no shit

Paley, Nina
2009
DIY Days Philadelphia 2009

Gives details about her income from Sita Sings the Blues. She is convinced she’s making more money using Creative Commons than if she had restricted Copyright.

She paid USD50,000 for the music rights. And she has nearly recuperated these costs.

Weiler, Lance
The Evolution of Storytelling
2009
Power To The Pixel

“When I think about these [story/media] outlets, I think about them in terms of like OK if they have the individual arc and then I have the overall arc in the full story, and it becomes about how I pace it, how I get it to an audience, and how I have them interact with it.”

Definition “story architecture”:
“Story architecture to me is kind of the idea of what effectively is a kind of fluidness of creative, technology in terms of how you actually deliver these things, how do you scale them, how do you get them to these various outlets. How do you make it an experience that somebody is going to be engaged by and want to continue to you know hopefully tell somebody else about. And then, you know, business. The last part is kind of entrepreneurial, you know, how do you actually derive your revenue streams from this. How do you actually look at it in a meaningful way, so it is ?impactful? [5:26 min] for yourself.”

“Once you have the data, and it is the future of everything, you know, if we look and we say search was the future, you know, a number of years back, it really is about discovery, it really is about filtering. And a lot of this discussion throughout the day, throughout this whole thing, you know, this conference, is going to be about how do people discover and find you in a world that is swelling with content.”

“What is interesting is, like, normally we started with like a three act structure in a screenplay. In the case of some of the work we have been developing it starts with the build of a universe, bible, game bible, show bible, where we kind of go through and define the world, define the interactions, define the characters, define the rules, and then from there it becomes this amazing kind of depth of information where you know more about the subject than you ever did before.”

Pratten, Robert
18.12.2009
Moving Filmmakers to a Transmedia Business Model

Not bad article, but still film-centred: the ultimate aim is to make a film.

4 interesting graphics.

“Remember that it’s not all for free! Free is your loss-leader to generate the money. Even if it’s “real content” you might still effectively look at it as a marketing cost – it can help to position it in this way to investors. And note that what’s free and what’s paid will be in flux – maybe changing over time and from media to media.

“Indies that follow this transmedia model will be offering an evolving service rather than a one-off product and that means audiences become customers that need to be listened to, responded to, cared for and managed”

“If you perfect this evolving transmedia ecosystem you may ask yourself if you still want to make a feature after all.” Good point, but he might not believe it himself.

“Don’t expect anyone to delve deeply into your storyworld looking for brilliance. You have to provide “satellite media” that orbits the core: it’s easy to digest and looks cool or fun. Celebrity cast or crew and genre are going to get attention and convey credibility – just as they always have.”

“To summarize then, filmmakers will move to transmedia storytelling because it’s going to be the way you build audiences.” His final point, and it’s wrong! Transmedia won’t be there to sell a film, but to sell the transmedia. And film can be part of it.

Moving Filmmakers to a Transmedia Business Model (05.01.2010)

category: PhD sources
tags:

So what is it that this movie is about? In all honesty – I don’t know. I for sure watched it. And I did not fall asleep like in Avatar. OK, I didn’t fall asleep in Avatar. But I did in Up in the Air. OK, I didn’t do that either. But I hope by now you’re with me when I say: this movie has confused me. Unfortunately not in a David Lynch way though, but in a different way. Perhaps even in a new way. Which then would be good. So let’s hope so.

The story is said to be complex. I’d say it is fairly simple. Ryan Bingham’s (George Clooney) job is to fire employees whose bosses don’t have the balls to do it themselves, which makes them walking embarrassments to our race (that includes all human beings and is actually beside the point, but I felt like telling them something: you guys are low, so low that I hope cockroaches will spit on you before they squash you with their ugly little shit-covered feet). The job includes travelling across the USA – a lot. So much in fact that the only place he really feels at home is on the move. And since the way he moves is by airplane, his home is airports. He’s told he leads a very isolated life, but he himself is happy being surrounded by lots of strangers. Then three things happen. First, he meets a woman (Vera Farmiga) he might actually like. Second, his boss tells him to take a young ambitious employee (Anna Kendrick) along and teach her the basics. Third, his company plans to ground him, which means he would have to stay in Omaha, Nebraska.

