MD6001 and MD6002 Week 7 - Original Kuleshov Effect Experiment, reading notes and my Own Experiment

The original Kuleshov Effect experiment was devised by Lev Kuleshov (1899 - 1970) to encourage viewers to interpret different feelings from the passive expression on the person's face based on what they see. In this experiment the man sees a bowl of soup, which could mean he is hungry; he then sees a dead child, which could make him feel sorrowful; and finally he sees a sexy woman, which could make him feel aroused or attracted.

I made the following notes on the Introduction and Principles of Montage chapter in Levaco, R. (1974). Kuleshov on Film. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

• When Kuleshov worked with Bauer, “he was introduced to and became impressed by” the technique of “American montage,” which used “rapid cutting, frequent close-ups and parallel lines of action of American films.” (4).

• In 1917, Kuleshov completed his first film using American montage called Engineer Prite’s Project, which had an industrial theme (4). Shots of actors looking off-camera were spliced with shots of cables to give the implication that they were looking at cables.

• The well-known Kuleshov effect experiment employed the actor Mozhukin. A different version of it used a close-up of his neutral expression that was spliced with a bowl of soup to signify hunger, a woman in a coffin to signify sorrow and a child playing with a toy bear to signify joy (7 8).

• The theory of montage is demanding and calls for “a particularly attentive approach and study.” (183).

• Montage represents “the essence of structuring a motion picture,” which explains how a film is edited to give it a montage look, for example the Kuleshov effect experiment. (183).

• Levaco “committed a whole series of the crudest errors” during his long time of working with montage theory, mostly by placing more emphasis on the montage structure rather than how the shots were made (183).

• Levaco claims that the film material is “so significant, and so complex that to render it by mechanical juxtaposition through “film-specifics” - by means of montage - was utterly incorrect.” This is one of the crudest errors he has made whilst working with montage theory. (183)

• Despite works of film with a high emphasis of montage having their errors, Levaco claims there are positive sides to them such as the ability to analyse the theory of montage due to its significance “in the work of the film director" (183 - 184).

• The montage technique began in America. It was not used until after the American Civil War and the Russian Revolution (184). It consists of the juxtaposition of separate shots that tell a coherent story when they are combined.

• Artists have different ways of viewing the world around them as well as different ways of viewing events, discussing them and joining them in the process of montage.” (184).

• S.M. Eisenstein “presented a particularly vivid and interesting example of various different approaches to montage” during his lecture at the State Institute of Cinematography. It is the same when capitalist and Soviet papers are edited in different ways since they both perceive world events differently.” (185).

• Based on the example of newspapers having different perceptions, “it becomes clear that montage” is “tied to the world-view of the person who has the material at his disposal.” (185).

• Levaco did not initially connect questions about montage or aesthetic theory to class interpretations. (186).

• Levaco began to work at a cinema in 1916, when World War II was still taking place and “the cinema was only halfway toward(s) being an art form at that time.” (186).

• Levaco and his colleagues “divided the cinema into three basic types: the Russian film, the European and the American” (187). He claimed “they were distinctly different from on e another in their construction.”

• The American films were the first to elicit “reactions from the audience” followed by European film and then Russian film. (187). This shows that American film is the most prominent location in the world for film.

• “The material of the cinema itself demands organisation” for instance the montage method is an example of how film footage is organised (188). More specifically the material of the cinema was “contained in the organisation of the cinematic material (which meant joining separate shots and scenes) in the joining and alternation of scenes among themselves, in other words, in montage.” (189).

• Reasons American cinema became more prominent than European cinema and Russian cinema are because “they contained the greatest number of shots, from the greatest number of separate scenes, and accordingly, that montage, as the source of expression, as the artistic organisation of material, affected the viewer more strongly and vividly in American films.” (189).

• A new type of montage created within American cinema was rapid action montage (190). This was created by “the dramatic line of energy in the competition, the action and victory of those who found the strength in American films.” The genre made viewers demand the greatest amount of action, events, energy, vigorous characters and dynamic construction “into a given length of film.” (190).

• "There were no conditions for the genesis of a rapid, energetic montage” in American films. (190).

• Levaco claims all his filmmaking errors had their roots “in the period of a blind acceptance of American film culture.” (191).

• Whilst studying montage, Levaco "decided that in American films not only did the scenes changed alternate more rapidly than in European or Russian films” but most of the scenes could easily be categorised into close-ups, medium-shots or long-shots (191).

• The close-up was prominent in Kuleshov’s first experiment, particularly with the bowl of soup and the man with the neutral facial expression.

• Levaco also “decided that montage had an enormous influence on the semantic comprehension of what is on screen.” (192) For example “an actor is performing some sort of dismal moment” and his face is filmed so that it can be spliced with equally dismal footage.

• If the actor Vitold Polonsky's neutral expression followed a bowl of soup, he would be hungry whereas if it followed an open prison cell door, he would be happy to be free (192).

• On page 193 is a diagram of a wavy line on a graph. There are several small lines on the graph that mark the different shots in a montage sequence. The marks establish “their interrelationships” and “their interactions.”

• When the director of a film, “does not know his work with actors well enough,” “he tries to rectify all his errors and tries to compensate the inadequacies of his acting with montage.” (194).

• Also when the director “constructs the basis of his picture principally on montage, he gradually loses confidence in his work with the actor.” (194). For example the director Pudvokin worked on his films “principally on montage construction” lost “his previous ability to work with actors more and more with each new film.”

• Lecvaco argues `’one must study montage” and work on it “because it has an extraordinary effect on the viewer (195).” I agree with his point because I feel that the montage technique I am using for my major studio project will have an extraordinary effect on the viewers.

Inspired by the original experiment, I created my own by taking a photograph of myself and combining it with three of my original images. Firstly I am looking at a pot of hot soup and a toasted sandwich, which makes me feel hungry. Secondly I see my cousin Kathryn Nelson's baby son William and my cousin-in-law Mark playing with a Very Hungry Caterpillar beanbag toy, which makes me feel happy or broody. FInally I look at a fairy figurine made from loom bands (small, colourful rubber bands that are arranged on a plastic loom to create such objects as bracelets and charms) that makes me feel inspired. I composed the experiment in Adobe Premiere by importing the photographs and arranging them on the timeline, changing them to black and white by going to the Effects tab in the timeline, clicking on Adjust and then ProcAmp. Next I went to Effect Controls, clicked on the ProcAmp drop down and changed the Saturation to zero. I also applied a film grain effect that I downloaded online for free to the Video 2 channel in the timeline. I am pleased with the result of my own Kuleshov effext experiment, although I feel that I could have improved the contrast of the loom band fairy and made the entire experiment in sepia tone as in the original experiment.

#md6001 #experiment #montage #md6002