Bordwell’s interventions
in The life of mise-en-scène
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact for pricing options.


If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

In the article, David Bordwell provides an account of the history of mise-en- scene criticism and the importance of widescreen processes to those arguments. Bordwell is setting out his stall, making the case for the approaches to be expounded at length in these substantial works. Bordwell makes clear his scepticism about Movie's interest in the integration of 'how' and 'what', but this last claim overlooks the other element of the journal's organicism: coherence across a work. Strategies that operate the length of River of No Return, such as the systematic use of long takes, are a major concern of V.F Perkins's article. Bordwell appeals for a critical account of directorial decisions which refers to the 'prevailing representative norms set upon all such choices'. The most striking feature of Bordwell's 'historical poetics of Hollywood cinema' is the impoverished results which the directly stated ambitions of the method promise.

The life of mise-en-scène

Visual style and British film criticism, 1946–78


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 50 30 0
Full Text Views 21 5 0
PDF Downloads 10 1 0