Jean Epstein’s “the fall of the house of usher” (1928) – REVIEW

Adaptation of two stories By Edgar Allan PoE – “the Oval portrait” and “the fall of the house of usher”. The author is a disciple of chinaimpression.org Abel Hans and Louis Deluca, master Luis Bunuel.

Why Epstein decided to merge two stories (which led to an altercation with an assistant and screenwriter Bunuel and the beginning of his independent artistic career)? My guess I will make in the end. But first, a little about aesthetics.

Before Epstein had two objectives: 1) to convey the atmosphere of a family curse, madness and decay characteristic of short stories; 2) to create an atmosphere of tension and horror characteristic of the mystical genre as a whole.

“Vampire” Dreyer has not yet been cleared, and Epstein, there was only one sample of the genre – films of the German expressionists with their theatricality and beauty, focusing on the scenery and actors of the game. However, these features of expressionism Epstein most and disliked. As, however, and the literary, considering that the Director himself has to create their own scenarios, without reducing cinema to other art forms. But Epstein as a writer, but in the film he consistently defended the theory of “why” and the autonomy of the cinematic language.

So what is the path taken in Epstein?

1) To create an atmosphere a La the Director used primarily close-UPS and double exposure. Large plans like crushed house of usher to part: pendulum, candles, curtains, doors, Windows, musical instruments exist by themselves, move at their own pace, separated from each other and from man. And each of the items is crushed multiple exposure, reinforcing the atmosphere of decay and decline. The use of rapid to image the movement of people and the normal rate for the image motion also works on this effect: house lives his life, more intense than his masters, which seemed to get bogged down in the decaying space.

2) To create a General atmosphere of terror using a combination of only semiotically significant and only semiotically neutral techniques within the same mounting phrase. In fact every such phrase is a counterpoint. This is especially noticeable in the scene of his wife’s funeral: the objective of the camera is punctuated by the subjective, the normal rate of movement – slow, normal image – double exposure, neutral angles – top and bottom, the middle ground is a large, consistent installation – parallel. Contrast the construction and installation of each phrase and creates a feeling of intense expectation of something unknown and therefore frightening.

Why Epstein has combined two stories in one? Topic “the Oval portrait” – creative destruction: the creation of perfect works of art kills the life that it generates. Similarly, understood the film and Sam Epstein – suffice it to mention his essay “the Devil’s cinema”, the name of which tells about the main idea: the film – destructive, human-readable, literary plot, the conventions of culture. But such destruction leads to creation. This is what happens in this movie: surreal kinoprem destroying ordinary perception, create the necessary atmosphere; the film is destroying literary Foundation, creates a new work of art. If the “Oval portrait” gave Epstein the topic, the “Drop” form, allowing the full force to demonstrate the effects of the destruction of the family, estates and life by means of film language.

Very beautiful and creepy film, where modern techniques are used for transmission of an intriguing story and creating a tense atmosphere.

Copyright © 2009 – 2017 Horrorzone.ru

© 2017 – 2019, paradox. All rights reserved.