has a lot of articles and works analyzed on "Battleship Potemkin" (hereinafter referred to as "Potemkin"). It can be said that this is a film that has been repeatedly analyzed for a long time. It can be said that it is difficult to see this movie from a new perspective or perspective. Then why do I need to do another analysis of "Potemkin" here? I like "Potemkin" very much, and have watched this movie many times. In the repeated viewing, "Potemkin" still bursts with brand new vitality time and time again. This film analysis hopes not only to re-explain the greatness of "Potemkin" from the perspective of film aesthetics, but also from the perspective of film history, to compare and study "Potemkin" with closely related film works in various periods. I hope to dig out Eisenstein’s artistic ideas from the director Eisenstein’s own essays, combined with "Potemkin" itself.
2. Eisenstein and Montage
Before analyzing "Potemkin", we must once again mention the film's director Sergey M. Eisenstein. Eisenstein was not the one who invented montage, but he was definitely a filmmaker who carried forward the theory of montage. After the Kurišov experiment, Soviet filmmakers began to put forward the theory that montage is the foundation of film. The classification of montages is a very interesting question. For example, Pudovkin divides montages into five categories: contrast, parallelism, comparison, simultaneous development, and recurring themes. For the time being, I don’t want to talk too much about the similarities and differences between the theories of many Soviet filmmakers, including Kurišov, Pudovkin, and Vertov. Here I will only discuss Eisenstein’s classification, in accordance with Eisenstein’s consistent style. The text of his classification is very difficult to understand. He said that montages are divided into:
1. The earliest motivation-length metric (Metric), similar to the length of the music, based on the length of the lens.
2. The earliest appeal-Rythmic, based on the length of the lens and the internal movement of the picture.
3. Lyrical appeal-Tonal montage (Tonal), based on the infectious repercussions of the lens.
4. Multi-tone appeal-Overtonal, based on the overall dominant mood of the film.
5. Rational appeal—Intellectual is a combination of rational response and the dominant appeal of conscience after thinking.
This classification method was proposed by Eisenstein in his 1929 book "The Method of Montage". As for the sixth type of montage he added in the mid-1930s, let's leave it alone. Marcel Martin (Marcel Martin) pointed out in his book "The Language of Movies" that this classification method is a good summary of all types of montages from simple to complex, and believes that this classification method is in the classification of Soviet filmmakers. The method is the best. And I think that what Eisenstein and Pudovkin actually said is not the same thing at all. Eisenstein pays more attention to the macro pattern of the montage, paying attention to whether the montage is long in the lens or in motion within the lens, or is the infectious effect of the lens. He doesn't care whether the montage is the impact of the contrast, and he doesn't even mention that the montage is done through editing or scheduling. We can also find that Eisenstein’s montage classification focuses on what we later often call "thought montage". In many of Eisenstein’s films, we can find that his use of montage strives to express thought through conflict, and Obviously, there was not enough effort in the pursuit of smooth narrative. For example, the 1929 work "General Route" was even ridiculous in many aspects of the narrative, even including his masterpiece "October", although it has a powerful expressive force. , Its narrative still has loopholes.
This wave of filmmakers in the Soviet Union is called the montage school. More precisely, they are the thought montage school, especially Eisenstein. Compared with Pudovkin’s pursuit of fluency, he pays special attention to conflict, which is almost Paranoid pursuit of camera conflict expression. The montage we are talking about now even includes the simplest editing, some narrative skills, plus the content emphasized by the Soviet montage school.
Let’s review some film history. Let’s take a look at the 1913 work "The Mysterious X" by the Nordic filmmaker Benjamin Christensen, where the mask has a very clear last-minute rescue (say Gerry Fez’s invention of last-minute rescue is imprecise), and his 1922 work "The Witch" (Haxan) takes the visual language to the extreme. Take another look at Griffith (DWGriffith). Griffith's films show some cats, dogs, and trees, which were regarded by earlier filmmakers as having nothing to do with the film. This is also a breakthrough in montage. There is also a magnificent track shot in the 1914 Italian movie "Cabiria". And Fritz Lang's smooth narrative editing in the 1922 film "Dr. Mabuse, the Gambler" (Dr. Mabuse, the Gambler). There are also "The General" (The General, 1926, dir. Buster Keaton) and "Nosferatu" (Nosferatu, 1922, dir. FWMurnau) and so on. We found that even before the Kurišov experiment (1917), montage had undergone a tremendous development in narrative. In "Intolerance, 1916, dir. DWGriffith" (Intolerance, 1916, dir. DWGriffith) and the aforementioned "Gambler Dr. Mabus", montage, at least narrative montage, has become very mature.
