I think Film Studies can sometimes be self-absorbed and maybe even power-obsessed in that we put a good amount of our focus on the power of the camera (which is definitely necessary) but we often forget about why we first fell in love with the cinema, which is that we consider ourselves storytellers, and we forget the content. We are a very proud bunch that likes to fantasize about the extent of the power of the camera but we’ll find that we end up with a dead end when there’s no content. As far as theory goes, we have gone from one extreme to another all the while trying to define cinema
I think it goes back to the acceptance of not knowing. Or, to make it easier, the acceptance of knowing there are an infinite number of interpretations and none of them are right or wrong.
Godard is one that argued for both sides, which, I think, is how we will find a satisfying answer as a collective to the mysteries of film. He exercised the capabilities of the camera technically but also expressed his thoughts about what he felt strongly about.