George Clooney’s performance most definitely is noteworthy. What’s more, there was not a single untalented supporting actor and particularly the beginning had some snappy editing. The movie had its happy-moments while touching on some very sombre topics. And that’s where my problems begin: Up in the Air starts off as a romantic comedy but quickly you notice it might not actually be one. Perhaps my +1 having told me we were in for a cheesy chick flick added to my overall confusion. Whatever it was, this flick needs a category of its own. Which might be a good thing. Think The Godfather, Apocalypse Now, Inglourious Basterds, Sin City, or any Ingmar Bergman or David Lynch film; they all are in categories of their own. I’m just not sure this movie is even the same fucking sport. But I might be changing my mind already.

In German I would say this film looks at life and its problems with a smiling and a crying eye, which is exactly what my face tried to do on my way out of the cinema. Turns out my face wasn’t made for that and consequently I looked a bit stupid – just as stupid as our perverse little world. Perhaps that’s what the filmmakers wanted.

Up in the Air
(2009)

Director: Jason Reitman
Screenplay: Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner, Walter Kirn (novel)
Cinematography: Eric Steelberg
Editing: Dana E. Glauberman
Score: Rolfe Kent
Cast: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick, Jason Bateman.

Amiel, John
Amiel, J ~ A Director’s Perspective

“The history of Hollywood can be described in terms of who has held the power to get films made at any given time. Broadly speaking the key eras have been:

  • Studio Heads 1930s – ‘50s
  • Directors late ‘60s – ‘70s
  • Agencies ‘80s
  • Corporate Heads early ‘90s
  • Stars late ‘90s – now”

Hollywood increasingly caters for the young audience who can “open” the film by turning up in large numbers on the opening weekend. These films are star-driven: a handful of leading actors effectively determine which films get made.

Keane, Michael
Exporting Chinese Culture: Industry Financing Models in Film and Television

13
“The question is then: how is such ‘creative destruction’ occurring in media industries, if at all?
“In spite of the success of a few media enterprises, creative industries in China are fragile when compared with the corporate structures and production relations of Hollywood. In developed economies the mass media are dominated by highly concentrated forms of organization.
“In China, the options for development of audiovisual industries are still uncertain and subject to vagaries in national media policy. Media organizations may expand provincially; they may aspire to horizontal integration; but the bottom line is likely to remain a lack of capital, which forces them to seek out low-cost ways of competing in a crowded media industry.

14
“In television industries for instance financial returns on program development and production are extended across, and within new territories. In cinema co-productions and runaway productions are a means of ensuring cost savings.”

15
“Globalization by franchising provides a very different model of development, one that is flexible, post-Fordist, and subject to user innovation.”
“Within the context of globalization, [...] there are four levels of economic activity: economic specialization, de-territorialized production (production of goods in lowest cost locations), partially traded or non-traded services, and routine manufacturing and services.”

economic specialization

    “These blockbusters and global brand services are often incubated in ‘export-oriented, specialized industrial clusters’. Hollywood and Silicon Valley, which are result of institutionally embedded know-how, produce continuous learning and innovation. The output of these centres targets world markets.”

de-territorialized production

    16
    “Outsourced productions in cinema are the most noteworthy example of how international producers seek to minimize costs.”

partially tradable or non-tradable services

    “The internationalized services as such need to partner up with local knowledge, in turn creating mutual benefits and cultural technology transfer.”

routine manufacturing and services

    “it is possible to make products and services at any location in the globe.”

16f
“The demand for innovation drives the imperative to constantly examine the international market for opportunities.”

