10 Essential Books on Film & Media

Cinema, like any other art, has had its fair share of theoreticians and authors with idiosyncratic perspectives on the medium, with a specific vision concerning its potential or role within society, or with a particular style or working method with an underlying idea or system of thought. In most instances, this foundation became manifest either through the works themselves or through the artists’ words given in interviews and press conferences. Occasionally, however, there were individuals who

laid their minds on paper, writing essays, manifestos, autobiographies or full-blown treatises on media and film theory. These texts shed light on the work of the authors or on the way they interpret the environment in which they manoeuvre themselves and can in many cases provide crucial insight that will fundamentally alter the readers’ understanding not just of their films but of cinema in general. In this video are presented 10 books of such nature, who have encouraged the production of the c

ontent uploaded on the channel since its beginning and without which there would be a very different set of themes and videos on it. Every now and then there will also be a few additional honourable mentions and supplementary texts indicated for those wishing to continue their film theory investigation. In any case, the books referred ahead, are substantial and influential literary works that will superbly enrich all cinephiles and help them appreciate, make sense, digest, and assimilate cinema,

regardless of its origin, period and style. Sergei Eisenstein is one of the great figures in world cinema and has been mentioned before on several videos on the channel. His visionary, ground-breaking approach to cinema resulted in creating some of the most influential films and iconic scenes in the history of filmmaking, forever altering its course and shaping it in ways that are still as impactful, touching and startling as they were 100 years ago. Luckily, Eisenstein was also a prolific writ

er and for decades he wrote articles, essays, theoretical text pieces, and voluminous notebook entries, which showcased his intellectual modus operandi and thoughtful understanding of the possibilities of cinema right from its infancy, illuminating the hidden engine and gearwork that lie at the base of his powerful creations. The writings of Eisenstein allow one to get an comprehensive grasp of silent cinema, particularly the Soviet productions, which will prove useful to anyone curious to learn

about what made his films so markedly unconventional and distinguished from other productions, revealing also the challenges put forth by a medium still fresh and malleable enough to allow for some modernist experimentation and vanguardism, even if conscribed by the ideological fences of the period, dedicating his time often to describe various concepts such as the different kinds of montage, the definition of expressive movement, or the conflicts and different kinds of dynamics acting as the i

nnards of his works. What usually draws people the most in his film writings, and perhaps the reason why they are still taken as foundational and mandatory, is the fact that they at some point delve extensively and in detail into his famed montage method, the “Montage of Attractions”, as derived and expanded after the Kuleshov effect, and this allows a modern reader and spectator to understand it as the root of what we see in modern creations today, but also to perceive the evolution the method

suffered through the decades. Other than that, Eisenstein is a sharp thinker and theoretician, not a mere and ordinary technician, his brilliant mind shines in sophisticated rationalizations of cinema, whilst acknowledging in his writings his clearly defined aim to move instead of amusing the viewer, “to help the audience feel their humanity” as he has put it, making evident his pursuit of organicity on all levels, and evincing the mental guidelines used to steer the crafting of a film as someth

ing beyond a simple visual and auditory product. Additionally, one may also look at the writings of Pudovkin and Dziga Vertov, two other early Soviet master directors, whose theories and work process marked cinema during its experimental and creative youth. From quite early on Cinema’s had artists and psychologists attempting to crystallize a theory of film that could synthetize the basics of its functioning and formulate the premises that could aid in a reading of its capacities and effects on

an audience. Whilst Béla Balázs, Hugo Münsterberg and Jean Epstein are often cited as having written some of the most significant, compelling and original texts of early film theory, one ought to pay particular attention to a short but famous essay by the intellectual stalwart, German philosopher and cultural critic, Walter Benjamin, named “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. In this deceitfully short text, Benjamin packs a wide, pervasive theory of art that seeks to exalt th

e then new media of photography and filmmaking, by justifying their value as found in its emancipation from dated concepts of authenticity and from the religious aura typically associated with preceding forms of art, and by acknowledging its democratization and availability to the common man, thereby also making it a potentially weapon of political nature, a claim which is corroborated by projects of ideological character and propaganda products. Noting the erasure of the distinction between exp

