“Cinematic History: Where Do We Go From Here?” by Robert Brent Toplin

After focusing on a French movie about Martin Guerre and documentary films, this third article brings us into the world of Hollywood and the use of history in the Hollywood movies. The main emphasis of this article is not so much on the historical content of those movies, but more on the interpretation of the use of history in the films. Toplin chooses to reflect on the “choices and challenges” facing cinematic historians, wondering how the situation will evolve from there on. Even though studying and analyzing experimental films is interesting, Toplin starts by encouraging historians to keep looking at the blockbuster ones. Indeed, as they usually are the ones attracting a wider and more general public, turning away from them would be turning away from a way to reach out to broad audiences. Toplin then ponders on the possible interrelation between the historic period used in the movie and the present time of its making. He does not defend one extreme or the other, but rather suggests that the present may influence part of the way the past is represented in the movie, without it being all about the current times. Finally, Toplin suggests that cinematic history should not focus on the political aspects of movies. According to him, it is an interesting challenge to research how those movies can give us an insight into other aspects, such as cultural, intellectual or social.
If historians can study mainly the technical characteristics of a movie, or focus on its historical context, Toplin suggests that a deeper level of study would be more contributing to the field. The research should be lead further after those two first levels, and cinematic historians should also investigate the “production histories behind the movies” (p.86). He encourages historians to also study different types of sources related to the production of the movie. This can bring a more accurate understanding of the historic content of the movie and of the context of its making.
In Toplin’s opinion, cinematic history is a genre of movies for itself and, as such, deserves to be researched, analyzed and talked about, above all by cinematic historians.
Therefore, Toplin’s contribution raises a central point that was also mentioned in one of the other articles: historians should not turn their back to commercial and mainstream movies, letting other people be experts on so-called historic movies and historic debates. To the contrary, they should engage in that field, contribute in one way or another to the making of those movies or documentaries, or at least comment on them, accept to debate about their accuracy, etc. It should not be considered as a “not good enough field” to invest time in, because it is not their familiar “purely academic world”. If historians want to convey their knowledge, share their work with others, they should accept to sometimes reach out and dip their toes in different kinds of waters.