17
“This leads back to the conundrum of creativity: how do developing countries compete? If it is easier to compete in the cultural economy by making local versions of global products—or by acting as a low-cost location for footloose multinationals—then the specificity of culture is ultimately eroded. On the other hand, a focus on the national can have the effect of marginalizing the cultural product and ensuring that it fits only into a niche culture market, as illustrated by national cinema and world music. The dilemma for producers, moreover, is making a leap into high-value markets: independents located in developing countries do not have the resources to incubate, produce, and market so as to produce ‘winner-takes-all’ branded products and services. In many instances, new artists are discovered in the margins and expediency drives them or their agents into to the arms of international financiers, often handing over the valuable IP rents in the process.
Over-bureaucratization is endemic to the cultural sector and works against implementation of long-term business models.

17f
“These factors, in combination with existing conventions within the marketplace, notably a propensity to rely on relationships make it difficult for cultural enterprises to generate start-up capital. Product innovation is therefore more likely to be incremental and imitation is favoured over innovation. The focus on imitation has led to the success of Japanese and Korean creative industries. Whereas these countries have managed to move to the next stage (innovation), China remains locked into a cycle of dependency.”
The principal financiers of the Chinese film industry are government: direct support for approved films as well as indirect support for co-productions via tax breaks and reductions of expensive red tape; foreign investors: particular in co-productions and joint-venture arrangements; major business enterprises: through revenue-sharing arrangements and product endorsements in film; advertising companies: often through brokering of services such as post-production; and state-owned enterprises: many of these such as the People’s Liberation Army, are in fact highly profitable enterprises with interests in communications.”
“In 2003 80 percent of revenue from box office receipts came from the 20 imported blockbusters (Hua 2004). According to official statistics copyright earnings on imported films were 10 times more than those received from domestic productions.

18f
The politicization of film content, erratic censorship regimes, and the necessity of managing scripts to appease officials, impacts on production investment in two ways. First, it discourages domestic investors who are unwilling to sink their capital into scripts that are politically doctored; and second, it opens up a private investment market for the more adventurous producers. Since 1997 the partial privatization of China’s leading film studios (Beijing Forbidden City Film Corporation, Xian Film Corporation, Ermei Film Corporation, and Shanghai Film Corporation) has stimulated private investment and co-productions. Most of the capital investment has come from Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan. While the majority of films in 2003 were still produced by the state-funded studios, there was a significant increase in the number of films (Ibid, 32) produced by privately invested companies. Some of the more notable independent production and investment houses are Beijing New Vista, Huayi Brothers and Taihe Film Investment Company, and Century Hero Audio-visual Investment Company (Yin 2004).”

19
The success of China’s film industry and the capacity to create exportable content is contingent on unleashing creativity as much as stimulating finance.
“Tarantino has undoubtedly been impressed by the willingness of the Chinese to work enthusiastically for low salaries in contrast to the spiralling costs in other international locations.”
“With a population of more than 1.3 billion China’s cinema box office revenue is just 25 percent of that of Korea, whose population is 47 million.”
“The success of the Korean new wave has seen film financing models going on-line, allowing ordinary people to buy into the movie-business (Kim 2003). Netizen funds are a way by which (mostly) young Koreans invest in film projects for a return based on the movie’s success after release.”

19f
“International connections are important in order to break out of the cycle of dependency on state funding. In 2003 more than half of the 140 feature films made in China received substantial investment from government but less than half the number of films legitimately screened in Chinese cinemas in 2003 were profitable, and as mentioned above, the heavy grossing films were international ‘blockbusters’.”