ert critics and mundane viewers for example, he also effectively dispels the intolerant elitism and aristocratic haughtiness that characterized opera, painting, theatre or sculpture until then, bringing cinema to a place where each and everyone may partake their time and minds, a true art for all. At the same time, he recognises the artificial nature underlying the celebrity status, as derived from the magic of the camera, a commodification of the persona or character played by the actors, there

by foreshadowing a criticism of film stardom that would be developed many decades later. Hence, Benjamin’s work stands as one of the first major assessments of the power of cinema that deserves to be known by any cinephile. Make sure to watch Prof. Moeller’s video on Benjamin’s theory in his channel Carefree Wandering, for a great in-depth and clear exploration of the text. A link will be on the description. A name often cited in film criticism due to the stature obtained with the reviews and es

says on lauded magazine Cahiers du cinéma is André Bazin. After his death in 1958 at mere 40 years of age, several of his writings were collected and published in a book under the title “What is Cinema?”, and although varied in their nature, a coherent and reoccurring idea emerges from them. In direct contrast with Eisenstein’s theory of montage, Bazin extolled the power of “true continuity”, of long-takes or even sequence shots, and deep focus as devices to enhance objective reality, whilst als

o championing an interpretation of cinema under such techniques as a window for interiority, a pull into the characters’ emotional landscape that navigates amidst ambiguity and observational poetics, betraying an inherent, persistent interest in the poetry of mundanity and worldliness, as well as on anti-dramatic performances and character depictions. His passionate and philosophically sound defence of film as a vehicle for a tactile, palpable and intelligent description of the world and its sto

ries, as well as his promotion of an individual vision for the director, which culminated with the development of an auteur theory for film artists, grant his collected writings with a seductive flair and demonstrate his unwavering commitment to the advocation of cinema as an outstanding, magical artistic conception. Bazin’s writing is one of fine poetic lyricism and acute philosophical finesse too, resulting in one of the most stimulating reads on cinema theory, whilst retaining accessibility,

never coming off as opaque or arcane, notwithstanding his astounding erudition. When reading Bazin, one immediately acknowledges how his spirit was carried and transmuted into images by the hands of directors such as Tarkovsky, Angelopoulos, Jancsó or Hsiao-hsien to cite a few, and in “What is Cinema?”, one ends up with the feeling that those masterful artists have been vindicated even before their works had been even conceptualized and assembled. “Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Real

ity” is a 1960 book by German philosopher Siegfried Kracauer, who by the time of its publication had become an immigrant and university professor in the USA to escape the seemingly unstoppable growth of fascism in Germany. A friend of the previously mentioned Walter Benjamin and of Theodor Adorno, two of the greatest intellectuals of the 20th century, Kracauer, a great thinker and philosopher himself too, had written extensively about cinema whilst still in Germany, before WWII, with both public

reviews and articles, and plenty of personal notes, already prefiguring some of the ideas that would coalesce into “Theory of Film”. In the book, Kracauer reveals his understanding of cinema through the lens of materiality mostly, hence the “redemption” mentioned in the title. According to him, within its form, lies an implicit dependence of the Past interpreted as the source for the present actuality, a deeply rooted sense of causality, which naturally also evokes a passion for the fleeting, i

nconspicuous moments and action, a love towards the ephemeral minutiae that are inevitably immortalized, regardless of their lack of grandeur and distinct unspectacularity, thereby leading him to classify cinema in a now famous expression as a “rag-picker”. While his characterization of cinema under those terms and with such goals would suffice to turn his theory as one of the most significant ever devised for the medium, by adding cinema’s power of portraying the physicality by “staging the uns

taged”, as well as highlighting the indeterminacy of its subjects and their thoughts as established by themselves and not by external entities with the aid of montage, as formalist authors achieved with great success in the first half of the 20th century, Kracauer ends up reinforcing the interpretation of cinema as a realistic means of showcasing and exploring the world, a thought not too distant from Bazin, even if formed through different devices. Youtube channel Film and Media Studies has a f

