They say that with the inclusion of sound one's attention is split between the image and the soundtrack. They say that the soundtrack does not work to enhance the moviegoing experience, but distracts the viewer into enjoying the film. They say that sound works as a crutch to help weaker and less substantial works of cinema be seen as great. So film purists out there, when referring to Pure Cinema, are referring to films that exhibit the conventions of cinema that set it apart from other arts. A film that exhibits features of Pure Cinema is a film that stays true to the conventions upon which cinema itself was discovered, the moving image alone. This is why they say that silent film is the only world in which Pure Cinema lives. .
Unfortunately for film purists times change, silent film is dead and we live in a world of films that exhibit complex conventions in both picture and sound. This is not unlike any of the other arts or anything else for that matter. As time drives relentlessly forward as does the complexities of things. All things move further and further from their origins as time goes on and a sense of entropy become somewhat inevitable, and film is no exception. We live in a complex world in which we require more out of our movies, and the advent of sound was an inevitable addition to film and something we cannot change so we must embrace it. We must attempt to find enjoyment out of something that is less Pure than its original, simply because that is just the way it is. We must attempt to find the elusive guise of Pure Cinema within the complex and unPure film world in which we live, and I guarantee it is there one must simply look harder. A complex world of film requires the ability of a viewer to look closer to find the art among the entertainment. What one wonders is what are these modern advances that makes the idea of Pure Cinema elusive within the modern film? I would say that music has/must become accepted in instances of modern Pure Cinema.