20
the average cost of production was only rmb 3 million (USD362,000), or 0.5 percent of the average cost of production in the U.S.
Cellphone received investment finance from a number of sources with major contributions coming from Motorola, China Mobile, BMW, and Mtone (a Chinese internet content provider). Motorola invested rmb 4 million (USD484,000), China Mobile rmb 800,000 (USD97,000), while BMW contributed rmb 1.2 million (USD145,000). Sponsors received product placement and visible recognition in the film promotional messages. For instance, the protagonist of the film—a successful TV talk host who inadvertently left a message from a lover on his new Motorola cellphone—also drives a BMW. In addition, Motorola and BMW’s logo were displayed prominently on advertising billboards. Music copyright delivered a further rmb 8 million (US$968,000) (Meng 2004). In addition to securing financial support, the production company (Huayi Brothers and Taihe Film Investment Company), which is incidentally the advertising agent for China Mobile, sought to ensure returns on investment by working with a Guangdong-based DVD maker to produce cheaper legitimate versions in efforts to limit piracy (Shanghai Daily Jan 21, 2004).”
Television is an industry that employs an army of people in China. The flow of investment is more dynamic than cinema as the market is shaped by domestic consumption and broadly supported by advertising.”
“Television stations are still technically owned by the state but they are now allowed to apply for licenses to operate as corporate entities responsible for their profits and losses.”

21
“This is not straightforward philanthropy, however, but investment based on guanxi (reciprocal) relationships.”
“In China cable television is ubiquitous but the business model remains low value because subscription to the 30 or so channels is under priced.”
“the mass audience for television – some 900 million — is shared among some several hundred stations. The bulk of income for television stations, and for producers, now comes from advertising.”

23
Digital content industries provide new challenges for investment in the creative industries.
Chinese government is investing heavily in video games production in Shanghai and an animation centre in Beijing. These are joint public-private ventures that draw upon government largesse towards new industry/new economy development in the wake of Korea and Japan’s video games exports. The government recognizes that digital content industries are growth industries and that they have global impact; that is, products and applications developed in China can be marketed globally, in comparison to television and film, which is hampered by being nationally specific. In addition, digital content is invariably produced with the intent of repurposing in multiple platforms: cable, free-to-air, Internet, mobile phone etc.
“Until recently oligopoly structures have not existed in China due to the need to control information.”
“Digital media is especially relevant to user-led innovation. There is a need to respond quickly to consumer demand and this gives China an advantage in that it has a large consumer base to test new products and applications.

24
while ideas may be generated in developing countries, finance to commercialize still comes primarily from multinational investors.
“In order to avoid becoming a low cost location for media production (Miller et al 2001), China needs to further develop its own industrial base and to recognize the importance of intellectual property protection in developing local creativity. The synergy between creative enterprise and financial inputs into core creativity, R&D, incubation, and marketing now becomes central to meet the challenge of developing export content.” Not sure about that.
“how do countries move from a low national production base into competitive export markets? The transition encompasses a five-stage process.

  1. low-cost outsourcing,
  2. isomorphism and cloning practices,
  3. legitimate co-productions and franchising agreements,
  4. niche markets and regional breakthroughs,
  5. cultural/ industrial milieu and local clusters can be produced to target high-value exports.”

“These media capitals (Curtin 2003) bring with them economies of scale and scope, the attraction of foreign investment, the certainty of rights management, and greater network and distribution complementarities.”

25
Successful exports of Chinese film and television, moreover, are ultimately contingent on institutional reforms within China, which will bring these five growth stages into synergistic alignment in order to generate greater value and industry confidence.”

Lucas, Rachael 2009. From here to eternity: what virtual worlds can teach us about creating infinite participant experiences. Lumina (Strawberry Hills, NSW) (1):161-168.

Very interesting but very utopian.

161
“Many screen practitioners I have come across don’t seem to recognise that there is a fundamental conceptual difference between how you construct old media and how you construct new media; that old media is about story arcs, editing to build inference and dramatic connotation and achieving narrative outcomes, whereas new media is largely about a real-time, private, momentary, disposable experience that unfolds in a virtual space.” This is way overgeneralised. The two can be combined => entarch!

