Humphrey Jennings

Conclusion

Jennings reputation is paradoxically both incredibly highly rated by some individuals and, in the context of general film criticism, largely ignored. This has lead to what I see as a drought of critical work on Jennings. There is a need for a fresh look at Jennings as a unique individual and as a key filmmaker, and this needs to be within a more direct critical framework. I suggest that it is more valuable to look at Jennings as an early proponent of Third Cinema. In my view, Jennings films not only hold all the characteristics of the principles of Third Cinema, but they are also, in my view, if not directly inspirational to the radical cinema of the late 60’s and early 70’s that epitomises Third Cinema, then at least a kindred spirit. I believe that looking at his work in this way will enable a more balanced critical argument, with the opportunity to re-evaluate the films in a way that provides opportunity to further establish his reputation by exploring their negative aspects. In the next article, I will be attempting to evaluate Humphrey Jennings in this context, and looking to open up new critical avenues for reading his films.