Ways of Being

The Spectator and the Spectacle

By Peter OBrien

A Film and Screen Studies Dissertation For the School of Humanities and Cultural Industries

Word count: 15,014

Abstract

An introductory speculation, Ways of Being: The Spectator and the Spectacle is a consideration of the epistemological, ontological and metaphysical downfalls of film theorys understandings of the spectator and the spectacle; with particular emphasis directed towards the neurobiological implications of the spectators body. The thesis will argue that these shortcomings are representative of wider ranging issues of complacency engulfing the film industry and film exhibition as a whole. Furthermore, the fundamental disruptions of the digital upgrade of cinema, and the expanding means through which film content can be experienced, will be explored in relation to the pressing need for film theory to reassess itself. Drawing on a plethora of empirical and non-empirical research, this dissertation is a highly progressive expression of how film experience has always been about transcendence and, as a result of its digital re-birth and diversifications, it is now becoming even more so.

For Douglas Trumbull. The dreamer who cared enough to keep going.

Contents

List of Illustrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Notes on the Text. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Declaration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Introduction

The Cave-Like Comfort Zone

A Pressing Need to Reconfigure the Spectator and the Spectacle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Chapter One

Looking Beyond the Gaze

The Spectators Relationship with the Spectacle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Chapter Two

Hypercinema
The Implications of the Spectacle as a Hyper-Immersive Commodity. . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Conclusion

Deshi Basara
A Pressing Need to Understand the Hidden Language of the Spectator and the Spectacle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 4

Appendix A

The Perceiving Participator and the Spectacle Experiencing Situation

An Example of a Reclassification for the Spectator and the Spectacle. . . . . . . . . . . 96

Appendix B

Fat and Sugar

The Variable of Cinema Snacking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Appendix C

The Terror of the Microphone

The Introduction of Sound and the Resulting Disruptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Appendix D

Large Formats of the Past

The Logistical Downfalls of Fox Grandeur and Cinerama. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Appendix E

Resolutions
Image Resolutions, Higher Frame Rates and the Standardisation of Film Exhibition. . . 109

Appendix F

The Multiplex is in Trouble

The Aesthetic Downfalls of Low Standards and LieMAXes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Appendix G

A Lousy Experience
The Multiplex Complaint that went Viral. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Appendix H

Highlighting IMAX
Comparisons of Conventional and IMAX Film Posters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Appendix I

The Multiplex is in Your Pocket

The Implications of the Interfacing Relationship of the Spectator and the Spectacle. . 131

Appendix J

The Overview Effect

Hypercinemas Profound Implications for Humanity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Discography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Filmography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Illustration Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

List of Illustrations

Introduction

Figure 1: An Illustration of Platos simile of the cave. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 2: A poster for Cave of Forgotten Dreams (Dir. Werner Herzog, 2011). . . . . . . . 28

Figure 3: The eight-legged bison. A screen capture from Cave of Forgotten Dreams. . . . 29

Chapter One

Figure 4: Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) looks through his peep hole. A screen capture from Psycho. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Figure 5: John Berger demonstrates perspective. A screen capture from Ways of Seeing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Figure 6: Jefferies (James Stewart) gazes at Lisa (Grace Kelly). A publicity photograph for Rear Window. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Figure 7: Dolby Atmos auditorium layout schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Figure 8: The Brain in your gut diagram. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 7

Chapter Two

Figure 9: An Illustration of 24 frames a second. A screen capture from a demonstration of Showscan Digital (2010). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Figure 10: The Higher frame rate FAQ sheet for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. . . . 51

Figure 11: An Illustration demonstrating the 3D stereoscopic effect, featuring Creature from the Black Lagoon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Figure 12: Douglas Trumbull directing an experimental test shoot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Figure 13: An Illustration demonstrating the enormity of Cinerama, from an edition of Life Magazine, 1952. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Figure 14: Film format and screen size comparisons. A diagram demonstrating the differences between 70mm IMAX, conventional 70mm and 35mm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Figure 15: IMAX is believing. A photograph of audience members in front of the IMAX screen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Figure 16: The number of films released in IMAX venues between 2009 and 2012. . . . 61

Figure 17: The IMAX poster for The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Figure 18: The number of IMAX venues worldwide between 2008 and 2012. . . . . . . . 64

Figure 19: Take in a Movie or get taken into one. IMAX is believing advertisement poster. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Figure 20: A photograph of an IMAX performance of The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . 68

Figure 21: A photograph of the auditorium of the BFI IMAX venue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Figure 22: A diagram demonstrating the peripheral visions role in the perception of motion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Figure 23: A diagram demonstrating the different peripheral occupation range of IMAX and conventional cinema screens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Figure 24: A diagram demonstrating the human eyes rods and cones receptors and their role in the perception of peripheral vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Figure 25: Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban) jump for their lives. A screen capture from the 9 minute IMAX preview of Star Trek Into Darkness. . . . 72

Figure 26: A photograph of a Showscan installation venue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Figure 27: A photography of the production of New Magic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Figure 28: A poster for Brainstorm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 9

Figure 29: A photograph demonstration of the in-ride experience of Back to the Future: The Ride. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Figure 30: Nancy (Rachel Blanchard) allures Jez (Robert Webb). A screen capture from an episode of Peep Show. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Conclusion

Figure 31: See a movie or be part of one. IMAX is believing advertisement poster. . . 83

Figure 32: A hand print cave painting from the El Castillo cave in Spain. . . . . . . . . . . 84

Figure 33: Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) prepares for his ascent from the pit. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Figure 34: A poster for Berberian Sound Studio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Figure 35: Bruce Wayne climbs up the cavern. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Figure 36: A poster for Silent Running. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Figure 37: Bruce Wayne contemplates his leap. A publicity photograph for The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 10

Figure 38: Bruce Wayne - risen from darkness. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Appendix B

Figure 39: A photograph of the food and drink counter of a Vue cinema. . . . . . . . . . 99

Appendix C

Figure 40: The Microphone the Terror of the Studios, the cover of Photoplay, December 1929. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Appendix D

Figure 41: A screenshot of The Future of Film article from Photoplay, December 1929. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Figure 42: A 70mm advertisement for The Master. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Figure 43: A point of view roller coaster sequence from This is Cinerama. A smile box re-creation of what the 3-strip Cinerama version of This is Cinerama would have looked like in a Cinerama venue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 11

Figure 44: A layout demonstration of the workings of a Cinerama theatre. . . . . . . . . 107

Figure 45: Linus Rawlings (James Stewart) greets the Native Americans. A smile box re-creation of what the 3-strip Cinerama version of How The West Was Won would have looked like in a Cinerama venue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Appendix E

Figure 46: A diagram illustrating the parameters of different image resolutions. . . . . 110

Figure 47: A photograph of an 8K television display. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Appendix F

Figure 48: A photograph of The Little Theatre Cinema, Bath, UK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Figure 49: A photograph of the city centre Cineworld, Glasgow, UK. . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Figure 50: A poster for Quartet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

Figure 51: A photograph of the Cineworld in Crawley, West Sussex, UK. . . . . . . . . . 118

Figure 52: A resolution comparison of LieMAX and IMAX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

12

Figure 53: An advertisement poster for Odeons isense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

Figure 54: A photograph of a 4DX cinema entrance hall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Appendix H

Figure 55: A conventional poster for The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Figure 56: The IMAX poster for The Dark Knight Rises. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Figure 57: A conventional poster for Skyfall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

Figure 58: The IMAX poster for Skyfall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

Figure 59: A conventional poster for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. . . . . . . . . 129

Figure 60: One of four IMAX character posters for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Appendix I

Figure 61: What a difference 8 years makes: St. Peter's Square in 2005 and yesterday. A photograph comparison created by NBC News. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

13

Figure 62: Netflix account homepage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Figure 63: Google Glass. A publicity photograph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Figure 64: Google Glass technical schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Figure 65: Glass Glass - a users point of view. A screen capture from How it Feels [through Glass]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

Appendix J

Figure 66: The Blue Marble. A photograph that is currently the highest resolution image of the Earth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

14

Acknowledgements

Fundamentally, the research project that finds its culmination in this dissertation is my attempt to rationalise why I have always enjoyed films so much. Additionally, I wanted to know why I enjoyed the experience of a film in IMAX more than the experience of the same film in a conventional cinema. While these yearnings formed the subconscious incentive for the project, the initial conscious embodiment of it was a vague notion of wanting to look at the gaze and explore how we feel films. When I said these two statements back in October 2012, not only did I have essentially zero prior knowledge of the gaze as it exists in film theory, but I knew little more about the study of film spectatorship in general. Appropriately for this papers content, I had a very strong feeling for the direction of the project and a belief that I had something deeply significant to say on its subject, even if I could not adequately put that something into words. Considering there is not yet a single unifying presence writing on the areas I deal with in the paper, this was probably just as well. Accordingly, the majority of the projects research has involved the connecting of a very disparate range of dots; as well as an equal amount of deduction, imagination and original thinking over the past seven months. The whole endeavour has been a hugely enriching experience in which my intellectual capabilities have greatly risen to a formidable level and through the process of which I have acquired a completely new way of enjoying films. In this dissertation, I believe that I have orchestrated a highly complex explanation for the projects original incentives; that covers much more than what I set out to do, with still more potential on the horizon.

However, this project was not a sole venture and, as such, I would like to thank:

15

My guiding tutor, Dr Suman Ghosh, for sitting through many of my incoherent ramblings and who had the patience to endure my nonlinear writing style for an exceedingly long time. Most of all, though, I would like to thank him for his sense of humour, words of wisdom and belief in my capabilities.

Dr Terrance Rodgers for letting me change to the dissertation module a week before it initiated, for allowing me to submit an increased word count and for authorising a deadline extension so that I could rework the paper to satisfy the new word count.

Stephen Manley for pointing me in the direction of the seminal Film Theory: An Introduction Through the Senses.

Bath Spa University as a whole for its support and encouragement.

Nic Driscoll (my sister), Tim Bradshaw and Matt Coot for their proofreading services.

My friends and family for their continual assistance, support and understanding.

Simon Callows highly articulate and overly indulgent prose style in his masterfully written biography Orson Welles: The Road to Xanadu. Now that Ive completed this dissertation, I look forward to continuing it!

The Dark Knight Rises at the BFI IMAX on the 20th July 2012, the subconscious progenitor for this project as a possible dissertation subject. The event was a hugely enjoyable and life changing filmic experience; the full implications of which this dissertation should go some way in expressing. 16

Notes on the Text

I feel that some clarification is required. The sheer amount of data that I unearthed as a result of my research led to me writing a first draft that was nearly 20,000 words long, double the acceptable amount for a submission! As such, this was followed by a second draft in which I aimed to decrease the word count, but only managed to get it down to around 17,000 words. These excessive word counts were not an agenda on my part, as I had always fully intended to submit an 11,000 word paper, with some potential appendix items. However, the breadth of my research, my passion for the subject and the fact that I had written each section of the first draft largely in isolation caused the overall word count to sky rocket. Ultimately, my dissertation developed to the point where it seemed the integrity of the argument was reliant on all the contents of its text. It would have been a deplorable mess, if I had just simply disbanded half of its contents and been done with it!

Therefore, a word count expansion to 15,000 words was authorised, as was a deadline extension in which I could re-work the excessive contents of the first and second drafts into appendix materials. As I had put a great deal of planning into building a strong, logical and multi-layered structural spine for the dissertation, the re-working of its content was not just a case of extracting huge chunks of material; rather, it involved extracting chunks of material and then reconfiguring the main body to compensate for their omissions, often this had a ripple effect that required the re-working of multiple points from multiple sections.

The new word count of 15,014 stated on the front cover, excluding titles and subtitles, refers to the primary content of the main body of this volume: Introduction, Chapter One, 17

Chapter Two and Conclusion. Originally the primary content also had a third chapter, but that has been removed to satisfy the new word count, it now exists as Appendices F and I. Likewise, Appendices A and B originally formed material of Chapter One; whereas Appendices C, D and E were originally components of Chapter Two. Minus titles and subtitles, the Appendices have a word count of 6,053. The unified word count for the entire dissertation volume is 30,775.

In regards to formatting, the presentation of this volume adheres to the required guidelines. However, there are two instances when text alignment has not been justified: the quoted text in Appendix G and in the reference details sections. The result of justifying these pieces of text led to a very unpleasant aesthetic result that, due to the amount of white space generated in the text, actually made the text harder to read! Unfortunately, my edition of Microsoft Word does not allow me to edit text alignment beyond justifying it or aligning it left, right or centre. Therefore, these sections of text remain aligned left.

There is a difference of page numbering that exists between the two hard copies and the digital submission. As with the text alignment, my edition of Microsoft Word does not allow me to utilise multiple types of page numbering in the same document. As the hard copies were created from three different documents, I was able to present the initial pages without numbering, the front matter pages with lower case Roman numerals and the bulk of the volume (the primary content, appendices and reference sections) with regular Arabic numbering. However, as the digital copy is contained within one document it utilises only the Arabic page numbering on all of its pages. Therefore, the sequential numbering of its pages is different to that of the hard copies and its contents pages has been adjusted according. Additionally, the digital version of the Declaration is a photograph of the hard copy counterpart, as this enabled me to include my signature in the digital copy. Aside from 18

these two differences, the digital and hard copies are identical in their content and their presentation.

Also, I have endeavoured to format the images and the text into an aesthetically pleasing whole as best as I can, but there are some instances where substantial areas of white space just could not be avoided.

Aside from the Harvard referencing guidelines already requiring a major overhaul in regards to the range of reference sources that now exist, as there is no dictated way to present image sources, I have endeavoured to present the required information based on what the guidelines already state for other types of content. However, the image sources have not been presented in alphabetical order; rather, they are presented in the same order that they appear in the List of Illustrations and their linear order throughout the main body. This has been done as it is more logical and makes the referencing of the image sources a much easier process.

The creation of this final submission draft has required a great deal of my time and effort, almost equivalent to formulating the original structure and writing the first draft! However, I am grateful for the extended opportunity that has enabled me to complete the dissertation I always wanted to submit. Initially the contents of Appendices F and I (originally Chapter Three) formed integral components of my original argument and I was very hesitant to disband them from the primary content. However, through the process of re-affirming the contents of the Introduction, Chapter One and Chapter Two as expressing what has always been the essential focus for this thesis, I can now say that while the contents of Appendices F and I are relevant to the overall subject, they are not integral to the essential focus of it. Additionally, with the appendices as a whole, while there are 19

indications at various points throughout the main body to reference them, this is by no means essential. The logic of the appendices inclusion is discernible by reading them in a linear fashion after finishing the conclusion.

In regards to the Conclusion, as it always existed in a very fluid, proto-form throughout the first and second drafts, I do not believe my original aim for its direction has been compromised; rather, the re-affirming of the Introduction, Chapter One and Chapter Two has produced a conclusion that presents a formidably strengthened culmination of my original intentions! Therefore, after a great deal of intricate re-formulations, I can satisfactorily say that the 15,014 word primary content of this volume absolutely expresses what I originally set out to define.

Finally, as much as this piece of work does adhere to the lethargic conventions of academic writing, I have endeavoured to make it progressively engaging, entertaining and above all enlightening.

I hope you enjoy reading it.

20

Declaration

I hereby declare that this dissertation is my own original work and that it has not been submitted for assessment at any other institution. Where other sources of information have been used they have been acknowledged.

Peter OBrien 06/06/2013 Bath, UK

21

Introduction

The Cave-Like Comfort Zone

A Pressing Need to Reconfigure the Spectator and the Spectacle

The study of the relationship between the spectator (film viewer) and the spectacle (film text/event) is film theorys primary concern. Film consumption and film presence are integral components of contemporary culture; the fact that the academic discipline of Film Studies developed out of cultural studies and has become an equally diverse field, with ever more emerging avenues of thought, is testament to this: In order to understand todays world, we need cinema. Literally, it is only in cinema that we get that crucial dimension which we are not able to confront in our real reality. If you are looking for what is in reality, more real than reality itself, look into the cinematic fiction (iek, 2006). While iek is speaking from a psychoanalytically and ideologically motived point of view, the study of the cinematic medium can offer us additional ontological and epistemological insights into reality and our very nature of being in that reality. However, before we can adequately attain this knowledge, first, we need to thoroughly understand the cinematic medium itself; we need to understand how the spectator views, absorbs, receives, engages, experiences, constructs, desires, negotiates, debates, infers, participates, fantasises, identifies, critiques, addresses, manipulates, senses,

recreates and integrates with the cinematic fiction. The problematic nature of terminology and diversity in film theorisation goes to the very heart of this thesis focus. This dissertation will be concerned with reconfiguring film theorys understanding of the spectator and the spectacle for application in a new, diversified and deeply integrated age of cinema.

22

Conceived two-and-half-thousand years ago, Platos allegory of the cave is one of the first recorded instances of theoretical thought being applied to a spectator-and-spectacle -like situation. Naively, it has often been compared to the archetypal cinema viewing situation:

Imagine an underground chamber like a cave, with a long entrance open to the daylight and as wide as the cave. In this chamber are men who have been prisoners there since they were children, their legs and necks being fastened that they can only look straight ahead of them and cannot turn their heads. Some way off, behind and higher up, a fire is burning, and between the fire and the prisoners and above them runs a road, in front of which a curtain-wall has been built, like the screen art puppet shows between the operators and their audience, above which they show their puppets Imagine further that there are men carrying all sorts of gear along behind the curtain-wall, projecting above it and including figures of men and animals made of wood and stone and all sorts of other materials, and that some of these men, as you would expect, are talking and some not. (2003:241).

While it is tremendously clumsy to apply Platos cave as a direct representation of the film viewing situation, the cave can tell us a great deal about film theorys treatment of it. Platos cave conceives of an ideal spectator a prisoner bound in the cave from childhood to observe the shadows on the cave wall. Therefore, Platos prisoner/spectator is just an absorber of what is presented before him. The prisoner/spectator has no other existence and knows of no other ideology, aside from the one he experiences in the cave the cave is the prisoner/spectators reality.

23

Figure 1. Platos simile of the cave.

When considering the relationship between the spectator and spectacle, this is the problem with much of the thinking in film theory every argument conceives of an ideal spectator (Elsaesser et al., 2010:4). As with the heavily criticised film theories of the 1970s where the spectator is a slave to the dominant ideology of society, Platos spectator is devoid of a life outside the cave/theory in which the spectators body is relegated to a position where it is essentially non-existent (not to mention a lack of cognitive consideration). However, beyond the thinking of the 1970s, while all film theories are not guilty of employing the caves spectator-wholly-as-dominant-ideological-absorber pre-set, the theories are at fault by only ever considering ideal spectators spectators made to fit the theory. As such, ideal spectators are problematic as they are not thoroughly representative of actual audience members (Williams, 1994:3). To say nothing of the corporeal influence, every audience member willingly enters a film viewing situation with a plethora of preconceptions and

24

other unrelated mental data drawn from an individual life experience which they cognitively apply to the film experience every audience member experiences a film differently and produces their own filmic experience.

Any cave-like theory that presupposes an ideal spectator, while always well intentioned: No amount of empirical research into the sociology of actual audiences will displace the desire to speculate about the effects of visual culture, and especially moving images, on hypothetical viewing subjects (Williams, 1994:4), ultimately, is going to end up being ignorant of the larger and unified contextual, cognitive and corporeal relationship that is actually at work:

The

cinema

and

cinematic

experience

remain

phenomenolgically

and

philosophically undertheorized, in my view, so long as the events on-screen and the spectator are each considered individually, as isolated entities separate from one another. One needs to enlarge the frame of description and know how to draw behind the back of the spectator, so to speak a second screen on which the osmotic exchange between the so-called spectator and the events on the primary screen becomes visible. (Voss, 2011:139).

