Peter Lehman and William Luhr,
Thinking About Movies: Watching, Questioning, Enjoying. (Second Edition). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.
ISBN: 0 631 23358 X
397pp
US$49.95 (pb)
(Review copy supplied by Blackwell Publishing)
A large introductory textbook can be a static piece of work and off-putting for the student who may have thought that taking a cinema course would be an enjoyable, and perhaps even a “light”, subject option. The attraction to Peter Lehman and William Luhr’s introductory textbook, Thinking About Movies, is that it is “alive”. These authors show that learning new terms and serious ways of approaching the cinema can be a pleasurable and a stimulating experience.
The simple way in which this book is presented, and yet the complex issues it raises, show that Lehman and Luhr have their target reader in mind. They state in their Preface that the book “has been written specifically for the student with no previous film background, who has never taken a film course, and who, in many cases may never take another”.
Lehman and Luhr encourage the beginner to think critically about film and work to dispel common and shallow assumptions. Judging a film in terms of whether it is “realistic” or not, or whether it is as good as the book it is based upon, are shown to be naïve and misguided ways to approach the cinema. One soon learns that there are many thought provoking ways to read the cinema: ways in which social issues are as affecting as aesthetic ones. For Lehman and Luhr, film exists in a living world of shifting cultural contexts and changing values.
One of the problems with textbooks of this kind is that they continually need updating in order to keep up with new developments and to include films of relevance. The long-standing and major textbook, David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson Film Art: An Introduction is now up to its 7th Edition (2004). This is Lehman and Luhr’s 2nd Edition. They expand on their 1stEdition (1999) and replace some of the films. For example, in the chapter on “Formal Analysis” they have replaced Mr. Hulot’s Holiday (France, 1953) with The Sixth Sense (USA, 1999). They include the film Timecode (USA, 2000) as a major discussion piece and mention such recent films as Gladiator (USA, 2000) and Pearl Harbor (USA, 2001).
Their choice of film includes the well known and the popular, Fatal Attraction (USA, 1987), The Lost World: Jurassic Park (USA, 1993) as well as what may be less known to the new student: classics such as John Ford’s The Searchers (USA, 1956) and Jean Renoir’s masterpiece Rules of the Game (France, 1939). Lehman and Luhr state that, “There is nothing privileged about the list of films except that they work for us and supply a balance between the familiar and the unfamiliar” (11).
The final chapter, “Digital Technology” is new to this edition and it seems a little tacked on. Nevertheless, this important addition, one feels, will inevitably be expanded on in future editions. Lehman and Luhr’s emphasis on reception projects this new awareness whereby “Digital technology is already affecting more than the ways in which films are made; thanks to video digital discs, it is affecting the way we watch films” (373).
The book’s structure facilitates active learning. What is discussed is always applied. The first half of each chapter takes a critical focus and the second half applies that focus to two individual films. By the time a student reaches the second last chapter, all of the topics, from Narrative Structure through to Class, Gender and Race, are applied to Citizen Kane(USA, 1941).
What Lehman and Luhr do so well in this book is to set up a solid framework for discussion: one that offers the teacher the flexibility of either screening the films they propose or else of substituting a film which may work better for them. As an example of a new phase in the representation of race in mainstream film, one could imagine at this end of the globe substituting Whale Rider (New Zealand, 2002) or The Tracker (Australia, 2002), amongst many others, for Boyz n the Hood (USA, 1991). Even though black, indigenous and ethnic issues may be very different from one culture to another, similar issues as those raised by Lehman and Luhr could apply.
These involve the importance of analyzing race in historical terms, including whites within the analysis and looking beyond the simplistic assumption that positive images have a good effect on society and that negative images have a bad effect.
Part of Lehman and Luhr’s teaching method is to reinforce issues raised in previous chapters without appearing repetitive. For example, the chapter on “Realism and Theories of Film” reinforces the issue that the director, as an ahistorical genius, is no longer credible: something already raised in a previous chapter on “Authorship”. Each chapter is both a past link and a progression in a journey that shows there are many ways to explore film.
While the authors say that they have separated the chapters on Gender, Race and Class, for pedagogical purposes, they also state that “all three must be studied together” (329). In this way, a student comes to learn that a film positive on race, for example, may not be so when it comes to gender and vice versa.
