Disrupted PECMA Flows

A Cognitive Approach to the Experience of Narrative Complexity in Film

in Projections
View More View Less
  • 1 University of Groningen v.ros@rug.nl
  • 2 University of Groningen m.kiss@rug.nl
Restricted access

Abstract

Over the past two decades, Hollywood cinema has seen the proliferation of disruptive narrative techniques that were previously thought to be exclusive to the realms of (post)modern literature and art cinema. Most scholarly contributions on contemporary complex cinema have been classifications, attempting to position these films relative to the “classical” mode of narration. This article sidesteps these efforts at categorization and, by offering a cognitive approach to cinematic narrative complexity, aims to provide an overview of the mental processes that complex films elicit in their viewers. Using Torben Grodal’s PECMA flow model, we theorize how the experience of complexity arises out of a confrontation with plot devices that disrupt the embodied viewing process by breaching or subverting familiar narrative conventions. In conclusion, we suggest five different scenarios—all following from different PECMA flow disruptions—and describe how one of them can affect the experience of complex (post)classical cinema.

Contributor Notes

Veerle Ros is a PhD student in the Film and Media Studies program at the University of Groningen. E-mail: v.ros@rug.nl

Miklós Kiss is Assistant Professor of Film and Media Studies at the University of Groningen. E-mail: m.kiss@rug.nl

Projections

The Journal for Movies and Mind

  • Anderson, Joseph D. (1996) 1998. The Reality of Illusion: An Ecological Approach to Cognitive Film Theory. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bordwell, David. 1985. Narration in the Fiction Film. Madison: Wisconsin University Press.

  • Bordwell, David. 1989. Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Bordwell, David. 2002. “Film Futures.” SubStance 31 (1): 88104. doi:10.1353/sub.2002.0004.

  • Bordwell, David. 2006. The Way Hollywood Tells It. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Bordwell, David. 2012. “Tinker Tailor: A Guide for the Perplexed.” David Bordwell’s Website on Cinema, 23 January. http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2012/01/23/tinker-tailor-a-guide-for-the-perplexed.

    • Export Citation
  • Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. 2004. Film Art: An Introduction. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. 2013. Christopher Nolan. A Labyrinth of Linkages. Madison, WI: Irvington Way Institute Press.

  • Bordwell, David, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson. 1985. The Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960. New York: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boyd, Brian. 2009. On the Origin of Stories: Evolution, Cognition, and Fiction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

  • Brakhage, Stan. 1963. Metaphors on Vision. Ed. P. Adams Sitney. New York: Anthology Film Archives.

  • Buckland, Warren, ed. 2009. Puzzle Films: Complex Storytelling in Contemporary Cinema. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

  • Buckland, Warren, ed. 2014. Hollywood Puzzle Films. London: Routledge.

  • Caracciolo, Marco. 2013. “Embodiment at the Crossroads: Some Open Questions between Literary Interpretation and Cognitive Science.” Poetics Today 34 (1–2): 233253. doi:10.2307/23408448.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coëgnarts, Maarten, and Peter Kravanja, eds. 2015. Embodied Cognition and Cinema. Leuven: Leuven University Press.

  • Damasio, Antonio. 1994. Descartes’ Error: Emotions, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Grosset.

  • Damasio, Antonio. 1999. The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.

  • Ebert, Roger. 1986. Review of Aliens, directed by James Cameron. RogerEbert.com, 18 July. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/aliens-1986.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Elsaesser, Thomas. 2009. “The Mind-Game Film.” In Buckland 2009: 1341.

  • Elsaesser, Thomas, and Warren Buckland, eds. 2002. Studying Contemporary American Film. London: Arnold.

  • Gallese, Vittorio. 1998. “Mirror Neurons: From Grasping to Language.” Paper presented at the conference Toward a Science of Consciousness, Tucson, AZ, 27 April2 May.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gallese, Vittorio. 2011. “Embodied Simulation Theory: Imagination and Narrative.” Neuropsychoanalysis 13 (2): 196200.

