to be.
February 8, 2025
Not at all what I was looking for or what I was hoping for. Oh well.
June 10, 2013
I've rated many books on GR so far without reviewing any, but I feel too strongly about this one not to say something about it. The "very short intro" format obviously has drawbacks, given its "very short" nature and all the inevitable omissions, simplifications, elisions, abbreviations, etc., that go along with it (drawbacks that are sure to be featured in tepid reviews of this and other VSI books). But that being said, I felt that this one, written by Michael Wood in the comparative lit department at Princeton, is easily the best VSI I've so far come across - a nimble and well-honed execution of a very short, but very useful, thoughtful, and informative introduction to film appreciation that instantly added about a half-dozen films to my "must see" list. It is written in sharp, clear, tight prose, and has something thought-provoking and worthy of fuller discussion and reflection to say in just about every sentence. Wood very thankfully bases his general claims about film aesthetics, history, and criticism in informed, meticulous, and lucid discussions of actual films and the history of the medium. The discussion of Ford's "The Young Mr Lincoln" towards the start of the book is an especially good example, and, relatedly, a good example of how you might get students in a classroom to start thinking critically about particular films and the peculiarities of film art in general. In this respect, the book is reminiscent of the work of V.F. Perkins - if you like the latter's FILM AS FILM, you'll probably like this a lot. (Although Wood, somewhat curiously, never mentions Perkins, he does draw a bit on Cavell's - excellent but I feel sometimes slightly overwrought - THE WORLD VIEWED.) If you're looking for an especially good specimen of film history, aesthetics, and criticism rolled into a lucid, compact book to read on a plane or on your bus commute, here it is.
August 31, 2012
The book is as informative as promised in the title, that is, introductory. Today is the age when films are a big part of our lives and have been for a while. There are films for all kinds of people and sometimes we all like to think that we are experts in this or that genre. But sometimes all our observations need to be properly formulated and categorized. And this is what Film: A Very Short Introduction does.
In the beginning it might seem that the book isn't going to tell a reader anything new. It gives a brief history of cinema, compares a photo and a film (having a go at Roland Barthes, I've got a strong feeling that the author dislikes the theorist), etc, etc.
Then comes the second chapter and it starts to feel that you're not wasting your time reading this book. All that's written above is well in place, and every part adds something to the picture of film that starts to form in your mind.
The third chapter is mostly about the industry but it also has a very suitable conclusion to the whole book. There is also a list of recommended films in the end but a lot more films are discussed in the book and I've added some of them to the list.
On the whole, the book is quite easy to read once you get used to sentence structure the author seems to prefer: a lot of inserted clauses. It is interesting, even captivating, and if you want to be introduced to film, that's a way to start.
In the beginning it might seem that the book isn't going to tell a reader anything new. It gives a brief history of cinema, compares a photo and a film (having a go at Roland Barthes, I've got a strong feeling that the author dislikes the theorist), etc, etc.
Then comes the second chapter and it starts to feel that you're not wasting your time reading this book. All that's written above is well in place, and every part adds something to the picture of film that starts to form in your mind.
The third chapter is mostly about the industry but it also has a very suitable conclusion to the whole book. There is also a list of recommended films in the end but a lot more films are discussed in the book and I've added some of them to the list.
On the whole, the book is quite easy to read once you get used to sentence structure the author seems to prefer: a lot of inserted clauses. It is interesting, even captivating, and if you want to be introduced to film, that's a way to start.
January 7, 2013
A rather philosophical, sometimes cryptic, yet fascinating essay on film as phenomenon. Wood discusses the relationship between motion and the series of static images that actually make up film; the influence of the director; genre; and the future of film in a digital world, among many others. He leaves room for Making movies: a very short introduction; The history of film: a very short introduction; and World cinema: a very short introduction.
'n Heel filosofiese, soms kriptiese, dog fassinerende essay oor film as verskynsel. Wood bespreek die verhouding tussen beweging in die werklikheid en die snelle opeenvolging van statiese beelde wat ons as rolprentbeweging ervaar; die invloed van die regisseur; genre; en die toekoms van film as kunsvorm in die digitale era. Daar behoort nog 'n paar boekies in dié reeks afgestaan te word aan ander aspekte van die onderwerp, soos die konkreet praktiese skeppingsproses van rolprente, die geskiedkundige ontwikkeling van die medium/kunsvorm, en rolprentkuns vanoor die wêreld. En laat iemand nou net die Yslandse films vergeet!
'n Heel filosofiese, soms kriptiese, dog fassinerende essay oor film as verskynsel. Wood bespreek die verhouding tussen beweging in die werklikheid en die snelle opeenvolging van statiese beelde wat ons as rolprentbeweging ervaar; die invloed van die regisseur; genre; en die toekoms van film as kunsvorm in die digitale era. Daar behoort nog 'n paar boekies in dié reeks afgestaan te word aan ander aspekte van die onderwerp, soos die konkreet praktiese skeppingsproses van rolprente, die geskiedkundige ontwikkeling van die medium/kunsvorm, en rolprentkuns vanoor die wêreld. En laat iemand nou net die Yslandse films vergeet!
September 19, 2016
Interesting synthesis of history, theory, and breakdown of fundamental elements. There's no popularizing or posturing here. I would hesitate to call this an introduction; Michael Wood has an encyclopedic knowledge and he doesn't hesitate to dump it on the reader. Because of the sheer quantity of thought packed into this small volume, and its focus on theory and making metaphysical sense of film as an art form, much of this will fly over the head of the average moviegoer (myself included).
This being said, Wood is obviously well qualified for writing a primer on this subject, and there's no faulting his ability to write articulately. Anyone who picks this up will get something out of it. For me it was an appreciation for how expansive a notion film is, both how little and how much it has evolved over its hundred and change year history, and mainly, the staggering contingency of this evolution - how film as industry, entertainment and art, could have easily developed into vastly different forms than what we take it to intrinsically be.
This being said, Wood is obviously well qualified for writing a primer on this subject, and there's no faulting his ability to write articulately. Anyone who picks this up will get something out of it. For me it was an appreciation for how expansive a notion film is, both how little and how much it has evolved over its hundred and change year history, and mainly, the staggering contingency of this evolution - how film as industry, entertainment and art, could have easily developed into vastly different forms than what we take it to intrinsically be.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews