Cinema Militans Lecture Toward a re-invention of cinema

by Peter Greenaway 28/09/2003

Cinema died on the 31st September 1983 when the zapper, or the remote control, was introd ced into the li!in"#rooms o$ the world% Cinema is a passi!e medi m% &t mi"ht well ha!e $ l$illed many o$ the e'pectations o$ an a dience o$ o r $athers and $ore$athers prepared to sit bac(, watch ill sions and s spend disbelie$, b t & belie!e we can no lon"er claim this to be s $$icient% )ew technolo"ies ha!e prepared and empowered the h man ima"ination in new ways% *here is, as we all well (now, brand new a diences o t there who ma(e p not + st a tele!ision "eneration, b t a post#tele!ision "eneration where the characteristics o$ the laptop are pers asi!e and "enerate new demands and create new benchmar( standards% *he ideas o$ e'cessi!e choice, personal in!esti"ation, personal comm nication and h "e interacti!ity ha!e come a lon" way since September 1983, and the act o$ cinema has had to e'ist alon"side and be a partner to a whole new world o$ m ltiple#media acti!ities, which ha!e all intrinsically metamorphosed cinema itsel$% &nteracti!ity and m ltimedia may well be words that are too $amiliar anymore to be tr ly attended to, b t they are certainly the ma+or contemporary c lt ral stim lants% ,ow will cinema cope with them, beca se it s rely m st% &$ the cinema intends to s r!i!e, & belie!e, it has to ma(e a pact and a relationship with concepts o$ interacti!ity, and it has to see itsel$ as only part o$ a m ltimedia c lt ral ad!ent re% -nce pon a time, cinema ## a$ter a!oidin" the iss e, re$ sin" to encompass it, pretendin" that the patient was not sic( and the ob+ect not bro(en, so why try to c re one, and mend the other. ## $aced and tac(led and adapted itsel$ to a new technolo"y o$ so nd% *he lon" e'istin", world#dominant entertainment technolo"y o$ the so#called silent cinema chan"ed almost o!erni"ht, and in essence it died% /nd it is !irt ally entirely b ried% 0ho now watches silent cinema. 1 ster 2eaton and Charlie Chaplin on tele!ision, and a small minority o$ $ilm enth siasts% 0hether we are "oin" to li(e it or not, the same may well soon happen to so#called so nd cinema% *his is a 3ilitans Cinema lect re% & can a$$ord to be militant% & ha!e been "i!en some license to be pro!ocati!e, disrespect$ l, irritated and an"ry% /nd militant% *he terms o$ this plat$orm e'pect it o$ me% /nd & ha!e been "i!en this license $or a second time% 4ast time & tried to ma(e a little entertainment% 0ith pict res and pro+ected alphabets% /nd a $ew thorns% *his time & want to ma(e a hea!ier polemic% 0ith thorns% 1eca se my complaint is that now, a$ter 108 years o$ acti!ity, we ha!e a cinema that is d ll, $amiliar, predictable, hopelessly wei"hed down by old con!entions and o tworn !erities, an archaic and hea!ily restricted system o$ distrib tion, and an o t#o$#date and c mbersome technolo"y% 0e need to re#in!ent cinema%

5!ery medi m needs to constantly re#in!ent itsel$% 0e need now not to p t new

wine in old bottles, and certainly not to p t old wine in new bottles, we need to p t new wine into new bottles% 6o are allowed to reco"nize the wine, which is h man in"en ity and ima"ination, and yo are permitted to reco"nize the bottles, which is cinema, tho "h & am con!inced we shall be needin" to chan"e that name% C rrent state o$ the cinema7s demise%