If you have watched some classic films from 1913 to 1928, you will definitely find that "Potemkin" is different from any film mentioned in the previous paragraph. The reason is Eisenstein's paranoid pursuit of intellectual montage. In fact, Eisenstein expressed disapproval of the last-minute rescue. Pauline Kael called "Potemkin" a superb but over-simplified "cartoon", in fact it was mentioned in a complimenting film review. My interpretation of Pauline Kyle’s point of view is that technical excellence refers to the successful use of a large number of montages of ideas, and over-simplification does not refer to simple stories or too correct politics (no one will accuse Robert Bresson of The film is too simple), but refers to its neglect of the narrative role of montage, and "cartoon" is the inevitable result of such a way of using montage.
3. Structure and Passion
Eisenstein's writings are very extensive, and his collection of essays and writings reached six volumes when it was published in the Soviet Union in the 1960s. If you have read Eisenstein’s thesis, it is not difficult to find that Eisenstein is a very knowledgeable person. His film theory research is very interdisciplinary. In "On the Structure of Works", the composition of classical famous paintings is greatly quoted, and even used Demonstration of mathematical formulas, while citing aesthetic principles in architecture. But in my opinion, the center of Eisenstein's work has always been structure and passion. These two words are taken from his works "On the Structure of Works" and "Passion." Many of Eisenstein's other works such as "Nature Not Indifferent", "Language of Film", "Method of Montage" and "Dialectical Method of Film Form" are actually discussing the issue of structure and passion. In the chapter "Passion", Eisenstein believes that the movie needs to make the audience enter a state of madness, which is the essence of passion. Although not explicitly written, I infer that Eisenstein believed that this crazy state was achieved through conflict. The "conflict" we are talking about now mostly refers to the conflict in the play, as Robert McKee's play theory has repeatedly emphasized, but the "conflict" that Eisenstein refers to is visual Yes, it is the language of the lens. In "The Dialectical Method of Film Form", Eisenstein divides conflicts into ten categories: 1. Graphic conflict; 2. Plane conflict; 3. Volume conflict; 4. Space conflict; 5. Light conflict; 6. Conflict of rhythm; 7. Conflict between matter and viewpoint; 8. Conflict between matter and its spatial nature; 9. Conflict between the world and its temporality; 10. Conflict on audio-visual counterpoint. And think that montage creates conflict. (But in fact, many of the above conflicts are realized in composition.)
We can find that just as Eisenstein has a strong paranoia about the classification of montages, he is also naive in the classification of conflicts, although this classification is somewhat more A good summary of the content of visual conflict and rational conflict.
Eisenstein's pursuit of passion and conflict is clearly reflected in "Potemkin".
In addition, in the structure of the work, Eisenstein was obviously influenced by Hegel. Hegel proposed the syllogism dialectics of the thesis, the antithesis, and the combination in the 19th century. Eisenstein adopted this method in his films.
In the following paragraphs, I will analyze "Potemkin" in detail through structure and passion, as well as the use of montage. Eisenstein divides "Potemkin" into five chapters: Man and Maggot; Deck Situation; Cry of the Dead; Odessa Stairs; Victory Grand Master. In chronological order, it tells the whole story of the mutiny of the battleship Potemkin.