163
“Even the so-called leaders in global, virtual world thinking, are still thinking old media. Hence the opportunity for the Australian screen industry. […] Australian screen practitioners just need to get ahead of the game and embrace progress, rather than be determined by it.”
“In a film, we measure our codes of morality and values against what is happening to a character. In a virtual world, we get the cathartic benefits without being put in the line of judgement (whether or to this is a false illusion). We are questioning our own reality.”

164
“[…] in our traditional way of looking at things we have to work with a timeframe, whereas someone could remain engaged in a virtual world forever.” (“That could be a young guy starting at 17 years old and ending at 42!”)
“The new era of vital word is about a conceptual exploration of emotions in more abstract ways. It is about exploration of consciousness. Your mission as a creator is to keep that fantasy going. This is based on the relationships your participants find within that world. The basic journey is of participants forming relationships and developing confidence to becoming a mentor or even a collaborative designer.
If audiences are both beneficiary and creator, the virtual world producer is the facilitator, the town planner – it’s a totally different role. You’re centre management. It’s customer service. The creative element is in setting up the next project: what its conceptual design and machinations will be. You want to get to a point with your brand where it can be licensed and sold off, to support your other brandable entities. Filmmakers will do best to think of each business as one aspect of a greater brand.
The six key principles of virtual worlds are shared space, persistence of world, immediacy, interactivity, a graphical user interface (GUI) and the encouragement of communities.The Big Brother house shares all six key principles but, again, from the point of view of the Big Brother participant. The unique experience of each contestant is their “ego journey”, as they experience self growth. But someone self-evolving in real time makes for rather uninteresting TV viewing for the rest of us, so we rely upon the edited highlights.”

165
“In fact, Reality TV is perhaps the closest example of an ego’s journey, although the editing, dramatic musical inferences, “highlights” packages and competitive “winner” outcomes tend to make it lean towards an audience friendly “hero’s journey”. It is still about structuring a passive, prescribed story which builds dramatic point cliff hangers to ad breaks. The Ego’s Journey in the virtual world is more private. There is no audience.” Not sure that’s true.
“There is much that can be learnt from the virtual paradigm in terms of screen content. Films don’t have to be films anymore. The notion of three acts, 90 minutes, does not keep up with the next level of internet customisation already being enacted out there in society every day.” I only partly agree. Film will continue to exist.
“If Johnny Rocku becomes enough of a presence to become a film, so be it but that shouldn’t be the starting point. This is a fundamental conceptual problem.
Filmmakers need to think of themselves as a brand first that has multiple slate of projects under that theme. Once you are established and have a core following you can branch out.

166
“The reason I prefer to talk about brand is that it has longevity far beyond 90 minutes. Disney, for example, does not have a beginning, middle of end. Disney will go on forever.” “A child will form relationships and an identity with Disney for as long as he or she desires it. That’s his or her journey. Until eventually he or she grows out of it. It’s not about imposing a story within that space but rather gives it enough interest to sustain participants creating their own journeys there.”
“I’m starting to think that social communication is entertainment.” Of course it is.

167
“There is also a need to design for different personality types: some people seek socialisation, some seek a sense of control, some want to nurture and some just want to blow things up! And the one person can go through many different phases. The whole system of designing the virtual world is about human psychology and how people relate to each other at various stages of their own evolution.”

168
“What does the age of ego-centricity do to character arcs?”
“In this new frontier of filmmaking, I’d like to inspire Australian screen practitioners to take a unified approach, to redraft policies together and rethink conceptually the future framework of our ideas. “Who am I?” is, after all, the oldest question on the planet.”

category: PhD sources
tags: ,

Luhrmann, Baz 2009. What now? A new perspective on Australian film. Lumina (Strawberry Hills, NSW) (1):9-17.

16
“Everyone has access to a video so there is no excuse for not making a film right now.”