8irst, a brie$ r n thro "h o$ some o$ the c rrent $actors we all (now abo t cinema7s demise% Cinema in cinemas is ndo btedly not the pop lar art it sed to be% &n the 1930s, 1990s, 19:0s, it is said that 5 ropean $amilies saw two $ilms at the cinema e!ery wee(% 0e can easily a"ree that yo wo ld be hard pressed to $ind a 5 ropean $amily that wo ld see cinema now in cinemas twice a year% Statistics $rom the heart o$ the ma+or 0estern $ilm ind stry in ,ollywood state that ;:< o$ people see their cinema on tele!ision, 20< b y their cinema as !ideo or =>=s, and only :< !iew their cinema in places called cinemas% &n this co ntry, & am told, the a!era"e = tch citizen watches only two $eat re $ilms in a cinema e!ery three years% *he head o$ 2oda( has stated that his company will not be man $act rin" cell loid in 10 year7s time% *he po!erty o$ o$$icial cinema distrib tion means that & cannot, and yo cannot, see any $ilm o$ yo r choice in any cinema o$ yo r choosin" this a$ternoon, or e!en ne't wee(, and probably not ne't month, and possibly ne!er% &t is easier $or me to see a minor paintin" by Cara!a""io in a small ?mbrian town than it is $or me to see 2 bric(7s @2001@ in any cinema that wo ld represent that $ilm in the way it was man $act red to be presented% 8o r tho sand $eat re#potential $ilms ha!e been made in the ?%S% e!ery year $or the last $o r yearsA 3:0 "et some cinema distrib tion, :0 hit sensible distrib tion $i" res in 80 ?%S% cities, lastin" $or abo t ## on a!era"e ## 10 days in a cinema% *hat is one reasonably distrib ted $ilm $or e!ery wee( o$ the year% *wenty $eat re $ilms a year hit the bi" time, 10 hit the !ery bi" time and $o r ma(e it s per bi" time% 8o r o t o$ 9,000% 0here do all the ndistrib ted $ilms end p. *he s al places are @strai"ht to !ideo@ or tele!ision, a third o$ them are d mped, tho "h most $ilmma(ers wo ld not be so bl nt as to admit it% 5 ropean newspapers were noisy in their complaints this year that the Cannes 8ilm 8esti!al was o$ poor B ality, and $ollowed it p soon a$ter by sayin" that the >enice 8ilm 8esti!al was not m ch better% *hese two $esti!als are traditionally s pposed to be a litm s paper to the li$e and health o$ the in!enti!e cinema world% *he reaction is no s rprise% *here is precio s little in!ention in the cinema world, beca se traditional c t#and#paste, narrati!e, ill sionistic cinema has had its day% 0e m st mo!e on% 0e m st re#in!ent cinema% &t is a $act that there are more and more $ilm $esti!als instit ted e!ery year, pro"rammin" "reater and "reater n mbers o$ $esti!al $ilms which are ne!er seen a"ain, $ilms which ha!e no hope o$ any cinema distrib tionC there is less and less in$ormed $ilm criticism in o r newspapers, $ewer and $ewer serio s pro"rams abo t cinema on tele!ision, a $all in readership o$ $ilm ma"azines, and "reater and "reater creation o$ media co rses in the ni!ersities o$ the 0estern world% Con$ sin" and apparently contradictory statistics. 0ell not necessarily% &t wo ld seem that somethin" !ery similar happened at the decline o$ opera and classical dance as

