This book explores how Soviet film worked with time, the past, and memory. It looks at Stalinist cinema and its role in the production of history. Cinema's role in the legitimization of Stalinism and the production of a new Soviet identity was enormous. Both Lenin and Stalin saw in this 'most important of arts' the most effective form of propaganda and 'organisation of the masses'. By examining the works of the greatest Soviet filmmakers of the Stalin era--Sergei Eisenstein, Vsevolod Pudovkin, Grigorii Kozintsev, Leonid Trauberg, Fridrikh Ermler--the author explores the role of the cinema in the formation of the Soviet political imagination.

Examines the 'New Soviet Man' not only as an ideal of masculinity presented to Soviet cinemagoers, but also, precisely, as a man in his specific, and hotly debated social, cultural and political context

Stalinism and Soviet Cinema marks the first attempt to confront systematically the role and influence of Stalin and Stalinism in the history and development of Soviet cinema. The collection provides comprehensive coverage of the antecedents, role and consequences of Stalinism and Soviet cinema, how Stalinism emerged, what the relationship was between the political leadership, the cinema administrators, the film-makers and their films and audiences, and how Soviet cinema is coming to terms with the disintegration of established structures and mythologies. Contributors from Britain, America and the Soviet Union address themselves to the importance of the Stalinist legacy, not only to the history of Soviet cinema but to Soviet history as a whole.

Cinema has long been recognised as the privileged bridge between Soviet ideologies and their mass public. Recent feminist-oriented work has drawn out the symbolic role of women in Soviet culture, but, not surprisingly, men too were expected to play their part. In this first full-length study of masculinity in Stalinist Soviet cinema, John Haynes examines the ‘New Soviet Man’ not only as an ideal of masculinity presented to Soviet cinemagoers, but also, precisely, as a man in his specific, and hotly debated social, cultural and political context. A detailed analysis of Stalinist discourse sets the stage for an examination of the imagined relationship between the patriarch Stalin and his ‘model sons’ in the key genre cycles of the era: from the capital to the collective farms, and ultimately to the very borders of the Soviet state. Informed by contemporary and present day debates over the social and cultural significance of cinema and masculinity, New Soviet Man draws on a range of theoretical and comparative material to produce engaging and accessible readings accounting for both the appeal of, and the inherent potential for subversion within, films produced by the Stalinist culture industry. New Soviet Man will be widely read by students and specialists in the fields of film studies, Russian and Soviet studies, gender and modern European history.

In Not According to Plan, Maria Belodubrovskaya reveals the limits on the power of even the most repressive totalitarian regimes to create and control propaganda. Belodubrovskaya's revisionist account of Soviet filmmaking between 1930 and 1953 highlights the extent to which the Soviet film industry remained stubbornly artisanal in its methods, especially in contrast to the more industrial approach of the Hollywood studio system. Not According to Plan shows that even though Josef Stalin recognized cinema as a "mighty instrument of mass agitation and propaganda" and strove to harness the Soviet film industry to serve the state, directors such as Eisenstein, Alexandrov, and Pudovkin had far more creative control than did party-appointed executives and censors.

Among early directors, Sergei Eisentein stands alone as the maker of a fully historical cinema. James Goodwin treats issues of revolutionary history and historical representation as central to an understanding of Eisentein's work, which explores two movements within Soviet history and consciousness: the Bolshevik Revolution and the Stalinist state. Goodwin articulates intersections between Eisentein's ideas and aspects of the thought of Walter Benjamin, Georg Lukács, Ernst Bloch, and Bertolt Brecht. He also shows how the formal properties and filmic techniques of each work reveal perspectives on history . Individual chapters focus on Strike, Battleship Potemkin, October, Old and New, projects of the 1930s, Alexander Nevsky, and Ivan the Terrible.

Film emerged in pre-Revolutionary Russia to become the 'most important of all arts' for the new Bolshevik regime and its propaganda machine. This text is a complete history from the beginning of film onwards and presents an engaging narrative of both the industry and its key films in the context of Russia's social and political history.