Talk:German expressionist cinema

Parsing problem

I haven't been able to parse "The German Expressionist movement was largely expanded down to the isolation Germany was in during World War I." The "was largely expanded down to" seems to be the problem. Can the author rephrase this sentence? Thanks. Knowthhill (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Westfront 1918

Would this count as a German expressionist film? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.224.133 (talk) 22:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

It would appear not, although it is clearly related. 1) It was produced in 1930. 2) It deals with World War I. 3) The article identifies the author's perspective as "New Objectivity". I'm going to add a "Related" link at the bottom, but if there is objection from those more expert on the topic than I, just remove it.

Ralohmann (talk) 14:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I notice

I notice that this page is virtually a copy of Expressionism (film), other than the photo that was added later. I believe that one of these needs to go and be turned into a redirect... though I'm not sure of the procedure for merging them. RcktScientistX 23:11, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Merging is done with {{merge}} and {{mergefrom}} - UtherSRG 19:37, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

do not merge the articles, i teach a film class, they are two seperate ideas. One was developed in America and the other in Germany. They should be kept seperate eventhough the ideas are seperate.

I disagree with the above poster. Unless they are modified, they should be merged. They are virtually identical. I see very little difference in the other article. If you wish to make is seperate, please as to edit the other article to actually make it different. Claude.Xanadu 04:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I oppose merging the articles. German Expressionism is a distinct and important period in German film. It's logical that the subject receives its own article. I believe the American and German sections in Expressionism (film) should be separated, but the German Expressionist article should remain in place. --metzerly 07:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I do not believe they should be considered one in the same. Though German Expressionism is the most notable and important aspect of impressionist film, "expressionist film" is a slightly broader term.

I agree with the majority. This page should never be merged. Expressionism in general is completely different from German Expressionism. I mean, the majority of the expressionist art schools were founded in Germany, so I see German Expressionism as a more refined and 'professional' version of general expressionist film. I too was a Film Studies teacher in Britain and one of the often studied modules is on German Expressionism, not expressionism in general. This page is extremely useful to that vast quantity of students. Please don't merge! - Shaft121 19:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

In regard to whether the entries should be merged, I feel that German Expressionism is a genre of its own and should stand apart from the larger category of expressionism in film. It's misleading to say that the two are identical. However, since the content of these two were (before edits I just made) virtually identical, it may make sense to attempt a merge. German Expressionism could easily form its own subsection of a larger description on expressionism in film. - Jmodel 10:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I would propose a re-direct to "German Expressionist Film" as there is also a school of painting often called "German Expressionism"Smiloid

I recently made a few edits to this entry and created two new sections (German Expressionist Film Today and Ties to Other Media). I made a point not to erase any existing content since I feel it is all informative and accurate. - Jmodel 10:59, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Title

This page should be retitled either "German Expressionism (film)" or "German Expressionist Cinema". German Expressionism was a much wider artistic movement, covering painting (Grosz, Dix and so on), poetry (Georg Heym, Trakl, Gottfried Benn), theatre (Toller, early Brecht) and music (Schoenberg, Berg) as well as other art forms. The main page "German Expressionism" should reflect that.--Folantin 12:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - Expressionist film really came at the tail end of the overall German Expressionist movement. The Expressionist poets, painters, playwrights and directors, had an unfortunate tendency to get killed in the first world war; those that came back alive had a much more cynical style more like Dada.-- Mark, 12 October 2006

This is a good and important point. The term "German Expressionism" is used in respect of a number of loosely connected movements in literary and visual arts - even architecture - and not just in film. Not only does the name of this article need to be changed; there is a real need for an article documenting the broader movement. Ian, 15 Nov 2006.

What is German Expressionism?

The introduction notes when it started and who contributed to it, but it never mentions what German expressionism is.

Sure it says filmmakers "developed their own style by using symbolism and mise en scène to add mood and deeper meaning to a movie," but I doubt these aspects are unique to German expressionism. The first section after the introduction contains some aspects of 1920s-1930s German Expressionism, but are these qualities shared by all films in this category? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.115.185 (talk) 06:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have tried to develop the article to include the forms other than film to which the term applies. The geographic spread of the artists included in Expressionism, and the large number of German (and American) artists included suggests a need for a nationally based series of articles. Philip Cross (talk) 23:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, Phil. I think i like the direction you're going, tho i was initially quite shocked that your removal of the HatNote Dab with the summary

  (moved wikilink)

since that was the more momentous of the two moved "lks", each of which you left in the "See also". But i see now that if you'd just worded it "move lk from Dab role... as scope is now GE in all media" i'd have had no reason to be shocked. Your reasoning sounds good, and you clearly know more abt it than i; my residual concern is that for good or ill, it's a major change of direction for an article that got its incipient Dab notice late in 2005, and many who worked on it since then may react strongly to your sudden change of direction. Perhaps you've already sorted thru the history of this and the articles that cover other areas of Expressionist activity in Germany, and brought past active contributors into the process, but that doesn't seem to be reflected here. Is there a relevant WikiProject? I just stumbled peripherally onto the article, but i'd hate to see it blow up into a restructuring war.