antastic 30 minute long video that makes Kracauer’s book and ideas accessible in a fluent and expertly weaved manner, make sure to check it out later. Marshall McLuhan’s “Understanding Media” is arguably one of the most influential texts in media theory and criticism ever devised. Published at a time when TV’s influence was expanding exponentially and entering the private households of every family in the civilized world, this remarkable, and in many instances prescient analysis of the multitude

of media platforms, whether it’s TV, radio, phone or cinema, is striking for its indictments and warnings of the insidious intellectual and emotional shaping particularly of the visual mediums. This broad-ranging and at times kaleidoscopic examination in which the age defining dictum “the medium is the message” is originally uttered, isn’t exclusively focused on cinema, but the insight it carries is applied to the 7th art with pristine coherence and astute efficacy. The distinction between “hot

” and “cold” mediums is rightly adapted to film works just the same, whilst his observations on the brutalizing nature of media as one of the sources for apathy and indifference, the disintegration effects that speed and pace effect on form and structure, the acknowledgement of media as a means to turn the psyche and society into an echo chamber, and entertainment as a strategy of neutrality for media with commercial interests, as well as the understanding of the continuity of space and time as

marks of an educated and sensible society, can all be used to evaluate and appreciate cinema as an unique contraption with humanistic capacity and pedagogical potential, as a bona fide Art, that thrives in freedom and creative expression rooted in our most edifying aspects and nature. Check the video on McLuhann’s theory by Prof. Moeller too, to get a marvellously presented and much broader approach on the book, whilst also giving a chance to Neil Postman’s striking media critique found in “Amus

ing Ourselves to Death”, if you’re interested in the way media conceives, shapes and controls the public discourse and guides the social structure in ways that are pernicious and ultimately harmful to our intellectual development and bodily health. Know today primarily as a filmmaker and with a string of well received, extensively praised films in recent years, Paul Schrader first drew attention on a wider scale with his series of scripts adapted by Martin Scorsese, the most acclaimed one having

resulted in “Taxi Driver”, that exceptional, indeed iconic cultural American piece of film. A couple of years before that however, Schrader had already made a splash in film criticism circles with his book “Transcendental Style in Film”. One finds, amidst this study focused particularly on the works of Carl Th. Dreyer, Yasujiro Ozu and Robert Bresson, three of the greatest and most influential directors of all time, a passionate and meticulous overview of stylistic traits, devices and themes th

at run across the three men’s works. Schrader highlights aspects such as their probing eye and sensibility towards the mundane, the estrangement and malaise found within protagonists and which ultimately secludes them from their environment, the contemplative tone and pace mixed with elliptic storytelling, the questioning of the meaning of existence, the observation of irrational passion or unexplainable mystical events that suddenly emerge, and many other distinctive approaches to plot and aest

hetics, all of these used in the pursuit of the ineffable, the invisible, a transcendental world that subtly permeates the many notable works conceived by the masterful directors. Written when he was a mere 24-year-old man, Schrader’s dissertation may not entirely convince all of his readers of its quasi-religious interpretation of cinema, but at the end of the day, his creative and individual perspective on film allows each reader to reflect on his own take of the 7th art and will inevitably br

oaden his understanding of some of cinema’s greatest works. On a sidenote, the most recent reedition of the text offers Schrader’s re-reading and contextualization of his system of thought within the works of Bergman, Tarkovsky, Kiarostami, Tarr, Angelopoulos and Reygadas, turning the book into a wider and still relevant filmic meditation. At this point in the video, and given the regular citation of his works on previous uploads, it is obvious that Robert Bresson is an unavoidable name in any d

eep foray into the world of cinema. For those still unacquainted with any of these films, a first viewing is likely to arise a set of unexpected questions such as “why are the actors so mechanical and undramatic?” or “what’s with the repetition in the action and movements?”, with Bresson’s characteristic pensive and brooding mood, penchant for silence and surprisingly enigmatic matter-of-fact descriptions of reality further refining his unique perspective. His striking commitment to “cinematogra