ma+or c lt ral $orces ## altho "h happenin" o!er a lon"er space o$ time ## an e'cess o$ attention as the B ality and proli$eration declined, a proppin" p o$ the instit tions by the dismayed, that the ener"y had e!aporated, and a deterioration o$ B ality and insi"ht as the means o$ prod ction apparently seemed easier% 3allarme s ""ested that all the world is created to be p t into a boo(% ,e mi"ht now say that all the world is created to be p t into a $ilm% 5!eryone wants to ma(e mo!ies% &t is a si"n o$ o!er(ill and a state o$ e'ha stion, res ltin" in banality and repetition% /nd we ha!e arri!ed at a monoc lt re, sin"le model o$ cinema all o!er the world% ,ollywood prod ct is made in Sydney, *o(yo, Shan"hai, Dotterdam and 4ondon, and especially in 4ondon% Perhaps we can say that the c t#and#paste, narrati!e, chronolo"ically plotted, ill strated#te't, ill sionistic cinema has played itsel$ o t% &$ yo belie!e it is still ali!e% Consider that they say a slow#mo!in", herbi!oro s and not !ery bri"ht dinosa r, shot in the head on a 3onday, is brain dead $or a wee(, and can mana"e to wa" its tail ntil the 8riday, be$ore the last breath lea!es its body% 8riday will soon be pon s% ,owe!er, howe!er, howe!er, all o$ which is no "reat ca se $or alarm or despondency, tears, sadness or nostal"ia, b t probably $or + bilation, beca se it is a sit ation $ittin" to a reco"nizable pattern, and the e'ha stion in!ariably coincides with re+ !enation% 0e sho ld re+oice that the dinosa r is soon to be a $ossil% 0e await those small creat res in the $orest $loor who will soon ta(e o!er the world% 0e ha!e e!ery ri"ht to be optimistic abo t the $ t re as lon" as we are prepared to ac(nowled"e @cinema is dead, lon" li!e cinema%@ 0e can belie!e in the phoeni'% / medi m is "o!erned and shaped and percei!ed by the characteristics o$ its technolo"y% *he aesthetic#technolo"y o$ cinema has lasted 108 years ## b t i$ cinema essentially e'pired on the apocryphal 31st September 1983 ## then, $rom 189: to 1983, is 88 years, the len"th o$ three "enerations% &t wo ld seem that the li$e o$ many aesthetic#technolo"ies mi"ht $it into an e'a""erated three "eneration li$espan, co!erin" the acti!ities o$ in!ention, consolidation and then a throwin" away in anticipation o$ a new cycle% *he prime time o$ $resco#paintin" technolo"y in the Denaissance spans Giotto, the in!entor o$ the primary technolo"ies, thro "h 3ichelan"elo, the consolidator, to the restless Carracci brothers who e'perimented with oil#based techniB es in association with the wet plaster, and essentially corr pted its primacy to ma(e way $or a si"ni$icant chan"e% *he basic $resco characteristics e'isted be$ore this cycle, and persisted a$ter it, b t the ma+or si"ni$icant wor( in the medi m is created within this span o$ time% Similar ar" ments can be p t $orward $or the s bseB ent paintin" technolo"ies o$ e"" tempera painters on wood panels ## !an 5yc( to = rer ## and the $irst and second wa!es o$ post#baroB e can!as painters ## 1ernini, >elasB ez, 5l Greco ## and then the painters o$ arti$icial li"ht ## Cara!a""io and de la *o r, =a!id, Goya and =elacroi'% Cinema has responded to the theory !ery well% &$ yo are a 5 ropean, 5isenstein in!ents the lan" a"e, 8ellini consolidates the lan" a"e and Godard throws it away% &$ yo are /merican, then the cycle mi"ht read Gri$$ith, -rson 0elles and Cassa!etes% &n all cases, the medi m mi"ht contin e wa""in" its tail, b t in homa"e to, or in admiration o$, a tradition, or to $ rther mine $ields already stron"ly prospected, or simply to en+oy the well#oiled machineries o$ prod ction str ct res and st dio $acilities, there will be re!isionist $ilmma(ers, as in the 19;3 to 198E period ## Coppola, 2 bric(, Scorsese wor(in" the 8ellini#0elles !ein ## and 0oody /llen, the Coen brothers and 0enders wor(in" the Godard !ein, and then the post#