In any cases, happy editing.
--Jerzy•t 09:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, please don't rewrite this article to move it away from German Expressionist Film, I think the problem with the article is that it is miss-titled. A quick glance at the catalogue for my local libraries [1] suggests that film is not the medium that most writers associate with "German Expressionism". However I and other contributors have added to the article attempting to show that the movement has been and continues to be, directly and indirectly, very influential- it deserves an article of it's own. While an article on "Expressionism in Film" may be needed I think that the narrower "German Expressionist Film" is a subject that comes up more often. When I first came across this article I had come across quite a few references to German Expressionist film and wanted to find out more, I would have been disappointed if there was no article dealing soley with this topic. I think the best solution to this would be to re-title the article "German Expressionist Film" and create a new page called "German Expressionism" at first consisting of a couple of sentances and a number of links to articles on the various areas of "Expressionism". Sorry for bringing up an editing idea without offering to act on it. My thanks, if this idea is thought to be good by the community, to whoever if anyone acts on it.

--Pete the pitiless (talk) 10:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I've changed the first section to reflect that this is an article about film. I hope I've not offended anyone in doing this. As I've said above I think this article is miss titled. However that doesn't change the fact that it is an article about film. Also I thought the short sections about the different areas of expressionism did very little to expand knowledge on those areas and links could do the job better. The article is tidier without them —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pete the pitiless (talk • contribs) 09:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree (hope I am inserting this comment correctly). This is an article about film, not "German Expressionism", which is described in the article titled "Expressionism" - this is an interesting article but when I think of German Expressionism I think of a school of painting. Thomas144 (talk) 16:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Logical mistake:

In the heading summary, in the very first sentence, it says: "German Expressionism refers to a number of related creative movements in Germany before the First World War that reached a peak in Berlin, during the 1920s." This is obviously false and contradictory, as the First World War ended in 1918 and the Expressionist movement began soon after. Tancrisism (talk) 07:52, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I've added the word "beginning" in order to correct the logical error. The wiki artical "Expressionism" gives the beginning of expressionism as before the first world war if you want to dispute this as a date for the start of the wider german expressionist movement please do so but you will need to provide sources. Pete the pitiless (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

"German cinema was arguably far ahead of cinema in Hollywood"

I know the qualifying word is "arguably", but on a site like Wikipedia it's usually a way of saying "it is better" without stirring the pot. This is a ridiculous statement for one big reason: "German Expressionism" doesn't remotely encapsulate everything about cinema in the 1920s. The Soviets were doing things the Germans weren't doing just as the Americans were doing things the Soviets were not. F.W. Murnau dropped the more obvious trappings of German Expressionism for a subtler cinematic expressionism/modernism and embraced montage and classical Hollywood form in his last films, the superb City Girl and the final masterpiece Tabu (even in his German period he wasn't nearly as ubiquitous with German Expressionism as he's always made out to be - this is true of German cinema in general.) His American students, particularly King Vidor and John Ford, and other contemporary filmmakers from around the world such as Jean Renoir, would continue on in this manner.

The impact of the German cinema of the 1920s if far greater than what's described in "Influence and legacy." Indeed, if Tim Burton and sci-fi movies were the fruit of Murnau's labor, German Expressionism would be absolutely nothing at all. JonasEB (talk) 09:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Followup

It appears that a variety of very good suggestions have been made here over the last 10 years, but there has been little followup. It appears that most of these can be accommodated fairly easily, so I'm going to try to deal with at least some of them, and I hope that others will keep an eye on these changes and comment or re-revise as necessary. Ralohmann (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, I look forward to your proposed changes. The title MUST be changed to something like "German Expressionism (film)," "German Expressionist film" or "German Expressionism in film" -- whatever accords best to the Wiki directives on titling. I was stunned this morning hoping to find a Wiki on the history of German Expressionism in the arts -- painting, printmaking and sculpture -- and instead found this. German Expressionism was a major art movement that emerged around 1905 and continued until the National Socialists condemned much of it as 'degenerate' around 1936-38. By that time, it had passed its peak, with many figureheads lost in the Great War or having, like Kandinsky, moved into other areas of artistic endeavor. A great resource for German Expressionism as an art movement may be found in "Das Blaue Reiter," a periodical that appeared around 1912 which has been widely reprinted.

Another aspect of this article as a film-relevant article that should be addressed by somebody is the fact that we cite Kracauer's "From Hitler to Caligari" as a source. This book was published in 1947 and large parts of its assertions have since been discredited. As I sit here, I'm not sure exactly what the complaint has been against it, but we should review such matters to see if it is of relevance to this article. I'm sure that they are relevant; at the moment I'm not positive I remember why it is so. We should look into it. Pinikadia 13:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I too expected to find something on German Expressionist paintings or painters and found zilch. This is currently entirely on cinematography.

