He_who_lurks So here I am, finally reviewing one of the first early films I ever saw in mah life! Whoa, why the heck did I save this movie for my 165th review on this site? That's like callin' this a bad movie, which it ain't at all; it is an awesome historical landmark that is not only a great look at life in 1896, but is also a film that totally freaked out audiences when they viewed it!!!! Yeah, so "Arrival of a Train at la Ciotat" doesn't actually tell us anymore than what the title says, but that image of the train arriving, actually, truly (well, if you'd like to believe it) made people panic and scream (and maybe even faint). Read the title of this review. Yes, THAT'S basically what people yelled when they first saw this.But how could this cause such a panic? I mean it's only a train in a station!Well, look at the angle of the camera. It is stationed so that the train comes diagonally towards the screen. So, if you lived in the 1890s, this short, 50 second bit of everyday life just might freak you out (but it has no effect at all today). This is why some people are calling this one of the first horror films. I, personally, do not exactly believe this is the first horror film; in my opinion the first horror film was Edison's "The Execution of Mary, Queen of Scots". And, as a film itself, the action is interesting because it showed you what happened one day at La Ciotat, France. That alone could be a real reason to watch this.This film was copied by many later filmmakers, which is more proof how famous it was. People such as Melies ("The Arrival of a Train at Vincennes Station" and "The Arrival of a Train, Joinville Station") Robert Paul (The Countryman and the Cinematograph) and even Lumiere himself (Arrival of a Train at la Perrache) created many remakes of this subject. This makes "Arrival of a Train at la Ciotat" probably the Lumiere Bro's most famous short film ever. If you want to begin watching silent shorts, this one is a great start.

ironhorse_iv While today, it might be mind-numbing to watch. People in 1895, love this 50 second film clip. Generally considered to be among the first motion pictures in modern history, this clip was filmed in La Ciotat, Bouches-du-Rhône, France that show a group of Turn of the Century people are standing in a straight line along the platform of a railway station, waiting for a train. Yeah, that's pretty much it. The film has no story besides that yet the film became popular to watch. Most people today could never understand the fear that gripped the 1895 audience facing the arriving train. Film in a way, the train looks as if it coming right at them. Some audiences' members at the time reacted by jumping or going under the chairs as they saw the train coming at them on screen. There is no apparent intentional camera movement, and the film consists of one continuous real-time shot. Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat illustrates the use of the long shot to establish the setting of the film, followed by a medium shot, and close-up. The whole time, the camera was static for the entire film, the effect of these various "shots" is affected by the movement of the subject alone. The train arrives from a distant point and bears down on the viewer, finally crossing the lower edge of the screen. It was great use of film by Louis and Auguste Lumière. If they didn't put the camera where it is, in my opinion, it wouldn't be as good as any other early films. I really glad they didn't film the train by the side. Not only is this one of the first early films, but it also serve as one of the first horror movies. This film also gave birth to documentary film. While it's not a great entertainment film; it's does give great insight of how life was like in Victoria Era 1895. Those female hats in the film are pretty outrageous wild. It's a remarkable piece of history, but it is not the first movie like some critics talk about. Not close at all. What film earns that honor depends partly on how you define movies. Asking what was the first movie ever made is a bit like asking which came first, the chicken or the egg. It's hard to give a definitive reply. If you consider Edison's Kinetoscope shorts to be movies, the first movies were from 1893, not 1895. Some historian claim that the first ever video footage was 1893's New York Fire Brigade footage. There might a film that earlier than that. The earliest celluloid film was shot by Louis Aimé Augustin Le Prince using the Le Prince single-lens camera made in 1888 call "Roundhay Garden Scene". Before then, there was 'the horse in motion' from 1878. It's hard to figure out where Lumière brothers' film fits in with the others. It was filmed by Auguste and Louis Lumière by means of the Cinématographe, an all-in-one camera, which also serves as a printer and film projector. Unlike all early Lumière movies, this film contrary to myth, was not shown at the Lumières' first public film screening on 28 December 1895 in Paris, France. The program of ten films shown that day makes no mention of it. Its first public showing took place in January 1896. What most film historians left out is that the Lumière Brothers were trying to achieve a 3D image even prior to this first-ever public exhibition of motion pictures. Louis Lumière eventually re-shot L'Arrivée d'un Train with a stereoscopic film camera and demonstrated it along with a series of other 3D short at a 1935 meeting of the French Academy of Science. Given the contradictory accounts that plague early cinema and pre-cinema accounts, it's plausible that early cinema historians conflated the audience reactions at these separate screenings of the 3D version of L'Arrivée d'un Train. The intense audience reaction fits better with the latter exhibition, when the train apparently was actually coming out of the screen at the audience. But due to the fact that the 3D film never took off commercially as the conventional 2D version did. The 3D film version never went anywhere beyond that point. An example of the screening of the film was depicted in the 2011 film Hugo, no less. Overall: The moving images had an immediate and significant influence on popular culture ever since and allow future filmmakers to advance the science and art to a new level of entertainment.

tavm Among the preserved films in the "Saved from the Flames" DVD collection was this early August and Louis Lumiere clip that simply depicted a train arriving with the passengers getting off unaware they're being filmed with their faces about to be immortalized for future film archivists. According to legend, first-time audiences fled their seats (if not the theatre) thinking the train was going to come after them! While I've no doubt some truth was in that statement concerning less sophisticated viewers, I'm also sure many of them were aware it was just a moving picture projection and just sat down for some entertainment. Anyway, this 1-minute short is worth a look as historical artifact.

bob the moo I watched this film on a DVD that was rammed with short films from the period. I didn't watch all of them as the main problem with these type of things that their value is more in their historical novelty value rather than entertainment. So to watch them you do need to be put in the correct context so that you can keep this in mind and not watch it with modern eyes. With the Primitives & Pioneers DVD collection though you get nothing to help you out, literally the films are played one after the other (the main menu option is "play all") for several hours. With this it is hard to understand their relevance and as an educational tool it falls down as it leaves the viewer to fend for themselves, which I'm sure is fine for some viewers but certainly not the majority. What it means is that the DVD saves you searching the web for the films individually by putting them all in one place – but that's about it.Anyway onto this film which is the continuation of the understandable Lumière standard of standing a camera pointing at an event and then recording it happen. In this case a train pulls into a station and people get out. In terms of action it is not that interesting but in regards history of cinema it does offer something at least. It struck me that the other films from Lumiere I had seen to this point had point head on at the action whereas this one was set so that we had a wider view and that things played out across the screen towards the viewer. Also amusing is that some people become awkward when they notice the camera whereas other just bluster in front of it unaware.The usual fare then that produces little of interest in terms of actual content but has more of interest when viewed in its historical and cultural context.