Therefore, the phenomenological and wider philosophical aspects of film theory and how they can provide a thorough understanding of the spectator-spectacle relationship form one half of this dissertation. While re-asserting the roles vision and cognition fulfil in relation to their respective film theories, Chapter One: Looking Beyond the Gaze will use empirical data in the emerging fields of neurocardiography and neurogastroenterology to demonstrate why the body of the audience member is a required phenomenological and empirical variable in film theorys conception of the spectator-spectacle relationship: 25

The idea of the body as sensory envelope, as perceptual membrane and materialmental interface, in relation to the cinematic image and to audio-visual perception, is thus more than a heuristic device and an aesthetic metaphor: it is the ontological, epistemological and phenomenological ground for the respective theories of film and cinema today(Elsaesser et al., 2010:11).

Following on from this, in order to be specific about what is actually happening in the film viewing situation, Chapter One will also assert a need to reclassify the spectator and spectacle elements of the film viewing situation, in an effort to demonstrate the philosophical need to change the ways in which that relationship is discussed.

However, when dealing with the problem of terminology, film theory is only half at fault, the film industry is equally to blame! Currently, the film industry is experiencing a technological shift in the manufacturing and exhibition of its products; which, in turn, has led to a plethora of new technical terms and differing processes of producing, exhibiting and streaming film content. Equivalent only to the introduction of sound in the 1920s, the 2000s saw the rise of digital filmmaking and the 2010s will see digital filmmaking become the dominant practice of the industry:

Did you read the obituary for film? No, me neither, but the movies you see at your local cinema, whether theyre blockbusters or smaller works, have probably been made without the use of that plastic material that comes in reels. The stuff that captured light and movement for filmmakers from the Lumires to David Lynch (Sweet, 2013).

26

35mm analogue filmmaking, the means by which films have been produced and exhibited since their infancy, is being assigned to the museum. Fujifilm recently announced that it has ceased production of celluloid film (Fujifilm, 2013); which comes as no surprise considering analogue motion picture cameras have also ceased production (Seitz, 2011). Certainly, when you take celluloid film out of the equation, what right do digitally produced films still hold to be called films?

Chapter Two: Hypercinema will present the pioneering innovations of entrepreneurial filmmaker Douglas Trumbull and, looking at the current growth of IMAX, the chapter will examine a growing investment in establishing something approaching a hyper-immersive cinematic exhibition commodity: Theaters, movies, movie-going and other core components of what we once called cinema persist, and may endure. But theyre not quite what they were in the analog cinema era. Theyre something new, or something else (Seitz, 2011). The aesthetic reconsiderations hypercinema is encouraging towards how films themselves are exhibited, how this form of exhibition is experienced by the spectator as a hyper-real impression and even how it may alter climatic language will be explored. Furthermore, this will provide additional evidence as to why the reconfiguration of the spectator and spectacle in relation to film theorys venture to gain an understanding of the ontological, epistemological and metaphysical aspects of cinema is an essential endeavour:

The film spectator constitutes, as a resonating body in need of further determination, the illusion-forming medium of cinema. Reflection on the formation of illusion by means of and in the cinema thus leads to a new, expanded concept of cinema itself that includes the spectators body a concept of cinema that emphasizes the relevance of intertwined sensations, and the interpretation of these sensations, for the aesthetic experience of the medium. (Voss, 2011:139). 27

The aesthetic experience of the medium is something that has suffered from a great deal of ignorance by film-goers, filmmakers and film theorists alike. In the first forty years of its existence the film industry was a hive of innovation; it underwent many changes as new techniques and technologies were introduced to better handle the medium. Since the stabilisation of sound and, aside from the introduction of colour, widescreen and television, from the 1930s to the 2000s, the industry has found itself in a largely undisturbed aesthetically and financially secure comfort zone. This was a result of the dominant ideology of the film industry - to generate profits (Figgis in Sweet, 2013)! Accordingly, this complacent and cave-like attitude has migrated into the majority of the audience and a large part of the theoretical thinking of Film Studies. Film-goers, filmmakers and film theorists were happy to submit themselves to the shackles of this cave-like scenario precisely because it provided a comfort zone that seemed to be aesthetically perfected and mutually beneficial for all involved parties.

28

Figure 2. The Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc Cave in France has some of the earliest recordings of cave paintings, over 30,000 years old!

Indeed, there is something deeply poetic about a conception of the cinema residing in a cave-like scenario, as the cave wall is where we can find the first recorded instances of humanity showcasing their artistic expressions. The cave painting is a proto-expression of what is a fundamentally ancient language the cave holds a fundamental link to our very nature of being.

Figure 3. we should note the artist painted this bison with eight legs suggesting movement, almost a form of proto-cinema (Herzog, 2010).

29

However, evolution forced us to leave the cave behind and adopt new canvasses for our artistic expressions; in turn, these new canvasses have expanded our ways of thinking. As such, digital evolution is doing the same with the cave-like comfort zone of cinema; it has disrupted the tranquillity of cinema and is forcing us to take notice of its imperfections. Accordingly, a great deal of foreboding surrounds the digitalisation of cinema (Dean in Sweet, 2013). Equally, there is also a great deal of optimism (Figgis in Sweet, 2013), as digitalisation came about precisely to ensure the longevity of the cinematic medium. We live in the age of the upgrade and now cinema too possesses that ability; therefore, it will continue to be in state of developmental flux for the foreseeable future. It seems cinema has returned to its roots of innovation and coupled with the diverse means through which film content can now be accessed, understanding its ways of being is paramount.

Ultimately, the topic to be discussed is vast and this dissertation cannot hope to cover the full diversity of that discussion; at best this dissertation is an introductory speculation. However, it will provide a broad overview and bring particular attention to elements that are key in relation to how the experience of films can reveal insights into our ways of being in the world. Far too long now a cave-like comfort zone has engulfed the film industry and film theory based on a complacent assumption that filmmaking, film exhibition and film theory had reached their optimum form. However, the ripples created by digitalisation are revealing otherwise and the pressing need for a major reconfiguration has become apparent:

Today, many see the moving image as our most precious (and endangered) historical heritage, a unique archive of life and of things over the past 120 years. Some have argued that cinema is the key and template for our cultural understanding of the new (digital) media; and, for yet others, the cinema 30

constitutes a material-mental organism in its own right, a new and vibrant articulation of matter, energy and information, and thus a thing that thinks, which philosophy can help us understand. This is why it makes sense to speak of both the cinemas epistemologies (ways of knowing, as well as ways of questioning how the cinema knows what it claims to know) and ontologies (ways of being, as well as ways of classifying what is and exists) as the proper domain of film theory. (Elsaesser et al., 2010:185-6).

In short, it is time to leave the cave behind.

31

Chapter One

Looking Beyond the Gaze

The Spectators Relationship with the Spectacle

The position of the gaze in relation to the spectator and spectacle has been a problematic subject of film theory for some time now. The very definition of the gaze invites

misconception from its outset. If you were to ask a layman to define the gaze as it exists in the film viewing situation, then they would probably reply that it is the spectator passively looking on as the film unfolds before them. While this statement is correct, according to the most basic understanding of the definition of the gaze: look steadily and intently, especially in admiration, surprise, or thought (Oxford, 2013), it is ignorant of the larger academic understanding of the gaze as a theoretical construct. These academic explorations of the gaze as a construct have been central to film theorys understanding of the spectator and spectacle relationship. However, the gaze is only one component of what needs to be a larger body of knowledge.

Figure 4. Is the film viewer a voyeur? 32

Theories of the gaze and the spectators relationship to the spectacle were developed for an academic grounding in the 1970s. The conception of the gaze in film theory signifies a significant shift when the thinking of many film theorists aligned to establish and contest theories that attempted to decode the spectators relationship with the film text. However, the thinking behind these ideas are largely drawn from thinkers outside of Film Studies: John Bergers Ways of Seeing could stand as the earliest and most accessible single statement of a whole generations turn toward a commentary on a hypothetical spectators relation to the visual image (Williams, 1994:1).

Figure 5. Perspective centres everything on the eye of the beholder (Berger in Dibb, 1972).

33

In addition to Bergers groundbreaking thinking, film theorists employed concepts from semiotics, literature studies, narratology, psychoanalysis and ideology to elaborate on the essential point of Bergers Ways of Seeing: that there is a way of seeing, structured into visual representations and the way those presentations address spectators (Williams, 1994:1). Key to this process of elaboration was Louis Althussers assertions on the nature of ideology:

the theory of ideology he proposed seemed to offer film theorists the basis for a detailed explanation of the influence of movies upon the imagination. In particular, film theorists argued that the kind of deception that cinematic illusion wrought upon the film spectator was a precise instantiation of the kind of deception wrought by ideology upon the individual (Allen, 1998:7).

Not only did the adoption of Althussers ideological theory serve to elevate the importance of Film Studies as an academic means by which the status quo could be deconstructed: Since cinematic illusion seemed to demonstrate his theory so well, the analysis of cinematic illusion promised to play a central role in bringing to fruition the Marxist project of explaining and criticizing the function of ideology in society (Allen, 1998:7), it also enabled film theorists to begin to grasp the information processing that occurs from film text to film spectator: they wanted to understand how the filmmakers (and by extension the cultures) view of the world became confused with, or displaced by, the spectators view; that is, they asked, how does their view become your view without provoking any protests? (Saper, 1991:33). Central to understanding this peaceful information/ideological transference was Lacanian psychoanalysis:

34

Lacan argues that infants acquire their first sense of self-identity (the formulation of an ego) through the experience of looking in a mirror and relating to their bodies. For Lacan, this experience metaphorically captures a stage in the childs development when the child anticipates a mastery of the body that she/he lacks in reality (McGowan, 2007:1).

Therefore, the basic premise of classical film theory is that the cinema affords the passive spectator only an illusionary sense of mastery over the ideology conveyed in the film text: the spectator inhabits the position of the child looking in the mirror. Like this child, the spectator derives a sense of mastery based on the position that the spectator occupies relative to the events on the screen (McGowan, 2007:6). By combining the thinking of Althusser and Lacan, a theoretical construct of a cinematic apparatus was established and seemed to account for how the ideological transference between spectacle and spectator took place:

the alignment of projector, spectator and screen, constituted a basic cinematic apparatus which in and by itself already predicated and circumscribed the effects it could have on the spectator the centering as well as pinning down or capturing of a single individual as the locus of consciousness and coherence, giving the impression of mastery when such mastery was the mere effect of the respective machineries optical, ideological, narrative, specular (Elsaesser et al., 2010:68).

In the apparatus conception of the film viewing situation, the film text and the physical cinema location form one systematic apparatus (the fire, the road, the puppeteers, the cave wall and the cave itself) and the spectator is the subject component of that apparatus 35

(the chained prisoner in the cave). The gaze (the arrangement of visual material as an ideological construct on the cave wall) is what supplies the spectator with a sense of mastery over the filmic experience: in the most seemingly natural or beautiful of visual images, there is an invisible ideology that affords the gaze that surveys it both mastery and equilibrium (Williams, 1994:1). Phallocentric and monolithic leanings sum up much of the thinking in regards to the gaze: that is, the cinema works to acculturate individuals to the structures of fantasy, desire, dream, and pleasure that are fully of a piece with dominant ideology (Mayne, 1998:18). Therefore, the gaze, as it exists in film theory, is less about the physical, voyeuristic action of the spectator sensing the film text through their eyes and more about a specific ideological construct which the spectator becomes subject to while performing that ocular process: The process of seeing paintings, or seeing anything else, is less spontaneous and natural than we tend to believe. A large part of seeing depends on habit and convention (Berger, 1972). The gaze is a pre-packaged ideology that the spectator adopts: Every image embodies a way of seeing. (Berger, 1972:2).

36

Figure 6. Feminist film theorist, Laura Mulvey famously and controversially postulated that classical Hollywood cinema possessed a dominant male gaze. Rear Window (Dir. Alfred Hitchcock, 1954) is a film about the shortcomings of voyeurism.

While every cinematic image does embody a way of seeing, as determined by the audio and visual construction of the film text by the director, this pre-packaged mindset is always open to further re-interpretations and, ultimately, is altered by the active cognitive participation of the spectator, as the cognitive film theory of the 1980s and onwards demonstrates:

Viewers cannot absorb cinematic images any more than they can absorb reality. Instead they undertake a perceptual dialogue, seeing in part what their schemas

37

encourage them to seek out, and in part what the artists shaping of cinematic form encourages them to see. If the viewers were studying a painting, their schemas would accommodate to the work over a period of time (and the longer the time, the more thorough the understanding, as any educator will attest) (Nadaner, 1984:126).

Cognitive theory is a reaction to the shortcomings of the earlier film theory and disregards its attitude of free association; it favours empirical explanations over the ideological interpretations of the 1970s cave-like thinking (Bordwell, 2009). Therefore, cognitive theory is able to factor in a spectator that is more than a passive, disembodied voyeur; rather, cognitive theory conceives of: the spectator as an active participant in

understanding the text (Allen, 1997:4) and, as such, has a conception of a spectator much closer to an actual audience member:

In explaining viewers responses, [cognitive theory] looks first to features of the human mind. This doesnt mean that researchers study minds cut off from society; rather, the emphasis is on the mental activities tied to all sorts of experience, including social action and interaction (Bordwell, 2009).

Therefore, in order to gain a thorough understanding of the spectators relationship with the spectacle we need to look beyond the gaze we need to look beyond looking: One of the major fallacies of contemporary film theory has been to imply that spectatorship in the cinema is inherently voyeuristic. This emphasis on the cinemas voyeuristic character results from an overvaluation of the role that vision plays in determining the emotional responses of the spectator (Allen, 1995:133). The experiencing of a film is achieved by more than just an ocular process - film viewership has never just been about viewing; in fact, film viewing 38

is not even an accurate term for it: film sensing or film experiencing would be better descriptions of the process by which a spectator absorbs a film text and then collaborates in the creation of the transcendental filmic experience:

We watch films with our eyes and ears, but we experience films with our minds and bodies. Films do things to us, but we also do things with them. A film pulls a surprise; we jump. It sets up scenes; we follow them. It plants hints; we remember them. It prompts us to feel emotions (Bordwell, 2012).

Certainly, beyond the ocular, the aural elements of a film play a huge role in the creation of a film experience; even more so with the monumental presence afforded by surround sound: sound embodies the image seeing is always directional, because we see only in one direction, whereas hearing is always a three-dimensional, spatial perception, i.e. it creates an acoustic space, because we hear in all directions (Elsaesser et al., 2010:129-30).

39

Figure 7. Dolby Atmos, the next generation of surround sound will allow you to hear the whole picture (Bowling, 2012).

Sound has always been an integral component of the film experience; not even silent films were silent, all silent era cinemas had some form of in-house foley and musical accompaniment (Brownlow et al., 1980). The role of sound in film cannot be understated as 40

the physical presence of sound allows the spectator to be: bodily enmeshed acoustically, spatially and affectively in the filmic texture (Elsaesser et al., 2010:131-32).

However, the human body as a complex organic whole comprises a major variable that has been missing from all film theories understandings of the spectator and spectacle relationship: the inclusion of the body in film theory is a way of overcoming the deadlocks of the representational model and of calling for a more diverse set of approaches to conceptualise the cinematic experience (Elsaesser et al., 2010:131). Perhaps the reason previous film theories have been unable to adequately factor actual audience members into their paradigms is precisely because they have deprived their ideal spectators of a physical presence and a body that can influence the filmic experience! Cognitive theory only incorporates the body as far as being an experience simulator driven by perceptual data sourced via the eyes and ears. However, what if the body was actively influencing the filmic experience as a perceptual membrane on a basis equivalent to the eyes and ears? What if the body was just as cognitively involved in the filmic experience as the brain proper:

Dr. J. Andrew Armour, introduced the concept of a functional heart brain in 1991. His work revealed that the heart has a complex intrinsic nervous system that is sufficiently sophisticated to qualify as a "little brain" in its own right. The heart's brain is an intricate network of several types of neurons, neurotransmitters, proteins and support cells like those found in the brain proper. Its elaborate circuitry enables it to act independently of the cranial brain to learn, remember, and even feel and sense (Madurasinghe, 2008).

41

The implications of the heart brain should be apparent, as only considering the neural activity of the cranial brain holds many, if you like, narrow-minded parallels with the 1970s treatment of the spectator as being only discernible with the gaze! The heart brains presence is even more important when it is realised that, while it does act independently in regulating itself, it also influences and sometimes overrides the cognitive processes of the cranial brain (Salem, 2007:4). However, the bodys role in our cognitive processes does not end with the influence of the heart brain, human beings also possess a stomach brain (Watzke, 2010)!

Figure 8. The source of butterflies in the stomach (Mosley, 2012).

42

The stomach brain is comprised of five hundred million nerve cells and one hundred million neurons (equivalent to a cats brain) and it plays a significant role in emotional regulation: The gut is connected to our emotional limbic system and the two speak to each other and make decisions (Watzke, 2010). The signals the stomach brain sends to the cranial and heart brains: directly affect feelings of sadness or stress, even influence memory, learning, and decision-making (Hurley, 2011). The cranial brain, the heart brain and the stomach brain all work in conjunction as one complex interconnected neural network, inherently influenced by the larger nervous and sensory systems of the human body: Throughout the 1990s, the view that the brain and body work in conjunction in order for perceptions, thoughts, and emotions to emerge gained momentum and is now widely accepted (McCraty, 2003:3), the terms gut feeling, follow your heart and many alike all seem to have a logical scientific basis. While the fields of neurocardiography (study of the heart brain) and neurogastroenterology (study of the stomach brain) are still very much in their infancy, the findings already compiled are highly suggestive of a deeper and vastly more complex role for human cognition. Therefore, beyond being an experience simulator, it can be speculated that the entirety of the human neurobiological system acts as a perceptual influencer in the film experiencing situation. We do not just watch films, we feel, simulate and become aspects of them.

Further research even suggests that we may not only neurobiologically experience and simulate data from a film individually, but are influenced by our fellow spectators as they neurobiologically experience and simulate data from a film:

There is now evidence that a subtle yet influential electromagnetic [field, as generated by the heart] or energetic communication system operates just below our conscious awareness. Energetic interactions possibly contribute to the 43

magnetic attractions or repulsions that occur between individuals, and also affect social relationships. It was also found that one persons brain wave can synchronize to another persons heart (Salem, 2007:2).

This research has a lot to say for intuition and could account for something film critic Mark Kermode has commented on:

its like theres a temperature change in the room and I know theres not physically a temperature change, but you can tell how a film is playing and its not because I can hear people sighing. No, its nothing that obvious. You can be in a room with a bunch of critics and you can tell how a film is playing. (2013).

However, there are doubtless many other potential ways the body can play an active role in the film experiencing situation; one such under studied area is the bodys consumption of food (see Appendix B). However, this is precisely why further research and consideration needs to be directed towards the body to ascertain just how involved it actually is in the creation of the filmic experience. Ultimately, integrating the body into film theory will enable the discipline to access a wider field of knowledge and, accordingly, will generate a number of new problems! Indeed, as has already been highlighted in this chapters diverse use of terminology in regards to the various attributes of cinema, e.g. spectator, viewer, audience member, film theory as an epistemological and what is fast becoming an ontological and metaphysical pursuit, needs to be exacting in the terminology it uses to discuss its fields of study. As ever, Mark Kermode elaborates:

Whats interesting about this habitual slicing vernacular, with its constant references to scissors, knives, cuts, trims and so on, is that it makes no sense 44

whatsoever in the modern digital era. You try editing a digital movie with some form of physical blade and see how far you get. The very idea of anyone merrily setting about a movie with a pair of scissors is rooted in the age-old physicality of celluloid, and harks back to a time when film was a physical entity rather than a conceptual conundrum. Nowadays, movies arent cut; they are modified, reformatted and adjusted to fit your screen. If youve been to the cinema in the past few months, chances are that what you were watching wasnt even a film at all. More likely it was a stream of electronic information, uploaded on to a server and then beamed on to the screen by a digital projector without ever having passed through the translucent celluloid that once gave the medium of film its very name (Kermode, 2011:301-2).

