The Monumental Cinema Of Sergei Eisenstein

With his dome-like forehead and shock of wild hair that looked like the aftermath of a bad experience with an exposed wire, it’s easy to mistake Sergei Eisenstein for a stereotypical mad scientist. Somehow, though, “film director” seems equally fitting–and “intellectual” goes without saying. And if you think about it, “scientist” isn’t too far off the mark either. His experiments weren’t with with tubes and liquids, of course, but scissors and strips of nitrate film–his exciting world of the editing room.

Eisenstein editing

Forging new paths.

Much like the way his revolutionary films surprised audiences, reading about Eisenstein’s life can be an eye-opener. It’s easy to come away from the “The Father of Montage’s” dense prose and feel that he was more of a shadowy Historical Figure than a human being. But his serious, studious side was only one part of the complex montage that made up Sergei Eisenstein. His friend Brooks Atkinson described the Sergei he knew in the mid-1940s:

…He was the gayest Russian I knew in Moscow in 1945-46 when I was serving as a correspondent there. He was a Puck-ish looking man of middle years with dancing blue eyes…he radiated joy and amusement. He had great gusto for everything except politics–for art in general, and the motion picture and theater in particular, for ideas in any form and for detective stories. 

Image result for sergei eisenstein

Eisenstein was born in Riga, Latvia back when it was still part of the Russian empire. His father Mikhail was an architect specializing in Art Nouveau buildings and his mother Julia was the daughter of a well-off merchant. His earliest memory was gazing at a bough of white lilac coming through his bedroom window: “My first childhood impression was…a closeup.”

Young Sergei with his parents Mikhail and Julia Eisenstein

Little Sergei, looking EXACTLY the same as he would years later.

While his early life was comfortable financially, he would be at odds with his parents. Mikhail was a pompous, bullying man who some suspect would be a model for the “bourgeois” characters in Sergei’s films; strong-willed Julia (who Sergei resembled the most) insisted on a love of culture but also pampered him. Eventually, the ill-matched couple separated, finally divorcing in 1910. Julia abruptly left Sergei with Mikhail and went to live in France. He would recall riding his little bike through the empty dining room, since she took most of the furniture.

Young Sergei became an avowed bookworm, fond of everything from literature to lurid dime novels to history–especially the history of the French Revolution. He was only seven during the Russian revolution of 1905 but grew up steeped in its lore, and to him it resembled the monumental events of 18th century France. It all fascinated him: “First of all it was because of their romance. Their color. Their rarity. I greedily devoured book after book. The guillotine enthralled my imagination…”

Image result for 1905 revolution russia

As a young man Eisenstein spoke several languages and adored theater and the opera. He also enjoyed drawing, doodling caricatures of performers he saw and making little comic strips. Despite this attraction to the arts, he decided to study engineering and architecture at the Petrograd Institute of Civil Engineering–dutifully following in his father’s footsteps.

The 1917 Russian Revolution soon put an end to this. While he was not particularly political, Eisenstein was enthusiastic about rebelling against the “bourgeois,” admittedly personified by his own tyrannical father. In 1918 Eisenstein signed up for the Red Army (not-so-ironically, his father would sign up for the White Army). Eisenstein’s experiences during his service would set his destiny in motion:

The revolution gave me the most precious thing in life – it made an artist out of me. If it had not been for the revolution I would never have broken the tradition, handed down from father to son, of becoming an engineer… The revolution introduced me to art, and art, in its own turn, brought me to the revolution… 

Image result for sergei eisenstein 1910s

Looking very artsy.

Once the Bolsheviks were in power, Eisenstein moved to Moscow and started working at the Proletkult (Proletarian Cultural Movement) theater. He was drawn to realism and the way it took drama to the next level. In 1923 he insisted on producing his play Gas Masks (set in a gas factory) in an actual gas factory. Where else could he go from there but to motion pictures, where he could use any real-life setting he desired?

Lev Kuleshov, a teacher at the world’s first film school VGIK, would be a big influence. Thanks to an early 1920s depression there wasn’t much film stock in Russia, so Soviet filmmakers made do with examining the films they had and figuring out how they pieced together. Kuleshov became famous for his insights on editing, especially his “Kuleshov effect”:

A new editing style sprung up–“montage,” distinct from the normal editing practice of simply moving the action along and keeping track of the characters. Eisenstein was attracted to it like a fly to honey. He also took it one step further–if emotions could shift depending on how a film was edited, ideas themselves could take visual form. He could, in other words, use unrelated images to create “an idea that arises from the collision of independent shots.”

Image result for sergei eisenstein montage

Sergei at work.

Eisenstein’s revelation was that film could be handled much like Chinese writing: two symbols might have two different meanings, but joining them together creates a new word entirely. Scenes of civilians being killed by soldiers could be paired with shots of cattle being slaughtered to suggest injustice; images of three stone lions appearing to “rise” could symbolize the people’s revolution. This “montage of attractions” would also be ideal for propaganda. An image of a heavyset man doesn’t have much meaning by itself, but pair it with a shot of a lolling pig and you’ve got yourself a “capitalist”–make it a heavyset farmer, and you’d even have a kulak.

