My understanding of silent films is still stuck in the fragments of Master Chaplin's works that were often broadcast on TV when I was a child. Exaggerated and comical action, music to match the plot, and white words on a black background from time to time, that's all. I have to admit that this "Battleship Potemkin" refreshed my view of silent films.
When I was on Baidu, I couldn't find the source of the film translated into Chinese, so I bit the bullet and watched the English subtitles. However, my half-hearted English level did not hinder my viewing at all. This is of course thanks to the fact that it is a silent film. Since I had some knowledge of symphony, I focused my main focus on music. The soundtrack of the film is almost a symphony. In the tight or heavy or brisk or soothing rhythm performed by various musical instruments, you can always follow the ups and downs of the music and cooperate with the picture to penetrate into the plot. It really does tell a story with pictures and impress the audience with it. Perhaps because of this, the film is highly provocative, such as the sailors on the battleship fighting back at the crunch time of imminent persecution, and the most classic part of the film in the square massacre. Such incitement stems from the original intention of the director to shoot the film as a revolutionary propaganda film to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Potemkin Uprising. The uprising was even praised by Lenin as the first demonstration that the armed forces could unite with the proletariat to overthrow the old order. This certainly adds a bit of politics to the film. When a work, whether it is a film or literature, once it expresses or symbolizes the current situation and politics, it can easily resonate and have a profound impact on the audience, just like "The Kite Runner". But at the same time, once such a situation is over, the influence of this work will gradually fade away. Maybe human beings are born to get rid of aggressive animal instincts, so wars always happen. Isn't it still happening today, nearly a hundred years after the filming of "Potemkin" in the movie at the square massacre?
I've never seen a movie like Potemkin without a three-dimensional personal image from beginning to end, it's not a story about a person, it's not a person's memory, the whole film can be avoided this. But even this did not affect the three-dimensionality and integrity of the film in the slightest. This kind of personal image that should have been shown more as a whole, the crew gathered on the deck, the masses gathered on the square, etc.
The greatness of "Potemkin" is that it firmly grasps the pulse of the times. Director Eisenstein insists on his own understanding of the organization of montage, that is, based on rhythm, the accumulation of lens editing leads to a certain concept, and the Not influenced by personal interests, lingering on individual roles. Looking back at the current film market, it is often criticized as bad films, and even the word "bad film" can be used as a marketing tool to win high box office. This is undoubtedly a dilemma caused by the ideology of practitioners' interests first. While the short-term benefits are appealing, it seems time for film practitioners to stop and "take the pulse." Long-term returns are actually more substantial than short-term benefits. Our film industry needs an excellent work that fits the times.
View more about Battleship Potemkin reviews