Philosophy, then, is another required variable in film theory that can and has been providing clarification. Essentially, philosophy has always formed the essential purpose of film theory (Mullarkey, 2009:6-7), but only in the last ten years has it gradually found its way to the surface as a prominent force and as a means of rationalisation (Elsaesser et al., 2010:185-6); thanks in no small part to the digitalisation of cinema and the diversification of film exhibition:

Cinema is a world of its own whether a grey soundless shadowy world or a fluidy manipulatable one. This film-world is a flat, ordered, compressed world; a world that is subtly, almost invisibly organised. A world that is a cousin of reality. And the multiplicity of moving-image media in the twenty-first century means that this filmworld has become the second world we live in. A second world that feeds and shapes our perception and understanding of reality. So it seems especially important that we get to grips with the moving image, that we came up with a 45

sufficient range of conceptual frameworks by which to understand it (Frampton, 2006:1-2).

The terminology of film is problematic as there are many redundancies and contradictions inherent in the definitions of the words that make up the film vernacular. With terms like spectator, viewer, audience member there is too much emphasis on passivity and the concept of gazing. On the other hand, with terms like spectacle, film, cinema, film viewing situation, film experiencing situation there are a great deal of redundancies and ambiguities. Beyond celluloid film being discontinued, does film refer to just theatrically produced entities or does it also refer to entities produced for television and the internet? Likewise, what is cinema referring to: the physical cinema location, an artistic temperament or the industry as a whole? Certainly, when dealing with audio-visual content spectacle seems suited to cover both theatrically and non-theatrically released content, as all audio-visual content is designed to create a spectacle. Without even moving onto the passivity inherent in spectator, spectacle alone does not adequately begin to cover the means by which a spectator is able to engage with it (see Appendix A).

As a growing ontological, epistemological and metaphysical discipline, film theorys only hope of clarity in adequately understanding the spectator and spectacle relationship is through philosophy. In addition to this, philosophys deployment of rationality and empiricism also enables it to work with differing film theories. This chapter has presented overviews of psychoanalytical and cognitive film theory two theories that represent a major polarisation in Film Studies and, as such, are highly critical of each other: Psychoanalytical readings are especially targeted for being ambiguous, equivocal and limited to emotive, irrational aspects of films (sexuality, fantasy, surrealism). For the cognitivists, if a scene can be explained cognitively, then there is no need for a 46

psychoanalytical reading (Frampton, 2006:107-8). However, philosophy offers a means through which both of their lines of thought and other contradictory/isolationist theories can be combined:

I will propose that film be seen instead as an immanent set of processes, specifically as a series of relational processes and hybrid contexts comprising the artists and audiences psychologies, the cinematic raw data, the physical media of the film, the varied forms of its exhibition, as well as all the theories relating themselves to these dimensions. This is a stratified approach to film as textual and material artefact, visual cognition and ontological world-view. As such, each partial view will also be partially accepted and incorporated into the meaning of film (without exhausting it, however), but each ones own partiality for its own view in other words, each theorys attempt to totalize and reduce film entirety to itself as its illustration will be deemed illegitimate (Mullarkey, 2009:10).

In particular, Framptons contribution to the philosophical debate is significant as he proposes a manifesto for a new way of understanding films. Frampton incorporates a multitude of thinking from many theoretical approaches and, as seems to be a growing trend in film philosophy, reconfigures the film as an entity that can think:

The filmind is filmosophys concept of film-being, the theoretical originator of the images and sounds we experience, and film-thinking is its theory of film form, whereby an action of form is seen as the dramatic thinking of the filmind Filmosophy proposes that seeing film form as thoughtful, as the dramatic decision of the film, helps us understand the many ways film can mean and affect (Frampton, 2006:6). 47

Therefore, if both films and their spectators can think, not only has film theory come a long way from its disembodied, ideologically based thinking of the 1970s, but it is now in a position where its status as an essential academic discipline has been established. Increasingly so in our multimedia dominated age, through its explorations of ontology, epistemology and metaphysics, as represented in the spectators relationship with the spectacle, Film Studies as a whole now serves the purpose of being able to reveal fundamental truths about reality and human nature. Likewise, by realising that the filmic experience is in many ways just another way of neurobiologically experiencing and cognitively understanding the world, film theory will be better equipped in its endeavour to understand the spectacles appeal to the spectator. Looking is only one part of the filmic experience; to understand it fully we need to explore its larger ways of being. Embarking on this endeavour means not only that we are leaving the cave behind, but that we are better prepared to consider the potentially game-changing paradigm of the hypercinema.

48

Chapter Two

Hypercinema
The Implications of the Spectacle as a Hyper-Immersive Commodity

If there is one leading figure that epitomises the desire to move away from the cave-like comfort zone, then that person is Douglas Trumbull. Renowned for his special effects wizardry and various entrepreneurial efforts, in 2011 Trumbull announced his active process of producing a 3D science fiction film to be filmed at 120 frames per second (fps). This is hugely significant as the 24fps frame rate has been one of the fundamental components of the film industry since the introduction of sound in the 1920s: the standard speed was increased to 24fps to accommodate sound Over the years, weve come to associate 24fps with the cinema experience. The look of Hollywood feature films is integrally tied to that frame rate (Ascher et al., 2007:98).

Figure 9. Usually one second of film is comprised of twenty four separate still images; when presented together in a one second sequence, the succession of still images create the 49

illusion of motion. Therefore, increasing the frame rate means you increase the amount of still images in every second of film.

Furthermore, if the frame rate is increased it will convey an impression of motion closer to how our eyes and brains sense the real world:

Most researchers agree we perceive 40 conscious moments per second In other words: our eyes see more than that [66] but were only aware of 40. So if a frame rate hits or exceeds 40 fps, it looks to us like reality. Whereas if its significantly below that, like 24 fps or even 30 fps, theres a separation, theres a difference and we know immediately that what were watching is not real (Kerwin in OConnell, 2012).

As a result the Hollywood/traditional filmic look is lost, as the recent case of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Dir. Peter Jackson, USA, 2012) has demonstrated in its 48fps version: There are scenes when it causes the images to be crisper and brighter but, especially in instances of high CGI content, it creates a non-cinematic picture. That may be the primary reason why isolated moments feel like video game outtakes. (Berardinelli, 2012). However, increasing the flow of motion closer to how our brains process visual information is not the only factor at fault. Doubling the amount of visual information in every second of film allows twice as much detail to be captured and this can bring attention to artificial elements, such as studio lighting and make-up (Kosner, 2013) - elements that have been refined over the last eighty years precisely to make up for the visual inadequacies of 24fps: The text-book reason filmmakers add makeup to actors and then light them brightly is that film is not as sensitive as the human eye (Knoll in Kosner, 2013).

50

Figure 10. An effort to educate a confused and paying public, this the higher frame rate FAQ sheet issued to all venues exhibiting the HRF version.

The Hobbits higher frame rate marks the first time a different frame rate has been commercially exhibited worldwide and the critical reception has been largely negative.

51

While the negative attitude does have some ground, as with citing the artificial elements the higher frame rate reveals, it also epitomises the cave-like comfort zone of the cinematic conventions of the past eighty years - the attitude of not wanting to move away from what many see as an aesthetically pleasing paradigm: Twenty-four or 30 frames per second is an inherent part of the cinematic experience. Its the way we accept cinema. Its the way we suspend our disbelief (Kerwin in OConnell, 2012). However, Trumbull has argued that due to the industry going digital the introduction of new technologies and filmmaking techniques is inevitable (Trumbull in Gilchrist, 2012). As such, filmmakers are not only going to have to rethink how they make films, but the audience is going to have to re-learn how they experience those films:

My guess is that people are going to go through the same experience that he [Peter Jackson] and I have been through, which is that once you sit in an editing room or screening room and start looking at stuff at 48fps, you get to really like it. And then when you go back and look at 24fps you say, Oh my God, how did we stand that for so long? Its a really interesting phenomenon. You kind of have to go there and be in it for a while. And so I think the audience is going to have that same experience (Trumbull in Steigbigel, 2012).

This interesting phenomenon holds many parallels with the introduction of sound into the film industry (see Appendix C). As with the addition of make-up and lighting to make up for the visual inadequacies of 24fps, sound technology was very quickly adapted into a process that not only allowed the filmmakers to work efficiently with it, but enabled them to discover a whole new way of telling stories. The filmmakers found a way to use sound as another storytelling tool to add an additional aesthetic dimension to their films (Elaesser et al., 2010:129-31; Scorsese in Stock, 2011). 52

Therefore, in light of this thinking, higher frames rates can be seen as just another filmmaking tool that filmmakers and the audience will eventually become accustomed to. Also, thanks to the diverse options afforded by digital filmmaking, there is a choice as to which frame rate filmmakers want to utilise (Showscan Digital, 2010); in the same way that: you dont have to use 3D and you dont have to use colour (Scorsese in Stock, 2011). Regardless of the negative critical reaction to The Hobbits higher frame rate, there continues to be strong enthusiasm for higher frame rates from filmmakers and spectators alike. James Cameron is going to capture and exhibit his Avatar sequels in 60fps, Andy Serkis will be doing likewise at 48fps for his adaptation of Animal Farm (2014) and there are now online communities, such as hfrmovies.com devoted to: news, info, downloads & discussions (hfrmovies.com, 2013) on the subject. However, probably the biggest incentive pushing for the use of higher frame rates is their ability to eliminate the motion blurring of 3D.

Stereoscopic 3D is another component of contemporary cinematic exhibition that shares many parallels and problems with higher frame rates, and the introduction of sound. The introduction of 3D has proven to be much more turbulent than sound. 3D first appeared commercially in the 1950s and very quickly fell out of circulation due to technical neglect (Burns in Skal, 2000), and it has reappeared and just as quickly disappeared in brief revivals since then. However, now in the 2010s, it looks set to stay having grasped a foothold where it is both technologically sustainable thanks to the digital transition and financially rewarding thanks to the fact that most blockbusters are either filmed digitally in 3D or postconverted into it (Sharp, 2012). As with sound and colour before it, there is now a growing trend among filmmakers to use 3D as a storytelling tool, as films such as Avatar (Dir. James Cameron, 2009), Cave of Forgotten Dreams (Dir. Werner Herzog, 2010), Hugo (Dir. Martin

53

Scorsese, 2011), Prometheus (Dir. Ridley Scott, 2012) and Life of Pi (Dir. Ang Lee, 2012) have demonstrated:

"Every shot is rethinking cinema rethinking narrative how to tell a story with a picture. Now, I'm not saying we have to keep throwing javelins at the camera, I'm not saying we use it as a gimmick, but it's liberating But it has a beauty to it also. People look like like moving statues. They move like sculpture, as if sculpture is moving in a way. Like dancers" (Scorsese in Kermode, 2010).

Figure 11. The introduction of 3D in the 1950s was envisioned to pry audiences away from their televisions and bring them back to the cinema.

However, while 3D is still generating profits since its widespread re-introduction in 2009, 3D is quickly losing its unique cinema attraction value (Sharp, 2012). As with widescreen, high definition resolution and surround sound, you can now experience 3D in your living 54

room thanks to 3D televisions and 3D Blu-rays; in addition to this, 3D will soon form a part of television production and broadcasting, as the BBCs upcoming 50th anniversary episode of Doctor Who (Dir. Nick Hurran, 2013) will demonstrate (Plunkett, 2013). Ultimately, this is only adding to a much larger problem for cinema exhibition:

I think the movie industry really needs a shot of excitement now because people are streaming their movies, downloading their movies and the phrase I use now: the multiplex is in your pocket convenience, low cost, ease of use, any time you want, anything you want and so the rationale for the multiplex theatre cinema which was all about that is now changing movie-going attendance is at a 16 year low right now and probably getting worse (Trumbull, 2012c).

This has been an increasing problem for cinema exhibition since the widespread introduction of television in the 1950s and earlier with the popularity of radio in the 1920s. How do the film exhibitors keep the audience coming to the cinema, when the audience can just as easily sit at home or delve into their pockets and have a similar experience?

This is where Trumbull steps in as the industrys champion: For movies to survive as a business, we have to make it better (Trumbull in Giardina, 2012); he has been advocating a new type of cinema for some time now, a type of cinema that will break away from the cave-like complacency of the last eighty years and bring the audience back to a revitalised auditorium: Id like to break ground on what I think will be a really powerful new kind of cinema experience that you cannot get on your tablet, computer, or your cellphone, or even in a regular theatre (Trumbull, 2012g). Trumbulls 3D 120fps science fiction project is his demonstration of this powerful new of kind of cinema, a kind of cinema in which 3D and higher frame rates are only two components: 55

its now possible with this new high frame rate, larger screens, higher reflective screens and 3D. There are so many things now available to make a new kind of movie experience which is going to be more like a window on to reality like a holodeck or something to break the theatre (Trumbull, 2012c).

Figure 12. Douglas Trumbull has been innovating and advocating a new type of cinema for over thirty years.

Thus far, Trumbull has described himself as a lone wolf in this area (Trumbull in Variety, 2012), but the fact of the matter is a widespread technological transformation of cinematic exhibition is already taking place and it is not too far from what Trumbull is proposing. The technology to make it a reality already exists, all Trumbull is suggesting is unifying all of these disparate technologies into a form of cinema that is aesthetically pleasing and that will provide a truly monumental (profit producing) cinematic experience:

56

Ive come to the conclusion that if your objective as a studio producer is to make a blockbuster spectacle thats going to take you to Pandora or another dimension or another world or [to see] vicious monsters that come out of the screen and eat the audience, we need a more powerful medium (Trumbull in Gilchrist, 2012).

A more powerful medium that any piece of consumer hardware outside of the auditorium will have a hard time matching: Im trying to bring to cinema this spectacular illusion of immersiveness. The spectacle of 2001 [: A Space Odyssey (Dir. Stanley Kubrick, 1968)] and better than that (Trumbull, 2012c). Until a better name comes along, Trumbull has christened this new type of cinema hypercinema (Trumbull in Variety, 2012).

The practice of what Trumbull envisions is very different, but in essence what he is describing is the digital version of large format cinema. Up until recent years, large format cinema has existed only as the occasional novelty and has always been overshadowed by conventional film exhibition (see Appendix D). The promise of a large/enhanced format cinema was first established concurrent to the introduction of sound: There is colour to give [movies] vividness and life. There is widescreen projection just out of the laboratory to bring you the spectacles of nature and art in their true majesty. There is the promise too of three dimensions to give lifelike perspective. (Will Hays in Merton, 2011). Aside from the widescreen, surround sound and 3D technologies that have ended up becoming a part of conventional cinema exhibition, there have been two prominent forms of large format cinema that have not: Fox Grandeur, a 70mm widescreen process, and Cinerama, a highly praised widescreen process projected onto a 146 panoramic screen that closely mimics human peripheral sight enabling a highly immersive experience (see Appendix D).

57

Figure 13. The highly immersive quality of Cinerama caused a sensation when it was first released.

However, unlike Fox Grandeur and Cinerama, a large format process that has persisted financially since its infancy in the 1960s is IMAX. Image Maximum, a.k.a. IMAX, currently boasts the highest resolution imagery of any image capturing and exhibiting process; the IMAX celluloid image is equivalent to 18K digital resolution (see Appendix E), around eighteen times the resolution of current high definition displays and superior to what the Human eye is actually capable of perceiving: IMAX doubted if the viewer can see 18K projected, estimating that 12K might be a more accurate guess (Wilson, 2009)!

58

Figure 14. Larger formats call for bigger cinema screens.

IMAX captures onto horizontally aligned 70mm film and, as such, is able to hold a great deal more detail than standard vertically aligned 70mm film: IMAX 70mm standard is three times bigger than normal 70mm and nine times bigger than 35mm [conventional analogue format]. (Wilson, 2009).

59

Figure 15. In an IMAX you feel everything more: you feel the picture, you feel the sound (Anon, 2010).

Like Cinerama (see Appendix D), due to its various logistical problems, IMAX was not a process that was quickly embraced by the mainstream film industry and, as such, the

60

majority of IMAXs initial output was documentaries. However, in the last ten years, a radical shift has occurred thanks in no small part to Trumbulls influence: I was one of the team who took IMAX public. We took IMAX from a sleepy little museum company into the mainstream of movie business in a pretty short period of time (Trumbull, 2012c ). This transition began with the introduction of the IMAX Digital Re-mastering process (IMAX DMR): a top secret algorithm that allows 35mm, conventional 70mm and digitally captured films to be upscaled into IMAX resolution. Essentially, the DMR process copies and pastes the pixels that are already in every single frame to increase the image resolution; as such, the DMR films do not have the same image vibrancy and detail diversity as a true 70mm IMAX image. Regardless of this separation, the number of feature films being released in IMAX venues has been on an upward curve as a result of the DMR process: often resulting in revenue multiples up to 8X the same film in a conventional 35mm theatre (Trumbull, 2010).

Figure 16. The large format that keeps expanding.

61

In addition to upscaling films into IMAX resolution, filmmakers have also started to shoot segments of their films in true 70mm IMAX. Christopher Nolan started this tradition when he captured 38 minutes of The Dark Knight (Dir. Christopher Nolan, 2008) in true 70mm IMAX (with the remainder of the films 35mm footage being upscaled); with The Dark Knight, Nolan proved that it could successfully be done and could reap huge financial rewards. Since then, other films have followed: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (Dir. Micheal Bay, USA, 2009) features 9 minutes of IMAX, Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol (Dir. Brad Bird, 2011) features 30 minutes and The Dark Knight Rises (Dir. Christopher Nolan, 2012) features 72 minutes. Upcoming true 70mm IMAX releases are: Star Trek Into Darkness (Dir. J.J. Abrams, 2013), The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (Francis Lawrence, USA, 2013), Transformers 4 (Dir. Michael Bay, 2014) and Interstellar (Dir. Christopher Nolan, 2014).

62

Figure 17. With 72 minutes of IMAX footage, The Dark Knight Rises is currently the longest IMAX feature film; the film played for over three months at the BFI IMAX, this was

63

considerably longer than its multiplex engagement! IMAX releases also receive additional promotional materials targeted at highlighting the films unique IMAX engagement. These additional promotional materials often express a heightened and more prestigious experience opposed to their multiplex counterparts, as the poster above demonstrates (for more IMAX and multiplex comparisons, see Appendix H).

On the whole, though, there is a strong aversion to filming in true IMAX as the system only allows you to capture for 3 minutes, it takes 20 minutes to reload the camera, the cameras are very cumbersome and sound has to be recorded separately, due to the unwanted noise created by the workings of the IMAX camera (Sciretta, 2008). This also accounts for why there has not yet been a complete feature film captured in the process. However, logistical problems aside, this sudden in-rush of true IMAX and IMAX upscaled films accounts for the worldwide growth of IMAXs brand, popularity and financial profits.

Figure 18. IMAX appears to be experiencing something of a renaissance.

64

Like The Dark Knight Rises before it, the online IMAX box office crashed when the tickets for Star Trek Into Darkness went on sale (Enk, 2013); there appears to be a definite demand for IMAX films, especially 70mm IMAX films and large format IMAX-like cinema experiences. In an age where high resolution images are easily accessed on a variety of displays, IMAX offers a level of image detail that just cannot be achieved on consumer devices or in multiplex theatres: given that IMAX is non-conventional and extremely immersive [I think] you're going to have a hard time creating the same immersive experience in a home (Bonnick in Lowe, 2013). As such, IMAX currently holds a unique profit producing novelty factor and its a profit producing novelty factor the film industry very much wants to be a part of:

Exhibitors and critics even suggest IMAX leads the industry rebound in theatrical revenue largely because it creates an experience that cannot be duplicated at home. The money tells the story. In its June 2012 quarterly report, IMAX announced 22.7 percent revenue growth over the preceding year. Moreover, profits climbed 80 percent, reaching $15 million IMAX tickets typically cost 30% more than standard admission, roughly $15 or more in Americas more expensive markets. Moreover, ticket sales for IMAX films tend to drop less week-to-week compared to standard theatrical releases. According to a report by the U.K. firm Dodona Research, revenue from large-format surcharges, including IMAX, will inject an additional $850 million to total ticket sales by 2016 (Vanderhoef, 2013).