To facilitate both teacher and student, Lehman and Luhr have taken into account the availability of the films they choose on either DVD or video. It is perhaps this concern for availability that has come at the expense of failing to introduce the student to “other” world cinemas, such as those from Asia or India. One could argue that this book is North America and Euro-centric. An added chapter on Third World cinema, including some of the New Iranian cinema, could have been as important as the chapter on Digital Technology. Nevertheless, this is a basic textbook: one that takes the Classical Hollywood model and examines its derivations and deviations. The Japanese film Rashomon (Japan, 1950) is discussed under the heading of Narrative Structure. This film is shown to begin like a Hollywood film in that it poses an initial question. Unlike Classical Hollywood, however, it does not resolve the question it poses (45-46).
Lehman and Luhr, of course, speak from their own cultural perspective and address the issue of different perspectives brought to the cinema by viewers from different backgrounds. Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story (USA, 1992) is given as an example of how Lee, unlike the other viewers watching the film within the film, is offended by the Asian stereotype he sees on the screen.
This emphasis on reception offers the potential to “open” up a lively discussion on cultural difference within the classroom. In the chapter on “Class”, for example, Lehman and Luhr note how American class origins differ from the British: the American/the cowboy, the British/the aristocrat. From another cultural perspective yet again, this prompts one to look at one’s own class origins: how these origins may differ from either the British or the American and how they may contribute to the making of one’s own cultural myths.
The authors are modest in the way they draw upon their expert knowledge without drawing attention to their own works. Lehman is an expert on the representation of the male body. In the Selected Readings at the end of the chapter on “Gender and sexuality”, however, the student is directed to the germinal works of Laura Mulvey and Richard Dyer. Both Lehman and Luhr are experts on Blake Edwards, having written the only two book length studies on his films. Throughout Thinking About Movies this knowledge is well utilized. Lehman and Luhr give many examples of Edwards’ films. In the chapter on “Film and its relation to radio and television”, Edwards’ work seems particularly well suited: the director having worked in all three media. The director’s visual style, his use of offscreen space, exemplifies so well the difference between film and the other two mediums.
Lehman and Luhr do not burden the newcomer with too much theory. The chapter on film theory is basic and succinct, the approach probing and pragmatic. They begin by asking, “What is film theory?” They encourage the student to look beyond tastes and uninformed judgements: “A complete theory … involves much more than a judgement about whether a movie is good or bad; it involves an examination of assumptions and criteria underlying such judgements” (245). Rather than expect the student to take in large quantities of film theory, they give a brief outline of the major shifts and developments in film theory. Lehman and Luhr note that up until the 1960s, film theory was discussed in oppositional terms of either formalism (a canvas) or realism (a window): Sergei Eisenstein and Andre Bazin being the main examples here. Now that oppositional paradigm has opened up to include wider possibitilies: “Since the late 1960s film theorists …have come to see realist styles as just another form that favors certain techniques over others” (249).
Fundamental to this book, and what contributes to its liveliness, is the acknowledgement that film exists within a world of shifting contexts and cultural change. Films change in accordance with industrial, technological and political conditions. Films also reflect change in accordance with shifting attitudes and moral values. The chapter on “Series, sequels and remakes” illustrates this well. A prime example is the Bond series. Lehman and Luhr reveal that not only does a Cold War mentality change in these films, but so too does Bond’s masculinity: “his sexist physical aggression on Pussy becomes unacceptable by the 1980s, and both Timothy Dalton’s and Pierce Brosnan’s Bonds have more involved relations with women” (133).
Genres are also shown to go through cycles and developmental periods. Lehman and Luhr warn the student to be careful in condemning genres, and give spaghetti westerns as an example of genre films that were once condemned, but are now appreciated (108).
With this book no one fixed idea is safe: attitudes towards authorship, genres, sexuality continually change. Lehman and Luhr offer many sophisticated ways to view the cinema, all of which interrelate with each other and lead to further questioning. The authors raise complex issues and yet maintain a level of accessibility and enjoyment. The positive feeling that emanates from this book is that the student, especially the one who may never return to film studies, will be left with “something” to carry through life. That “something” is a respect for the cinema as having its own distinct features; it is also an awareness that the cinema is more affecting than previously thought. When I taught film studies to first year arts degree students, I always hoped for that.
June Werrett
Australia.
Created on: Tuesday, 4 May 2004 | Last Updated: 4-May-04