re!isionists o$ the late 780s, $ rther tradin", pastichin" and homa"in" li(e *arantino, Stone and Scott% D nnin" parallel to the last throws o$ the old medi m, the technolo"y chan"es ## o t o$ a desire $or chan"e itsel$, or beca se the bendin" o$ the medi m creates !ario s brea(in" points, or o t o$ a wish to rep diate the past, or beca se the stretchin" o$ the pre!io s technolo"y "enerates h "e impro!ements alon" the a!en es o$ cheapness, swi$tness, "reater accessibility and "reater ease o$ handlin", and sometimes e!en beca se o$ the introd ction o$ a brand#new base#ener"y so rce, which in the case o$ the mo!in" pict re ind stry, as in m sic, has been $irst ma"netic tape, and then, as in so many other $ields, the $ ll e'plosion o$ the di"ital re!ol tion% &$ this theory o$ the three "enerations o$ in!ention, consolidation and re+ection will not s it yo r perception o$ the pro"ress o$ 108 years o$ cinema, cinema as an entire medi m has always been slow and sl ""ish and resistant to !i"o ro s chan"e% 5!en a well#respected cinema director li(e Scorsese basically ma(es the same $ilms, str ct rally and narrati!ely, as Gri$$ith, the $o nder o$ narrati!e in cinema% *here are better em lsions, smarter eB ipment and s perior p blicity, b t the same str ct res with be"innin"s, middles and ends, mo!in" $rom a position o$ ne"ati!e beha!io r to positi!e beha!io r on a lar"ely Christian morality pro"ram, ha!e not chan"edC re!en"e ordained and completed, wron"s ri"hted, retrib tion obtained, s ccess rewarded, innocents e'onerated, $inishin" with happy clos res ## these are str ct res that are repeated o!er and o!er and o!er a"ain ## and they are str ct res that ha!e pre!io sly been in!ented, employed and elaborated by the 19th cent ry literary "iants, =ic(ens, 1alzac, Fola, *olstoy% 0hen we are bro "ht to realize that most cinema is ill strated te't, we then ha!e a $ rther demoralization, to disco!er that o$ all these te'ts ill strated by cinema, $ew, i$ any, ha!e ad!anced to e!en the early years o$ literary e'citements o$ the 20th cent ry% )one, $or e'ample appear to ha!e approached Games Goyce% *he distances o$ lan" a"e chan"e and de!elopment tra!elled in cinema are sli"ht compared to what has happened in the other media in the same 189: to 199: period% Consider the chan"es that ha!e occ rred $rom 189: to 199: in m sic ## Stra ss to Stoc(ha sen !ia Schoenber", or =eb ssy to Deich !ia Gohn Ca"eC in literat re ## $rom ,ardy and 3ann to 1or"es and Perec% /nd "ettin" closer and closer to cinema, consider that, in the theater, Che(o! is ali!e in 189:, and by 199:, we ha!e e'perienced -sborne and Pinter, 1recht and 1ec(ett% /nd closer still to the ideals o$ a pictorial cinema, in paintin", !an Go"h, Ga "in, Cezanne, 3ale!ich and 2lee are all ali!e and well and (ic(in" in 189:, and we ha!e now ha!e tra!eled to 0arhol and 2ei$er !ia 3atisse and = champ, Picasso, Doth(o and Gasper Gohns% &t is di$$ic lt to ima"ine s ch chan"es in characteristics, lan" a"e, attit de, perspecti!e and immense pl rality, in the march o$ cinema $rom 189: to 199:% &s this s ch an n$air comparison.

Consider the h "e ener"ies, the !ast s ms o$ money, the one#time lar"e p blic a diences, the h "e crowds o$ man $act rers and the sheer n mber o$ mo!ies made thro "ho t this cent ry o$ years ## with these $actors doesn7t it seem we co ld ha!e e'pected "reater de!elopmental thr st and p ll and ran"e o$ practice. ,owe!er, it is now too late% *he "ame is o!er% 0e ha!e lost o r opport nity% 0e m st roll o!er and start a"ain% /nd we can% & belie!e the last time we saw radical cinema#lan" a"e chan"e and no!el cinematic in!ention was with the German cinema in the mid and late se!enties ## ,erzo",

Stra b, 8assbinder and the early 0enders% /$ter that, there has been little radical e'periment and radical in!ention% 3aybe there co ld not ha!e been anymore, beca se by 1980, tele!ision had $inally won the battle $or the mo!in" ima"e e'perience% /$ter 1980 there is little e!idence o$ in!esti"ati!e $inances bein" p t into the cinema media% *he money, and the ener"y that always $ollows money, was bein" placed elsewhere, and the really interestin" in!enti!e minds o$ the mo!in" ima"e went to places where li$e was more stim latin" ## !ideo e'periments, 0eb# masterin", m ltimedia in!esti"ations, !ideo clips, animation ## the $eat re $ilm was no lon"er the !ehicle $or ma+or synthesis and chan"e, the all#embracin" symphonic $orm that encaps lated the total !ocab lary% 0e can easily belie!e that 1ill >iola is worth 10 Scorseses% ,owe!er important the $actors are o$ social, political, economic and c lt ral press re ## the absol te stren"th o$ the medi m is in its aesthetic, its relationship o$ lan" a"e to content, its rele!ance to now, the ability to stim late and entrance, pro!ide stim l s to dream, le"itimize ima"ination, set $ire to possibilities, indicate what happens ne't, enco ra"e wholehearted participation ## and & wo ld say ## enco ra"e wholehearted participation to the point o$ the panic o$ o!ere'citement% & belie!e cinema as we (now it now, simply $ails to do this% /nd & belie!e this, in some "ood meas re, is d e to $o r tyrannies% *he $o r tyrannies

