Comparing Cinema and Film with Painting, Literature and Other Arts

Film and cinema have always been compared to other types of art such as painting or works or literature. Film writer James Monaco makes a clear distinction between films and “other recording arts” while film critic Manny Farber contrasts this view by saying that film is no different than other representational art. 

In James Monaco’s book How to Read a Film, he compares film and cinema with other types of arts such as photography, painting, literature, theater, and music. Monaco makes the argument that film has combined the works of the older arts and is able to create certain images or impressions due to its technology in which the older arts struggle to measure up. While painting and photography are able to capture one moment in time that can captivate a viewer’s attention, film is a reproduction of many images throughout several scenes in the film. Painting had tried to keep up with motion picture of cinema through Cubism, but as cinema developed newer and better technology, photography and painting were never truly able to capture the concept of motion in the same way film has succeeded. As Monaco states, “In a sense, movies simply fulfill the destiny of painting (44)." Movies have been able to make scenes or images come alive and appeal to the viewer through motion and connecting with real situations and feelings in a way in which painting cannot.