65

Figure 19. Do the immersive aspects of IMAX qualify it as hypercinema?

66

However, IMAXs financial success is not just produced by its ability to offer the best image quality on truly monumental screens: usually in the range of 70 feet by 50 feet (Solis, 2012). Beyond this, IMAX has a continuing investment in maintaining high exhibition standards, something that the majority of multiplexes are currently falling short on:

Right now, in the movie industry, we are at an all-time low in technical quality of theatres. Not all theatres, some theatres are very good. But were taking 3D movies; we put a filter in front of the projector to get 3D it cuts the light in half! You put your 3D glasses on cuts the light in half again! So youve got a quarter of the light. The average being measured out in theatres now is two and half footlamberts of brightness which is unbelievably dim. Thats average, that means there are some theatres which are one footlamberts. (Trumbull, 2012a).

IMAX compensates for the 3D filter light loss by appropriately increasing the brightness of the image during the IMAX post-production process. Furthermore, all IMAX releases are incredibly vivid in terms of their brightness thanks to the highly reflective screens, 15,000 watt projector bulbs and increased shutter opening times that all 70mm IMAX venues utilise.

67

Figure 20. An IMAX performance of The Dark Knight Rises, notice the level of illumination being reflected onto the audience.

In addition to the high image clarity, all IMAX releases have uncompressed sound that output through IMAXs patented surround sound system, which they claim is superior to Dolby Atmos (Lowe, 2013). Each film has its soundtrack calibrated by the technical staff of each IMAX venue to ensure that the films soundtrack is exploited to the full potential the structural dimensions each IMAX venue can afford it. IMAX auditoriums have specially housed cameras next to the projector to monitor the image on the screen during a performance and this allows the projectionist to make any required adjustments (Marshall, 2013). However, probably the most significant difference is the standard geometry of an IMAX auditorium:

Most movie auditoriums are long and narrow, to get the most people in, with the screen way off at the far end. The distinctive shape of an IMAX theatre is designed

68

to bring the audience not only closer to the screen, but better-positioned in relation to it (IMAX, 2013a).

Figure 21. The auditorium of the BFI IMAX, London. The venue houses the largest screen in the UK and is able to seat 500 patrons.

The stadium seating of the IMAX auditorium and the fact that the screen itself is curved ensures that every seat offers an almost equal viewing experience: The result is an image thats wider and higher than your field of view; a picture thats immersive because youre not aware of where it ends. And that, in turn, is what gives you the feeling youre part of the action, out among the stars, not just peeking into a scene (IMAX, 2013a).

69

Figure 22.

As was the case with Cinerama (see Appendix D), if a cinema screen can occupy your peripheral vision it will create sensations of motion, balance and depth in your neurobiological network (Helms, 2008).

Figure 23.

70

While an IMAX screen fills considerably less of your peripheral vision than a Cinerama screen (146), its increased width and curvature means it still occupies a greater degree (70) than a standard multiplex screen (54). In addition to this, and unlike Cineramas screens, an IMAX screen fills considerably more of your vertical peripheral vision.

Figure 24.

Cones and rods, the two types of receptors housed within the human eye, are exploited even more so in an IMAX venue: Cones are a part of your central vision and allo w you to focus on detail. Rods are important to your peripheral vision (IMAX, 2013a). Therefore, the more of your eyes receptors that are stimulated by the visual information on the screen the greater the neurobiological activity there will be in your body. Together with the higher resolution imagery that can transcend the level of detail the human visual system can process in the real world (when viewing 70mm IMAX) and the specially calibrated, uncompressed surround sound: This increased sensation of motion is one of those things that makes you believe youre in that world you see on-screen (IMAX, 2013b). Therefore, when viewing the 70mm IMAX prologue to Star Trek Into Darkness as when Captain Kirk

71

(Chris Pine) and Dr McCoy (Karl Urban) leap over a cliff edge there is a reason a vertigodanger-falling sensation shoots through your body.

Figure 25. The first 9 minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness were screened before showings of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Imagine experiencing this on a screen that is at least five floors high!

While you are consciously aware that you are watching a movie, on an instinctual level, thanks to a considerable part of your peripheral vision being occupied by the IMAX screen, your neurobiological network gets tricked into thinking that it too is about to go over the cliff edge: if the edge of the cliff scene is registered by rod cells in your eye your brain cells are going to tell your body to watch out for that cliff. This makes your experience at the movies more than just popcorn and snacks, it's an adventure to another world (IMAX, 2013b) this is the IMAX experience and its innovation is a far cry from the cave-like comfort zone. In comparison to the mediocre experiences that multiplexes are currently offering (Pledger, 2012; see Appendix G), it is no wonder the public are willing to pay the 72

extra money for an IMAX ticket. After viewing the IMAX upscale of Skyfall (Dir. Sam Mendes, 2012), director Sam Mendes commented: IMAX is the most well perfected version of watching a movie there has been thus far (2012).

However, the type of immersive spectacle Trumbull is proposing as hypercinema goes way beyond what IMAX is currently offering and, as Trumbull points out, it needs to transcend IMAX because: The problem is that all [IMAX is] doing is blowing up conventional movies on to a larger screen. No one's still thinking about it as a different medium. I think it's a completely new thing. And I think the audience that pays for movies is completely ready for a new thing (Trumbull in Leopold, 2013). To fully understand what Trumbull is envisioning, we need to look at Showscan, hypercinemas analogue large format precursor. Showscan was a filmmaking process Trumbull innovated in the late 1970s and early 1980s: A film process whereby 65mm film is photographed at 60 frames per second, and projected using 70mm prints at the same rate. The result is unsurpassed image clarity and realism made possible by the tremendous reduction of blurring (Trumbull, 2010).

73

Figure 26. One of the Showscan installations built to demonstrate its proportions and to showcase its process, notice the IMAX-like scale and geometry.

Showscan was incredibly similar to IMAX; the only major difference was that it used a considerably higher frame rate. This was the result of a series of tests (a surprising rarity for this field of study) Trumbull conducted to ascertain what qualified as the optimum film viewing experience:

We did tests at 24, 36, 48, 60, 66 and 72fps. We filmed a first person point of v iew shot in a car driving down a winding road. We brought in people to look at these movies at these frame rates, and hooked them up to an electrocardiogram [records electrical activity in the heart], electroencephalogram [records electrical activity on the scalp], galvanic skin response [measures electrical conductivity of skin], and electromyogram [records electrical activity in muscles]. We found out that peoples

74

physiological stimulation levels would rise tremendously as a result of frame rate. It showed a perfect bell-shaped curve that peaked around 66 frames per second (Trumbull in Steigbigel, 2012).

These results are not surprising, if we follow Kerwins comment in regards to the human brain being able to process 66 moments in every second, then it is only logical that Trumbulls results peaked at 66fps. Furthermore, this accounts for why Showscan: stopped looking like a screen and started looking like a window (Gerrold, 2010). This window effect was exceptionally illustrated in one of Trumbulls experimental short films New Magic (Dir. Douglas Trumbull, 1983). The film itself starts off as a documentary that very quickly encounters technical problems, so the projectionist stops the film and heads around the auditorium to the backstage area behind the screen to grab the other print of the documentary. As the projectionist has put the lights on behind the screen, and because cinema screens are perforated, the audience can see him fumbling around through the screen:

and so people like, seasoned movie professionals like Steven Spielberg, hes a really good example hes a friend of mine came to see my demo film. And so when that happened, he got up out of his seat, shook my hand and said, Doug, you know, call me when you get it fixed. And then he just started walking across, and I was just waiting: Hes going to understand this in a minute and he got to the door and looked sideways to the screen and realised it was just a two-dimensional [Showscan] movie of this Projectionist. (Trumbull, 2012g).

75

Figure 27. From the filming of the breakdown sequence in New Magic or from when it was projected onto the screen?

Aside from the similar instance of the Lumires Arrival of a Train at the Station (Dir. Auguste Lumire et al., 1896) supposedly causing patrons to flee in fear because they feared they were going to be run down by a train (Gunning, 1994:116), New Magic is certainly a first for cinema an experience where the audience were absolutely fooled into thinking they were seeing reality. Trumbull was even able to use Showscan to hypnotise an audience by having a hypnotist perform directly into the camera (Trumbull, 2012f).

However, the higher frame rate was not the only factor responsible for these tricks, the increased image brightness and higher resolution of a 4-5K 70mm Showscan image would have added to the visual authenticity of the images portrayal of reality. Currently IMAX only captures and exhibits in 24fps, but it can only be imagined the type of hyperrealistic experience that would be created if the IMAX frame rate was increased to 60fps or more

76

(see Appendix E). This is what Trumbull is proposing with hypercinema and why it can revitalise cinema going.

In terms of its aesthetics, though, for Trumbull, hypercinema is not just about creating truly monumental immersive experiences: theres plenty of the normal stuff, I want to do the un-normal stuff (Trumbull, 2012d), hypercinema is about making a different kind of hypercinematic film, that fully exploits the potential of a hyper-real cinematic experience: No one in the industry has seen a 3D movie at 30 foot Lamberts at 120 frames per second What happens when you get into this hyper-real realm of a movie, that seems to be a window onto reality, is that the entire cinematic language begins to change (Trumbull in Variety, 2012).

Figure 28. In Brainstorm (Dir. Douglas Trumbull, 1983) a procedure is created which allows human perceptual experiences to be recorded and played back to be re-experienced by 77

other users. As a means of further audience immersion into the film experience, the recorded perceptual experience segments of the film were originally going to be captured and exhibited in Showscan. This would have made the neurobiological processes of the spectator a much more intimate part of the films narrative and would have been a progression towards a new type of cinematic language.

Cinematic language (the means by which subject matter and meaning is expressed in film form) was refined throughout the silent film era, but has not progressed much since then, directly as a result of the cave-like complacency: we cant, as an industry, say that we got it right in 1927, dont change a thing at some point you have to look at ways that you can increase that experience (Jackson, 2012). Certainly, there is nothing wrong with the already established cinematic language; the reason why it has lasted for so long is because, as with basic grammar, it assigns rules and meanings that everyone can understand. However, if filmmakers want to use a higher frame rate or they want to use 3D, those filmmakers need to ask themselves how this will impede on the parameters of the traditional cinematic language with which they are already familiar. Precisely one of the reasons 3D has earned the stigma of a gimmick is because the majority of filmmakers have not used it as a storytelling tool. In most cases, 3D has mostly been implemented as a financial selling point that worked against the visual aesthetic and integrity of the film. Using 3D to its full artistic potential requires a filmmaker to rethink the entire presentation of what would otherwise be a 2D image: It's literally a Rubik's Cube every time you go out to design a shot, and work out a camera move, or a crane move (Scorsese in Kermode, 2010). The same is true of a broader paradigm like hypercinema:

Its a new cinematic language, which calls for different kinds of camera angles and movements, different selection of lenses, different kinds of action and framing, and 78

a different editorial pace, because the result of 120 frames in 3D on a very bright screen is like being inside a movie rather than looking at a movie Its a very intense, participatory experience (Trumbull, 2012c).

In addition to exploiting the scale of IMAX, the type of hypercinematic aesthetic paradigm Trumbull is proposing would be something closer to a theme park ride: when you get into an immersive experience like this its like youre in the movie, not looking at a movie. You become a participant in the movie, like in a theme park ride (Trumbull, 2012a).

Figure 29. In 1990 Trumbull was given the challenge to create Back to the Future: The Ride, a theme park attraction ride that: blends breakthrough simulator technology with a cutting-edge Omni-max 70mm film to create a total sensory experience (Sciretta, 2007).

79

The attraction has consistently been described as: the best ride on the planet (Olson, 1998).

However, while it would employ a monumental theme park ride aesthetic, hypercinema could also encourage a greater intimacy with the subject matter. In this respect Trumbull has been experimenting with something that is akin to the television show Peep Show (2003 present): Its breaking the fourth wall, the forbidden fourth wall, which may include an actor actually turning to the camera and acknowledging the presence of the audience (Trumbull, 2012f).

Figure 30. Peep Show is a television show presented exclusively through character point of view shots, making the spectator feel like they are the characters. Trumbull has a similar

80

vision for hypercinema: I can hire a really beautiful actress to look in the lens and seduce every guy in the audience (Trumbull, 2012e).

While Trumbull is eager to ignite hypercinema as a new form of film exhibition, by no means does he see it as replacing conventional film presentation: I think 24 frames-persecond movies on normal movie screens is a wonderful, beautiful, long-lasting art form that will go into the future and it is completely appropriate for most films, actually. (Trumbull in Variety, 2012) Therefore, hypercinema is not a replacement of the current film exhibition sector; in the same way that you do not have to use, colour, sound, 3D or different frame rates, hypercinema would be just another means through which film content can be accessed, as a much more participatory and hyperrealistic experience. As IMAXs success has already demonstrated, an exhibition paradigm such as hypercinema could very well give public exhibition a new lease of life.

However, if something like hypercinema can present a hyperrealist representation akin to New Magic, that makes the spectator a part of the spectacle, then it has larger implications! Hypercinema will put many of the traditional assertions of film theory into question: No one would ever think of touching the figures of light on the film screen in order to test in this way their degree of reality. (Voss, 2011:142). Certainly, hypercinemas ability to present reality to a level of detail equivalent to how the brain processes it requires film theory to reassess one of its most fundamental understandings of films status as only being an impression of reality:

the experience of the impression of reality in the cinema takes the form of a benign disavowal where spectators entertain in thought that what they see is real in a manner akin to the experience of a conscious fantasy. The difference lies in the 81

fact that in the cinema this conscious fantasy is fully realized for the spectator in the form of projective illusion. Thus I argue that while I know that what I see is only a film, I can experience this film with the kind of realization that occurs in dreams (Allen, 1995:5).

While moving forward, the digital re-forging of cinema is reviving fundamental questions of how to define reality. As with the bodily implications in the creation of the filmic experience, philosophy can provide clarity in this endeavour. Regardless of whether hypercinema becomes an actuality as Trumbull envisions it, all the new filmmaking techniques and technologies present huge potential implications for the spectacles and the spectators ways of being in reality (see Appendices I and J). Therefore, in light of these new industry paradigms and fundamental questions they raise, the reassessment of film theory and the reconfiguration of the spectator and the spectacle (see Appendix A) are all the more warranted.

However, beyond the neurobiological implications of the spectators body and the spectacles expansion through larger formats into hyper-cinematic commodities, the relationship of the spectator and the spectacle in reality becomes even more problematic when it is considered that film exhibition is not only getting bigger, but it is also getting smaller. Crucially, we now live in an age where film content can be accessed in any context. As Trumbull has already pointed out, while larger forms of cinema promise to dominate the public exhibition sphere (see Appendix F), the multiplex is finding its way into our pockets (see Appendix I). All of these innovations and diversifications of film content are further strengthening embodiments of the fundamentally ancient truth that lies at the heart of the film mediums continual ways of being a dominant financial and artistic presence - a truth of transcendence. 82

Conclusion

Deshi Basara
A Pressing Need to Understand the Ancient Language of the Spectator and the Spectacle

Film viewership is far more than precisely that viewing. Never in its one-hundred-andeighteen years of existence has film experience been a purely passive activity (Butsh, 2007:297); on some level, it has always encouraged the participation of the audience (Nadaner, 1984:126). The only difference that exists in the current digital age of cinema is that the participatory aspects are being encouraged even more so, due to cinematic immersion being commoditised.

Figure 31. Belief is the key to (financial) success.

The growing trend to commoditise all types of film experience is emblematic of concurrent questions being asked in regards to film experience if films are about more than looking, then what do they qualify as? What constitutes film experience? While heavily resisted, the 83

incentive to move away from the cave-like comfort zone is the result of the digital re-birth. For eighty years, there has existed a supposedly accomplished business and aesthetic model for the entire paradigm of the film industry. However, the ongoing digitalisation of the film industry has exposed the inadequacies of the supposedly perfected analogue era:

Then think what would naturally happen to them if they were released from their bonds and cured of their delusions. Suppose one of them were let loose, and suddenly compelled to stand up and turn his head and look and walk towards the fire; all these actions would be painful and he would be too dazzled to see properly the objects of which he used to see the shadows. What do you think he would say if he was told that what he used to see was so much empty nonsense and that he was now nearer reality and seeing more correctly (Plato, 2003:242).

84

Figure 32. Older still than the cave paintings of the Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc Cave in France, are the paintings of the El Castillo cave in Spain. These paintings are 40,800 years old, the oldest yet discovered (Than, 2010)! Cave paintings demonstrate that cavemen understood visual representations as being about more than the process of looking. Perhaps even more so, cavemen understood that visual presentations were also absorptions into something bigger: If memory is our means of preserving that which we consider most valuable, it is also painfully linked to our transience. When we die, our memories die with us. In a sense, the elaborate system of externalized memory [of cultural artefacts] weve created is a way of fending off mortality (Foer, 2011:19).

While we do not want to be constrained by it (McGowan, 2007:ix), the cave is still important in formulating a larger understanding of film experience. Ultimately, film experience is just an updated version of the cave painting and what has always been a vital endeavour for humanity: to express a fundamentally unchanging and ancient language the language of human nature as entwined with narratives: Life is cognitive, not narrative. We need narration to understand it, but we live it cognitively (Reygadas in Stock, 2013). Narratives are intimately linked to the human intellect because they offer us explanations of a world that does not make sense; through the mutual dialogue between spectator and spectacle, narratives allow us to achieve transcendence. In a recent episode of Doctor Who, the protagonist commented that: The soul's made of stories, not atoms (Dir. Farren Blackburn, 2013). Films are currently the most successful means of expressing this ancient language of transcendence because the film medium is currently the only art form that comes close to mimicking the human cognitive process; hence the mediums more intimate connection with humanity and further validation as to how the medium can have a profound neurobiological influence on us (see Appendix J):

85

Since its invention film has been compared to the mind, whether through analogy with human perception, dreams or the subconscious. The shock of seeing a world freed by mans imagination caused many early writers to see a profound link between the mind of the filmgoer and the film itself, leading them to understand film as a mirror of mindful intent. In a sense film offers us our first experience of an other experience Film seems to be a double phenomenology, a double intention: our perception of the film, and the films perception of its world. Thus our understanding of our world can be informed and changed by this other way of experiencing a world, this other view of a similar world (Frampton, 2007:15).

Figure 33. Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) readies himself to climb out of his prison - an underground cavern supposedly impossible to escape from - in The Dark Knight Rises: my soul is as ready to escape as my body (2012).

Whether it is the sensory overload of the IMAX or the intimate experience of the smart phone, the diversifying means through which film content can now be experienced are 86

greater than ever before. These diversifications are fuelling the largest ongoing dialogue that has ever existed between content and consumer, spectacle and spectator. The resulting comfort zone disruptions and the intimate-technological-integration of content into everyday life has created a scenario where the fundamental dialogue between the spectator and spectacle is becoming more widely acknowledged. While it is not widely understood, the dominating presence of film-like content and the increased opportunities created for transcendental potential, now that film content can be accessed in any context (see Appendix I), greatly intensifies the inherent religiosity of film experience:

I believe there is a spirituality in films even if its one that cant supplant faith. I find that over the years there are many films that address themselves to the spiritual side of Mans nature It is as if movies answer an ancient quest for the common unconscious; they fulfil a spiritual need that people have to share a common memory. (Scorsese et al., 1995).

