Abstract
The article is a theoretical proposal which aims to create an alternative framework for mapping postclassical cinema. This framework is based on establishing various modes of relations between narration and spectacle, especially those represented by mind-game films and post-plot films. Instead of considering narration and spectacle as opposition, I suggest redescribing their complementary dynamics. I argue that there is visible feedback between mind-game films and the cinema of digital attractions, which I see as complementary processes of making “spectacular mind games” and “mind-gaming the spectacles”. The article contains an analysis of similar types of cinematic experiences delivered by “narration” and “attractions” and indicates the mutual influences between these two phenomena. Both narration and attraction may bring similar, affective sensations: the notion of shock and dissonance, discomfort, astonishment, kinesthetic impulse or cognitive stimulation.
 As for the article’s conclusion: postclassical cinema variously reshapes the distribution of narration and attraction. Mind-game films are becoming cinematic spectacles. On the other hand, more and more “post-plot” blockbusters are introducing the “mind-gaming the spectacle” strategy, and are engaging viewers with “cognitive” attractions as well.
Highlights
I argue that there is visible feedback between mind-game films and the cinema of digital attractions, which I see as complementary processes of making “spectacular mind games” and “mind-gaming the spectacles”
Mind-game films have already been described in the context of both art and classical narration (Kiss, Willemsen 2017)
The affective tension and perverse pleasure of cognitive insecurity that strike us during this type of ambiguous scene are important cinematic experiences and should not be marginalized as this is the very moment when mind-game films’ “impact really starts as they attach themselves to spectators, taking hold of their minds and entering their fantasies (Elsaesser, Hagener, p. 151)
Summary
Thomas Elsaesser considers mind-game films as those which play games with both the characters and the viewers, while Warren Buckland defines puzzle films in narratological categories, underlining their complex or complicated storytelling structure. The prominent idea of contemporary narrative was introduced by David Bordwell In his view, action and blockbuster film narration is not disturbed by visual attractions but are even more fluent. Post-Millennial cinema “trades visual intelligibility for sensual overload”, and in consequence “the new action films are fast, florid, volatile audiovisual war zones” (Stork) In this view, attraction becomes distraction – narration becomes disorientation. Viewers’ experiences related to disorientation, distraction or discomfort (perverse pleasures of film) lead us towards mind-game films (Elsaesser 2009) or puzzle films (Buckland 2009) This is why I would like to consider attraction as a digitally designed element of the cinematic spectacle, and as a narrative defamiliarization (Shklovskij)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