408
“While economies with high levels of copyright enforcement are able to protect creative output and provide a basis for its exploitation and commercialization in the marketplace through well-enforced intellectual property systems, China’s creative industries must find other ways of extracting value from their work.”
“Both Confucian and socialist concepts of creativity provide a rich tapestry for Chinese intellectual property lawyers to draw upon as they seek a balance between strict enforcement of individualized rights and mapping out limitations or exceptions to those rights, as well as promoting alterna- tive models for managing copyright in certain sectors or spaces – such as Creative Commons and Science Commons models. Confucian philosophy emphasized the transmission or passing down of creative works for others to build on, rather than learning or creation as in individualized activity. The Confucian statement: ‘I transmit rather than create – I believe in and love the Ancients’ (The Analects) is an example of this approach.”

409
“The recognition of individual proprietary rights in creative works marked a historic shift – on paper at least – away from notions of sharing, distribution and collaborative production, emphasizing instead the role of the individual author and his or her right to dictate the terms on which a work can be modified or distributed.”

411
“Reduced levels of government funding [since the early 1990s], combined with new opportunities provided by the market economy, are placing film-makers and musicians under heavy pressure to find new sources of funding and to build commercially sustain- able businesses. Complicating matters is the fact that levels of piracy in China mean that the royalty-based business models that dominate other markets are simply not yet viable in China.”

411f
Some companies are enforcing copyright legally, with some success.

412f
Huayi Brothers make extensive use of product placement.

413
advertisers whose products appear in Huayi Brothers films do not really care whether the films featuring their product are distributed legally or illegally. As long as people watch Huayi’s films and are exposed to the products being displayed within them, companies that have paid money to help develop a brand profile are satisfied. As in other markets, this strategy helps take pressure off royalty payments as the only source of income for film producers.”

413f
Mp3 downloading sites are fairly easy to fight in China, because the Internet is so strictly controlled. P2P, however, might change this entirely.

414
“The paltry income that can be derived from these sources [CDs and the Internet] leaves them with artist management and live events as their most significant sources of revenue.”

415
FLOSS (Free Libre Open Source Software) and Creative Commons “help reduce enforcement costs and refocus copyright management on creativity and distribution, rather than control.”

416
“At present, pressure for enforcement of copyright in China is still driven to a large extent by foreign governments and corporations that wish to see their intellectual property protected. Once this motivation is more directly related to China’s own creative sector it might be expected that copyright law and enforcement will be more closely scrutinized and invested in by government and local businesses.”
“the demand for creative products – particularly by emerging upwardly mobile urban middle classes – and the successes in extracting income from content experienced by music copyright owners in relation to mobile phone ringtones, suggest that with a combination of pricing, local product, technology and legal enforcement, such a cultural shift [such changes in copyright practices] may not be impossible.”

1
“broadcast TV cannot wipe out cinema any more than cinema was able to wipe out theatre.” But every next generation is bigger: theatre is tiny, cinema bigger, TV huge

10
“Sophisticated new technology always seems to provoke a flurry of wild and naive speculation about its effects.”

11f
The technology alone does not create the use to which it is put: technology is implemented (or, as with most inventions, never implemented) according to the prevailing patterns of use into which it can be fitted, and according to the emerging forms of social organisation with which it can align itself.”

12
“TV lines up with (and inflects) the increasing domestic use of technology, the emphasis on home and family as site of consumption; cinema lined up with (and superseded) public forms of entertainment like vaudeville and music hall, the sites of public enjoyment and of the development of non-religious mass ideologies.”

16
TV & newspapers feed off each other.

24f
“The form of the entertainment film is one reason for the confusion between cinema and broadcast TV. The entertainment film can be broadcast on TV, hence it seems as though there is little real difference between the two media. Two immediate objections can be made to this assumption. First, a film on TV yields a very different experience to its viewer, unless that viewer is able to suspend the sense of watching TV and imagine instead the sense of being in a cinema. Second, it is not possible to show broadcast TV material in a cinema in the way that it is possible to show films on TV. Broadcast TV has developed its own forms, those of the serial and the series, which resist showing in the ‘single work’ form that cinema imposes.”

