from Rick Altman, Film/Genre (BFI, 1999), 38-39.

If genre theory as currently practised were conceived as a game, then a list of the rules according to which that game is played might begin as follows:

1. From industry or critical sources, glean the existence of a genre.

2. Analysing the characteristics of the films most often identified with the genre, establish a description of the genre.

3. Scouring filmographies, compile a full listing of films that share enough generic traits to be identified as belonging to the genre.

4. On this basis, begin analysis of the genre.

This game might well be called the 'Critic's Game', to stress its retrospective nature. Fundamentally synchronic in nature, the Critic's Game is diametrically opposed to the entirely prospective 'Producer's Game', which has quite different rules:

1. From box-office information, identify a successful film.

2. Analyse the film in order to discover what made it successful.

3. Make another film stressing the assumed formula for success.

4. Check box-office information on the new film and reassess the success formula accordingly.

5. Use the revised formula as a basis for another film.

6. Continue the process indefinitely.

Critics never tire of explaining how Hollywood used generic formulas in order to assure production simplicity, standardization and economy. Yet, curiously, they always seem to prefer the Critic's Game to an approach that would deal directly with production decisions. In this section I propose to play a version of the Producer's Game. Instead of looking backward to constitute the corpus of a genre that didn't establish itself firmly until the late 30s, I propose to start with a successful 1929 film and from there to trace producer decisions until the genre is fully recognized.