&n association with the cinema celebrations o$ 199:, with some considerable an'iety and some deep disenchantment abo t contemporary cinema, & planned an in!esti"ation into $ilm lan" a"e to see what abo t it was in!esti"ati!e, se$ l, a tonomo s and worthy o$ preser!ation, and, primarily, niB e% 0hat co ld cinema do, a$ter a cent ry, that no other media co ld do. & constantly saw cinema as bein" easily deconstr cted bac( into other media $orms where what it had to say, co ld be said as easily and probably more $orce$ lly and more e$$iciently in other ways% 0e considered ten characteristics that seemed especial to cinema ## li"ht, the te't, the $rame, pro+ection, props, m sic, scale, time, actors and the camera, and embar(ed on a series o$ citywide e'hibitions, nder the "eneric title the Stairs% 0e s cceeded in placin" a lar"e e'hibition in the streets and sB ares, par(s and b ildin"s o$ Gene!a $oc sed on the $rame ## erectin" 100 wooden staircases across the city where a !iewer was in!ited to climb a short $li"ht o$ stairs to an eyepiece to e'amine a $ramin" o$ the city, a wide#shot or a medi m#shot or a close# p% *he staircases remained in the city $or 100 days, and the $ramin"s were a!ailable to all $or 29 ho rs a day in s nshine and rain, moonli"ht and $o"% *he scenarios o$ this li!in" cinema#$ilm o$ 100 !iewpoints $or 100 days were anythin" that mi"ht happen% 6o co ld watch a man ta(e a do" $or a wal(% 6o co ld, i$ yo were l c(y, watch a do" bite a man% &$ yo were e'ceptionally $ort nate, yo co ld watch a man bite a do" ## the ordinary, the n s al and the e'traordinary% *he $irst moti!e was to consider why cinema, alon" with all the other plastic arts, !iews the world within the con$ines o$ a rectan"le, a parallelo"ram, within the bo ndaries o$ $o r ri"ht#an"les. /nd when we do so indeed, what mi"ht that mean. /nd do we need to contin e to do this, and how was the act o$ $ramin" rele!ant to the act o$ $ilmma(in" itsel$. /nd which sin"le $rame is the most rele!ant and is it possible to "et the timin" o$ the $ramin" ri"ht. 0as the sin"le $rame necessary,

co ld we brea( it, e'plode it, co ld we re#in!ent it. 0hat were the ad!anta"es and what were the disad!anta"es. /nd the most important B estion ## was action, e!ent and acti!ity within the sin"le $rame separable $rom the sin"le $rame itsel$. &n 199: we were pri!ile"ed to place a second e'hibition in the series in the city o$ 3 nich, and the s b+ect was the act o$ pro+ection% -n the cathedral, the town hall, the opera#ho se, shops and shoppin" malls, o$$ices, the police station, "asometers, ch rches and theaters, we made screen pro+ections to sim late the essence o$ the cinema e'perience ## 100 ill minated screens ## p rs in" a chronolo"y o$ cinema history $rom simple blac( and white 189: 4 miere pro+ection thro "h to color and the e'perimental ratios o$ the 19:0s and 7E0s, to the ad!ent o$ the tele!ision ratios ## 100 cinema screens ali!e with pro+ected li"ht all the ho rs o$ dar(ness% *his time the moti!e was to demonstrate the central cinema e'perience, the pro+ection o$ li"ht across a distance onto a $ramed space to be !iewable sim ltaneo sly to a mass a dience% *he e'hibition in the series o$ the Stairs dedicated to props, the si"ni$icance o$ the inanimate ob+ect in cinema ## can yo ima"ine a "an"ster mo!ie witho t a " n, a telephone and a car, a Sha(espearian $eat re witho t a s( ll, a da""er and a crown, -thello witho t =esdemona7s hand(erchie$ ## was e!ent ally t rned into an e'hibition in >ienna called -ne , ndred -b+ects to Depresent the 0orld, and then into an opera o$ the same name that tra!elled the world% )o sin"le characteristic o$ cinema is entirely separable $rom all the others, and & was be"innin" to see the characteristics as tyrannies, which were con$inin", strai"ht#+ac(etin", e!en ab sin" the cinema, tyrannies that were perhaps destroyin" any $ rther emancipation o$ the idea o$ the mo!in" ima"e in cinema% & $inally saw those ma+or tyrannies as the tyrannies o$ the $rame, the te't, the actor and the camera% *he tyranny o$ the te't