Eisenstein would write extensively on his complex theories of montage, publishing intellectual works like The Film Form and The Film Sense. He had begun trying out his ideas in his “revolt against the theater,” Strike (1924), his first feature-length film (his first film ever was a short experiment made for one of his stage productions). Dynamic and intensely creative, as if Eisenstein was trying to get as many ideas on nitrate as possible before exploding, Strike revolved around a workers’ strike that ended in tragedy. The violent ending can shock us even today.

Image result for eisenstein strike

It certainly shocked and impressed the Soviet government, for soon a commission came his way. The result would be Battleship Potemkin (1925), one of the most influential films of all time. Hardly a film is made today that isn’t indebted, even in a small way, to Eisenstein’s editing techniques.

Image result for sergei eisenstein montage

Image credit: BSA (film) SIT Blog

Work on pro-collectivist farm propaganda Old and New (1929) (also known as The General Line) was interrupted for another commission: October: Ten Days That Shook the World (1927), glorifying the 1917 Revolution. Perhaps Eisenstein’s most operatic film, he had thousands of extras at his disposal and gloried in shots of dense crowds interspersed with grand statues. In one famous montage, images of Christ are followed by Buddhist and Hindu gods, then African idols, and finally military regalia, suggested that “backwards” religious devotion be transferred to reverence for the state.

Old and New is a prime example of cinematic art used to uphold the party line (in one heavy-handed sequence, fervent participants in a religious procession are compared to sheep). It also revolved around a distinct character–the peasant Marfa–not the norm in collectivist works. At this point, despite his fame Eisenstein was being regarded with suspicion by the Soviet government, which was starting to favor socialist realism. Feeling the sting of criticism for being too “experimental,” when an offer came from Paramount Studios he accepted, likely with some relief.

Image result for eisenstein old and new

In Hollywood he would hobnob with Charlie Chaplin and Upton Sinclair and attempt several film projects, none of which excited Paramount. In the end, the decision was made to sever his contract. A friend recalled that despite the failure, Eisenstein “had no bitterness in his soul about anything and he remembered America with the gratitude of a schoolboy recalling a holiday when he was out from under institutional controls.” This sense of adventure likely contrasted with the atmosphere back home, where Stalinism was in full swing.

Image result for eisenstein chaplin

Happier times hanging out with Charlie.

During the early talkie era, Eisenstein decided to head to Mexico, a country whose art and culture had always fascinated him. He shot a great deal of footage with the idea of making a film called ¡Que viva México!, but kept bumping heads with Mexican authorities. On top of that, he was in Mexico for so long that Stalin was beginning to suspect that the USSR’s most famous director had deserted.

Image result for eisenstein que viva mexico

Returning to the Soviet Union, Eisenstein married fellow filmmaker Pera Atasheva (there have always been rumors of his homosexuality, but he didn’t publicly confirm them) and resumed filmmaking under the government’s watchful eye. His later work, less experimental but still ambitious, included the epic Alexander Nevsky (1938), climaxing in a great battle on a frozen lake (allegedly Stalin was very pleased with the film and declared, “Sergei Mikhailovich, you are a good Bolshevik after all!”). It also included the planned three-part Ivan the Terrible series in the early 1940s. Ivan the Terrible: Part I nabbed Eisenstein the Stalin Prize. Part II, however, would be harshly criticized and banned from release, the authorities suspecting it too closely paralleled Stalin’s reign of terror (a surprising risk for the seemingly loyal Eisenstein). Part III would never be completed.

Image result for eisenstein ivan the terrible

In 1946, Eisenstein  suffered a heart attack which doctors initially feared would kill him. He spend months recovering, and Brook Atkinson recalled paying him a visit:

When my wife and I visited him, he greeted us exuberantly and plunged into the sort of nonsense he loved to prattle.

“I’m dead right now,” he said when we came in. “I really died about five weeks ago. Now that I am dead I can do anything I like and I am going to…This is the best thing that ever happened to me.”

Image result for sergei eisenstein

This sort of impish optimism kept Eisenstein going the next couple years, until a second heart attack finally claimed his life in 1948. The Soviet government, which had praised and criticized the director in turns for so long, gave him a grand funeral. Flowers filled the House of Cinema Workers where his body laid in state, and his ashes–in an urn decorated with the star of the Soviet Union–were buried in the Novodevichy Cemetery in Moscow.

Eisenstein’s place in cinema history is unshakable, although complicated. His techniques have managed to float free of their time period, but his filmography will always be shadowed by its support of communism and the Soviet regime. Yet in his writings he is never more enthusiastic than while talking about art, and all its bright possibilities. Not long before his death his wrote:

A place must be prepared in consciousness for the arrival of new themes which, multiplied by the possibilities of new techniques, will demand new aesthetics for the expression of these new themes in the marvelous creations of the future.