phy” as a distinguished from “mere cinema”, a sort of exalted, pure act of artistic creation of a higher level, is bound to cause acute strangeness and a sense of discomfort to viewers used to the more theatrical, melodramatic and artificial cinema tropes that we all came to assimilate and accept as the conventional way of films to come across. The underlying motive is something as simple as “realism”, in the sense of performing in the closest possible way as if things were really happening, wit

hout phony, preconceived or planned emotions, to merely react as one does in actuality, spontaneously without thinking of the act itself. A video will be produced at some point later on, focused solely on Bresson’s technique, but for now one may indicate his book, “Notes on the Cinematograph” as the perfect manual to unveil Bresson’s art. In it, his method, ideas an aesthetics are revealed in short aphoristic style with notable rigour, exposing the core meaning of his idiosyncratic, austere styl

e, in a way that resembles the haikus of enlightened Zen masters or their pithy death poems . “Notes on the Cinematograph”, albeit informing the reader of the hidden machinations, philosophy and concerns amidst Bresson’s portrayals of humanity, also works as a guide for an entire kind of subtle and sublime filmmaking that does not overtly and directly reveal itself fleetingly to its viewers, and in that sense it is meaningful and valuable as a piece of film theory that remains mandatory for peop

le seeking the disclose and interpret the work of, say, Michael Haneke, Pedro Costa, Lav Diaz, Nuri Bilge Ceylan or Abbas Kiarostami, to cite a few great directors whose films can be said to have inherited some of the principles of the French master. Among all the books on filmmaking ever written, Bresson’s short manual is definitely one of the most resplendent and profound, a compulsory acquisition for any cinephiles bookshelf. The time has now come to mention what is one of the most thorough,

sophisticated and notoriously difficult writings on film theory to have been published. Gilles Deleuze, by the time he presented his ground-breaking book “Cinema 1”, was a philosopher of great stature, his most famous works being “Difference and Repetition” and “Anti-Oedipus”, the latter co-written with psychoanalyst Félix Guattari, with the French philosopher having displayed a particular interest in metaphysics, politics and arts throughout his literary career. In “Cinema 1 & 2”, Deleuze intro

duces and develops a film theory that in a very briefly resumed manner divides the film picture between the “movement-image” and the “time-image”. The former has a linear, classic dynamic based on plot action and other typical devices, whereas the latter demonstrates a preoccupation with a thought, the psychological landscape of the film, with a focus on time and memory, also highlighting suspended action or non-action, as well as incommunicability and the contradictions inherent of the human co

ndition. As he himself describe sit, it is a “cinema of the seer, not of the agent”, meditative in tone, pacing and mood, interested in the mental lives of its subjects, effectively a cinema of the mind, not of matter, a characteristic that is common to the works of all great directors, form Antonioni to Mizoguchi, from Bergman to Tarkovsky, from Murnau to Dreyer. As mentioned, Deleuze has a dense and at times opaque prose, riddled with neologisms and terms originally crafted by him to encapsula

te his unique ideas makes for a hard reading for most people, but his immense cultural baggage and intellectual knowledge is effectively crystallized into one of the most admirable and engaging texts that film theory has ever seen, resulting in a book that is bound to forever change, enrich and influence the way you will look at cinema. Once again, make sure to check the video on Youtube channel Film and Media Studies, if you’re interested in a finely crafted and more exhaustive exposition of De

leuze’s theory. If there was a single book about cinema that one ought to pick, before delving into the medium in a full-time schedule, “Sculpting in Time” would be the first recommendation. Tarkovsky’s investigation of his own remarkable seven films, and of cinema in general, takes the reader inside the head of one of cinema’s greatest artists, an intimate and rather personal ride throughout the Russian director’s life, thoughts, dreams, influences, experiences, memories and aspirations. Like h

is own films, “Sculpting in Time” is a mosaic reflecting variegated natures and concerns, seamlessly hopping between memoir, poetry, history, correspondence, film theory and autobiography, but taken as a whole, it is one of the most fundamental books on cinema ever written. In it, Tarkovsky presents and expounds his theory of “poetic cinema”, his own method of filmmaking and which he finds traces also in Dovzhenko, Parajanov, Buñuel or Mizoguchi for example, a way of structuring film which aims

