June 02, 2005
Over at Digital Poetics, Nick has an interesting piece on the aesthetic qualities of the experience of watching a film online. He writes:
Who's to say that the experience of watching a film in a theater with friends and strangers in the dark is not as much a part of what makes a movie "good" than the movie itself?Watching a movie on the web lays bare its tricks, strips it of the hucksterism that has always been part of the movie experience. I can easily click to another web page if I'm bored, or it loads to slowly, or the sound is bad.
I'm very much a devotee to the cinema-going experience - the whole experience of it, the inherent (and literal) sleight of hand of it all; the big screen offers a form of enchantment, and I've written at length before about how important I think that is to all types of film. Conversely, Nick hits the nail on the head regarding the rather clinical drawbacks of online distribution. I have trouble not checking my e-mail when I'm watching a movie at home on DVD - it'd be even worse if I was actually watching it on my desktop. Of course, these faults are dependant on current technology, and technology will change as it does too - but movies need to change too.
Not all movies, of course - god forbid the cinematic experience become extinct! But the key to online content is an evolution of form. There's a reason that short film have been so popular online, and I think the key to the evolution is an increased hybrid of brevity and interactivity. I'm not suggesting that films should not be feature length (although in this context matters of length are extremely archaic), but that they must take advantage of the shortened attention span fostered by expediency of information, rather than simply catering to it. A new manner of enchanting audiences is needed.
As I discussed in the last exchange with Matt, I want to make my own films in the traditional sense; I want them to be seen in the cinema and to traverse that wonderful stream of shuttered light; but I also am quite excited about the possibilities represented in the creation of cinema designed solely for the internet. It's something I've been thinking (and writing) about a great deal these last few weeks; and if all goes well, it's something I'll be exploring in the literal sense very soon.
Posted by David Lowery at June 2, 2005 11:15 AM
Comments
Very well and eloquently put David. I love what you say about wanting your films to "be seen in the cinema and to traverse that wonderful stream of shuttered light." Also, the "hybrid of brevity and interactivity." I almost hesitated posting about the aesthetic pitfalls of internet video, in part because I am working on my own which will no doubt be posted soon, and also because books are filled with past critics who have mis-predicted the power of new mediums.
Is it possible to be skeptical of some new technologies without seeming to be reactionary? I hope so...but I'm not sure. I still think that, right now at least, it comes down to the social experience of seeing a movie in public, with total strangers. Home viewing--whether on VHS, cable, DVD, or internet--just can't mimic the randomness and arbitrariness of seeing a movie with people who have never met before and will never meet again. Does the miniaturization of movies portend the miniaturization of the social dimensions of movie viewing?
Posted by: Nick at June 3, 2005 09:26 PM