Montage

"Cinema is, first and foremost, montage." Eisenstein certainly lives by his words. Though he is quick to note that montage is present in other forms of art, like hieroglyphics, film, due to reproduction and movie technology, allows for montage to be utilized and seen in a new, active manner. In “October”, Eisenstein creates an entire movie of montage through various rapidly changing shots and mood music. He relies on montage so much that characters are reduced to the proletariat and the bourgeois. Also, these actors are shown on screen in such quick shots that at times it is difficult to remember who they represent as well as if they have been on screen before. Furthermore, the plot is merely a retelling of the Revolution of 1917. The lack or triviality of these features are not necessarily a flaw of the film, as Eisenstein notes: "The means of production determine the form." For him, the capacity to edit such quick cuts into montages create the film into its intended form.

Similarly, Benjamin also discusses what this new technology means for the art form. This type of mechanical reproduction allows artists to break away from art’s past and the rituals associated with it. For Eisenstein, this takes on double meaning. First, he is able to produce a piece that relies heavily on the technology of the time and is impossible to create without the reproduction capabilities of a camera. Second, this breaking from tradition mirrors the subject of the film--the break from the old empire into a new nation. Concurrently, the chaos and rapidity of the montages reflect and add to the pandemonium of a revolution.

Though I cannot say that “October” is a film I would view again, I do think that it does reflect a change in film and film theory. It truly uses the technological capabilities in a new way. The film’s utilization of these new abilities both contribute to the film’s meaning and the advancement of film and art theory. For that alone, “October” has etched a place in the history of film.