87

Figure 34. A film that superbly demonstrates this transcendental religiosity of the dialogue between spectator and spectacle is Berberian Sound Studio (Dir. Peter Strictland, 2011). It is a film in which the film itself becomes sentient and, by merging with its protagonist, folds over into itself. The film and protagonist ascend beyond each other and the transcendental result is the filmic experience. Ultimately, the spectator leaves the film with a unique filmic experience that is different to the filmic experience of any other audience member, precisely because the spectator would have been a collaborator in its creation; the filmic experience will go on to have a continued neurobiological and cognitive existence as part of a larger narrative, as the spectator lives his or her life (Sobchack, 1992:5; see Appendix A)! As much as it is a result of the digitally-orientated times it was made in: It seemed kind of perverse in a sense that were making a film about analogue but by digital means (Strickland, 2011), Berberian Sound Studio is a highly progressive meditation on the spectators relationship with the spectacle: Its not about understanding it so much its more about feeling it (Strickland, 2011).

It is this type of meditation, film theory and Film Studies as a whole, would do well to nurture. As should now be clear, the ontological, metaphysical and epistemological attributes of film experience require philosophically-inclined minds to successfully decode those inherent attributes of film experience:

call it a double movement: from the disembodied but observing eye, to the privileged but implicated gaze (and ear); from the presence of the image as seen, felt and touched, to sense organs that become active participants in the formation of filmic reality; from the sensory perceptual surface of film that requires the neurological brain, to the unconscious that registers deep ambivalences in the logic of the narrative, where rational choice or rational agency theories see merely an 88

alternating succession of action and reaction. At the limit, film and spectator are like parasite and host, each occupying the other and being in turn occupied, to the point where there is only one reality that unfolds as it enfolds, and vice versa (Elsaesser et al., 2010:11).

As much as films go on to exist in us, we go on to exist in them.

Figure 35. His fellow prisoners urge him on: Deshi, deshi, basara, basara. Deshi, deshi, basara, basara (The Dark Knight Rises, 2012), this is a chant that beats like a pulse beneath the surface of the film. Throughout his career as Batman, Bruce Wayne has developed a fearlessness of death: The leap to freedom is not about strength fear is why you fail you do not fear death (ibid).

An attitude of indifference has largely found its way into Film Studies, as it puts too much emphasis on the past, it is an academic subject that is increasingly feeling very dusty. It does not invest enough energy into progressive thinking or into examining the practical 89

aspects of how film entities are constructed: Film also possesses unique representational capacities that enable it to present additional aspects of the artists world view. The temporal and sequential nature of film allows it to organize images in a pattern that simulates the pattern of the artists perception and thought. (Nadaner, 1984:125).

However, this result is not surprising when it is considered that nostalgia is an integral component of cinema: As an audience, we are invited to relive a moment of awakening through new eyes (Singh, 2012:192); considering film contents dominating presence, it is not surprising the current age is saturated in nostalgia. The problem with nostalgia, of course, is too much of it leads to a cave-like complacency. Like Douglas Trumbull, the figures that have the power to make changes are few and far between, but the digital rebirth is nurturing new champions and new paradigms. Framptons Filmosophy, the seminal Film Theory: An Introduction Through the Senses (Elsaesser et al., 2010) and its championing of the body as a unifying means through which film experience can be understood are examples of very progressive thinking!

90

Figure 36. In Douglas Trumbulls directorial debut Silent Running (1972) the protagonist sacrifices everything to protect the Earths last forest from the destruction of a human race that has become indifferent towards preservation. The film is about what happens when people stop caring we lose sight of our humanity.

In short, there is too much indifference in Film Studies. The discipline is too focused on cave-like thinking and film theory of the past; a pantheon of knowledge that is becoming continuously outdated and finding itself at odds with new advancements and diversifications, such as the digital re-birth and large format hypercinema. Film scholars have always sought to understand the spectators and spectacles mutual pursuit of enlightenment; while they have uncovered aspects of it, there still does not exist a single unifying explanation of the profound processes of that relationship:

The universalizing claims about the cinematic experience made by figures such as Sergei Eisenstein, Andre Bazin, Christian Metz and Laura Mulvey have disappeared. Contemporary film scholars are increasingly content to make local, particular claims about film. This focus on particularity that is, the analysis of isolated phenomena completely dominates the field of film studies. Amid this contemporary landscape, proffering a universal claim and totalizing theory of the filmic experience seems outdated and nave (McGowan, 2007:ix).

We need to move beyond the particular claims and look to how a unified understanding can be reached, because it is all very well encouraging diverse studies (see Appendix B) but at some point they have to be unified. This is something that Elsaesser and Hagener do with the variable of the body in Film Theory: An Introduction Through the Senses: the inclusion of the body in film theory is a way of overcoming the deadlocks of the representational 91

model and of calling for a more diverse set of approaches to conceptualise the cinematic experience (Elsaesser et al., 2010:131). Following their lead, this dissertation has endeavoured to take their concept one step further by speculating on the wider neurobiological influences of the heart and stomach brains. Ignorance needs to be disbanded; Film Studies needs to move beyond wholly cave-like thinking and the study of ideal spectators: film studies needs to be seen as more than the analysis of film texts, or even the study of their industrial production and of their interpretation by audiences. (Jancovich et al., 2003:3). In the current digital transition where many of the assumptions of previous thought are having their validity questioned, as has already been discussed with the potential of hypercinema, a leap into the unknown is not only inevitable, but is required!

Figure 37. In order to gain the strength required to ascend from the pit, Bruce Wayne needs to lose his fearlessness of death his ignorance of life is keeping him from enlightenment.

92

He needs to change his attitude; he has to want a new lease of life: Make the climb as the child is, without the rope (The Dark Knight Rises, 2012)!

This dissertation was written for a Film Studies course entitled Film and Screen Studies and, therein with the addition of Screen, lies an acknowledgement of the need to study a much wider field, e.g. television, video games, internet content, etc. Therefore, while progressive thinking is not dominant, it is something that is gradually being nurtured. The plethora of audio-visual content that now exist means that Film Studies is no longer just about films. It can be speculated that as Film Studies developed out of Cultural Studies, a new discipline will develop out of Film Studies to focus on the wider areas that are much more widely linked with the cultures of humanity. Certainly, one such academically driven proposal already exists: Interface Studies (Dieter et al., 2010; see Appendix I).

Judging by humanitys increasing interactions with film-like content, if Film Studies is: a subject that is studying a medium that [increasingly] permeates and mediates on every area of human existence (Mullarkey, 2009:6), then it is highly probable it will become one of the more important academic disciplines of the twenty first century: In order to understand todays world, we need cinema. Literally, it is only in cinema that we get that crucial dimension which we are not able to confront in our real reality. If you are looking for what is in reality, more real than reality itself, look into the cinematic fiction (iek, 2006). However, if Film Studies is ever going to stand a chance of uncovering the meaning of the increasingly multifaceted relationship of the spectator and the spectacle, it will need to nurture progression and it must not be afraid to ask nave questions. Children are very good at asking fundamental questions and a child-like curiosity is exactly what film theory requires:

93

this simile must be connected throughout with what preceded it. The realm revealed by sight corresponds to the prison, and the light of the fire in the prison to the power of the sun. And you wont go wrong if you connect the ascent into the upper world and the sight of the objects there with the upward progress of the mind into the intelligible region the final thing to be perceived in the intelligible region, and perceived only with difficulty, is the form of the good; once seen, it is inferred to be responsible for whatever is right and valuable in anything, producing in the visible region light and the source of light, and being in the intelligible region itself controlling source of truth and intelligence. And anyone who is going to act rationally either in public or private life must have sight of it (Plato, 2003:244).

As an introductory speculation, this paper has endeavoured to uncover some of the hidden aspects of the relationship of the spectator and the spectacle. Drawing on the largely overlooked implications of the spectators body as a neurobiological influencer in the creation of the filmic experience; as well as the fundamental disruptions of established knowledge caused by large formats and hypercinema-like paradigms, this paper has gone some way in expressing the pressing need to move away from ignorant thinking (Mullarkey, 2009:23) and has endeavoured to provide some clarity on the true complexities of what constitutes the experiencing of a film (see Appendix A). In order to understand how the spectator views, absorbs, receives, engages, experiences, constructs, desires, manipulates, debates, infers, identifies, fantasises, negotiates, participates, critiques, senses,

addresses, recreates and integrates with the spectacle, and vice versa, a major reconfiguration of thinking and attitude needs to take place.

Ultimately, our ways of being the spectator and the spectacle can reveal fundamental truths about the realities we occupy, but only if we care enough to want to find out in the 94

first place. In order to ascend from the cave and to attain enlightenment on our true ways of being we need to break free from the shackles of our comfort zones and disband ignorance. Only then we will be able to decode the intimately woven and transcendental dialogue of the spectators and spectacles profoundly ancient language.

Figure 38. Deshi basara... also known as rise.

95

Appendix A

The Perceiving Participator and the Spectacle Experiencing Situation

An Example of a Reclassification for the Spectator and the Spectacle

In light of this dissertations endeavour of highlighting a need to reconfigure the theorisation that is concerned with the study of spectators and spectacles, it is at this point that a speculative reclassification will be ventured: Ive suggested that despite the insistence on real viewers as distinct from the subject, the place of the spectator in film studies is not easily or readily defined as either a real person or a position, a construction (Mayne, 1998:36). While this paper cannot propose a whole new language through which film could be discussed, it will demonstrate this need by proposing new terminologies for its primary focus: the spectator and the spectacle.

With terms like spectator, viewer and audience member there is too much emphasis on passivity and the concept of gazing. Therefore, instead of spectator, something along the lines of perceiving participator should be used as it indicates everything Chapter One has already ventured in regards to the function of a film spectator; through the perceptual membrane that is the audience members physical body, a spectator perceives the film text and, on a neurobiological and cognitive basis, actively collaborates in the creation of the filmic experience. A film is unique to each audience member precisely as a result of that active collaboration.

96

On the other hand, with terms like spectacle, film, cinema, film viewing situation, film experiencing situation there are a great deal of redundancies and ambiguities. Beyond celluloid film being discontinued, does film refer to just theatrically produced entities or does it also refer to entities produced for television and the internet? Likewise, what is cinema referring to: the physical cinema location, an artistic temperament or the industry as a whole? Certainly, when dealing with audio-visual content spectacle seems best suited to cover both theatrically and non-theatrically released content, as all audio-visual content is designed to create a spectacle. However, spectacle alone does not adequately cover the means by which a perceiving participator is able to engage with it. As such, the terms film viewing situation and film experiencing situation have already been used a number of times throughout this paper to refer to the situation (inside and outside the cinema auditorium) where the spectator engages neurobiologically and cognitively with the spectacle content. As has already been pointed out viewing needs to be discarded in favour of the broader connotation of experiencing. The filmic or spectacle experience is something that is created from collaboration between the spectacle text and the perceiving participator. However, the perceiving participator does not collaborate in its creation based solely on the data provided by the primary spectacle text; rather, there are additional data inputs, e.g. websites, adverts, filmmaker interviews, previous life experiences, original source material, posters, repeats, memes, apps, franchises, similar spectacle texts, etc. that are added into the mix by the perceiving participator. Ultimately, the perceiving participator is the author of their own individual experience of a spectacle text. As such, the spectacle experiencing situation is an ongoing experience that can begin long before the perceptual participation with the primary spectacle text has even taken place. Likewise, its ability to transpire at any time and in any place emphasises the use of situation, the situation refers to the two necessary attributes: the opportunity where the primary or secondary spectacle text data arises and the active engagement of the perceiving 97

participator. In light of this, spectacle experiencing situation seems best suited to discuss the situation where active cognitive and neurobiological engagement of the perceiving participator takes place with the spectacle text.

Complicated? Yes, but so is the truth of spectators relationship with the spectacle and it is only when sufficient conceptual frameworks are conceived will film theory be in an effective position to decode the complexities of that relationship.

98

Appendix B

Fat and Sugar

The Variable of Cinema Snacking

Considering the monumental physical and financial presence they occupy, cinema snacks are surely another empirical and body-related area crying out to be studied. Aside from the disruptive noise these snacks produce, weve known for centuries that food can affect our moods and physiological state. Sugary snacks create opiate-like effects in the brain (Dailey, 2009) and fatty foods elevate our mood as well (Hurley, 2011); even more so when they are consumed in large quantitates, as all multiplex venues encourage.

Figure 39. The gauntlet that is the multiplex food and drink counter.

99

Cinema snacking could also be one of the variables that accounts for why general audiences tend to enjoy films that are otherwise critically panned, as Mark Kermode has commented: No one enjoyed Pirates at the Carribean: At Worlds End some of them may claim to have enjoyed it. But they didnt. Not really. They just think they did (2011:65), or, rather, their stomach brains (in conjunction with their larger neurobiological networks) think they did. Beyond this speculation, it would be interesting to see how the film experience differs between audience members who eat snacks and audience members who do not.

100

Appendix C

The Terror of the Microphone

The Introduction of Sound and the Resulting Disruptions

The ability to reproduce sound existed before the first mechanisms of cinema and it took thirty years to bring the two mediums together in a way that offered the best logistics in terms of technological adaptability and financially rewarding outcomes. However, even after this had found validation in the huge commercial success of The Jazz Singer (Dir. Alan Crossland, USA, 1927), the initial phase of sound films or talkies are often accused of being aesthetically regressive (Cousins, 2011). With the introduction of early sound equipment came many restrictions for filmmakers: it created a necessity for the camera to be encased in a soundproofed booth to eliminate the mechanical noise of the camera (crane shots and moving camera shots in general were out of the question), the director could no longer direct the action while a scene was being filmed, early microphones were largely immobile requiring the performers to go the hidden microphone on set, films lost much of their visual action in favour of long static aural speeches and the microphone put many prominent silent film actors out of work due to undesirable voices (Brownlow et al., 1980b; Bader et al., 2007).

101

Figure 40. The introduction of sound changed everything.

The fear of the microphone was born out of the fact that it so fundamentally changed the production process and the artistic impression of a films final result. However, as with the 102

addition of make-up and lighting to make up for the visual inadequacies of 24fps, sound technology was very quickly adapted into a form that not only allowed the filmmakers to work efficiently with it, but enabled them to discover a whole new way of telling stories. The filmmakers found a way to use sound as just another storytelling tool to add an additional aesthetic dimension to their films (Elaesser et al., 2010:129-31; Scorsese in Stock, 2011).

103

Appendix D

Large Formats of the Past

The Logistical Downfalls of Fox Grandeur and Cinerama

Developed by the Fox Film Corporation and dbuted in 1929, Fox Grandeur, a 70mm widescreen format, marked the first time that the industry tried to establish a larger form of cinema as a commercial venture.

Figure 41. Fox Grandeur was the first commercially available form of what is today being referred to as 4k ultra-high definition, something that is only just becoming commercially available.

104

Unlike the majority of analogue films from the last eighty years that captured onto and projected from 35mm film prints, Fox Grandeur captured and projected from 70mm film prints: 70mm has an image resolution equivalent to about a 5K digital image (5000 horizontal lines of resolution/pixels; see Appendix E), around five times the resolution of current high definition television and 1k above the current resolution of higher-end multiplex digital projection. However, the Great Depression and the cost of sound conversion caused Fox Grandeur to be discontinued in late 1930.

Figure 42. Aside from finding a brief peak period during the 1960s and 1970s, The Master (Dir. Paul Thomas Anderson, 2012) is a very rare example of a whole feature film being filmed in 70mm.

In 1952, Cinerama, an image capturing process that projected onto a 146 panoramic screen that closely mimicked the peripheral range of human sight, was introduced to widespread enthusiasm, much critical acclaim (Strohmaier, 2002) and a great deal of 105

financial profits: when they opened the first Cinerama theater in Hollywood called This Is Cinerama, they made more money in that one theater in one year than in the rest of the movie industry (Trumbull in Variety, 2012)!

The Cinerama process was praised for its heightened immersive quality: Since peripheral vision is responsible for our visual perception of motion, balance, and depth, the Cinerama picture could produce those perceptions in the audience (Helms, 2008).

Figure 43. Cinerama was designed to match the peripheral vision range of human sight. It was also filmed in and projected at 30 frames per second.

Originally captured on and projected from three separate strips of 35mm celluloid, Cinerama later photographed onto a single 70mm strip of celluloid and projected from a single 70mm strip of celluloid. This was necessitated by the technical difficulties of photographing and projecting from three separate strips, the high costs of doing so and the logistical problems associated with using the three strip camera: the three-camera Cinerama rig had plenty of limitations: an extraordinary weight (all metal no plastic parts), 106

an excessive power source (three automobile batteries kept it running) and a single lens that could not accommodate close-ups or zoom effects (Hall, 2013).

Figure 44. If one of the three projectors went out of sync, the 146 illusion would be destroyed (this was one of the technical problems that plagued analogue 3D projection).

107

The majority of Cinerama films were documentaries and travelogues, as its laborious and costly system was not logistically appealing to the mainstream film industry. However, there were two exceptions: The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Dir. George Pal et al., 1962) and How The West Was Won (Dir. John Ford et al., 1962), these were captured in the three strip process.

Figure 45. Filming How The West Was Won in 3-strip Cinerama created countless logistical problems for the production team.

Ultimately, after twenty years of commercial exposure, Cinerama was discontinued due to its high production and exhibition costs; as well as the industrys dominating competition in the form of its CinemaScope and VistaVision widescreen formats. Unlike Fox Grandeur and Cinerama, the financial and logistical success of the widescreen formats enabled widescreen to become a standard component of film exhibition.

108

Appendix E

Resolutions
Image Resolutions, Higher Frame Rates and the Standardisation of Film Exhibition

RED, a major digital camera manufacturer, recently announced their new digital camera sensor which captures images at 6K resolution (RED, 2013), so digital cameras can now capture images superior to conventional 70mm film. The digital camera has entered the large format arena and, theoretically, digital cameras will one day be able to capture images equivalent to IMAX resolution; IMAX is already developing an 8K digital camera to in a continuing endeavour to do just that (Lowe, 2013). This current digital IMAX development has come as a result of competition, but also of the growing attention being directed towards higher frame rates. Higher frame rates are something true 70mm IMAX struggles to cater for; in the 1990s, IMAX HD was a brief attempt at filming and projecting in 48fps, but the constant wear and tear breakdowns of the system and high costs of each reel of film lasting half as long caused it to be largely discontinued. Therefore, IMAX can only exhibit higher frame rates via a digital system, which at 8K resolution is considerably less than its analogue counterpart. However, Japans national broadcaster NHK, the developers of an 8K prototype television have argued: 8K is enough for the human eye. That is why we do not need any more than 8K resolution (BBC Click, 2012).

109

Figure 46. Resolution parameters are determined by the number of rows of pixels that run horizontally across an image; therefore, 2K refers to 2000 lines of pixels: the more pixels, the more resolution. 1920x1080 - current High Definition Standard for consumer displays, 2K equivalent to 35mm film resolution, 4K the current standard the industry is transitioning to using, 8K (Digital IMAX) what everyone wants to be using, 18K (70mm IMAX) this is off the perceptual scale! When viewing an 18K IMAX image only 12K resolution is perceivable (Wilson, 2009).

IMAX is currently in the process of introducing its new digital laser projection system which will mean that, in accordance with its digital camera, IMAX has to downgrade its resolution from 12K to 8K (Lowe, 2013), at least when screening digitally. Therefore, until 8K televisions are available on the consumer market, 8K looks set to be the standard resolution for large format exhibition. However, the problems of 4K have to be embraced first and industry experts have commented that, aside from digital IMAX, 8K is still a few of years down the line for all other exhibition outlets (Shapiro, 2013).

110

Figure 47. This one of only a few 8K display prototypes that are currently in existence. It is currently impossible to make an 8K display smaller than this!

Additionally, an 8K digital IMAX will go a long way in reducing the backlash the IMAX Corporation is currently receiving as a result of its lieMAX installations (see Appendix F).

