Aspects from Melies, Eisenstein, and Dmytryk that Have Shaped Modern Film

There will likely be terms, names and concepts that are unfamiliar to you—look them up! The text will become much more accessible and interesting once you know what the author is referring to in his writing. Not sure what “Actuality Films” are? there’s a wikipedia entry on it!
Want to know what Gunning is talking about when he speaks of Méliès films—many of them are on youtube. Be a curious reader!
What does Gunning mean by the term “Cinema of Attraction”? What is he setting this in opposition to?
What implications does this history of cinema have for the way we understand moving-image art, entertainment and media?
How does Eisentein understand the relationship between language and film?
How does montage create meaning?
What is the relationship between what is shot (the footage) and its organization in time (montage)?
How do different fields of creative pursuit (music, language, literature, fine art, etc.) serve as tools or metaphors for his discussion of film, and particularly montage? What are the larger (political, intellectual) stakes that Eisenstein claims for montage?
How do Dmytryk’s “rules” differ from Eisenstein’s discussion of editing?
What kind of films do these two approaches lead to?
What world-view can we draw these two approaches more broadly?
Eisenstein worked as an artist dedicated to the utopian ideals of the communist revolution,
Dmytryk (though embroiled in McCarthyism’s “Red Scare”) worked for Hollywood, how do their two approaches resonate with these different political worldviews and ideologies? Is there a direct connection in your mind?
Feel free to make connections to your own experiences with media and the digital age we are all living in. You do not have to remain within the historical bounds of the text!
YOU DO NOT NEED TO ANSWER ALL (OR ANY) OF THE ABOVE QUESTIONS. THESE ARE JUST SOME GUIDELINES AND POINTS TO KEEP IN MIND AS YOU ARE READING!