September 17, 2007

Regan, Marie
Intro to Film

Please keep in mind that this review is more than 5 years old.

Yeah, this is an intro to film class. Which means a pretty healthy mix of film nerds and first and second years who have no idea what the hell they're talking about, but like to think they do, anyway. What I don't get is why we even bother to read film theory when the T.A just glazes over it in class and doesn't even bother to elaborate on *any* of the major theorists referenced in the readings--how can you talk about the beginning of film without referencing Benjamin or Kracauer, especially to a bunch of freshmen who have no idea who they are? Anyway, Regan is okay, though rather rigid, she seems smart--despite the fact that she referenced the Russian constructivists as people who "constructed things into abstract art." I guess her, and the T.A's, missed the memo that film didn't develop in a vacuum. I'm obviously not a film major, but I'd much rather watch these films on my own time and skip the 5-
hour hell where people make such comments as, "I'm so over dialectical montage--they use it on FRIENDS!" Somebody shoot me.


medium--about 60 pages of reading a week, which may seem dense to those who'd rather glue their eyes to a screen instead of read the theory behind it...