Four, people and maggots
This is the first chapter of "Potemkin". The beginning of the chapter is the fierce waves hitting the rocks and dams. There are five shots in total, heralding the fierce Potemkin mutiny and revolution. Then a long list of subtitles appeared, to the effect that the torrent of revolution was coming. Then cut to the dialogue between the two sailors on the Potemkin battleship. The dialogue was to the effect that the sailors on the Potemkin battleship would support the revolution. Then there is a set of shots of the sailors sleeping very heavily. There are a total of eight shots, roughly ranging from far to near. The cutting here is very fast, and each shot takes about 2 seconds. Then the officer entered the cabin, and after a few shots, the officer poked a young sailor awake. Here, Eisenstein used what he called the first type of montage, that is, the earliest motivation, in the same picture, the officer’s neat clothes were compared with the sailor’s tattered clothes, and a close-up shot of the sailor’s facial expressions was also used. (Close-up) The contrast between the officer’s arrogance and the sailor’s anger and confusion, clearly shows that the sailor was oppressed by the officers on the battleship Potemkin. The next set of shots is very interesting. The sailor Vakurinchuk we have seen before began to call on his comrades in the cabin to actively participate in the revolution. We saw him giving an impassioned speech, accompanied by a wealth of physical movements and subtitles. The content of his speech, and then cut to the other sailors, they seemed to be awakened by his speech, and then cut back to Vakurinchuk to give an impassioned speech, and then cut back to the other sailors. They were not half-asleep this time, but I woke up completely and seemed to be communicating with Vakurinchuk, and everyone reacted differently. From sleeping, to half asleep, to awake, a set of rhythmic montages connected by Vakurinchuk's revolutionary speeches, as if Vakurinchuk's speech "awakened" the oppressed sailors. Sure enough, in the next set of shots, on the deck, the sailors said that they would never eat carrion again: "This thing is not even eaten by dogs, this piece of meat can crawl into the sea by itself." Then the ship doctor came to check this. A piece of rotten flesh. Through this close-up shot, the audience can clearly see that the flesh is full of rushes. However, the ship doctor said that this is not a maggot. There is no problem with this piece of meat. The class antagonism on the battleship USS has ignited the anger of the sailors. Sure enough, the sailors did not buy this set, the contradiction was completely generated, and the conflict was on the verge of breaking out. The struggle began, we first saw the senior officers began to push the sailors. Then there are a series of shots of sailors at work, including a close-up shot of a cannon. We can clearly see that the sailors are quite veiling in their work. Eisenstein was also afraid that his images were not clear enough, so he added The subtitle "Helpless anger is spreading" is actually unnecessary, and the audience can already see it very clearly. In the early silent films, I mean that before 1925, this kind of redundant explanatory subtitles was very common, just like the title of a comic strip. This kind of subtitles are completely unnecessary. What Griffith seems to be Everything is marked with subtitles. Even if the filmmakers were as good as Griffiths and geniuses as Eisenstein, they didn't fully hand over the narrative to the screen. Let’s get back to the topic. After playing this subtitle, Eisenstein arranged a lot of scenes of the outbreak of conflict, among which the sailors refused to drink borscht. Then the sailor who was cleaning the plates for the officers saw the words "give me a daily meal" on the plate. The more he looked at it, the more angry he became. The camera repeatedly switched between the close-up of the sailor's face and the close-up of the plate, and the sailor's anger increased every time he switched. One point, this set of rhythm montages has a powerful traction effect. Until the end, he broke the plate. The scene of breaking the plate is very interesting. Eisenstein shot the same scene of the plate falling from nine (or eight?) different angles and edited them together. Each sub-mirror overlapped with each other, thus prolonging the fall. The time that the plate matter was on the screen. This usage is similar to the injection of Uma Thurman by John Travolta in the 1994 "Pulp Fiction" directed by Quantin Tarentino (Quantin Tarentino) The adrenaline scene is similar. So far the first chapter is over. The scene in Fiction where John Travolta injected Uma Thurman with adrenaline is similar. So far the first chapter is over. The scene in Fiction where John Travolta injected Uma Thurman with adrenaline is similar. So far the first chapter is over.
The first chapter "Man and the maggot" did not have bloody conflict, but showed that the sailor's anger kept rising, reaching the threshold at the end of the chapter, which logically opened the second chapter "Deck Wind and Cloud". The overall use of montage throughout the first chapter can be said to be tonal, which is what Eisenstein calls lyrical appeal. However, in the first chapter, Eisenstein seldom used graphics, planes, light, etc. in the composition to create visual abstract conflict effects. At most, it was a comparison between officers and soldiers, and did not accommodate more abstract conflict metaphors.