to overcome the barriers of literality, the circumscriptions of closed meanings, the fraudulence of theatricality and profit-based productions, the limitations of temporal linearity and causality, by finding and thriving in “rhythm”, which to him is the most important aspect in the creation of a film and the core of the film image, all in the pursuit of a singular artistic voice and as a means to reach individually each and every viewer. Even with his keen, perceptive intellect, wittiness, and s

ensibility, Tarkovsky is never obscure or puzzling, his discourse remains clear, smooth and lucid throughout, thereby resulting in a reading that despite offering a stunning interpretation of film which to some may be comparable to a literal paradigm shift, is accessible regardless of one’s familiarity with the subject. After reading “Sculpting in Time”, very few if any films will come across as abstruse or encumbered by a veil of impenetrability, even if still shrouded in ambiguity or lyricism.

Viewers interested in books written by directors about their films and work, with an interest in self-examination and bearing substantial psychological insight, should also give a chance to Ingmar Bergman’s The Magic Lantern and Images, and to Michelangelo Antonioni’s The Architecture of Vision. Peter Watkins is an English director with feature films, documentaries, TV mini-series and other productions, who is known for his inventive mixture of documentary and fiction, being described as one of

the founding figures of docudrama, as well as for his controversial takes on the media industry. His films feature profound social awareness and deal with weighty and pressing themes such as war, suicide, totalitarianism, police violence, poverty, nuclear holocaust, the arms race and other sensitive subjects, but his main attack is centred mostly around media and the way it portrays those issues and how it shapes the public discourse and understanding of it. His book “Media Crisis”, unfortunate

ly still unpublished in English but available in Spanish and French, is a radical indictment of the media industry, criticising the way it exploits entertainment to submit and distract the viewers from relevant concerns, its total thematic control and catering to consumerism and economic policy, the standardization of narrative forms and sabotage of critical debate, the application of high speed and fragmented time to prevent individual reflexion, the persuasion attempts of its supposed neutrali

ty and impartiality, as well as its short-sighted and restricted access to information, curtailing of public critical dialogue regarding its strategies resulting in professional proscription and exclusion, and the collaboration with teaching institutions to ensure the normalization and uniformity of its students and aspiring artists and creators, among other alarming problems. The book describes the awarded English director’s decades long experience as a creator and as a spectator, offering a pr

ofound critical evaluation of the TV shows, feature films, news, commercials, media corporations and education system, from which his most precise and important definition arises, the “monoform”, which he classifies as the main internal narrative device that drives most audio-visual productions today, describing it as a bombardment of highly compressed images and sounds, edited into an accelerated pace, with audio tracks brimming with music, voice and sound effects to produce a surprise effect,

as well as melodramatic melodies saturating several scenes, and rhythmic dialogues of incessant, permanent camera motion. The aforementioned seminal work by Marshall McLuhan “Understanding Media” had predicted in some ways the end result typified by the “monoform” assessed by Peter Watkins, which is now in full bloom, but the English director doesn’t just pinpoint the troubles and traps of modern media, for towards the end of the book he also offers in return a meticulous plan as a solution for

the problems society is facing with the presented media content, one which may seem to be fighting a losing battle in a milieu firmly in the tyrannical grip of social media and giant media corporations, but which is a necessary effort that demands tremendous courage and sacrifice if freedom and creativity is to be salvaged from the gutter in which it lays today. For those interested in texts of media criticism, another noteworthy and early work is the 1967 book “The Society of the Spectacle” by

Guy Debord, in which the French author lampoons and denounces the consumer culture, the marketing excesses which enslaved mass media and eroded artistic liberty and authenticity. So here are the 10 books that have informed and inspired the most the content produced, and the vision presented on this channel. If you enjoyed the video and found these recommendations useful, feel free to leave a like, comment, or to share it with your friends or acquaintances. As always, thank you for listening and

see you next time.