Review of Vicky Lebeau, CHILDHOOD AND CINEMA
Bonnie S. Kaufman
Sartre's recollection, in Les Mots, of his first visit to the cinema is a multi-layered and ambivalent text through which Sartre proposes a number of interlocking arguments: concerning the contrast between the 'sacred' space of the theatre and the non-ceremonial space of the cinema, between the theatre as associated with paternal authority, and the cinema as associated with a clandestine bond with the mother. But the text also sets up a quasi-sociological account of the public Sartre encounters in the cinema itself as revealing to him the truth of the social bond, a truth he expresses with the term 'adherence', and which he says he only rediscovered in his experience of being a prisoner in the Stalag in 1940. Rather than the basis of a sociological account of the social bond, which would seem at odds with Sartre's social philosophy, I read this as the expression of a desire for physical proximity. The space of the cinema thus develops a fantasy, and this is in continuity with the role of the cinema in the evolution traced in Les Mots, in which it is described as instigating a withdrawal into imaginary life and an indulgence in daydreaming. Through reference to Christian Metz and to Roland Barthes, whose essay 'En sortant du cinéma' is proposed as a parallel and a response to Sartre, I suggest that the 'true bond' of adherence which Sartre encounters is an unconscious rather than an epistemological truth.
Human-computer interaction in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century has been aided by the graphical user interface (GUI). Cinematic representations of the GUI have reflected its pervasive quotidian presence and expanded beyond to create spectacular technophilic Hollywood blockbusters. The screen-based interaction, which computers and the cinema share, offers an important point of reflection upon the embodied relationship among screen, spectator, and the onscreen computer user. By examining cinematic representations of hackers, experts, and users and the extent to which they manipulate or submit to the computer's vision, this article considers the possible future interaction between spectator and the digital medium of cinema.
. One just goes to the cinema, or watches a DVD on a home theater system, or opens a digitally encoded version of a movie and watches it on a laptop or tablet. So it seems. Behind this commonsense answer, however, are a number of complexities I bring
Michael Radford’s The Merchant of Venice
Maria-Clara Versiani Galery
making a film’, writes Freedland. The medium influences the way the work is understood, for ‘film is an emotive medium, uniquely able to manipulate through lighting and music as well as words’. 3 This manipulative aspect of cinema has been subjected to
skilled body such as a surfer or a skateboarder; rather, it is about coming into movement. 1 Considered, then, in relation to cinema (as Deleuze does), the camera does not shoot a movement but comes into a wider field of movement already in process
A Reply to Critics
conceptual distinctions between my book and earlier examinations of Hollywood aesthetics, most notably David Bordwell's chapters on classical narration in two books, The Classical Hollywood Cinema ( Bordwell et al. 1985 ) and Narration in the Fiction Film
David Bordwell (2002) has described contemporary mainstream cinema as a cinema of intensified continuity. When we combine Bordwell's analysis with that of recent cognitive work on attention, especially with work on edit blindness, we discover some intriguing results. For example, the increased rate of cutting in contemporary cinema serves to keep our attention continually aroused, but, at the same time, that which arouses our attention—the increased number of cuts—becomes decreasingly visible. That is, the greater the number of cuts made in the services of continuity editing, the less we are able to spot them. If, while watching contemporary mainstream cinema, the attention of viewers is aroused but viewers are decreasingly capable of spotting the reasons why this is so (i.e., the cuts themselves), then does this also serve to make contemporary mainstream cinema “post-ideological,” because it concerns itself only with “intensified” experiences? Or, as this article argues, does the sheer speed of contemporary mainstream cinema renew the need for the ideological critique of films?
The Embodied Film Style of Éric Rohmer
on this solo view of authorship, as he considered the filmmaker and not the cinematographer to be the most important agent in the conception of the image. In an interview, he once expressed this view as follows: “Others might think that cinema is
The connection between film elements and brain responses has been suggested by a number of neurocognitive studies. The studies of event segmentation, in particular, support that film editing conditions cognitive responses. After discussing the findings of these studies, this article draws on Münsterberg and Arnheim's classical cognitive approaches to film as well as on poststructuralist film theory to argue that the event segmentation approach still falls short of accounting for the impact of noncontinuous film stimuli on the brain's event segmentation, while it shares with other neurocognitive film research the tendency to naturalize narrative and continuity editing. Finally, the article points out that by approaching the findings of event segmentation studies from the perspective of complex systems neuroscience, new hypotheses can be drawn on how noncontinuous and complex film stimuli condition our brains by mediating (enabling or disrupting) event segmentation and cognitive patterning.