This documentary promoting the joys of life in a Soviet village centers around the activities of the Young Pioneers. These children are constantly busy, pasting propaganda posters on walls, ... Read allThis documentary promoting the joys of life in a Soviet village centers around the activities of the Young Pioneers. These children are constantly busy, pasting propaganda posters on walls, distributing hand bills, exhorting all to "buy from the cooperative" as opposed to the Pri... Read allThis documentary promoting the joys of life in a Soviet village centers around the activities of the Young Pioneers. These children are constantly busy, pasting propaganda posters on walls, distributing hand bills, exhorting all to "buy from the cooperative" as opposed to the Private Sector, promoting temperance, and helping poor widows. Experimental portions of the f... Read all
- Director
- Writer
Featured reviews
However, and this is important, the film can't be completely dismissed because of its strong bias. First, for a 1920s documentary, it's pretty well made and took a lot of work. Second, despite the government strictly controlling this film, it does give an idealized view of the early years of the Soviet Union--minus, of course, such things as food shortages, purges and the like. So for film historians, it is an interesting film. But don't at all confuse this with real life--it's all carefully orchestrated. However, I WAS confused by the odd plot throughout the film--what did the mental patients and other odd portions of the final portion of the film have to do with the beginning?! I think (and I am guessing here) that perhaps these people might have been a way to describe the pre-Soviet days--sick and disturbed. However, it sure was vague and there was a lot of material in the film that just seemed to be random (such as the portions on radios). Weird.
By the way, there are a few odd things about the film. While audiences of the time must have thought the backwards portions of the film were cool, today it does appear terribly dated. Also, by today's standards, showing repeated closeups of the dead guy seemed really, really creepy. Also, while most might not think of this, most of the kids in this film were probably killed in the Great Patriotic War (WWII) and this makes it all pretty sad, as these kids would have been on the front lines during the country's invasion.
This film is better than the average propaganda film. It makes use of some of the innovative techniques that were developed in American comedies to add interest to the film. Obviously shot on a low budget, it does not have the same production values that were current with American comedies of the same era. Many have praised the film for its "innovation", however, a brief survey of the American comedy films shows that this is not true.
In this age of political correctness, it is fashionable to say that no matter how good a film may be artistically, if it is ethically flawed, then it should be shunned. This film added to and promoted an effort that murdered Millions, and set up a system of communes that didn't work even brought starvation to many. So if you decry films like "The Birth of a Nation" with its heroes, the Klu-Klux-Klan, or "The Triumph of the Will" that showed a Nazi rally as glorious and beautiful, then this is one you should also decry.
It should be noted that the Lenin and Stalin were responsible for murdering millions of their own people. They are at the top of the brutal dictators of all time - no one, not even Hiter comes close. We are talking over 60 Million lives and that is only what can be verified. Vertov is their promoter. I feel he should be held to the same standard as the people who promoted and propagandized for Hitler.
The brutal reality behind this happy little film belies its innocence. It was a tool to promote a vicious, murderous regime, and that is historical fact.
Although there isn't a story in the conventional sense, two common themes hold it together and give it substance beyond the individual sequences. In terms of content, the activities of the Young Pioneers form the connection between the numerous short sequences. The various experiments and special camera effects themselves form the other main thread, because they are much more than mere visual tricks. In every case, they represent Vertov's effort to take the obvious, literal images that are inherent in the material, and to project them to an extreme that is either perfectly logical or perfectly impossible, depending on one's point of view.
In most of Vertov's features, he is openly interested in promoting what he considered to be the virtues of the Soviet state. Yet the interesting thing about his best features, of which this is one, is that they also have a timeless quality, because - whether he realized it consciously or not - his way of looking at things sometimes goes well beneath the surface, and when it does, it can bring out themes that underlie humanity in general, without respect to political systems.
"Kino-Eye" is certainly not as polished as "Man With a Movie Camera" - in particular, it could have benefited from tighter editing and selection of material - but it is definitely worthwhile in itself. Not only can you see Vertov's technique in a stage of advanced development, but the movie also has some material and sequences that are quite interesting in themselves.
It is interesting to compare this film with Vertov's "Three Songs of Lenin" ten years later. While "Kinoeye" is interested in showing the truth about life and the world, "Three Songs" is only interested in dogmatic praise of Lenin. The two films show the difference between the Soviet Union of Lenin and the Soviet Union of Joseph Stalin. This film shows people drinking, smoking, taking cocaine, and joking. We see disfigured people in an insane asylum, we see a homeless boy sleeping in the streets and a man who died in the streets. In contrast to this, in "Three Songs," everybody is heroic and everybody is marching forward, there are more machines than people, and the film suggests that Lenin magically solved all the problems of the past. One can argue that the Soviet Union was facing the threat of Nazi Germany in 1934 and therefore needed heroic militaristic films to inspire their people. The same images of poverty and people just surviving day to day, that we get in "Kinoeye" would not have inspired people faced with the threat of Nazi insanity.
These things are hard to judge, but when socialist realism turned into socialist heroism and only showed the good and strong instead of showing everything, I think it took a big step away from the truth. I should like to think that Lenin would have loved "Kinoeye" and hated "Three Songs of Lenin". After all, he never flinched from looking upon and seeing the darker sides of reality.
Did you know
- Alternate versionsThere is an Italian edition of this film on DVD, distributed by DNA srl, "L'UOMO CON LA MACCHINA DA PRESA (1929) + CINEOCCHIO (1924)" (2 Films on a single DVD), re-edited with the contribution of film historian Riccardo Cusin. This version is also available for streaming on some platforms.
- ConnectionsEdited into Man with a Movie Camera (1929)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Film oko
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 18m(78 min)
- Color
- Sound mix