Visual(film-making)-Audio-Entertainment Industry

Cinema

The daddy of them All

Spawned Bastard Children

Television           YouTube        Hulu/NetFlix

                Television is the most           Casual Recreational     Precriber service

                addictive media provider.      user.

Crack-Cocaine    Marijuana      Oxycontin 

Is the most addictive drug     Recreational use          Prescription Drug  

Cinema

The daddy of them All

Heroin

One of the most deadliest Drugs

Choose your Drug of Choice

They are all addictive

Phase 1

             Television

             Crack-Cocaine; A euphoric feeling. Inflated sense of self and increased self-importance. Sense of escaping reality.  Intense burst of energy. Increased focus.

Phase 2

             YouTube

             Marijuana: Many people experience a pleasant euphoria and sense of relaxation. Other common effects, which may vary dramatically among different people, include heightened sensory perception (e.g., brighter colors), altered perception of time. Others some people experience anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.

Phase 3

             Hulu/Netflix

             Oxycontin: Extreme relaxation. Reduced anxiety. Pain relief. Sedation, Drowsiness

Phase 4

              Cinema

              Heroin: Droopy appearance, as if extremities are heavy, Delusions, Hallucinations, pupils will be constricted

Phase 5

              Euphemism: We should veer 180 degrees from what we structured and substitute it with a milder, indirect, or vague style and expression, i.e. a contrast. For example, the subject has a moment of self-reflection, he no longer feels seriously addicted. As a result of this self-reflection he goes off to rediscover what about cinema he loved. He now feels more deeply and sees more deeply than ever before. He seeks to capture untutored vision, i.e. a beginner’s vision; sense of space and light unspoiled by knowledge and social training.

             Poetic Realism/Justice: After a life of addiction, the subject gets a last chance at “pure cinema,” but it ultimately ends with death. 

In each phase the mise-en-scene and film aesthetics should mimic the effects of the drug, but representing it as if the viewer is the addict NOT Camera-head. This perspective should be juxtaposed by the Camera-head’s perspective. Basically when we are viewing Camera-head’s perspective he doesn’t reflect any signs of these drug effects. Basically what I am saying is that, metaphorically we [the viewer] are the ones that are addicted, but we are actually oblivious to it; while the subject is also oblivious to its personal addiction. I’m sure there will be viewers saying; why isn’t Camera-head’s perspective the one that is distorted, why is it our perspective distorted. It is because Camera-head represents self-reflexive; i.e. he represents us, we do not think we are addicted. Does this make sense?

Since Cinema is the daddy of these other bastards, in one way or another, cinema should show its presence during each phase; like a shadow hovering over the entire project.

Why? For one it characterizes nostalgia, second it exacerbates the subject’s addictiveness, and thirdly it’s the genome material of this gigantic entertainment organism.

Example; let’s say the subject is binge watching television episodes, if we can also project a movie onto the television so the episodes and the movie can physically overlap each other. Or it can be the shadow of a movie camera and operator reflected on the wall. Any creative ideas here are welcome.

Diegetic World

That of Camera-head acting out his addiction

Non-Diegetic World

Found-footage used as a metaphorical and or allegory about Camera-Head’s world

   1- Generally exhibiting a pessimistic view of society.

   2- As a social-critique

   3- Highlighting conformity, basically behavior that is the same as the behavior of most other   people in a society, group

   4- A fatalistic view of the life of the character

   5- Marginalizing

We should experiment with creative new ways of trying to visually and audibly mimic the effects of the drug use. I would rather try to accomplish this by using non-traditional forms, basically trying to stay away from using too much software. Fundamentally we are restricting ourselves, but we can use a lot of the old techniques they used in the past. For example, we can use Vaseline on the lenses, filters, textured or colored glass in front of the lens. For movement maybe we can experiment by using different tuning forks, e.g. touching the camera with different tuning forks to see if we get some type of weird vibration that embeds itself to the image, something that cannot be imitated by software. Audibly, maybe we can examine embedding the sound-wave onto the image; like I was talking about in class. Sound-waves can also represent colors. For example let’s say the tuning forks do create some type of weird motion, we can then think about attaching a colored sound-wave, one that represents the tone and rhythm of the tuned fork. 

Andre mentioned that we should explore why people get addicted or what they exactly get addicted too, basically what is it about cinema that is addictive. That’s a legitimate issue to persue, but it is also a very psychologically complex issue. Rather than exploring that avenue, the film invites the public to reflect whether they feel it’s a legitimate addiction, if it is, is it healthy or not, do people even see it as an addiction. Are we also perpetuating and or promoting the addiction by our consumer habits? For example, a consumer who buys pirated copies of movies, and or downloading pirated copies. Is he or she creating a new problem that aggravates the original difficulty? Basically creating an illegal market just like illicit drug use created an illegal drug market? 

The movie is asking these questions.