  • Gallese, Vittorio. 2017. “Visions of the Body: Embodied Simulation and Aesthetic Experience.” Aisthesis 1 (1): 4150. doi:10.13128/Aisthesis-20902.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gallese, Vittorio, and Michele Guerra. 2012. “Embodying Movies: Embodied Simulation and Film Studies.” Cinema: Journal of Philosophy and the Moving Image 3: 183210.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gallese, Vittorio, Magali Rochat, Giuseppe Cossu, and Corrado Sinigaglia. 2009. “Motor Cognition and Its Role in the Phylogeny and Ontogeny of Intentional Understanding.” Developmental Psychology 45 (1): 103113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ghislotti, Stefano. 2009. “Narrative Comprehension Made Difficult: Film Form and Mnemonic Devices in Memento.” In Buckland 2009: 87106.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goldman, Alvin L. 2006. Simulating Minds: The Philosophy, Psychology, and Neuroscience of Mindreading. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Grodal, Torben. 1997. Moving Pictures: A New Theory of Film Genres, Feelings, and Cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Grodal, Torben. 2007. “Bio-culturalism: Evolution and Film.” In Narration and Spectatorship in Moving Images, ed. Joseph D. Anderson and Barbara Fisher Anderson, 1628. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Grodal, Torben. 2009. Embodied Visions: Evolution, Emotion, Culture, and Film. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Johnson, Mark. 1987. The Body in the Mind. The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kiss, Miklós, and Steven Willemsen. 2017. Impossible Puzzle Films: A Cognitive Approach to Contemporary Complex Cinema. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Leslie, Alan M. 1987. “Pretense and Representation: The Origin of Theory of Mind.” Psychological Review 94 (4): 412426.

  • Lilliard, Angeline S. 1993. “Pretend Play Skills and the Child’s Theory of Mind.” Child Development 64 (2): 348371.

  • Reber, Arthur. 1992. “The Cognitive Unconscious: An Evolutionary Perspective.” Consciousness and Cognition 1 (2): 93133. doi:10.1016/1053–8100(92)90051-B.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Richardson, Brian. 2001. “Denarration in Fiction: Erasing the Story in Beckett and Others.” Narrative 9 (2): 168175.

  • Rizzolatti, Giacomo, Leonardo Fogassi, and Vittorio Gallese. 2001. “Neurophysiological Mechanisms Underlying the Understanding and Initiation of Action.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2 (9): 661670. doi:10.1038/35090060.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Russell, Michael. 2005. “The Kuleshov Effect and the Death of the Auteur.” FORUM: University of Edinburgh Postgraduate Journal of Culture and the Arts 1: 117.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shaw, Christopher A., and Jill C. McEachern, eds. 2001. Toward a Theory of Neuroplasticity. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

  • Steen, Francis F., and Stephanie A. Owens. 2001. “Evolution’s Pedagogy: An Adaptionist Model of Pretense and Entertainment.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 1 (4): 289321.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sternberg, Meir. 2001. “How Narrativity Makes a Difference.” Narrative 9 (2): 115122.

  • Taberham, Paul. 2014. “Avant-garde Film in an Evolutionary Context.” In Cognitive Media Theory, ed. Ted Nannicelli and Paul Taberham, 214231. New York: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Thanouli, Eleftheria. 2006. “Post-classical Narration: A New Paradigm in Contemporary Cinema.” New Review of Film and Television Studies 4 (3): 183196. doi:10.1080/17400300600981900.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vygotsky, Lev Semyonovich. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Ward, Mark. 2013. “Art in Noise: An Embodied Simulation Account of Cinematic Sound Design.” Paper presented to the Society for Cognitive Studies of the Moving Image, Berlin University of the Arts, Germany.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wojciehowski, Hannah, and Vittorio Gallese. 2011. “How Stories Make Us Feel: Toward an Embodied Narratology.” California Italian Studies Journal 2 (1). http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3jg726c2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 71 71 12
Full Text Views 24 24 0
PDF Downloads 24 24 0