‘Old and New’ was about the re-construction of the countryside and the new methods of work on collective farms. This article is a fine example of ‘old-school’ criticism, where no room for misinterpretation of the film can be found. The viewer must and cannot think anything other than this. To diverge from it would be very wrong. It is quite critical of the film and of Eisenstein. It starts by saying the audience will be ‘quite disappointed’. The author points out that the film took three years to make and during that time the nature of life changed, leaving the film commenting not on the present, but on the past of 3 years ago. He urges the director to embrace the real possibilities of Soviet Cinema. He criticises him for working too slowly – suggesting that Eisenstein works at the speed of ‘Pushkin’s era’. This criticism is a good example of the way directors were taken to task in those days. It is not just the film, but the whole package. It is mild criticism compared to what was to come for Eistenstein.
The montage of stills on further pages comes from the film ‘Revolt of the Grandmothers’, a film with an admirable title that is sadly lost.
These wonderful 1929 magazines are among few surviving documents in the public domain portraying the face of a golden age of cinema. If you wish to purchase the entire collection of 11 pieces please contact us.