At one point in the cinémathèque documentary Henri Langlois discusses the dangers of collecting on the basis of taste. In his view, one can “never assume the value of a film” for future audiences/researchers and the best strategy is to simply collect everything possible. This struck me as so different from the mission of an art museum, premised on the idea of exclusivity and curatorial discernment. I’d be curious to know how Langlois’s approach to film acquisition informs current collecting practices at the cinémathèque — especially now that it has a permanent space for display.

Even though Langlois warns against the danger of forming an archive based on subjective taste, his strong personality and knack for showmanship were a major draw of cinémathèque in its early days and helped establish it as a major site of cultural discourse. Moreover his performative film programs helped foster the development of auteur theory — an idea structured around the genius and agency of individual directors. To what extent does auteur theory represent an attempt to add “value” to film, akin to fine art? Can we reconcile langois’s contradictory approach to the acquisition and display of cinema? In the case of early silent film, is auteur theory anachronistic?