5!ery $ilm director, with precio s $ew e'ceptions, has to ha!e a te't be$ore he or she can ha!e an ima"e% 8rom Spielber" to Godard, 4ynch to *arantino, 2 bric( to 8assbinder% 0ith the cinema that we ha!e de!eloped ## tho "h o$ co rse, it need not ha!e happened that way ## it is impossible to approach a st dio or a prod cer with three paintin"s, $o r prints and a s(etch#boo( o$ drawin"s, and e'pect to be rewarded with s pport to ma(e a mo!ie% *he cinema is s pposed to be an art and an ind stry o$ the ima"e, yet we ha!e a te't#based cinema% 5!ery $ilm yo ha!e watched yo can see the director $ollowin" the te't, and i$ yo are l c(y, ma(in" pict res as an a$ter#tho "ht% )o s rprise o$ co rse% 0e are all !ery sophisticated, e!en across all the lan" a"e barriers, at ma(in" and sin" and recei!in" te'ts, written and spo(en% - r ed cational systems are based on $orce$ lly $eedin" the letters o$ the alphabet to rel ctant children, and then to press home a necessity to amassin" an nderstandin" o$ words% /s adolescents the readin" proced res become more sophisticated, and as ad lts, contin ally pers aded practice, hones and re$ines and $oc ses o r abilities ## a systematic ni!ersal act o$ ed cation in the word% 6o ha!e a ton" e% &t will not spea( comprehensi!ely on its own, it needs trainin"% 8ew, in proportion to the mass attendance at the te't al altar, attend art school, desi"n school, recei!e architect ral trainin"% 6o ha!e an eye ## can it tr ly see witho t bein" trained. G st beca se yo ha!e eyes, does that mean yo can see. /nd i$ yo can see, can yo pro+ect and comm nicate yo r meanin" indeed to those who also ha!e had no e'tensi!e trainin" o$ the eye. 0o ld yo , co ld yo , pres me to write a sensible comprehensible letter, lea!e

alone

no!el,

witho t

nder"oin"

intensi!e

trainin"

in

te't.

&t co ld be said that most o$ s s $$er $rom considerable !is al illiteracy, pers aded pon s by a te't#obsessi!e ed cational insistence% ,ence the reliance on the word, not the ima"e% =errida $amo sly and wittily s ""ested that @the ima"e always has the last word@ ## it is o$ co rse a $alse statement, the word always has the last word, and anyway isn7t a word an ima"e. &n 5n"land and /merica, there is "reat and !i"o ro s s pport $or a writer7s cinema% 0e do not need or want or desire a writer7s cinema% 0e need a cinema#ma(er7s cinema% *he cinema sho ld not be an ad+ nct to the boo(shop, ser!icin", ill stratin" literat re% *he last three dominant si"ni$icant cinema e!ents ha!e been @*he 4ord o$ the Din"s,@ a boo( ## three boo(s ## @,arry Potter,@ a boo(, probably e!ent ally, $o r boo(s, and @Spider#3an,@ at least that is s pposed to sprin" $rom a semi#!is al so rce, a comic, b t essentially an ill strated boo(% &n pessimistic moments, & wo ld ar" e that yo ha!e ne!er seen any cinema, all yo ha!e witnessed is 108 years o$ ill strated te't% *he tyranny o$ the $rame

