Impacts of WW1 On the Shape of The World Cinema Industry

Student
Instructor
Course
Date
Abstract
As a means of documenting combat and influencing public opinion, the First World War had a major influence on the change of cinema. As a result, it had a big impact on the public's view of cinema as a socially acceptable medium, as well as on the evolution of certain film genres, as well as on global trends in movie-going.
Impacts of WW1 On the Shape of The World Cinema Industry
The effects of war on global cinema are explored in this article. Social views about cinema-going were influenced by the belief that films provided people on the home front with a unique opportunity to participate in the war experience from the comfort of their own homes. As censorship of war films was imposed in most belligerent nations, this urge to communicate war atrocities was seen as a crucial way to show allies and neutrals that the supporters and neutrals were on board with the war effort and that it was succeeding. Because of the difficulties in capturing the realism of warfare and the boundaries of obtainable expertise, some film producers used manufactured materials.
Even though movies were not a place where the broadcast was "broken," the war expedited the creation of what would become known as newsreels to respond to this need for knowledge, which also assisted birth of the category of feature-length film. Even while commercial cinema makers released pacifist and patriotic films throughout the time, many of the most popular films of the era avoided the war entirely (Whalan 616). The employment of animation and the strengthening of the "star" system via the use of prominent personalities for patriotic causes were two further advances in film that were accelerated by the war. Wartime economic realities also influenced changes in cinema distribution and production.
Cinema Going before and during the war
Cinema was developed as a prominent medium just before World War I for popular pleasure. As a result, screenings, which had previously taken place in various settings, such as music halls, fairgrounds, and nickelodeons, are now taking place in purpose-built facilities. Year after year, they grew in size and splendor, as well as in number. The almost 3,000-seat Mark Strand Theatre, which opened on Broadway in New York City in October 1914, was the latest and biggest addition to more than 10,000 exhibition halls (George, 6). Over 4 million people could be accommodated in the 5,000 permanent theatres in Great Britain by 1914. Despite Russia's reputation as a backward country, there were 200 cinema theaters in St. Petersburg and Moscow.
As a popular form of entertainment, the cinema was viewed with disdain by traditional arbiters of cultural taste due to its carnival roots and mostly working-class audience. The absurdity of this industry cannot be put on a level with art by anybody except an insane person. Better performance halls and more culturally significant works like the Italian epic Quo Vadis? were among cinema's first steps toward elevating its social standing before World War II. After 1914, these tendencies remained in place. People who might have avoided going to the movies in the hopes of better understanding what was going on were drawn in by the war's progress, as well as other cultural shifts, to the theaters(McManus 520). At the time, King George V said that the general population should watch The Battle of the Somme to understand better what the British army was doing and why it was doing it.
This reluctance to embrace cinema as a source of knowledge and understanding resulted in films being intentionally promoted as "official" to boost their status. Contrast this with attempts in other media, notably in Britain, to hide the real sources of most propaganda because their opinions would have more idea if they looked to be the result of automated thinking. This was strikingly different.
Censoring data and management
Even before the advent of the feature-length film, audiences were drawn to films that depicted actual events alongside stories created by the filmmakers themselves. These "actualities" included newsreels of national and international importance and films that allowed viewers to recognize themselves, their family members, and friends in smaller-scale productions. For those who were fortunate enough to have relatives who served in World War I, a chance to see their loved ones in the faces of the troops recorded would be a major draw for spectators.
Audiences at home embraced films from the front as the genuine thing at last, eager to learn about the realities of fighting soldiers. In the beginning, the soldier's commanding officer was skeptical of the concept of recording on the front lines. Concerned that unlimited reporting may reveal information useful to an adversary or pictures destructive to recruiting or morale at home, all combatant states implemented laws at the outset of the conflict restricting press freedom. As we've seen, the officer class held these issues in high esteem, which was reflected in the films(George, 7). A year-long ban on photography and film was put in effect because of this argument.
Perceptions that the British propaganda drive for neutral nations was losing and that they were not providing enough interest at home prompted the government to lift Kitchener's restriction on the use of Official Cinematographers in 1915. There were huge crowds in France when the authorized camera operators showed the Clash of The Somme River. This made people worried about how the war would affect morale back home. It's ironic that after Britain finally agreed to allow battlefield filming because of fears Germany was captivating the literature war for impartial estimation, the enormous achievement of the Battle ...