applied to humanistic film theory. Smith is ideally placed to provide such a defense, since he has an insider’s knowledge and understanding of both the world of film theory and the world of philosophy. Because I am a philosopher, and a philosophical
JINHEE CHOI AND MATTIAS FREY, EDS., CINE-ETHICS: ETHICAL DIMENSIONS OF FILM THEORY, PRACTICE, AND SPECTATORSHIP
Phenomenology Encounters Cognitivism
associative approaches to theorization, a dogmatic deference to “master thinkers,” and overestimation of film interpretation as equivalent to film theory (see Sinnerbrink 2011 ). Yet there is much common ground between both approaches, despite differences in
has been neglected not just in philosophy, but also in film theory. 2 In both fields, there has been a tendency “to focus on a fairly standard inventory of emotions and moods, including anger, sadness, fear, joy, grief, jealousy, guilt, and so on” and
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.
, according to Ted Nannicelli and Paul Taberham (2014: 5) , has become “one of cognitive film theory’s most central and lively research projects”: the investigation of emotions in film viewing. Indeed, there are good reasons why emotions should be considered
Patrick Colm Hogan
It is commonplace to remark that India has the largest film industry anywhere, producing “unquestionably the most-seen movies in the world” (Kabir 2001: 1). Of the many languages in which Indian movies are made, films in Hindi (or Urdu) are the most prominent globally, and they comprise the most obviously “national” cinema (Ganti 2004: 12). Indian films in general, and Hindi films in particular, have had international success for decades (Desai 2004: 40). They constitute perhaps the only national cinema that can come close to rivaling the U.S. film industry. This parallel with Hollywood has led to the popular name for the Hindi film industry, “Bollywood.” The name refers particularly to the entertainment-oriented films from the 1960s on, and of these especially the films produced since the early 1990s in the period of economic neoliberalism and globalization.
Constructing the Villain in Narrative Film
Columbus, Alfonso Cuarón, Mike Newell, and David Yates, 2001–2011)—that provoke their audiences’ moral condemnation. What are the psychological underpinnings of this response, and by what means do the villains provoke it? Cognitive film theory has not yet
Between Movies and Mind, Affective Neuroscience, and the Philosophy of Film
, including the empathic imagination, of more elaborate, finely specified states of mind” (180). Detailing the interrelationship between feeling and thought in complex phenomena like the empathic imagination is one of Smith’s greatest contributions to film
Triangulation and Third Culture Debates
-historical psychology and neuroscience shaped Eisenstein's film theory and practice. To do so, I focus on three specific areas: language and speech; motor regulation and expressive movement; and synesthesia. Through my analysis, I demonstrate how we can see at work in