I'd like to weigh in on the intro text discussion, since this is the first year I've used Bordwell and Thompson's "Film Art," and my own reaction has been mixed. While I like the fact that it emphasizes formal analysis (which works for a course like mine that is Intro to Film rather than History of Film), I think that it is difficult text because the authors aren't very good at separating the important from the minor. For example, the chapter on cinematography discusses film stock and aspect ratio in as much detail as it discusses things such as shot scale (camera distance). And Bordwell and Thompson are so careful to note exceptions to generalizations (even to the point of discussing growing mold on film as a kind of cinematography) that the useful generalizations often get buried. I do think the text is a good one, but it seems to bury crucial points in a welter of undifferentiated detail--and this makes it harder than it needs to be for students. For several years, I used Maltby's "Hollywood Cinema," though students found it repetitive. If your class focuses on American film and you're interested in social and political analysis along with formal analysis, Maltby's book is a good text. He is a bit wordy and repetitive, and I switched because of student grumbling. In between I used Phillips's "Film: An Introduction," which was more popular with students but lacked some of the challenging material that Bordwell and Maltby bring. Chris Ames Agnes Scott College ---- For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html