Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Protraph Lack of good storyline.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

zre-30676 When "Man With a Movie Camera" was made it created a entirely new perspective of documentary film. Dziga Vertov used a new point of view to show everyday life. Vertov used first person so the audience felt like they were in the movie. This was a success to the public because people had never seen any content like it in the past. Vertov's shots created a turning point in the film industry and created a new genre in film making. "Man With a Movie Camera" was a twist on the traditional documentary film. It is the first reality film of its time. Vertov captures shots of people's everyday life in Russia but the new perspective kept them entertained. Vertov added scenes of real life into the movie to make it feel more real and genuine. He included scenes of real divorce into the movie which displayed genuine reactions and emotions that could not be faked. Vertov also used private controversial scenes in the movie. Vertov used a live child birth in the movie which at that time was rarely done. This concept had not been attempted before and kick started a popular genre in the future.Vertov created a new point of view in the filmmaking industry. Vertov centered the film around the first person point of view and close up shots. Through the film Vertov takes shots of what the average Russian would see throughout their day. This point of view made the film relatable to the views of the movie. This included shots of the city landscape and everyday life. There was also a sense of first person when Vertov uses a moving eye to control where the camera pans to. This makes it seem like a human eye is controlling the shots and cements the first person point of view even more. Vertov also used close up shots and perspectives not easily accesses to the viewer. For example Vertov shows the bottom side of train cars. This is not something that the audience sees everyday and the new images intrigued the audience."Man With a Movie Camera" was a experimental film. Vertov experimented with unique shots and cinematography. Unconventional shots are used to depict the landscape. For example the filmer used a tower to take shots of the cityscape. Stop Motion was used as part of the movie. Stop Motion was not a common practice in filmmaking at the time. Vertov used stop motion to show how filmmakers could manipulate images to make the audience believe an inanimate object moved. This may not seem that exciting but at the movie was filed this was never before seen. This blew the minds of the audience and helped this film rise to popularity. Vertov's experimental film helped progress filmmaking as a whole. His shots inspired a new genre of filmmaking. There are still few movies and TV shows that match the amount of realism in "Man With a Movie Camera". Vertov showed the potential movie effects and laid the groundwork for the future of filmmaking.

jgcorrea A tree. A baby. Machinery. A basketball match. An old lady. Homeless people. Piles of smoke. A busy street. The merry-go-round. A cinema. Another homeless person asleep. A woman who dresses up. In a nutcase, everything is incredibly annoying. This film did not invent the jump cut, the 'montage of attractions,' or the Gestalt-like editing practice. Its 65 minutes seem like 6.5 hours of pure boredom. A waste of time, therefore. A bad example of what has since been labeled 'precursor,' even 'inventive historical classicism.' It's just a succession of random shots, taken by a leisurely director who, in his free time, vaguely edited it. It tried to capture the feel and rhythms of a modern city (Moscow) as well as the joy of living and working in the Worker's Paradise. Stylistically and modernly speaking, the closest comparison would be, for example, with Koyannisqqatsi or Arne Sucksdorf's Rhythms of a City. But Vertov suffers by comparison with any other documentary filmmaker. He is far from being a "must" for filmmakers or film buffs. A revolutionary film? Absolutely not. It did not represent any advance. Berlin: the Symphony of the City, dated 1927, or Joris Ivens' Rain, dated 1929, would best qualify for such epithet, and yet that would be an exaggeration. A documentary? There is a great difference between documentary and propaganda. A documentary generally shows life as it is, while propaganda shows what a filmmaker wants to show in order to make a point and convince others of some idea (usually political or economical). Vertov is frank propaganda. His concept of artistic social responsibility was derived from Stalinist notions and later incorporated into Nazi concepts. His goal was to glorify the Soviet regime. In 1929 Stalin consolidated his power in Russia and was about to embark on what was one of the most brutal and bloody regimes in history. Vertov perhaps did not know then whereto the regime would lead, but he did continue to make films that praised Stalin (Kolybelnaya, for example). Let no artist be condemned just for working for the state. I like Eisenstein, for example. If you must rent and watch The Man With a Movie Camera, do it with a solid perspective, regardless of... taste.

Richard Walker Whilst films showing life in big cities were not exactly rare during the 1920s the inventive style David Kaufman brought to "A Man with a Movie Camera" was so unique and left such an impression that to this day it is still seen as one of the greatest documentaries ever made.Kaufman filmed the picture under the name Dziga Vertov, which translates as spinning top, nicely summing up the frenetic editing and jumping of the shots in the film. Kaufman was no fan of the narrative film feature calling it "the Opium of the people…long live life as it is", which is exactly what he did, preferring to shoot life as he saw it.The film is a city symphony showing the events one day except Kaufman actually filmed it in three cities over a period of four years. Kaufman succeeds in making daily life look thrilling; it's frantic pace bringing a high level of excitement. At the time, audiences must have been thrown off by the editing (the shot length averaging 2.3 seconds was unheard of in 1929). Kaufman essentially makes editing the star. In one sequence we are even shown the editing process, which he combines with still shots to great effect.Adding to the excitement is the regular footage of "the man with a camera". Many of the shots are of footage being taken and great lengths were gone to in order to capture some images. Balancing on a car, lying on train tracks as a locomotive approaches and hovering over a waterfall just to name three. Many versions are available with varying musical accompaniment. The version reviewed was with a score by the cinematic orchestra, which flowed beautifully and helped bring character to the images.It's fair to say that this will not be for everyone, somewhat ironically given our attraction to fast edited movie scenes and mobile phones meaning everybody seems to film every aspect of every day. But no talk or true story would put most people off; but go along for the ride and you'll enjoy it.Plus 1 if: You are a firm admirer of film history and editing Minus 4 if: You prefer your footage of daily like to include grumpy catsthearbiterofgoodtaste

Cinish Narayanan I had picked this up due to academic interest and expected that this would be a bit boring and that I need to explicitly consider the fact that this movie was made way back in 1929.Well, the movie was very engaging. Far from boring, it challenged me to keep up with the multitude of content that the movie presents. It is excellent in everyday-life content , presenting so much of real life. True real content.The extent of passion and effort that has gone into the making of the movie is also striking.Amazing number of techniques used making the movie engaging even today.