In this article, Harrah examines Pudovkin’s theories on film aesthetic reiterating Pudovkin’s stance on the development of film as deriving from theatre (capturing the “art of the actor”). He also talks about the American discovery of the active camera which lead to different shot sizes and angles to emerge and the development of editing. Harrah writes that each shot is conditioned by real time and space, however through editing a filmic time and space can be achieved. Pudovkin believed in editing as the foundation of film art; he highlights the power of montage over the audience, in producing rhythm, and as a creative tool to abstract reality with symbolism. Pudovkin’s view is that montage is made of units, when juxtaposed together, create a unity and (in the words of Eisenstein) “the most complete image of the theme itself”. There is also discussion of sound, but he warns this must be used economically. Dialogue, music, and background sounds must be employed selectively so as to complement, rather than distract, from the image. Film itself should be economical in general to avoid overwhelming audiences.

Although secondary sources have generally been more straightforward, this article by Harrah was at times difficult to comprehend. Nevertheless, Harrah was able to give more detail in his examination of Pudovkin compared to Butler, enabling more understanding on his key ideas.