About Archives RSS 📑(links)

[…] In spite of film having already ostentatiously won the competition for biggest screen, it still deems it necessary to set rules to avoid distraction from other durational devices; film’s claims on space have to be aggressively defended because it has lost its monopoly on time. More precisely, cinema has lost its monopoly over the dominating inner-time that the screen acts as a conduit for. Who does not know the experience of leaving the cinema at night with the surreal feeling that the film you have just seen continues in reality? The playhead moves about on its own. The streets at night feel like you are still in the cinema. Usually, this feeling lasts no longer than a few minutes, but it is perhaps one of the strongest impacts that a film can have on our perception of ourselves in the outside world. It is not just that this reality is augmented by the afterimage, it is as if the film’s world continues despite the timeline being over. If we accept that the ultimate experience of an artwork is in the eye of the beholder, then this strange afterimage must be, in some way, accepted as part of the artwork, part of the film — with a still-moving playhead running into the hors-temps or off-time. After some minutes, reality prevails; the film’s artificial Now is slowly fading into the backdrop. The playhead evaporates and disappears. This is something that cinema can do but the interface cannot, at least outside of VR. The duration of the cinematic experience, and its life-likeness to the world outside, are feeding into a continuum. […]”

Metahaven, Digital Tarkvosky, 2018.

  #film     #time     #digital     #cinema  

← Next post    ·    Previous post →