25f
Cinema marketing sells two rather distinct things: the single film in its uniqueness and its similarity to other films; and the experience of cinema itself. Cinema and film are both sold at the same point, at the point of sale of an admission ticket. It is not the film that is sold at this point, it is the possibility of viewing a film or films; it is not cinema as an object that is sold, but cinema as an anticipated experience.”

26
“tickets are sold [...] on the expectation of pleasure.”
“What is bought in the cinema is the possibility of a pleasurable performance: the performance of a particular film and the performance of cinema itself, both together.”

26f
Cinema in this way becomes a very precise urban experience, that of the crowd with its sense of belonging and of loneliness. Alternatively, cinema in smaller communities tends to perform a different function when most of the audience are acquainted with each other. Here the entertainment is related to particular characteristics of individuals or of the place itself. The film comes from outside, the cinema belongs to the particular place. However, such group experiences of cinema are becoming more and more rare, and cinema is now characteristically an urban phenomenon, [especially in Britain].”

27
“‘picture palaces’ [are] now the subject of nostalgic photo-books: simple brick shells decorated in bizarre and rich styles, and usually of a massive size to emphasise the grandeur of the cinematic experience.”

28
1920s: “The couple visiting the cinema during this period experienced cinema as an integrated succession of entertainments that went far beyond the simple experience of viewing a film together in a more or less anonymous crowd.”

30
“An idea of the film is widely circulated and promoted, an idea which can be called the ‘narrative image’ of the film, the cinema industry’s anticipatory reply to the question ‘What is this film like?’” => The narrative image is the promise -> the film is the realisation of that promise.
“Payment for a ticket is not an endorsement of a film, nor is it an endorsement of a particular performance of a film in a particular place. It is an endorsement of the narrative image of the film, together with the general sense of the cinematic experience.”
“Cinema demands single films, complete in themselves and distinct from other films.”

37
“The experience offered is one in which an individual film will complete the enigma of the narrative image. The experience of cinema that is offered is one of the public viewing of images with their supporting sounds. These images and sounds, viewed in the particular circumstances of the cinema, produce a particular kind of spectating that is intense and sustained.” Is this any different from TV / home cinema nowadays?

38-61
Ellis uses psychoanalysis to describe the relationship between cinema & viewer? Interesting, but I don’t agree.

38
Cinema is constructed in another time & place => absent from the place in which the viewing takes place => yet it is (very) present.

40
“Commercial cinema, in increasing its scale and scope as far as possible, tries to standardise its audiences to the same kinds of attention to the screen.”
In cinema everybody is alone and in near-darkness => particular kind of mental state: “a concentration of psychic activity into a state of hyper-receptivity”: dream-like, close to sleep => “what is seen is not subject to the usual expectations of plausibility that we apply to everyday life.”

41f
Cinema provokes identification with:

  1. apparatus of projection (beam of light from projector = imagined beam of light from spectators’ eyes),
  2. narcissistic identification with any figure on screen.

42
“[the] partial suspension of the judging function of the ego [is] necessary for the activities of day-dreaming and the construction of fantasies.” The ghost and the shell are not unified anymore -> one looks at oneself from the outside.

43
“Both dreaming and fantasy deal with fragmented and contradictory representations of figures” (oneself)

45
The spectator is looking at something that doesn’t look back at him = voyeurism.

47
Voyeurism is what constitutes the pleasure & fascination with cinema. I don’t agree, it’s about story.

50
Gazing is the constitutive activity of cinema. Broadcast TV demands a rather different kind of looking: that of the glance. Gazing at the TV is a sign of intensity of attention that is usually considered slightly inappropriate to the medium.”
“As the conventions for the depiction of reality change, so audiences tend to deride what once was taken as ‘the real’ as being spectacular or a fake.” Perhaps why I don’t like classic films that much?

51
“entertainment cinema has been concerned [...] to play between the [spectacle and reality], to make the real spectacular and the spectacle plausible.”

53
“The cinema image is routinely more elaborate and detailed than the TV image.”