Five, deck situation
This is the second chapter of "Potemkin". The second chapter begins with the horn, and the sailors are summoned to the deck. It was the officers who started the action first. An overhead shot, with the cannon in the middle, and the sailors lined up on both sides, clearly shows that the officer is putting tremendous pressure on the sailors at this time. An iris lens was given to Captain Gorikov, and he said: "Those who are satisfied with borscht go forward two." The non-commissioned officers all go forward two, and a few soldiers. Gorikov said that he would hang all the remaining people, and at this time he was given an elevation lens to show his lewdness. Then there was a subjective imaginary shot. The old sailor saw several dead bodies hanging on the ship's side. Then the captain called the firing squad. The shot at this time was very interesting. There was a conflict inside the picture. When the firing squad passed by, it was a shot with depth of field. The sailors were standing in the background. The firing squad in the foreground looked tall. The Zhongda Cannon is pressed on top of the sailors. The cannon symbolizes the power of the captain or the Tsarist Russian government. This graphic conflict perfectly reflects the suppressed state of the sailors. Then it was more interesting. Vakurinchuk had been interspersed before calling the sailors to the fort. After a "it's time", the sailors gathered on the fort. The act of occupying the fort also implies that the situation is developing in favor of the sailors. A small number of sailors failed to escape and were covered with oil tarps by the firing squad, accompanied by a close-up of the captain, but at this time the captain's shot was taken overhead, implying that the captain's power had been reduced. Then there is a picture of a priest, the firing squad takes aim, the priest beats the cross again, the close-up of the lifebuoy, the close-up of the trumpet. At the call of Vakurinchuk, despite the captain's repeated orders to shoot, the firing squad lowered the gun, and the series of montages were towed by the priest in series. Then the mutiny broke out, the conflict escalated, and the tension that had been brewing for a long time was broken. In a series of battle scenes, the officers are defeated and the sailors occupy the battleship Potemkin, but their hero Vakurinchuk is also killed. Among them, after the ship doctor was thrown into the sea, his glasses were still hung and put on. Eisenstein gave a close-up of the glasses and a close-up of an extra carrion that was covered with maggots. It reminds us of the first chapter of the Chinese ship doctor. The plot that rotten flesh is okay.
Throughout the second chapter, a tonal montage method with lyrical appeal is also used to tow the transformation of the strong and weak forces of the officers and sailors on the deck, and it is logical to show the large-scale conflict of studying abroad.
The second chapter ends with a deep paragraph. Vakurinchuk's body was placed on the Odessa dock, with a candle lit, and a sign saying "For a spoonful of soup". In the last few shots, in order to fit this deep and sad atmosphere, Eisenstein used a soft focus lens to shoot, low-key photography, as in French impressionist movies, or later Hollywood romantic director Frank Boussaki ( Frank Bozage).
6. The cry of the deceased
"Potemkin" has a degree of relaxation. After a small climax, Chapter 3 "The Cry of the Dead" is relatively calm. The chapter begins to continue the photographic style at the end of the second chapter, and shows all kinds of ships, pigeons, and the surface of the water without hesitating the lens. There are various scenes, and the editing is slow. It is a very good rendering of the sacrifice of Vakurinchuk. The tragic scene. Sure enough, Eisenstein gave several close-ups of Vakurinchuk, including the candle in his hand. After that, more and more people came to see him, and the battleship lowered its sails. If the previous chapters are highly stylized, then the third chapter can be said to be realistic. Pauline Kyle's "Spicy Compliment" does not apply to this chapter.
Then there is the scene on the shore. People on the shore heard of the Potemkin mutiny and a sailor was killed. They gathered together, and we saw that people were passionate. It was at this time that photography gradually became non-low-key, and the focus was still very soft (but later hardened), which is a typical tonal montage. The group leader expressed passionately to avenge Vakurinchuk, everyone waved their arms, united, and joined the revolution. At this time, the editing speeds up again, and there is also the use of montage in the rhythm (not the rhythm montage that Eisenstein said, it is the rhythm montage we are talking about now). Odessa dock, battleship Potemkin, the sun rises, the red flag rises, coloring is very rare in silent films, marking the end of this chapter.
The entire third chapter uses a near-realistic approach to calmly express the changes that Potemkin’s mutiny and Vakurinchuk’s sacrifice have brought to the masses of the Odessa Pier on the shore, which makes the masses also join in. The revolution is coming. At the end of the chapter, the rhythm gradually becomes faster again, and the photography style returns to a relatively high-key and hard-keyed, ready for the climax of the next chapter.
Seven, Odessa stairs
The Odessa Stairs is the fourth chapter of "Potemkin", a climax of the whole film, and one of the greatest, most outstanding, and most exciting passages in the entire history of human cinema. Fred Murray (Fred Murray) Murray) did not even add the word "one" in his film reviews. We mentioned earlier that the structure of Eisenstein's works is a dialectical method of thesis, antithesis, and syllogism influenced by Hegel. The first three chapters can be said to be the thesis, showing the mutiny of Potemkin and the participation of the people on the shore in the revolution. Then, the next Odessa ladder is the opposite, it shows the cruel suppression of mutiny and revolution by the Tsarist Russian government.
