Jean-Louis Comolli and Jean Narboni are very structuralist in nature, when it comes to thinking of film critically. They show support towards this ideology when they state that "scientific criticism has an obligation to define its field and methods. This implies awareness of its own historical and social situation, a rigorous analysis of the proposed field of study, the conditions which make the work necessary and those which make it possible, and the special function it intends to fulfill" (686). They say that their object is to "not to reflect upon what we 'want' (would like) to do, but upon what we are doing and what we can do, and this is impossible without an analysis of the present situation" (686). They speak of where this occurs, the films, and the critical function of those films.
Comolli and Narboni talk of their magazine and how they should go about writing in it. The situation they believe to be in is not to talk about pure film, but rather study the history of a film and how it is produced, manufactured, distributed, and understand. They ask "what is the film today? This is the relevant question; not, as it possibly once was: what is the cinema? We shall not be able to ask that again until a body of knowledge, of theory, has been evolved (a process to which we certainly intend to contribute) to inforrn what is at present an empty term, with a concept" (687).
On the idea of film, they question what it is and they come to the thought that it is somewhat a "product, manufactured within a given system of economic relations, and involving labour [Money] to produce a commodity, possessing exchange value governed by the laws if the market" (688). They also believe that it's "an ideological product of the system, which means capitalism" (688). They believe filmmakers can't change this and that criticism helps define the changes of these and what conditions those changes. They continue to state that all films are political in nature and are similar to that of literature production.