111

Appendix F

The Multiplex is in Trouble

The Aesthetic Downfalls of Low Standards and LieMAXes

Picturehouse, a UK based company formed: to challenge the multiplex model and provide cinemas that serve their communities in city-centre locations (Picturehouse, 2009) caused a great deal of consternation in December 2012 when they made the announcement that they had been purchased by multiplex chain Cineworld (Pierrot, 2012). However, after the dust settled on the announcement, the acquisition itself proved not to be the most surprising part; rather, it was the reasons Cineworld highlighted for the acquisition, as Cineworld's chief executive Steve Wiener commented:

"I don't want to make any changes. It's a profitable organisation and I want to leave it alone and let it continue making a profit and entertaining the public The demographic profile of people that go to the cinema is getting older. They like arthouse cinemas, and we wanted to have a piece of that (cited in Tobin, 2012).

Cineworld's finance chief, Philip Bowcock elaborated further: "We're going to keep the quirkiness. It's a very different customer set a little bit older, more discerning, more experienced. To lose that would be to lose the raison d'tre of Picturehouse." (cited in Kollowe, 2012).

112

Figure 48. Picturehouse enables each of its cinemas to operate themselves and maintain their own distinct quirky identities; The Little Theatre Cinema in Bath, UK is one such cinema.

However, beyond the profits generated from Picturehouses customer set, further speculation was raised after a conversation on Mark Kermodes Twitter profile provoked the following response from Cineworld: Picturehouse bought by Cineworld. We'll help them grow & learn from them too! say @cineworld Not change ..just grow (Kermode, 2012b). Furthermore, Cineworlds wish to: learn from Picturehouse caused Kermode to produce a video blog in which he asked his followers to comment on what they thought this ambiguous statement meant (Kermode, 2012c).

113

Figure 49. Like all multiplex brands, each individual Cineworld cinema complex adheres to streamlined corporate branding. The City Centre Cineworld in Glasgow, UK is currently the worlds tallest cinema.

In contrast to the independents, IMAX exhibits films that largely cater for the whole family and that are all very big-concept immersive spectacles. On the other hand, the small independents are able to cater for the types of films that would not really be served in an IMAX venue and to a level of showmanship/customer consideration that still manages to

114

transcend the multiplexes. Indeed, a grey pound film, such as Quartet (Dir. Dustin Hoffman, UK, 2013), a film that is targeted at an older demographic (Stock, 2013a) would have been wasted as an IMAX release.

Figure 50. Quartet is a lovely little charm bracelet of a film, a fairy tale for the geriatric set blessed with a wonderful cast and a carry-on attitude (Long, 2013).

Aesthetically, it just is not the type of film that would warrant from an upscale into IMAX; precisely because it is a small, character driven piece the spectacle of this film is the ensemble cast it is an experience designed to be seen on a smaller screen. In contrast, while it is an equally character driven film, Les Misrables (Dir. Tom Hooper, 2012) absolutely benefitted from an upscale into IMAX because the audio and visual spectacle created from its status as a musical gave it the impression of hyper-reality and, as such,

115

required a bigger format to showcase it: The extraordinary power of Les Misrables and the epic nature of the storytelling and yet the intimacy are things that IMAX do better than anything (Mackintosh, 2013).

However, following on from this and Trumbulls wish to introduce a new type of hypercinematic film as part of hypercinema, the types and varieties of films that can be commoditised as offering different experiences for the spectator is gradually becoming a major factor in the film exhibition sector. In light of the growing presence and market domination of large format cinema, one can speculate that Cineworlds acquisition of Picturehouse is an investment for the future. As Trumbull elaborates: I think 24 framesper-second movies on normal movie screens is a wonderful, beautiful, long-lasting art form that will go into the future and it is completely appropriate for most films, actually (Trumbull in Anon, 2012). Therefore, it can be argued that what Cineworld wants to learn from Picturehouse is how to operate as a smaller form of cinematic exhibition; to exploit the area of the market and the types of films that would be wasted in a larger format. The reason Picturehouse/arthouse cinema attendance is up is because in the last couple of years they have discovered a very big niche market with the grey pound demographic (Stock, 2013a). In addition to this, the independents are supplying a cinematic experience that still offers a high level of showmanship/customer care, something most modern multiplexes have made redundant:

This is the engine of the modern multiplex: a computer programme with no memory of the past, no human interaction, no history, no soul. We did away with celluloid because it needed too much care and replaced it with a stream of digital information about which no one cares. We handed the control of our ticket purchases over to speak-your-weight machines only to discover that they were 116

actually running the whole cinema. And while we were all so busy squinting at pointy digital images through smudgy 3-D glasses we didnt notice the lights going off in the projection booth behind us (Kermode 2011:312).

While there have been many professional figures bemoaning the state of multiplexes, these negative rumblings can best be summed up by a complaint an Odeon patron, Matt Pledger, posted on Odeons Facebook page in August 2012 (Pledger, 2012; see Appendix G). Bemoaning the high costs and the low quality experience, it was a complaint that very quickly went viral and gained widespread media attention (Kelly, 2012). As of May 2013 the compliant has received just fewer than three hundred thousand likes!

The added problem of movie piracy and film content being more widely available on a number of diverse consumer devices thanks to services like LOVEFiLM and Netflix, the multiplex really needs to rethink its whole approach and offer their own type of cinematic experience that will bring the audience back. It is not that the public does not want to use the cinema anymore, as the growth in IMAX and independent attendance has shown: while many people claim to prefer television to the cinema because they can watch films in the comfort of their own homes, this preference is only a general one. Many still have a firm commitment to going out, even if only every now and then (Jancovich et al, 2003:232), it is just multiplexes have a lot to answer for with their low quality customer care and presentation of films:

The problem is not digital projection per se, but the lack of human accountability that the rise of digital has facilitated. In the past year I have sat in a UK multiplex in which a digital image simply froze something which we are assured cannot

117

happen, but an error with which many multiplexes patrons will be familiar, and which no one was on hand to correct (Kermode, 2011:11).

There is no doubt that the growing market presence of large format cinema is creating ripples in the multiplex community. While it can be argued multiplexes are trying to better understand the customer-focused approaches of the independents, multiplexes have also begun to transition themselves into the large format arena: The widespread take-up of new exhibition technologies hinges not only on the seamlessness with which they are able to assimilate the viewer into their onscreen worlds, but their cost and ease of implementation (Sharp, 2012). Some multiplexes have even partnered with IMAX and offer IMAX exclusive screens. However, these IMAX installations have only added to the multiplexs low quality image, as much criticism has been raised against what have has been termed LieMAX.

118

Figure 51. The Cineworld in Crawley, West Sussex, UK has a lieMAX screen. Notice how the IMAX brand eclipses the Cineworld one.

The multiplex IMAX screens claim to offer the same IMAX experience of genuine IMAX venues, such as the BFI IMAX, and even charge the same ticket prices. However, the multiplex IMAX installations use digital projection and, as such, are only able to exhibit films at 4K resolution (see Appendix E) the same as standard multiplex projection, something for which IMAX and the partnered multiplex companies have been heavily criticised for (Ebert, 2009).

Figure 52. LieMAX vs. IMAX.

However, in addition to the LieMAX installations, most multiplexes have 4K projection, every multiplex is now able to screen stereoscopic 3D, Cineworlds cinemas are currently in the process of having D-Box moving seat technology installed in all of its venues and Odeon has introduced isense a large format audio-visual system that they say closely mimics IMAX (Odeon, 2012; Young, 2012).

119

Figure 53. Is it worth the extra money?

As these new installations are still fairly recent there is not yet enough feedback to determine whether they have been successful, but from what feedback there has been they appear to be making a positive impression (Young, 2012; OKeeffe, 2012; Neish, undated). However, when speculating on how the multiplex will position itself in the exhibition community, the safest assumption to make is that multiplexes will follow the example set by the South Korean 4DX cinemas: In a 4DX presentation, the film is fundamentally the same as one can see in any other venue, albeit accompanied by chair

120

motions and the other environmental additions created by the CJ 4DPLEX programmers (Strong, 2012).

Figure 54. 4DX has already started to target the multiplex chains of the USA (Giardina, 2013).

Certainly, a system that puts the spectator at its centre can not be a bad thing for an exhibition service that is being constantly criticised for its lack of consumer consideration; whether or not this expanded format/immersive type of experience will make up for the current aesthetic failings of the multiplex model remains to be seen. Financially, the multiplexes are still making a profit and a steady yearly growth (Thomas, 2013), but when considering the yearly growth and increasing market domination of IMAX (Vanderhoef, 2013), the necessity for multiplexes to rethink their strategy in the exhibition sector 121

becomes pressingly apparent. However, there is a key irony and a hugely significant point to be realised at the end of all this: a major contributing factor as to why IMAX is becoming a dominating exhibition presence is largely down to the profits generated from the multiplex lieMAX installations! The multiplex is in trouble, but it is by no means dead in the water.

122

Appendix G

A Lousy Experience
The Consumers Multiplex Complaint that went Viral

While there have been many professional figures bemoaning the state of multiplexes, these negative rumblings can best be summed up by a complaint an Odeon patron, Matt Pledger, posted on Odeons Facebook page in August 2012. Bemoaning the high costs and the low quality experience, it was a complaint that very quickly went viral and gained a great deal of media attention (Kelly, 2012). As of May 2013, Pledgers Facebook post has received just fewer than three hundred thousand likes:

Dear Odeon,

I went out last night with friends to see Ted. I'd not been to the cinema for a long time so I thought I'd treat myself and the fianc to a film. Firstly, 21 for 2 tickets and a medium 7UP! I don't know who you expect to get into your cinemas but they must have more money than sense as this is ludicrous. I could go onto Play or Amazon and buy myself about 12 DVD's for that price!

Secondly, the place was dead. I can only attribute this to your insane ticket prices. There were more staff than paying customers. "You'll have been served quickly then" you may ask. Well, no. There were 4 staff behind the counter, 2 of whom I can only assume we're there to play with a cloth and talk about pointless crap with their teenage colleagues whilst watching 4 people becoming more and more irate

123

in the queue. Even more annoying was, despite the plethora of school-drop-out 'staff' that were milling about trying to look busy and achieving the square root of nothing, no-one came into our screen so we had to pull the doors shut ourselves. Trivial you may think but, hey, I shelled out 20 for the 'cinema experience' so I expect to actually get it.

Thirdly, I think it's ever so nice of Odeon to give their cinema goers 2 movies for the price of one because, whenever there was a part in Ted that has little or no dialogue, we were all treated to the wall shaking sound of Batman being played in the next screen but, come on, why not charge half as much and we could SEE both rather than watching one and hearing two.

Your little advert about piracy killing film was the final straw though. Between us in the group we paid you over 45 so four of us could get the 'cinema experience.' Considering the way the country is don't you think this is excessive? Especially when I could go out, by a DVD, buy a lot of 7UP, buy everyone food and have change for the same price, AND I could watch the DVD over and over to my hearts content. I know that I wouldn't get the whole 'experience' but I'm sure I could pay a spotty teenager to ignore me and leave my lounge door open so I at least feel little like I'm in an Odeon.

If you want to see more people in your cinemas and actually put a dent in film piracy you should really try and cut your prices, hire decent staff and forget the 600% profit margins on your food and drink.

124

You are putting plenty of nails into the cinema coffin Odeon. I won't be back in a hurry (2012).

125

Appendix H

Highlighting IMAX
Comparisons of Conventional and IMAX Film Posters

A further separation IMAX has from conventional exhibition is its unique advertisement materials. The designs of these advertisements emphasize IMAX as a heightened and more prestigious experience the promotional materials have a special edition feel to them designed to present a different aesthetic.

Figures 55 & 56. The Dark Knight Rises one of the conventional multiplex posters next to its IMAX counterpart.

126

Figure 57. Skyfall one of the conventional multiplex posters.

127

Figure 58. Skyfall the IMAX poster.

128

Figure 59. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey one of the conventional multiplex posters.

129

Figure 60. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey one of four IMAX character posters.

130

Appendix I

The Multiplex is in Your Pocket

The Implications of the Interfacing Relationship of the Spectator and the Spectacle

The diversification of the spectacle through various types of content, its diverging means of exhibition and its ever complicating relationship with the spectator extends beyond the cinema. Smaller modes of exhibition: home cinema systems, desktop computers and laptops, have become integral components of the consumers lifestyle in the last ten years.

Figure 61. What a difference 8 years makes: St. Peter's Square in 2005 and yesterday (NBC News, 2013). 131

However, even smaller modes, such as the smart phone and the touch screen tablet, have become just as integral and have even deeper implications for the spectators and spectacles relationship; as well as film theorys understanding of it.

Figure 62. Netflix a new type of multiplex.

Everyone now has the ability to access a wide plethora of film content and to do so in any location. Unlike large format cinema, the smartphone and the tablet are not about immersion, they are more about intimacy: Certainly the big screen fascinates, but it cannot compete with the potential control over and immersion in favourite titles that home-based playback technologies afford (Klinger, 2006:136). The frequency at which consumers use their handheld devices in the everyday situations of their lives (frequencynews.com, 2010; Perez, 2012) should qualify these devices as extra bodily limbs. Viewing film content and

132

any audio-visual content on these devices fundamentally changes the meaning of those film texts:

This is vividly illustrated by what happens when a painting is shown on a television screen. The painting enters each viewers house. There it is surrounded by his wallpaper, his furniture, his mementoes. It enters the atmosphere of his family. It becomes their talking point. It lends its meaning to their meaning. At the same time it enters a million other houses and, in each of them, is seen in a different context. Because of the camera, the painting now travels to the spectator rather than the spectator to the painting. In its travels, its meaning is diversified (Berger, 1972:13).

These meanings are again diversified by the type of interface through which the spectator experiences the content: different media not only have different meanings but they do so because they offer different types of experience. While a new media may become dominant, it does not follow that it will render the experiences offered by other media undesirable (Jancovich et al., 2003:232). In addition to this, having the multiplex in your pocket not only allows you to access content anywhere, but it is also offers the potential for content customisability. The spectators unique filmic experience, which is the result of an interfacing collaboration between spectator and spectacle, now has an overtly outward expression with the promise of even more innovations for film content. In addition to the innovations that have already been explored in regards to revitalising cinema exhibition, trials are currently taking place for a second screen cinema paradigm, a form of cinema that would enable greater participation for the spectator due to the use of tablet-like devices (Macaulay, 2013). Likewise, there are trials being done for subconscious cinema, a cinema experience paradigm where the outcome of the film content is determined by the

133

spectators emotions (BBC News, 2013). Could these form additional components o f hypercinema?

However, the promise of greater diversification comes with the Google Glass, a device that will fundamentally integrate the interface, the spectacle and spectator into the most intimate union that has ever existed between content and consumer.

Figure 63. Google Glass is worn like a pair of glasses and projects an interface image directly into the eye. In addition to this it is able to use the users skull as a conductor for sound that the ear drums are able to pick up. The device is mostly voice controlled.

134

Figure 64. The age of the cyborg is fast approaching as the National Intelligence Council have predicted in their 2030 Global Trends publication (2012): Brain implants will also allow for advanced neural interface devices what will bridge the gap between minds and machines (cited in Dvorsky, 2012).

Google Glass is no work of science fiction, currently it is being trialled and should be widely commercially available within a year: Currently, Google Glass is only available to the handpicked group of testers who shelled out $1,500 (Crabbe, 2013). Google Glass is only the first step in a new type of integrated hardware-content-spectator relationship; the implications of this symbiosis are too vast, too speculative and too tantalising to be

135

explored here, but it is further validation as to why a major reconfiguration of thinking needs to take place!

However, what should be realised is the inherent spiritual relationship that has always been present between the spectator and spectacle is now becoming much more apparent through its diversifications and greater integration into our everyday lives: users will have to "develop some new social etiquette" (Schmit in Crabbe, 2013).

Figure 65. Google Glass turns Human sight into an interface. Regardless of the potential this offers for new types of immersive and participatory content, where does this position the gaze? Where will this take the relationship of the spectator and the spectacle?

Ultimately, the modes through which content can be experienced are continuously diversifying, as are the scales on which that content can be experienced. From the Google Glass to the IMAX screen, the spectator and the spectacle have never had so many ways to exist together. To say that films are just entertainment content cut off from our daily lives

136

that can not influence and/or explain our place in the world is cave-confined nonsense. We are the content and the content is us, Berger elaborates:

Adults and children sometimes have boards in their bedrooms or living-rooms on which they pin pieces of paper: letters, snapshots, reproductions of paintings, newspaper cuttings, original drawings, postcards they have been chosen in a highly personal way to match and express the experiences of the rooms inhabitant. Logically, these boards should replace museums (Berger, 1972:23).

Everything that has been presented throughout this paper is representative of the shift in thinking that is slowly taking place alongside the digitalisation of cinema and needs to continue to take place! In moving away from the cave, we have stopped viewing spectacle content on a screen, and we now experience and interact with it via an interface. If there is a great deal of neurobiological participation happening on the spectators part, then perhaps this offers a more accurate way to talk about the process by which the spectator interfaces with any type of film spectacle. While this section can not hope to provide many answers to the questions it has raised, one obvious conclusion should be apparent - all these diverging means of experiencing the world will continue to have huge implications on our ways of being in the world.

137

Appendix J

The Overview Effect

Hypercinemas Profound Implications for Humanity

When you consider that a system equivalent to hypercinema can fool the human neurobiological system into thinking it is sensing reality, then the implications of the following statement by Douglas Trumbull becomes all the more powerful:

Im a member of a new group called the Overview Institute [2012] theres a thing called the Overview Effect, its a book written by a man named Frank White, who was interviewing astronauts coming back to Earth their minds were expanded by looking at the Earth from Space. And they said, Woah, were on this planet thats in the middle of nowhere, and its very precious, and its very beautiful so why are we having all these wars; why do we have borders; why do we fight over everything? They just came back with this changed view of Mankind, of Earth as an issue.

And Edgar Mitchell, who was one of the Apollo astronauts, formed this thing called the Noetics Institute [2013], and hes on the Board of the Overview Institute. Our objective is to see if we can give people that kind of experience a profound experience of our planet as a precious jewel, in the void and see if that will help change peoples political views, or environmental views, or help solve global warming, or all the other things that were doing to basically use up this planet (cited in Hannermann, 2012).

138

Figure 66. Imagine being able to view/sense the Earth in a hypercinema installation with the same impression and level of detail as reality itself, as if you were actually looking at the planet in the void of space. Surely, seeing the whole of your everyday reality suspended in a single sphere would have fundamentally profound and life-changing implications on your ways of being after that experience: "When we look down at the earth from space, we see this amazing, indescribably beautiful planet. It looks like a living, breathing organism. But it also, at the same time, looks extremely fragile (Garan in Bhasin, 2013).

139

Bibliography

Allen, R. (1997) Projecting Illusion: Film Spectatorship and the Impression of Reality. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Abel, R., Acland, C. R., Allen, R. C., Ambler, C., Butsch, R., Biltereyst, D., Doherty, T., Gaines, J. M., Glancy, M., Gurata, A., Jancovich, M., Klenotic, J., Klinger, B., Kuhn, A., Lindvall, T., Maltby, R., McKenna, C. J., Morey, A., Sedgwick, J., Stokes, M., Thissen, J., Waller, G. A., Wasson, H. (2008) Going to the Movies: Hollywood and The Social Experience of Cinema. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.

Ascher, S. and Pincus, E. (2007) The Filmmakers Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide for the Digital Age. New York: PLUME.

Balcerzak, S. Cagle, C. Church, D. Fellemen, S. Martin, A. Morrison, J. McKim, K. Russell, C. Pigeon, T. Spence, S. Sperb, J. Singh, G. (2012) Cinephilia in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Film, Pleasure, and Digital Culture, Volume 2. New York: Columbia University Press.

BBC News. (2013) Subconscious cinema - film endings changed by your mood [online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22436014 [accessed 08/05/2013].

Berardinelli, J. (2012) The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey: A Movie Review [online]. Available from: http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=2563 [Accessed 03/04/2012].

