Review of The Hollywood Eye by Jon Boorstin (1990)

4/16/19

Patrick Charsky

The screech of the violin in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. The intense need to know in Fatal Attraction. The gut turning scenes of a man hanging from a cliff. Ever wondered why these scenes work so well? Ever think about how a filmmaker puts it all together to make it so good? Jon Boorstin lays it all out in his book The Hollywood Eye: What Makes Movies Work. Boorstin is a writer, producer, and director of movies. He was a producer on the famous film All The President’s Men which won Oscars for it’s expose of the Watergate break in during the Nixon presidency. According to IMDB.com he has eleven credits as a Screenwriter.

The book is rather short. It clocks in at 213 pages. Despite its short length the book is a concise look at how movies are made and what makes them work. In six sections, Boorstin details the way people look at films. He defines three ways of seeing the movies. Voyeurist, vicarious, and visceral are the ways we experience films. The book is a blend of film criticism, technique, anecdote, and film theory. Boorstin talks about great films such as Citizen Kane, Psycho, Fatal Attraction, and Dangerous Liasons. He describes what great movies do and what poor films do not do. In the last chapter he talks about what makes Hollywood films and filmmakers different from the rest of the global film industry

The film uses the three techniques of seeing films to analyze classic films. The voyeur’s eye, the vicarious eye, and the visceral eye are all ways of looking at films according to Boorstin. His description of how each way works is detailed and laced with examples and anecdotes from his own experiences as a filmmaker. In his analysis of Psycho the visceral way of experiencing a film is expertly described. It is one of the best parts of the book. After reading about Notorious, another famous Hitchcock film I was so taken with his analysis that I watched the film for the first time. I was similarly inspired to watch Psycho again. And to watch the infamous shower scene without music to see if, as Boorstin says, it’s not as a good without the music. The analysis of these films is excellent.

Another positive about the book is his anecdotes from personal experiences of working on movies. Boorstin was a producer on All The President’s Men. He talks about the processes that were used to make the film. He says the film wouldn’t have been made without Robert Redford backing the picture and starring in it. He also gives great insight to how Alan Pakula worked on the film. How he had a vision for the film and brought that vision to life. In another anecdote later on the book Boorstin talks about how he was going to make a feature film about an event in Tennessee that happened after WWII. But, it turns out that the events were different from what had been reported. So the project never came to be. It’s stories like these that bring his experiences to life.

The next positive about the book is the way it is structured. The book breaks down into six sections with several chapters to each section. Except for the last section which is a short discussion of Hollywood and it’s competition in the World. Each chapter deals with a specific aspect of film theory and the way we experience films. The fourth chapter talks about ways filmmakers combine aspects of the three ways to see films to create a unique experience in watching films. The book flows very well and is easy to read. It combines theories, stories and films to create a very good read.

Sometimes I felt a little overwhelmed with some of the theories. I’m not a film theorist, but I get the feeling that Boorstin has taken a course or two on Film Theory. Some of his ideas are very high-minded and might go over the heads of some readers who are not well versed in Cinema. The whole book is great. A few sections are very philosophical which would appeal to a specialized audience.

Another negative is that Boorstin rambles sometimes. He seems to go on and on about some aspect of filmmaking or a story from his experiences, but doesn’t make a strong point. It justs seems to go on for a time without coming to a conclusion or making a point.

Aside from some small negatives, I would recommend this book to anyone who was interested in films. I found out about the book from my MFA guide’s Screenwriting section. The way it talks about seeing films was new to me. The films it discusses are classics or new classics which might be underappreciated. Everyone knows about Citizen Kane and Psycho, but what about Notorious? Or Fatal Attraction? The latter films seem worth studying as well. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and would recommend it to any fan of films or someone who makes movies.

Book Review of Screen Language by Cherry Potter (2001)

4/1/2019

Patrick Charsky

Screen Language by Cherry Potter shows filmmaking techniques used by master filmmakers. The book was published in 2001. I found out about the book through my MFA guide that I received in Graduate School. Cherry Potter is a long time film professor who has written widely and taught for many years.

The best part about the book were the films selected for review. I read each chapter and watched each film. The films selected were either recognized masterpieces like Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction or films that deserve a second look like Camino’s Heaven’s Gate and Bertolucci’s The Conformist. The latter two films are underappreciated and Potter does a great service to film scholarship by analyzing them in her valuable book.

The next great aspect of the book was how it was organized. Each thematic chapter was organized around a particular aspect of film language. There were sections that dealt with the use of dreams and fantasies. There was a section about departures from the classic narrative structure. This section was especially good. It turned me on to Mirror by Tarkovsky which is considered his best film. It also discussed different theories about how to structure films which I found fascinating.

The writing was also excellent. There is so much valuable information in this text. It should be required reading for film students looking to study films or make their own films. I was enraptured with the amount of theoretical sophistication as well as the short reviews of each study film. I couldn’t wait to read each chapter and watch each film.

The book is decidedly academic. It might be over the heads of non specialist readers. Fanboys will be turned off from this book as too many art films not enough popcorn filcks. The films reviews are a little tedious and maybe not enough.

Aside from those drawbacks the book is excellent. It provides a concise analysis of different aspects of film language. It combines theory with examples it a way that is easy to read and easy to understand. One of the best film studies books I’ve ever read. Brings back films that were dismissed as too arty or bloated and sets them in their rightful place as film art.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in film studies or filmmaking. It might not be for the fanboy audience, but it shows film as a glorious art form which anyone can appreciate.