To open the way for them is a great and sacred task, and all those who dare to designate themselves artists are called upon to contribute to its accomplishment.

Image result for sergei eisenstein on set

Sources:

Bergan, Ronald. Eisenstein: A Life in Conflict. New York: Arcade Publishing, 2016.

Kenez, Peter. Cinema and Soviet Society: From the Revolution to the Death of Stalin. London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2001.

Leyda, Jay. Kino: A History of the Russian and Soviet Film. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1983.

Seton, Marie. Sergei M. Eisenstein: A Biography. New York: Grove Press Inc., 1960.

Eisenstein, Sergei. “A Dialectic Approach to Film Form.” http://www.casaruibarbosa.gov.br/arquivos/file/A_Dialectic_Approach_to%20_Film_Form_SergeiEisenstein.pdf

Eisenstein, Sergei

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Eisenstein

 

6 thoughts on “The Monumental Cinema Of Sergei Eisenstein

  1. Wow. Yet again, my mind is blown. I didn’t know virtually ANY of this. I didn’t even know what Eisenstein looked like! I always imagined a guy with a big long white beard! Boy was I wrong!

    Great writing line, Lea: “…his serious, studious side was only one part of the complex montage that made up Sergei Eisenstein.” Kudos, again! lol.

    Yeah, watching those Russian movies definitely has the party line laid on thick. But then again, so do a lot of American movies. I mean, we have the Air Force flying over football games, what the heck is that all about? lol. Nationalism, patriotism, even religious faith are not the easiest things to communicate to people who are on the outside of it. It always looks a little ridiculous, especially when the government isn’t living up to the ideals they’re espousing. To be honest, it’s that kind of tedium that has kept me from diving more into the Russian cinema from that period. I draw the line on the Nazi propaganda cinema, though! No “Triumph Of The Will” for me! I don’t care how great of a director Leni Riefenstahl was!

    Anyways, I’ve never seen “Strike”! I’ve been meaning to, my whole life! I’m going to watch it soon, now! I don’t know anything about the shocking ending! And I have both “Ivans” but only have seen the first one. You definitely have steered me into watching those in the near future.

    Thanks, Lea!!!!

    • STRIKE is fascinating, I recommend it 100%! It’s perhaps not as strong as POTEMKIN but man he put a lot of creativity into it. OCTOBER is another good one.

      IVAN II, of course, is the one that the Soviet government didn’t like and got Eisenstein into hot water. Thus, I highly recommend it. 😉

      Yes, there’s certainly propaganda of sorts in American films too…but there’s a big difference between making patriotic films during wartime or upholding cultural standards (perhaps unconsciously), and a government with a specific ideology deliberately deciding that films have to follow set rules, with no room for error or free speech. It’s a huge difference, which I hope is clear in this month’s posts!

      I am so with you about Riefenstahl. I was a little worried about liking some of Soviet cinema at first, but Soviet directors were under a pressure we have a hard time understanding. And there’s evidence that some of them were more interested in the art of filmmaking than propaganda, but had to comply for their own safety.

      Riefenstahl, on the other hand, used concentration camp victims in one of her films. No.

      • Oh my god, yes. What I was saying in my own garbled way was that I shouldn’t let the propaganda keep me away from checking out more Soviet cinema just because of the propaganda parts. Because I already have my eye-rolling moments. (And I say “moments”; I’m not anti-Capra! lol.) Hollywood – and lots of other places – are free to make whatever film they want. The government doesn’t oversee looking into every comedy, drama, thriller and love story, paranoid it’s putting out “the wrong message”.

        While we’re on the subject, I should state that Hollywood itself – and the golden era(s) that we love so much – makes me feel patriotic! Doesn’t it for you, too? Like….look at what we did! lol. We didn’t do too badly on the music front, either!

        I’m on the case with all the Eisenstein recommendations. Every week I’m picking a year and binging on movies I haven’t seen of that year. Last week was 1951 (great year for movies!) Right now I’m doing 1968. Next week: Eisenstein week! Whoopee! Let’s see how many friends join me!

        • Heck yes, the sheer amount of creativity, talent, and joy that old Hollywood gave the world makes me dang proud! And I can’t resist watching YANKEE DOODLE DANDY around the 4th of July, too.

          Enjoy exploring Eisenstein’s work, there’ll be so many incredible images that stick in your mind! Hmm, wonder how unsuspecting friends would react to the end of STRIKE…! O_o

  2. Hi Lea, I enjoyed this deeper dive into Eisenstein, and my appetite is whetted to see more of his films. My intro to film professor at Penn State, many moons ago, highlighted Eisenstein’s greatness as an international filmmaker, of course, and showed us the Odessa steps sequence from “Potemkin”. It was great to learn more about him, and I appreciate this great post!

    • Oh good, that’s great to hear! I hope it fleshed him out a little too. Like I said in the beginning of my article he’s more familiar as a name than a human being, and it’s always interesting to “get to know” these figures better.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s