I agree with the previous post that it makes sense to move this article to German Expressionism (film). However, perhaps that needs to be done at the same time as some editor being motivated enough to create at least a sub-level article German Expressionism that covers the different arts evenly. --Kiyoweap (talk) 02:12, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah I came hoping to learn about German Expressionism in literature.. and found an article dedicated to film. -- GreenC 20:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

On the German Wiki, they just have "Expressionism (film)", "Expressionism (art)" etc.. each medium has its own article, and then a general article about Expressionism. This is entirely reasonable. They don't even say "German" expressionism which seems like an Anglo-Saxon thing to make it somehow exotic or other. -- GreenC 20:43, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Expressionist directors who went to Hollywood?

The article says "a number" of expressionist directors went to Hollywood but no names are mentioned. Could someone expand on this point? Ralohmann (talk) 15:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on German Expressionism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051229032301/http://www.greencine.com/static/primers/expressionism1.jsp to http://www.greencine.com/static/primers/expressionism1.jsp
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council--services/lc/leicester-city-museums/exhibitions/german-expressionist

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Useful sources

I came across some useful sources while editing Faust (1926 film)#Reception. You may be interested in the 7 "canonical" expressionist films. Anonymous-232 (talk) 06:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Change to Expressionist Cinema?

There was extensive discussion going back several years regarding possible refocus of this article, but there seems to have been none recently.

There are now separate articles on Expressionism in its broad sense (covering many different artistic and cultural forms). There are also stand-alone articles on Expressionist dance and Expressionist theater. This article would seem to fit best into this broader group of articles as covering specifically Expressionist cinema without a geographic limit just to Germany.

It seems to me that this is the role this article is actually doing. That is, I don't think the problem is the content, but rather the title. The lead would need a bit of reworking.

Does anyone have views on this? Karl Bildungshunger1965 (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@Karl Bildungshunger1965 Yes, I agree with you. I just stumbled on this page looking for German Expressionism in the visual arts (painting, sculpture, etc.) and was very surprised this didn't mention anything outside of film, though earlier commentators are certainly right: It was an important, and influential, movement in film. My only question is naming terminology, and a brief spin around Wikipedia didn't help: Should it be German Expressionism (film) or should it be ... (cinema)? By the same token, should the Expressionism page include an identifier like (arts)? I find it odd that it describes multiple arts too, and that German Expressionism (fine arts) isn't a stand-alone article, but then painting, etc. aren't that well represented on Wikipedia. Anyway, all of this is to say, I agree with you, and think the terms should follow Wikipedia convention, whatever that is. :) EditGirl99 (talk) 12:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Mary Wigman Photo

The image of an expressionist dancer Mary Wigman is included in the "Expressionism" article. It is very relevant there, but seems off-topic here, so I am removing it. If anyone disagrees, feel free to explain why. Thank you.EditGirl99 (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 5 June 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 22:04, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

---

German Expressionism → German expressionist cinema – To avoid confusion with German Expressionism (the larger movement), which includes more forms of art such as painting, sculpture, printmaking etc, and includes many artists, including some associated with groups such as Die Brücke and Der Blaue Reiter, which have nothing to do with cinema. Di (they-them) (talk) 05:48, 5 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 20:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose based on the evidence provided so far. It is true that there were many Expressionist painters who were German (and that much of the creative force behind Expressionism originated in Germany), but that does not necessarily indicate there is a conflict with the title of this article. For example, we have Category:Finnish Expressionist painters too, but that does not mean there was a particular Finnish Expressionism distinct from Expressionism; it is just a category convention to list them by nationality+school. As far as I know, when the phrase "German Expressionism" is used to refer to something in particular, and distinct from general "Expressionism", it primarily refers to the cinematic version. Dekimasuよ! 06:15, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

• A further note: in the case of agreement that there is something called "German Expressionism" of which the cinematic movement is one part, it seems like the article should be expanded rather than moved. Dekimasuよ! 06:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Dekimasu: There are several sources (including Tate, MoMA, University of Maryland, and Britannica) that use the phrase "German Expressionism" to refer to a movement that isn't limited to cinema. It's clearly its own movement, not just the German regional form of Expressionism. Di (they-them) (talk) 06:24, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Not sure expanding an article on cinema making it the tail of a different dog is helpful. Best to leave the article as is and title it recognizably. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:23, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - the current title is misleading ; use of the term in GBooks relates to German expressionist art (large section on Expressionism main article) and Der Blaue Reiter group etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
• Weak Support - Is there a "German Expressionism" page for the movement? Or is this it as well? If there is no parent article, maybe leave it here for now, and let it serve as it, until it fills out. Walrasiad (talk) 00:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support because the article states, "This article deals primarily with developments in German Expressionist cinema …" The inadequacy of the current title has been discussed above for years; it's time to act on it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:26, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Expressionism covers multiple artistic fields (of which cinema is one) and is primarily a German movement. This article is solely about German expressionist cinema. While WP:CONCISION applies, we must also consider the principle of least astonishment. In this case, the latter carries more weight - it is astonishing to see this is just about cinema when the subject (per others and the main article) is clearly much more. Regardless, use lowercase expressionism per MOS:MOVEMENT, this evidence and the general guidance at MOS:CAPS. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.