Is cutting a movie a form of manipulation? Where Bazin broke with Eisenstein

Is editing a neutral tool, or a way of steering what you think? Many theorists of the 1920s and 1930s emphasized how cinema could manipulate reality. Eisenstein felt that the collision of shots could manipulate the emotions of the audience and create film metaphors. André Bazin, a French critic, said that this was exactly the problem.

Bazin argued that realism is the most important function of cinema. His call for objective reality in film, understood through deep focus and the lack of montage, was linked to his belief that the interpretation of a film or a scene should be left to the spectator. He advocated deep focus, wide shots and what he called true continuity through mise-en-scène, over experiments in editing and visual effects. He championed documentaries and the films of Italian neorealism.

Bazin's life was as unlikely as his ideas. After graduating, he pursued a career as a teacher but was denied a teaching post because of his stammer. During the German occupation of Paris he founded a ciné-club, and in 1951 he co-founded Cahiers du cinéma. He died of leukemia at 40, one day after shooting began on The 400 Blows, which François Truffaut dedicated to him.

The split with the Soviets was clear: Bazin's dismissal of montage and Cahiers' assertion of the primacy of directors became the rift between West and Soviet filmmaking. For one side, a film makes meaning by cutting. For the other, it should reveal the world and let the viewer decide.