140

Berenstein, R. J. Clover, C. J. Crary, J. Friedberg, A. Gunning, T. Hansen, M. Mayne, J. Schwartz, V. R. Sobchack, V. C. Williams, L. (1994) Viewing Positions: Ways of Seeing Film. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

Berger, J. (1972) Ways of Seeing. London: Penguin.

Bhasin, K. (2013) Astronauts Describe The 'Overview Effect' That Transformed Their Minds After Seeing Earth From Space [online]. Available from: http://www.businessinsider.com/astronauts-overview-effect-2013-1 [accessed 06/05/2013].

Bordwell, D. (2009) Observations on film art: Who will watch the movie watchers? [online]. Available from: http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2009/06/16/who-will-watch-themovie-watchers/ [accessed 02/03/2013].

Bordwell, D. (2012) The Viewers Share: Models of Mind in Explaining Film [online]. Available from: http://www.davidbordwell.net/essays/viewersshare.php [accessed 03/03/2013].

Crabbe, L. (2013) You'll have to wait a "year-ish" for Google Glass [online]. Available from: http://connect.dpreview.com/post/1501287165/google-glass-wait [accessed 03/05/2013].

Dieter, M., Erinc, S., Knoller, M., Lancel, K., Lino, J. A., Prez, L., Salem, B., Shanken, E., Simons, J., Yomamoto-Masson, N. (2010) Interface Studies [online]. Available from: http://www.interfacestudies.org/index.html [accessed 26/05/2013].

141

Dvorsky, G. (2012) U.S. spy agency predicts a very transhuman future by 2030 [online]. Available from: http://io9.com/5967896/us-spy-agency-predicts-a-very-transhuman-futureby-2030 [accessed 16/12/2012].

Ebert, R. (2009) That's not the IMAX I grew up with [online]. Available from: http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/thats-not-the-imax-i-grew-up-with [accessed 02/05/2013].

Elsaesser, T. and Hagener, M. (2012) Film Theory: An Introduction Through the Senses. New York: Routledge.

Enk, B. (2013) Star Trek Advance Ticket Sales Crash IMAX Website [online]. Available from: http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/star-trek-advance-ticket-sales-crash-imaxwebsite-180938545.html [Accessed 14/04/2013].

Foer, J. (2011) Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything. London: Penguin.

Frampton, D. (2006) Filmosophy. London: Wallflower Press.

Frequencynews. (2010) New Report on Consumer Smartphone Use [online]. Available from: http://www.frequencynews.com/wordpress/general-discussion/new-report-on-consumersmartphone-use/ [accessed 10/05/2013].

Fujifilm. (2013) Discontinuation of Motion Picture Film production [online]. Available from: http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n130402.html [accessed 17/04/2013]. 142

Gerrold, D. (2010) Future Tense: The Showscan Insight [online]. Available from: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/columns/future_tense_showscan_insight [accessed 07/03/2013].

Gilchrist, T. (2012) VES Honoree and Effects Guru Douglas Trumbull on How Technology, Spectacle Can Rescue Hollywood [online]. Available from: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/risky-business/ves-douglas-trumbull-peter-jacksonjames-cameron-2001-kubrick-288290 [Accessed 16/03/2013].

Giardina, C. (2012) The Hollywood Reporter: SMPTE 2012: Douglas Trumbull Urges 'Experience-Creating' Cinema [online]. Available from: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/smpte-2012-douglas-trumbull-urges-381978 [accessed 20/04/2013].

Giardina, C. (2013) CinemaCon: 4DX Targeting U.S. Market [online]. Available from: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/cinemacon-4dx-targeting-us-market442301 [accessed 18/04/2013].

Hall, P. (2013) The Last Days of Cinerama [online]. Available from: http://www.filmthreat.com/reviews/63673/ [accessed 07/03/2013].

Helms, H. (2008) "This Is. . . . . . Cinerama!!" [online]. Available from: http://harryhelmsblog.blogspot.co.uk/2008/10/this-is-cinerama.html [accessed 04/03/2013].

HFRmovies. (2013) hfrmovies.com [online]. Available from: http://hfrmovies.com./ 143

[accessed 07/03/2013].

Hurley, D. (2011) Your Backup Brain [online]. Available from: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201110/your-backup-brain?page=2 [accessed 17/02/2013].

IMAX. (2013a) Theatre Geometry [online]. Available from: http://www.imax.com/about/experience/geometry/ [accessed 26/03/2013].

Institute of Noetic Sciences. (2013) noetic.org [online]. Available from: http://noetic.org/ [accessed 25/05/2013].

Jancovich, M., Faire, L., Stubbings, S. (2003) The Place of the Audience. London: British Film Institute.

Kelly, S (2012) Going to the cinema: does this rant against Odeon strike a chord? [online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/30/cinema-odeonrant [accessed 06/05/2013].

Kermode, M. (2010) Martin Scorsese: '3D is liberating. Every shot is rethinking cinema' [online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/nov/21/martin-scorsese3d-interview-kermode [accessed 23/04/2013].

Kermode, M. (2012a) The Good, The Bad and the Multiplex. London: Random House Books.

144

Kermode, M. (2012b) Picturehouse bought by Cineworld [online]. Available from: https://twitter.com/KermodeMovie/status/276633195468951552 [Accessed 09/04/2013].

Kimble, G. (2002) How The West Was Won in Cinerama [online]. Available from: http://www.in70mm.com/news/2002/west/ [accessed 27/03/2013].

Klinger, B. (2006) Beyond the Multiplex: Cinema, New Technologies, and The Home. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kollowe, J. (2012) Cineworld buys Picturehouse [online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/dec/06/cineworld-buys-picturehouse [accessed 10/03/2013].

Kosner, A.W. (2013) The Reason Why Many Found The Hobbit At 48 FPS An Unexpectedly Painful Journey [online]. Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2013/01/11/the-reason-why-many-foundthe-hobbit-at-48-fps-an-unexpectedly-painful-journey/ [accessed 17/03/2013].

Leopold, T. (2013) Special-effects master pushes new movie format [online]. Available from: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/13/tech/innovation/douglas-trumbull-interview [accessed 09/05/2013].

Life magazine. (1952) The biggest new entertainment event of the year. Issue and page number unknown (see Illustration Sources).

145

Long, T. (2013) Quartet Reviews [online]. Available from: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/quartet_2012/reviews/ [accessed 29/04/2013].

Lowe, M. (2013) IMAX talks the future of cinema, laser projection, doubling up 4K, camera tech and more [online]. Available from: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/50430/imaxinterview-future-cinema-brian-bonnick [accessed 12/04/2013].

Macaulay, S. (2013) Jason Brush and Michel Reilhac Discuss the Second Screen and New Interactive Cinema at SXSW [online]. Available from: http://networkedblogs.com/JHr61 [accessed 29/03/2013].

Marshall, B. (2013) How IMAX Works [online]. Available from: http://www.howstuffworks.com/imax1.htm [accessed 19/04/2013].

Mayne, J. (1993) Cinema and Spectatorship. London: Routledge.

McCraty, R. (2003) The Energetic Heart: Bioelectrical Interactions Within and Between People. United States of America: Institute of HeartMath. Available from: http://www.ssporer.com/downloads/Energetic_Heart.pdf [e-book accessed 16/12/2012].

McGowan, T. (2007) The Real Gaze: Film Theory after Lacan. New York: State University of New York Press, Albany.

Mosley, M. (2012) The second brain in our stomachs [online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18779997 [accessed 18/01/2013].

146

Mullarkey, J. (2009) Refractions of Reality: Philosophy and the Moving Image. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian.

National Intelligent Council, U.S.A. (2012) Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds. A publication of the National Intelligence Council [online]. Available from: http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/GlobalTrends_2030.pdf [e-book accessed 04/01/2013].

NBC News. (2013) What a difference 8 years makes: St. Peter's Square in 2005 and yesterday [online]. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=555336131153088&set=a.162132393806799. 30950.155869377766434&type=1&theater [accessed 07/03/2013].

Nadaner, D. (1984) Film and Cognition: A Critical Review of Current Theory. Studies in Art Education, 25 (2), pp.121-129 [online]. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1320950 [accessed 28/11/2012].

Neish, S. (undated) Thinking outside the D-Box BFF goes four-dimensional [online]. Available from: http://bestforfilm.com/film-blog/thinking-outside-the-d-box-bff-goes-fourdimensional/ [accessed 14/04/2013].

OConnell, S. (2012) Science Explains Why The Hobbit Looks Weird In 48 Frames Per Second [online]. Available from: http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Science-Explains-Why-HobbitLooks-Weird-48-Frames-Per-Second-34673.html [Accessed 06/01/2013].

147

OKeeffe, A. (2012) The Future of Film at Dublins New Odeon Cinema [online]. Available from: http://anthonyokeeffe.com/2012/05/the-future-of-film-at-dublins-new-odeoncinema/ [accessed 14/04/2013].

Odeon. (2012) Odeon isense [online]. Available from: http://www.odeon.co.uk/fanatic/isense [accessed 01/03/2013].

Overview Institute, The. (2012) overviewinstitute.org [online]. Available from: http://www.overviewinstitute.org/ [accessed 27/05/2013].

Oxford Dictionaries (2013) Definition of gaze [online]. Available from: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/gaze?q=gaze [accessed 03/02/2013].

Perez, S. (2012) 85 Percent Of Tablet And Smartphone Owners Use Devices As Second Screen Monthly, 40 Percent Do So Daily [online]. Available from: http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/05/nielsen-85-percent-of-tablet-and-smartphone-ownersuse-devices-as-second-screen-monthly-40-percent-do-so-daily/ [accessed 10/05/2013].

Picturehouse. (2009) Picturehouse Company Profile [online]. Available from: http://corporate.picturehouses.co.uk/company-profile/ [Accessed 09/04/2013].

Pierrot, J. (2012) Good News for Picturehouse Cinemas [online]. Available from: http://picturehouseblog.co.uk/2012/12/06/good-news-for-picturehouse-cinemas/ [accessed 10/03/2013].

148

Photoplay Magazine (1929) The Microphone The Terror of the Studios. Photoplay, December, front cover referenced (see Illustration Sources).

Photoplay Magazine (1929) The Film of the Future. Photoplay, December, page unknown (see Illustration Sources).

Plato. Lee, D ed. (2003) The Republic. 4th Edition. London: Penguin.

Pledger, M. (2012) Matt Pledger Complaint [online]. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/ODEON/posts/523396924342167 [06/05/2013].

Plunkett, J. (2013) Doctor Who goes 3D for 50th birthday [online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2013/feb/11/doctor-who-3d-50th-birthday [accessed 29/02/2013].

RED (2013) RED DRAGON BEGINS NOW [Online] available from: http://www.red.com/news/red-dragon-begins-now [Accessed 12/04/2013].

Salem, M. O. (2007) The Heart, Mind and Spirit. London: Royal College of Psychiatrists [online]. Available from: http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Heart,%20Mind%20and%20Spirit%20%20Mohamed%20Sale m.pdf [accessed 15/03/2013].

Sciretta, P. (2007) Back to The Futures Last Ride [online]. Available from: http://www.slashfilm.com/back-to-the-futures-last-ride/ [accessed 10/05/2013].

149

Sciretta, P. (2008) How The Dark Knight Went IMAX [online]. Available from: http://www.slashfilm.com/how-the-dark-knight-went-imax/ [accessed 13/04/2013].

Scorsese, M. (undated) The Film Foundation: Filmmakers for Film Preservation [online]. Available from: http://www.filmfoundation.org/common/11004/default.cfm?clientID=11004&thispage=homepage [accessed 10/05/2013].

Saper, C. (1991) A Nervous Theory: The Troubling Gaze of Psychoanalysis in Media Studies. Diacritics, 21 (4), pp.32-52 [online]. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/465375 [accessed 01/12/2012].

Seitz, M. Z. (2011) R.I.P., the movie camera: 1888-2011 [online]. Available from: http://www.salon.com/2011/10/13/r_i_p_the_movie_camera_1888_2011/singleton/ [accessed 03/04/2013].

Sharp, J. (2012) 4DX: Here come the feelies [online]. Available from: http://www.bfi.org.uk/news/sightsound/4dx-here-come-feelies [accessed 16/01/2013].

Sobchack, V.C. (1992) The Address of the Eye: A Phenomenology of Film Experience. Princton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Solis, B. (2012) The IMAX experience [online]. Available from: http://www.washtenawvoice.com/2012/05/the-imax-experience/ [accessed 01/05/2013].

150

Steigbigel, M. (2012) Visionary Filmmaker & Inventor Douglas Trumbull Talks The Hobbit and his Latest Incredible Invention [online]. Available from: http://www.thecredits.org/2012/12/we-speak-with-visionary-filmmaker-inventor-douglasstrumbull-aboutthe-hobbit-his-work-with-kubrick-spielberg-and-the-future-of-filmmaking/ [Accessed 31/03/2013].

Than, K. (2012) World's Oldest Cave Art FoundMade by Neanderthals? [online]. Available from: http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cavepaintings-spain-science-pike/ [accessed 03/05/2013].

Thomas, N. (2013) Cineworld posts blockbuster profits [online]. Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/leisure/9916415/Ci neworld-posts-blockbuster-profits.html [accessed 27/05/2013].

Tobin, L. (2012) Cineworld snaps up Picturehouse [online]. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/cineworld-snaps-up-picturehouse8390782.html [Accessed 09/04/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2010) Douglas Trumbull.com [online]. Available from: http://douglastrumbull.com/ [accessed 10/04/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2012g) Douglas Trumbull - A Conversation [online]. Available from: http://www.in70mm.com/news/2012/trumbull_interview/index.htm [accessed 05/04/2013].

151

Wilson, M. (2009) How Regular Movies Become IMAX Films [online]. Available from: http://gizmodo.com/5250780/how-regular-movies-become-imax-films [Accessed 23/01/2013].

Vanderhoef, J. (2013) Things to Know about IMAX [online]. Available from: http://www.carseywolf.ucsb.edu/mip/blog/things-know-about-imax [Accessed 23/03/2013].

Variety. (2012) Trumbull lights up Hypercinema [online]. Available from: http://variety.com/2012/digital/news/trumbull-lights-up-hypercinema-1118050369/ [Accessed 14/02/2013].

Voss, C. (2011) Film Experience and the Formation of Illusion: The Spectator as Surrogate Body for the Cinema. Cinema Journal, 55 (4), pp.136-150 [online]. Available from: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/cinema_journal/summary/v050/50.4.voss.html [accessed 04/12/2012].

Young, G. (2012) IMAX vs isense: The eye-popping, boneshaking future of cinema in Birmingham? [online]. Available from: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/whatson/films/imax-and-isense-square-up-in-birmingham-268777 [accessed 13/04/2013].

152

Discography

Mark Kermode and Simon Mayos Film Reviews: 22/03/2013: Danny Boyle (2013); hosted by Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/kermode [accessed 24/03/2013].

Night Waves: 14/02/2013: Did we notice the death of celluloid cinema? (2013); hosted by Matthew Sweet [online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0153csp [accessed 21/04/2013].

The Film Programme: 01/12/2011: Martin Scorsese on Hugo and the future of cinema (2011); hosted by Francine Stock [online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b017mwrn [accessed 27/03/2013].

The Film Programme: 03/01/2013: The Grey Pound (2013a); hosted by Francine Stock [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006r5jt/broadcasts/2013/03 [accessed 06/01/2013].

The Film Programme: 21/03/2013: In the House, Point Blank, Compliance (2013b); hosted by Francine Stock [online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r9sl5 [accessed 25/03/2013].

153

Filmography

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968); directed by Stanley Kubrick. 141 minutes. USA and UK: Stanley Kubrick Productions and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM).

Animal Farm (2014); directed by Andy Serkis. Duration unknown. Production companies unknown. Project in development.

Anon. (2010) Audience Testimonials of the IMAX Experience [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8TzXQyn5Z8 [accessed 27/04/2013].

A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese through American Movies (1995); directed by Martin Scorsese and Michael Henry Wilson. 225 minutes. United Kingdom: British Film Institute, Miramax Films [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0yuKp55cuw&list=PL7K7UEvDonQ0Y_f0jnBNZMo43K YjXz5lP [accessed 23/02/2013].

Arrival of a Train at the Station (1896); directed by Auguste Lumire and Louis Lumire. 1 minute. France: Lumire.

Avatar (2009); directed by James Cameron. 162 minutes. USA and UK: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Lightstorm Entertainment in association with Dune Entertainment and Ingenious Film Partners.

154

Back to the Black Lagoon: A Creature Chronicle. (2000) DVD; directed by David J. Skal. 40 minutes. USA: Universal Studios and Universal Home Video (2004).

BBC Click (2012) Will 8K be the ultimate TV screen? [online]. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/9774380.stm [accessed 17/12/2012].

Berberian Sound Studio (2012) Blu-ray; directed by Peter Strickland. 92 minutes. UK: Warp X, Illumination Films, the UK Film Council and Artificial Eye (2012).

Bowling, S. (2012) About Dolby Atmos [online]. Available from: https://vimeo.com/40699179 [accessed 20/12/2012].

Brainstorm (1983); directed by Douglas Trumbull. 106 minutes. USA: AJF Productions, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), SLM Entertainment and MGM/UA Entertainment Company.

Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2010); directed by Werner Herzog. 90 minutes. Canada, USA, France, Germany and UK: Creative Differences, History Films, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication, Arte France, Werner Herzog Filmproduktion and More4.

Cinerama Adventure (2002) DVD; directed by David Strohmaier. 93 minutes. USA: Warner Home Video and CA Productions in association with American Society of Cinematographers (ASC) and Cinerama Productions Corp (2008).

Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954); directed by Jack Arnold. 79 minutes. USA: Universal International Pictures and Universal Pictures.

155

Doctor Who: 50th Anniversary Special (2013); directed by Nick Hurran. 90 minutes. UK: BBC Wales, British Broadcasting Corporation.

Doctor Who: The Rings of Akhaten (2013); directed by Farren Blackburn. 44 minutes. UK: BBC Wales, British Broadcasting Corporation.

Hollywood: A Celebration of the American Silent Film, Episode 1: The Pioneers (1980a); Dir. Kevin Brownlow and David Gill. 60 minutes. United Kingdom: Thames Television [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e91G9aDyS_s [accessed 03/03/2013].

Hollywood: A Celebration of the American Silent Film, Episode 13: End of an Era (1980b); Dir. Kevin Brownlow and David Gill. 60 minutes. United Kingdom: Thames Television [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-MhhuP5EpI [accessed 03/03/2013].

How it Feels [through Glass] (2013) Google [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1uyQZNg2vE [accessed 29/04/2013].

How The West Was Won (1962); directed by John Ford, Henry Hathaway and George Marshall. 164 minutes. USA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Cinerama Productions Corporation and Cinerama Releasing Corporation.

Hugo (2011); directed by Martin Scorsese. 126 minutes. USA: GK Films and Infinitum Nihil and Paramount Pictures.

156

Interstellar (2014); directed by Christopher Nolan. Length to be confirmed (currently in preproduction). USA and UK: Lynda Obst Productions, Syncopy, Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros.

IMAX. (2013b) IMAX 101: Theatre Geometry [online]. Available from: http://www.imax.com/community/blog/imax-101-theatre-geometry-video/ [accessed 19/04/2013].

Jackson, P. (2012) Peter Jackson on 'The Hobbit' - Film 2012 - Episode 16 - BBC One [online]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypTiGpwhb7Q [accessed: 19/12/2012].

Kermode, M. (2012c) Kermode Uncut: Chain Reaction [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRX4qIPensk [accessed 09/04/2013].

Les Misrables (2012); directed by Tom Hooper. 158 minutes. USA and UK: Relativity Media, Working Title Films, Cameron Mackintosh Ltd. and Universal Pictures.

