Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Movies and its influence
Brief history of motion pictures
Brief history of motion pictures
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Movies and its influence
Films as Primary Sources for History If a picture is worth a thousand words than how much is a moving picture, or movie, worth? In the study of history, the usage of movies as primary sources is controversial. Motion pictures are more commonly well-known as sources and created for entertainment purposes. Film is a creation of a reality. This has some valuable resources for the study of history in many respects. They may or may not be representational, and some may include writing or printing. Some can be categorized as fine art, others as documentary record. Originality may or may not be important, and the content may or may not be the primary focus. History is made by people - in a sense that it is written by people positioned in time and in location, living under a certain political regime, in a certain cultural arena, and having an access to certain interpretative schemes. There are many different types of films. Documentaries and news (newsreels in some instances) are one of the most widely recognized and less-controversial in the study of history since their purpose is not purely entertainment but instead the exploration of an aspect of the world around us. In many respects, they are exposing history as it is happening. Yet with even these films, it should be realized that they are the interpretation of the director/producer, the camera angles are chosen, the people interview are chosen, the information portrayed is chosen. Yet it still retains its advantages. This is the past at its most immediate, valuable for its record of social and cultural life (even if inevitably somewhat distorted in its art form by its purpose as something other than an accurate record). News footage has recorded, both for the cinema newsreel ... ... middle of paper ... ...f all, because it is the ongoing story of humanity. So should films be primary sources for history? Both an affirmative and a negative are the answers. Many factors including, the time of film, who created it, who the intended audience is, what the film is about, etc. in relation to the topic being studied are what make film a valuable historical source. Films, in many respects, are no different from any other type of historical sources and should be treated as such. Visual resources are a peculiarly direct and telling source of encounter with the past, even if the image cannot always be taken as truthful, and film, being the one of the youngest visual mediums, is usually discredited. Film is a historical tool, but that does not mean that it should be neglected as an aesthetic object, instrument of propaganda or a phenomenon of mass media and cultural industry.
There are many adaptations and interpretations on how the English arrived to the Americas and established their colonies. The 2005 film “New World”, written and directed by Terrance Malick, is a film based off the English settlers and how they settled in the Americas in 1607, and the forbidden relationship between John Smith and Pocahontas. Although the film highly exaggerates on some scenes in order to make the history seem more interesting, the film still holds most historical accuracy and is an enjoyable film.
The Revolutionary war, sparked by the colonist’s anger towards taxation without representation, was a conflict between the United States and its mother country Great Britain. This event had been considered the most significant event in the American history. It separated the thirteen colonies from the tyrannical ruling of King George. The revolutionary war was not a big war, “The military conflict was, by the standards of later wars, a relatively modest one. Battle deaths on the American side totaled fewer than 5,000”1. However, the war proved that the thirteen colonies were capable of defeating the powerful Great Britain. Over the years there were many Hollywood films made based on the revolutionary war, 1776, Revolution, Johnny Tremain, and The Patriot. But, no movie has stirred up as much controversy as the Mel Gibbson movie The Patriot. The patriot is very entertaining but it is historically inaccurate. Too much Hollywood “spices” was added to the movie for viewing pleasures.
[2] Manipulated history used in an inappropriate manner is one of the ways in which the Nazis were able to convince so many people to follow their evil and tyrannical beliefs. This is not something that we as Americans can have happen. History in the cinema should be a carefully monitored area, so as to prevent fictional accounts to be passed as the truth. If we allow our screenwriters and directors to have free reign in the movies, they could theoretically conjure up any scenario that they pleased and pass it off as an actual event. This can not be so. If history is to be conveyed through film, it should be of the highest accuracy. Many people rely on what they see as fact so that if all movies decided to create a “history” that never happened, a large percentage of the American population would fall victim to their chicanery.
Stanley, Robert H. The Movie Idiom: Film as a Popular Art Form. Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc. 2011. Print
...at the various means of propaganda have on the great masses, film is without question the most powerful. The written and spoken word depend entirely on the content or on the emotional appeal of the speaker, but film uses pictures, pictures that for eighty years have been accompanied by sound. We know that the impact of a message is greater if it is less abstract, more visual. That makes it clear why film, with its series of continually moving images, must have a particular persuasive force. Film is a very effective tool in waging a war. With out it, it would be hard to get the people to stand behind you and
Film is an important source. There are hundreds of movies made during the course of a year. A lot of themes are explored and conclusions are drawn. History is a major subject in film,
Thompson, Kristin , and David Bordwell. Film History : An Introduction. 3 ed. New York:
Films are necessary in our time period because the human eye can articulate the message intended through sight allowing visual imagination to occur. In the book, world 2 by Max Brooks, he creates a character by the name Roy Elliot who was a former movie director. Roy Elliot manages to make a movie titled “Victory at Avalon: The Battle of the Five Colleges” and some how it goes viral. Similarly, Frank Capra’s film, “Why we Fight” expresses a sense of understanding the meaning of wars. Films do not inevitably portray truth because they display what the film director views as important and beneficial for people to know.
... history and the thoughts they evoke for Marker. It goes beyond documentary to create an essay-film.
...ctual roles, or adding in exciting events that revise the storyline. These changes are beneficial to producers because they engage a large audience and generate massive profits. In contrast, they do not always have a positive effect on viewers. Although they are entertaining which is an important aspect of theatre culture, they also are often misguiding. Many spectators take movies at face value, without considering that they may not exactly qualify as primary source material. Even when an historical event is fabricated to teach or enhance a moral message, it still doesn’t compensate for bending the truth. Moviegoer’s may have a positive experience and gain some skewed historical perspective, perhaps better than what they knew before the movie, but they loose out on the truth and therefore, a genuine understanding of the historical event, and its significance.
When Karl Marx wrote “the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,” he interpreted the historical stage and his writing of history as parts of a theatre: he writes;
Entertainment has traveled from burlesque and vaudeville to high tech filmmaking, and this is the physical existence of our century. The Era of Silent Film in the early 1900s had such geniuses as Charlie Chaplin who paved the road to the time of the "talkies" and to development of sound. If not for him and some other "greats" along the way, where would our film culture be today? Much of the history of our nation seems to be held as digital recordings through visuals. In this respect it is interwoven with the current era of computer information because we want to preserve and record the history of the present as well as at the turn of the millennium.
Schwartz, Donna. “Objective Representation: Photographs as Facts.” Picturing the Past: Media History & Photography. Ed. Bonnie Brennen, Hanno Hardt. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1999. 158-181.
The ideation of objectivity remains a highly debatable subject among philosophical elites. Some philosophers may argue that human’s understanding of objectivity is subject to the scope of understanding of the term and exposure (Livingstone & Plantinga 10). When the term objectivity is entwined with realism, it yields a complex ideation that remains highly debatable and less agreeable among erudite authors (Livingstone & Plantinga 23). However, to understand and appreciate the concept of realism and objectivity in film, it becomes critical to adopt a definite definition. First, the term reality in film is used to describe concepts that are visible in nature as experienced on a daily life by one or more individuals (Livingstone & Plantinga 24). The term objectivity in this case is used to define a set of ideations or perspectives that are incorporated in the film (Livingstone & Plantinga 24). Documentaries are used to create a form of reality, an experience or ideation of the person or group of person experiencing an event or phenomenon. The argument in this analysis is that it is impossible for documentary films to objectively capture reality.
‘Then came the films’; writes the German cultural theorist Walter Benjamin, evoking the arrival of a powerful new art form at the end of 19th century. By this statement, he tried to explain that films were not just another visual medium, but it has a clear differentiation from all previous mediums of visual culture.