CULTURE

Why Movies Don’t Feel Real Anymore: A Close Look at Changing Filmmaking Techniques


Any­one who keeps an eye on Hol­ly­wood knows — indeed, has been ever more fre­quent­ly and anx­ious­ly informed — that the the­ater busi­ness is in trou­ble. If few­er of us than ever have been going out to the movies, one rea­son must have to do with the easy avail­abil­i­ty of home stream­ing, to say noth­ing of all the pro­lif­er­at­ing dig­i­tal dis­trac­tions pre­ci­sion-engi­neered to cap­ture our atten­tion. But could it also have to do with a change in the pic­tures them­selves? With more than two mil­lion views racked up in just four days, the new Like Sto­ries of Old video essay above ven­tures an expla­na­tion as to “Why Movies Just Don’t Feel ‘Real’ Any­more.”

In recent years, even long, colos­sal­ly bud­get­ed, and cease­less­ly mar­ket­ed spec­ta­cles feel strange­ly insub­stan­tial on any screen, big or small. The video’s cre­ator Tom van der Lin­den points to a vari­ety of fac­tors, begin­ning with a wors­en­ing lack of cor­re­spon­dence between the cin­e­mat­ic image and our per­cep­tion of real­i­ty.

One clear­ly — or rather, read­i­ly — notice­able con­tribut­ing trend is the preva­lence of shal­low focus, which keeps the char­ac­ters in the fore­ground sharp but lets all the details of the back­ground go blur­ry: not the way we see the real world, unless we mis­place our glass­es. Because we live in deep focus, deep focus cin­e­matog­ra­phy feels more real to us.

Of course, not every movie can be Lawrence of Ara­bia. But there was a time when prac­ti­cal­ly all of them did deliv­er what’s called “hap­tic visu­al­i­ty,” the word hap­tic relat­ing to the con­cept of our sense of touch. Old­er films have a tan­gi­bil­i­ty about them in large part because the film­mak­ers had no choice: work­ing only or pri­mar­i­ly with ana­log tools, they could only do so much to detach images from our phys­i­cal expe­ri­ence. Dig­i­tal pho­tog­ra­phy, post-pro­duc­tion CGI, and now the open abyss of AI have made any­thing tech­ni­cal­ly pos­si­ble, though as van der Lin­den under­scores, those tech­nolo­gies by them­selves don’t guar­an­tee that the result­ing movie won’t feel real. Ulti­mate­ly, unre­al­i­ty is a choice, and one we movie­go­ers should hope the indus­try will stop mak­ing — if not for our sat­is­fac­tion, then for its own sur­vival.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Dark Knight: Anato­my of a Flawed Action Scene

The Impor­tance of Film Edit­ing Demon­strat­ed by the Bad Edit­ing of Major Films: Bohemi­an Rhap­sody, Sui­cide Squad & More

Why Mar­vel and Oth­er Hol­ly­wood Films Have Such Bland Music: Every Frame a Paint­ing Explains the Per­ils of the “Temp Score”

Why We All Need Sub­ti­tles Now

Why Do Wes Ander­son Movies Look Like That?

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.





Source link

MarylandDigitalNews.com