Review Of How To Read A Film By James Monaco

In his book How to Read a Film, James Monaco introduces a discourse through the section “Expressionism and Realism: Arnheim and Kracauer”, explaining two opposing stances towards film-making, mainly by addressing Arnheim and Kracauer’s prescriptive theories on Expressionism and Realism. By contrasting the two stances on where the esthetics of film should lie on, Monaco concludes with a suggestion of a goal films should reach for. Monaco starts by giving a simple definition of Realism and Expressionism, whereas Realism underlines the actual reality that is filmed, Expressionism focuses more on the capability of the filmmaker in addressing and remodeling the reality. He continues by giving a brief history on reasons why Expressionism was more

On one hand, Realism had stronger emphasis on reality itself rather than in the “art” form, and on the other, because of its priority towards the filmmaker’s potentials in reshaping reality, Expressionism was a better option then Realism. Second, Expressionism had a more economical advantage because it was expensive to make a film. As Monaco had put it, “If film is strictly a commodity, how could we justify “making the consumer work” for his entertainment,” (Monaco, 443) explaining the disadvantage Realism carried in contrast to Expressionism, as Realism theories necessitated the participation of observers, whereas theories of Expressionism did not. Monaco then cites two texts in contrasting Expressionism and Realism. Film as Art, written by Rudolf Arnheim, presents its theory by starting with the main premise that the esthetic value of film, like all arts, rely upon materialistic borders. These limitations forges content and form for the

Similar to the structure of Arnheim’s argument, Kracauer’s theory develops from the main premise that film art must put emphasis on its capacity for imitating reality purely because it comes so near in doing so. This stance led Kracauer to suggest esthetics from material, rather than from form, and thus leading the concept of film art out of the traditional concept of art by instituting a new order of values. Through this logical process of establishing the uniqueness of film, Kracauer leaps to a point where he suggests, “Since it can reproduce reality so well, it ought to.” (Monaco 447) Monaco finds this part of Kracauer’s theory to be very controversial. After this statement, Kracauer continues, and by placing his belief in “found stories”, he shows that films serve a purpose. Not just as any pure artwork, as that tends to exist for its own stake. Because film is based on relations with reality, Kracauer thought it crucial for film to return to it, as its