Life of Pi (2012); directed by Ang Lee. 127 minutes. USA: Ingenious Media, Haishang Films, Dune Entertainment and Fox 2000 Pictures.

Mackintosh, C. (2013) Les Miserables IMAX featurette (ODEON) [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cl4uE3rqnW8 [accessed 01/05/2013].

157

Master of Fantasy Douglas Trumbull (1998); directed by Lee Olson. 25 minute episodes. USA: The Sci-Fi Channel [online]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Q3B4aGrTY [accessed 10/05/2013].

Mendes, S. (2012) Skyfall IMAX Featurette #1 [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0oKwNXQRgM [accessed 14/03/2013].

Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol (2011); directed by Brad Bird. 133 minutes. USA: Skydance Productions, Bad Robot, Film Works, Skillking Films, TC Productions and Paramount Pictures.

New Magic (1983); directed by Douglas Trumbull. 23 minutes. USA and Canada: Showscan Film Corporation.

Paul Mertons Birth of Hollywood (2011); directed by Paul Merton. 180 minutes. UK: BBC Bristol.

Peep Show (2003 present); created by Andrew OConnor, Jesse Armstrong and Sam Bain. 24 minute episodes. UK: Objective Productions and Channel 4 Television Corporation.

Prometheus (2012); directed by Ridley Scott. 124 minutes. USA and UK: Dune Entertainment, Scott Free Productions, Brandywine Productions and Twentieth Century Fox.

Psycho (1960); directed by Alfred Hitchcock. 109 minutes. USA: Shamley Productions and Paramount Pictures. 158

Quartet (2013); directed by Dustin Hoffman. 98 minutes. UK: Headline Pictures, BBC Films, DCM Productions, Finola Dwyer Productions and Momentum Pictures. Rear Window (1954); directed by Alfred Hitchcock. 112 minutes. USA: Patron Inc. and Paramount Pictures.

Showscan Digital. (2010) Showscan Digital from Douglas Trumbull [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkWLZy7gbLg [accessed 11/05/2013].

Silent Running (1972); directed by Douglas Trumbull. 89 minutes. USA: Trumbull/Gruskoff Productions and Universal Pictures.

Shapiro, A. (2013) Tribeca's Future of Film Live: Making Motion Pictures with 4K [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c65SrnrttUo [accessed 04/05/2013].

Skyfall (2012); directed by Sam Mendes. 143 minutes. UK: EON Productions, Danjaq, MetroGoldwyn-Mayer (MGM) and Sony Pictures International.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013); directed by J.J. Abrams. 132 minutes. UK: Skydance Productions, Bad Robot and Paramount Pictures.

The Dark Knight (2008); directed by Christopher Nolan. 152 minutes. USA and UK: Legendary Pictures, Syncopy, DC Comics and Warner Bros.

159

The Dark Knight Rises (2012); directed by Christopher Nolan. 165 minutes. USA and UK: Legendary Pictures, Syncopy, DC Entertainment and Warner Bros.

The Dawn of Sound: How Movies Learned to Talk (2007); directed by Robert Bader and Tim Prokop. 85 minutes. USA: Warner Bros. Entertainment, Sparkhill Production, Turner Entertainment and Warner Bros. Video (online). Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk7i07t8oqw [accessed 16/03/2013].

This is Cinerama (1952); directed by Merian C. Cooper and Gunther von Fritsch. 115 minutes. USA: Cinerama Productions Corporation and Cinerama Releasing Corporation.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012); directed by Peter Jackson. 169 minutes. USA and New Zealand: New Line Cinema, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Warner Bros. and WingNut Films.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013); Francis Lawrence. Length to be confirmed (currently in postproduction). USA: Color Force and Lionsgate.

The Jazz Singer (1927); directed by Alan Crosland. 88 minutes. USA: Warner Bros.

The Making of Berberian Sound Studio (2012) Blu-ray; directed by Anon. 46 minutes. UK: Warp X, Illumination Films, the UK Film Council and Artificial Eye (2012).

The Master (2012); directed by Paul Thomas Anderson. 144 minutes. USA: The Weinstein Company, Ghoulardi Film Company and Annapurna Pictures.

160

The Story of Film: An Odyssey (2011); directed by Mark Cousins. 900 minutes. UK: Hopscotch Films and More4 (2012).

The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (1962); directed by Henry Levin and George Pal. 135 minutes. USA: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Cinerama Productions Corporation and Cinerama Releasing Corporation.

Transformers 4 (2014); directed by Michael Bay. Length to be confirmed (currently in production). USA: China Movie Channel, DreamWorks, Hasbro, Jiaflix Enterprises, Di Bonaventura Pictures and Paramount Pictures.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009); directed by Michael Bay. 150 minutes. USA: DreamWorks, Paramount Pictures, Hasbro and Di Bonaventura Pictures.

Trumbull, D. (2012a) The Future of Cinema with Douglas Trumbull Part 1 Aint it Cool News with Harry Knowles [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpZd-UoYWCY [accessed 05/03/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2012b) The Future of Cinema with Douglas Trumbull Part 2 Aint it Cool News with Harry Knowles [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs_ILzu1ny [accessed 05/03/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2012c) Douglas Trumbull - A Conversation [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL42O6xiuc4 [accessed 12/03/2013].

161

Trumbull, D. (2012d) Interview | Douglas Trumbull | FMX 2012 [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEwnWajSMK8 [accessed 22/04/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2012e) Berkshire International Film Festival and Filmmaker, Douglas Trumbull, on 4D and New Cinema [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kFA4MCm8MM [09/05/2013].

Trumbull, D. (2012f) Hypnotic & Magical Aint it Cool News with Harry Knowles [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kFA4MCm8MM [accessed 09/05/2013].

Watzke, H. (2010) TED Talks: Heribert Watzke: The brain in your gut [online]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkeBjP_9ZR4 [accessed 15/03/2013].

Ways of Seeing (1972); directed by Mike Dibb. 120 minutes. UK: British Broadcasting Corporation [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUyI_LdXRnI&list=PL872405DBCBDFF922 [accessed 14/01/2013].

162

Illustration Sources

Figure 1: An illustration of Platos simile of the cave [online]. Available from: http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01538e2889c2970b-800wi [accessed 14/03/2013].

Figure 2: A poster for Cave of Forgotten Dreams (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://cdn.mos.totalfilm.com/images/c/cave-of-forgotten-dreams-exclusive-quad-poster00-470-75.jpg [accessed 17/03/2013].

Figure 3: The eight-legged bison. A screen capture from Cave of Forgotten Dreams (see Filmography). This screen capture was created on my iPad.

Figure 4: Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) looks through his peep hole. A screen capture from Psycho (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~daorgero/images/psycho.jpg [accessed 04/03/2013].

Figure 5: John Berger demonstrates perspective. A screen capture Ways of Seeing (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pDE4VX_9Kk [accessed 15/03/2013].

Figure 6: Jefferies (James Stewart) gazes at Lisa (Grace Kelly). A publicity photograph for Rear Window (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0IQtUA4Hyww/TPJynwwSKgI/AAAAAAAAAU0/h4GKMXA1ILs/s4 00/rear%252Bwindow.jpg [accessed 23/03/2013]. 163

Figure 7: Dolby Atmos auditorium layout schematic [online]. Available from: http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&tbo=d&biw=1280&bih=699&tbm=is ch&tbnid=y2Gky7n0SSqedM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dolby.com/us/en/consumer/technolo gy/movie/dolby-atmosdetails.html&docid=uj_ZYhHwzGi_xM&imgurl=http://www.dolby.com/uploadedImages/As sets/US/Img/Cinema/Dolby_Atmos_Theatre_Configuration.gif&w=650&h=763&ei=eBzlUNu cB8_Y0QX204DgBQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=389&vpy=255&dur=2558&hovh=243&hovw=2 07&tx=109&ty=94&sig=106453598564333896046&page=1&tbnh=139&tbnw=115&start=0 &ndsp=24&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:0,i:109 [accessed 16/12/2012].

Figure 8: The Brain in your gut diagram [online]. Available from: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/evl1gDPR3iY/TVmTC4k1htI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/2Z8W250NNis/s1600/gut.large.jpg [accessed 08/02/2013].

Figure 9: An Illustration of 24 frames a second. A screen capture from a demonstration of Showscan Digital (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkWLZy7gbLg [accessed 26/02/2013].

Figure 10: The higher frame rate FAQ sheet for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://media2.firstshowing.net/firstshowing/img5/HobbitHFRFAQSheetFUllsize599-01.jpg [accessed 27/12/2012].

164

Figure 11: An Illustration demonstrating the 3D stereoscopic effect, featuring Creature from the Black Lagoon (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sysimages/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2010/9/1/1283365897216/3D-FILMS-006.jpg [accessed 18/03/2013].

Figure 12: Douglas Trumbull directing an experimental test shoot [online]. Available from: http://digitalcinemasymposium.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/dt-directs-1a2.jpg [accessed 22/04/2013].

Figure 13: An Illustration demonstrating the enormity of Cinerama, from an edition of Life Magazine (see Bibliography) [online]. Available from: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_79TdQF9qAm4/R9KLnMkJiYI/AAAAAAAAAPE/LolxtFIBwt4/s640/ Mass+-+Boston+-+I+Was+In+Cinerama!.jpg [accessed 29/05/2013].

Figure 14: Film format and screen size comparisons. A diagram demonstrating the differences between 70mm IMAX, conventional 70mm and 35mm [online]. Available from: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_eb8WRKxaHbE/TQzattyVwFI/AAAAAAAAABg/J9zNQuyJOI0/s160 0/imax_002.jpg [accessed 04/03/2013].

Figure 15: IMAX is believing. A photograph of audience members in front of an IMAX screen [online]. Available from: https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-akash3/541929_10151379966776639_1171262204_n.png [accessed 26/01/2013].

Figure 16: The number of films released in IMAX venues between 2009 and 2012 [online]. Available from: https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-akprn1/47683_10151387031121639_358116167_n.jpg [accessed 28/12/2012]. 165

Figure 17: The IMAX poster for The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.scifinow.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/darkknightpostert752012.jpg [accessed 27/05/2013].

Figure 18: The number of IMAX venues worldwide between 2008 and 2012 [online]. Available from: https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-aksnc7/578011_10151392236076639_686285762_n.jpg [accessed 28/12/2012].

Figure 19: Take in a Movie or get taken into one. IMAX is believing advertisement poster [online]. Available from: https://encryptedtbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQssoDvfRbd4dwUxgsmk8YP5sZcyNZujAiXquA01IVHX9PJMDe [accessed 04/03/2013].

Figure 20: A photograph of an IMAX performance of The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sysimages/Film/Pix/pictures/2012/7/23/1343040706215/Imax-screening-of-The-Dar-008.jpg [accessed 29/12/2012].

Figure 21: A photograph of the auditorium of the BFI IMAX venue [online]. Available from: http://cdn.londonandpartners.com/asset/e050a52959f71947e94a338f5e40263c.jpg [accessed 13/04/2013].

Figure 22: A diagram demonstrating the peripheral visions role in the perception of motion [online]. Available from: http://static.imax.com/media/filebrowser/uploads/imax_101___theatre_005.jpeg [accessed 27/03/2013]. 166

Figure 23: A diagram demonstrating the different peripheral occupation range of IMAX and conventional cinema screens of IMAX and conventional cinema screens [online]. Available from: http://static.imax.com/media/filebrowser/uploads/imax_101___theatre_006.jpeg [accessed 27/03/2013].

Figure 24: A diagram demonstrating the human eyes rods and cones receptors and their role in the perception of peripheral vision [online]. Available from: http://www.imax.com/community/blog/imax-101-theatre-geometry-video/ [accessed 27/03/2013].

Figure 25: Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban) jump for their lives. A screen capture from the 9 minute IMAX preview of Star Trek Into Darkness (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xo4RhC564MA [accessed 25/05/2013].

Figure 26: A photograph of a Showscan installation venue [online]. Available from: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTE35F0Tm3WCXJhSJu6N6psLp4c0pi1aGaq_SubCYyeePPzRnnfQ [accessed 05/03/2013].

Figure 27: A photograph of the production of New Magic (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.in70mm.com/news/2012/trumbull_interview/images/new_magic_01.jpg [accessed 05/03/2013].

167

Figure 28: A poster for Brainstorm (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/85/MPW-42890 [accessed 06/03/2013].

Figure 29: A photograph demonstration of the in-ride experience of Back to the Future: The Ride [online]. Available from: http://ssheltonimages.com/img/43/434/Back_to_the_Future_The_Ride.jpg [accessed 28/04/2013].

Figure 30: Nancy (Rachel Blanchard) allures Jez (Robert Webb). A screen capture from an episode of Peep Show (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://i3.ytimg.com/vi/JQL0IWbNaWQ/hqdefault.jpg [accessed28/04/2013].

Figure 31: See a movie or be part of one. IMAX is believing advertisement poster [online]. Available from: https://www.empiretheatres.com/files/movies/2012/09/IMAX_Image2012.jpg [accessed 27/05/2013].

Figure 32: A hand print cave painting from the El Castillo cave in Spain [online]. Available from: http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/2012/06/120614-neanderthal-cavepaintings-spain-science-pike/# [accessed 09/05/2013].

Figure 33: Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) prepares for his ascent from the pit. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXxw-zXRqOs [accessed 26/04/2013].

168

Figure 34: A poster for Berberian Sound Studio (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sq79yEUFSA0/UDIo_V2ZeuI/AAAAAAAAAj4/ufyz35j8VE/s1600/berberiansoundstudio.jpeg [accessed 26/05/2013].

Figure 35: Bruce Wayne climbs up the cavern. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXxwzXRqOs [accessed 26/04/2013].

Figure 36: A poster for Silent Running (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: https://encryptedtbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSZmEJMEbEk_nM2maQO85nA6j1xnFBgyaqypTGT m6620a81SkHN [accessed 21/04/2013].

Figure 37: Bruce Wayne contemplates his leap. A publicity photograph for The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://images.fandango.com/MDCsite/images/featured/201211/Christian-Bale-in-TheDark-Knight-Rises.jpg [accessed 21/04/2013].

Figure 38: Bruce Wayne - risen from darkness. A screen capture from The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXxwzXRqOs [accessed 26/04/2013].

Figure 39: A photograph of the food and drink counter of a Vue cinema [online]. Available from: http://www.familycomms.com/site/wp-content/uploads/cinema-image1.jpg [accessed 11/03/2013].

169

Figure 40: The Microphone the Terror of the Studios, the cover of Photoplay (see Bibliography), December 1929 [online]. Available from: https://encryptedtbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSHAnxzzJ1jDVSZZewK7q6IiZ3XcoSuxI5duLTMNpX0 xNOffCWz [accessed 15/03/2013].

Figure 41: A screenshot of The Future of Film article from Photoplay (see Bibliography), December 1929 [online]. Available from: http://www.criticalflicker.org.uk/pages/grandeur.html [accessed 17/03/2013].

Figure 42: A 70mm advertisement for The Master (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: https://encryptedtbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR3RX2hpnWxb62ynwzjhUxOBhMz6RZEucQMMJR4 sOqzwndfcsV9 [accessed 17/03/2013].

Figure 43: A point of view roller coaster sequence from This is Cinerama (see Filmography). A smile box re-creation of what the 3-strip Cinerama version of This is Cinerama would have looked like in a Cinerama venue [online]. Available from: http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/Roller-coaster-400.jpg [accessed 27/05/2013].

Figure 44: A layout demonstration of the workings of a Cinerama theatre [online]. Available from: http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/Cinerama-setup-new600.jpg [accessed 27/05/2013].

Figure 45: Linus Rawlings (James Stewart) greets the native Americans. A smile box recreation of what the 3-strip Cinerama version of How The West Was Won (see Filmography) 170

would have looked like in a Cinerama venue [online]. Available from: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6qgeWVXWLfY/TH3ZtvAgUYI/AAAAAAAAA7A/A8gFuz6tMw4/s1 600/Cinerama.jpg [accessed 03/02/2013].

Figure 46: A diagram illustrating the parameters of different image resolutions [online]. Available from: http://www.nag.co.za/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/resolution_comparison_chart.jpg [accessed 13/03/2013].

Figure 47: A photograph of an 8K television display [online]. Available from: http://images.pcworld.com/images/article/2012/04/panasonic_145_tv-11353149.jpg [accessed 17/03/2013].

Figure 48: A photograph of The Little Theatre Cinema, Bath, UK [online]. Available from: http://www.cotswolds.info/images/Bath/buidings/little_theatre_cinema.jpg [accessed 22/03/2013].

Figure 49: A photograph of the city centre Cineworld, Glasgow, UK [online]. Available from: http://www.scottishcinemas.org.uk/glasgow/cineworld_06_1.jpg [accessed 24/03/2013].

Figure 50: A poster for Quartet (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQNeLDlOOZckrVnlwXu1xs9QGEWxKlb9Vnwur UeZKr2YQsTBnvOQw [accessed 25/03/2013].

Figure 51: A photograph of the Cineworld in Crawley, West Sussex, UK [online]. Available from:

171

http://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/webimage/1.4598384.1355837479!image/1588000340. jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_595/1588000340.jpg [accessed 24/03/2013]. Figure 52: A resolution comparison of LieMAX and IMAX [online]. Available from: http://www.metalsucks.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/IMAX-vs-LIEMAX.jpeg [accessed 26/04/2013].

Figure 53: An advertisement poster for Odeons isense [online]. Available from: http://dubbelin.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/seat-jpg.jpg [accessed 24/03/2013].

Figure 54: A photograph of a 4DX cinema entrance hall [online]. Available from: http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/image/4DX-2012-001-superheroes-launch.jpg [accessed 21/04/2013].

Figure 55: A conventional poster for The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/5299/thedarkknightrisesposte.jpg [28/04/2013].

Figure 56: The IMAX poster for The Dark Knight Rises (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.scifinow.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/darkknightpostert752012.jpg [accessed 28/04/2013].

Figure 57: A conventional poster for Skyfall (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/a_q_7l6Jrwo/UJe_KBnqJAI/AAAAAAAACMw/TNYk2Zkn_xU/s1600/Laying_Quad_SKYFALL.jp g [accessed 28/04/2013].

172

Figure 58: The IMAX poster for Skyfall (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/a_q_7l6Jrwo/UJe_KBnqJAI/AAAAAAAACMw/TNYk2Zkn_xU/s1600/Laying_Quad_SKYFALL.jp g [accessed 28/04/2013].

Figure 59: A conventional poster for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotosash3/p480x480/578587_10151214512681558_1487527690_n.jpg [accessed 28/04/2013].

Figure 60: One of four IMAX character posters for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.liveforfilms.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/11/Hobbit-Poster-Bilbo-IMAX.jpg [accessed 28/04/2013].

Figure 61: What a difference 8 years makes: St. Peter's Square in 2005 and yesterday (see Bibliography) [online]. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=555336131153088&set=a.162132393806799. 30950.155869377766434&type=1&theater [accessed 29/03/2013].

Figure 62: Netflix account homepage. Created from my own Netflix account and screen captured on my iPad.

Figure 63: Google Glass. A publicity photograph [online]. Available from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sysimages/Guardian/About/General/2013/3/6/1362575657501/Googles-Sergey-Brin-weari010.jpg [accessed 04/05/2013].

173

Figure 64: Google Glass technical schematic [online]. Available from: https://encryptedtbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRNa7cdNCVmxfWHHfe7no8Bb0t7KPHa6mJ9eVVjfE J9ZIAqozdL [accessed 10/05/2013].

Figure 65: Glass Glass - a users point of view. A screen capture from How it Feels [through Glass] (see Filmography) [online]. Available from: http://www.google.com/glass/start/howit-feels/

Figure 66: The blue Marble. A photograph that is currently the highest resolution image of the Earth [online]. Available from: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=57723 [accessed 24/05/2013].

174

Im a pioneer. Okay, thats my life, Ill just keep doing it until I do it (Douglas Trumbull, 2012h).

175