Before that big subtitle "suddenly" appeared, it was still more like the content of Chapter 3, and I am not going to talk about this part. Then "suddenly", the Odessa massacre began, and the most outstanding segment of the entire film began. Before and after this subtitle, the contrast between joy and horror is very strong. The excitement of the Odessa Ladder lies not only in the wonderful use of montage and conflict, but also in Eisenstein's ability to schedule big scenes.
We might as well recall the scene of the plate throwing arranged by Eisenstein in the first chapter. Through repeated perspective changes, the performance of the fact of throwing the plate on the screen has been prolonged. The Odessa Steps Massacre also used such a technique, and this time on a larger scale, the total length of the Odessa Steps Massacre was 6 minutes (the viewing time was even more than 6 minutes), but in fact such an event cannot be used. so long. This reminds me of the carriage race in the epic work "Ben-Hur" (Ben-Hur, 1959, dir. William Wyler) in 1959.
With a drum beat, we first saw a close-up of a frightened person with his hair covering his face, and then the person in the background began to flee towards the foreground. Then there appeared the Tsar’s soldiers, they lined up in a row. At this time, the camera gave a overhead shot. The hand of a huge statue was pointed at the fleeing crowd. Obviously, this statue symbolized the power of the Tsar. This is a wonderful figure. Conflict, strength and weakness are instantly clear. Then cut until the crowd ran down the stairs, someone was hit, and they fell down and were given the middle shot. This is also a graphic conflict. After showing the big vision of the escaped from multiple angles, it was given to the Tsar's soldiers again. At this time, there were two rows of soldiers. The soldiers are given a neutral motion lens, so on both sides of this lens, the 180 degree rule can be broken, because the neutral motion lens makes the audience forget the direction of movement of the fleeing crowd. In the next shot, the escaping crowd ran down the stairs from the left to the right of the screen (at first from right to left), but Eisenstein did not make a mistake here. Then show a few concrete people hiding beside the stairs, and once again show the Tsar soldiers shooting, people running away and shooting. A very expressive moment arrived. A child was hit. He lay on the ground and howled in pain. He bled a lot of blood on his head. She cut to the half-length view of his mother. Obviously, she was very shocked and panic. She repeatedly cut back and forth several times. , The boy fell, his mother went crazy, and the scene changed from a half-length scene to a close-up. The boy was trampled by the crowd, and his mother went up against the crowd, creating a huge conflict in the direction of the movement. Then she held the child and walked up again, swarming down with the crowd. The Tsar soldiers held their guns and slowly descended to form a strong contrast and conflict. The order of the Tsar soldiers and the panic of the crowd formed a contrast and conflict at the same time. What a great moment! This is the moment when Eisenstein fully realizes his conflict theory and montage theory. After the music fell silent, my mother wanted to intercede with the Tsar soldiers. Several others tried to persuade the Tsar soldiers. At this time, they shot down from above the Tsar soldiers. Needless to say, the ending is needless to say. After a short pause, the soldiers still fired and the mother fell to the ground. The mother who fell on the ground was surrounded by the neat shadow of the Tsar's soldiers, another intense conflict, and the soldier's coldness was vividly expressed. Some people have reached the bottom of the stairs, but the Cossacks arrived on horseback under the stairs, flanking them on both sides. At this time, it is extremely tense, and the rhythm is already very fast, but Eisenstein has a wonderful way to speed up the film again at this time, so that the audience is completely in a state of madness. The appearance of the stroller is the greatest arrangement I think in the Odessa stairs. The mother pushed the stroller down the stairs. However, she was shot and gave her a close-up of her abdomen. Another cut out of the camera. When she cut back, her abdomen was already A lot of blood is flowing (actually it is a flash before). Then mother The pro slowly fell, the stroller began to roll down, the whole pattern changed from walking and running to rolling down the stairs, and the fast-paced passage was accelerated again, and the speed was so fast that it could not be further increased. Then there is a whole set of montages connected by strollers, close-ups of people's panic expressions, army massacres, guns on dead bodies, and people killed with sticks. A woman with clip-nose glasses was beaten to blood, like a grand and magnificent song. The last chapter of his symphony. The massacre paragraph ends here, and the counter-topic ends here. Later, in the film "The Untouchables, dir. Brian De Palma" (The Untouchables, dir. Brian De Palma) filmed in 1987, there was also a crappy tribute to the stroller section. Next came the bombardment of Potemkin at the Odessa Theater of the military command. In the passage of the bombardment theater, three consecutive close-ups of the stone lions were given, namely the sleeping stone lion, the awakened stone lion, and the standing stone lion. When the three close-ups are edited together, there is a feeling that a lion is awakening, which is the same as Vakurinchuk's call to the sleeping sailor to join the revolution in the first chapter. At this point, Chapter 4 is over.
This chapter highlights the Hegelian elements of Eisenstein in structure. The syllogisms of the topic (before the "sudden" subtitle), the counter topic (the Holocaust), and the combined topic (the shelling command) are very obvious.
8. The Victory General Division The
Victory General Division is the final chapter of "Potemkin", and it is also a bigger theme than the bombardment command, that is, the revolutionary masses are more united. The soundtrack sounded a passage from the "Marseillaise" (this should have been done by someone later and has nothing to do with Eisenstein).
The dilemma facing the battleship Potemkin is that other fleets will sink it. After the Odessa Steps, Eisenstein used such a suspense to maintain the drama of "Potemkin". In my opinion, this is also a last resort. If it can be divided into another paragraph, it will serve as a bridge between the two climaxes. After Eisenstein’s quarrel at the beginning of Chapter 5, he showed that at night, he did adopt a lot of the photography and editing styles at the beginning of Chapter 3, slow pace, low-key, and soft focus. This can be regarded as the drama produced by barely maintaining the Odessa ladder.
Then the sailors of the battleship Potemkin noticed that a fleet appeared on the sea level. The rhythm accelerates, and the final climax opens. Next is a series of shots showing the sailors preparing for battle, the ship is advancing at full speed, leaving a series of water marks, giving close-ups of the turbine. The series of shots form a rhythm montage, with both superimposing and traction effects. The pace is getting faster and faster, and the suspense is getting clearer, whether other ships will fire. Eisenstein has consciously enhanced this suspense, depicting a large number of shots of the unfolding of the fort, making it seem like a battle is inevitable. Then the red flag reappeared, heralding the ending, the scenes of multiple nervous faces, from the middle shots to the close-ups, the music suddenly eased, and everyone waved their hats to celebrate the success of the revolution. See the red flag that symbolizes victory again. The chapter ends with an upside-down shot of the battleship Potemkin, which also ends the entire film.
We can see that Eisenstein has made a lot of efforts to maintain the strength of the Odessa ladder, including the suspense setting, the intentional extension of the suspense, the addition of slow-paced editing as a buffer, a low-key soft focus lens buffer, and finally a set of The pitch montage is accelerated like crazy (apparently using fast play). The final victory master gave the whole film a "combination", that is, the unity of revolutionary forces.
9. Concluding Remarks
"Potemkin" is a 1925 film, but it has become more new over time, and its conflict and montage application can be said to be insurmountable to this day. But one thing I want to point out is that to a large extent, I agree with Pauline Kyle's statement that "Potemkin is a highly technical but overly simple'cartoon'". There is almost no task creation in "Potemkin". Everyone, whether it is a sailor, a crowd, a Tsar soldier, or an officer, is either black or white, and there is no duality in the characters. In addition, in the plot, there is no winding at all, and the entanglement of the progress is very simple. Each chapter talks about one thing. It can be said that if Robert Bresson were to make "Potemkin", he could make a 15-minute short film if he wanted to. Edward Murray pointed out that Eisenstein often overemphasizes the rational role of editing, but does not emphasize enough what the camera sees. I think it should be summed up as what I said in the second section. Eisenstein's excessive pursuit of intellectual montage is almost paranoid, while ignoring the narrative role of montage. Eisenstein is a great formalist. In fact, I discovered this problem when I watched Eisenstein's film "The General Route". Eisenstein wanted to dramatize reality in any place and ignored the story.
However, Eisenstein's contribution to "Potemkin" is beyond doubt.
X. References
1. "Review of Ten Classic Films" Edward Murray 1985 China Film Publishing House
2. "Nature Not Indifferent" Sergey M. Eisenstein China Film Publishing House
3. "Film Language "Marcel Mardan China Film Publishing House
4. "The Great Film" Roger Ebert 2011 Guangxi Normal University Press
5. "Study on Eisenstein's Aesthetic Thought" Lv Li 2015 Shandong University PhD thesis
6. "Story" Robert McGee Tianjin People's Publishing House
7. "The Language of Film" Sergey M. Eisenstein Electronic Edition
8. "The Dialectical Method of Film Form" Sergei M. Eisenstein electronic version
9. Wikipedia'Sergei Eisenstein'
View more about Battleship Potemkin reviews