0e !iew all the plastic arts thro "h a ri"id $rame% Since paintin" separated itsel$ $rom architect re at the end o$ the 3edie!al period, it re" lated its parameters, with !ery little e'ception, to $it $o r ri"ht#an"les% /nd theater, with a prosceni m arch, copied paintin"C opera and ballet arran"ed its scenarios and choreo"raphy to be seen in association with theatre7s prosceni m arch sta"e#space, and cinema copied the theatre, and tele!ision copied the cinema, and then there are photo"raphs sB ared p $or paintin"#pict re#$rames and to $it the ri"ht an"les o$ a boo(% *his wholesale practice has become so traditional and orthodo', it is not B estioned% Detrospecti!ely, it is the !iew thro "h a window, tho "h we are thin(in" now $rom a contemporary window point#o$#!iew, since the ma+or horizontal aspect window ratio o$ a cinema screen co ld not ha!e been matched architect rally by a window m ch be$ore the middle o$ the nineteenth cent ry% 1 t the analo"y is important beca se traditional cinema insists on creatin" an ill sionistic space to "i!e a diences a window e'perience ## a s r!eillance thro "h a window $rame o t into a parallel ni!erse connected to that which the a dience physically e'periences as it sits in the cinema% *here is no s ch thin" as a $rame in the nat ral world ## it is a man#made, man# created de!ice, a dia"rammatically sharpened and re" lated reaction to his own irre" lar horizontal !iew o$ the world bordered by the brow and the chee(#bones when the $ace is held ri"id and the eyes (ept steady% &t is an ironic c riosity that the Gapanese ha!e tried to re!erse the "ame by $orcin" man#de!ised $rames into landscape desi"n sin" the sea horizon as the absol te horizontal, and plantin" tall strai"ht#tr n(ed trees to ma(e the !ertical $rame#lines ## ironic and c rio s, since -riental pict re#ma(in" has stead$astly, ntil it came in contact with 0estern practices o$ seein", eschewed the $rame, not $indin" it at all necessary to se a $rame to contain and shape the world% /nd the $rame in the cinema has e!er restrictin"ly ti"htened% *here sed to be se!eral aspect ratios open to a cinemato"rapher, especially in the years o$ pre# standardization, and a"ain when cinema tried to $i"ht the e$$ects o$ tele!ision with a rash o$ e'perimental ratios in the 7E0s and 7;0s, b t now we ha!e been steadily

red ced to that most con!enient o$ aspect ratio $rames, the tele!ision $rame o$ the ratio 1 to 1%33% /nd all pro$essional $ilm practitioners (now the contortions and h miliations that cinema has had to e'perience to "et its non#tele!ision ratio demands onto the tele!ision screen with letter#bo'in", croppin", red cin", pannin" and scannin"% S ch has been this so dominant ind strial practice that $ew tele!ision !iewers are e!en remotely aware that they are not watchin" the real thin", b t some partic lar tele!ision#con!enienced !ersion% &$ the $rame is a man#made de!ice, then + st as it has been created, so it can be n#created% *he parallelo"ram can "o% *he tyranny o$ the actor

*o ac(nowled"e and o!ercome the third tyranny, the tyranny o$ the actor, is perhaps not "oin" to be so pop lar% &t co ld be said that we deli"ht in bein" tyrannised by actors% /nd & am "oin" to ha!e some di$$ic lty in $ollowin" thro "h the premise that the cinema is not, and sho ld not be a play"ro nd $or Sharon Stone or a Syl!ester Stallone or e!en a )icole 2idman or a Dobert de )iro, tho "h in 108 years we ha!e allowed and permitted it to be so% So many $ilms are set p to create a space $or an actor to per$orm, that it wo ld seem sometimes that the cinema is a !ehicle $or their appearance alone% *here are many "enres o$ paintin" in which the actor is absent, or red ced to the concept o$ a $i" re in a landscape% & am not ad!ocatin" a cinema where there are no actors, where the h man $i" re is not by in$erence the centre o$ o r interest, b t & will ar" e that the actor has to serio sly share the cinematic space with other e!idences o$ the world, has to be, in essence a $i" re in a landscape which is li(ely to "i!e attention to space, ideas, inanimacy, architect re, li"ht and colo r and te't re itsel$% *he le"itimate s premacy o$ the actor in the !iewin" space is a characteristic o$ theatre, where the demands on his dominant !isibility are essential to "i!e credence to the s spension o$ disbelie$ in a patently symbolic world, b t li(e it or not, the cinema sho ld not be a species o$ recorded theatre, and the actor has to relinB ish any s premacy he ri"htly mi"ht belie!e is his $or the ta(in" in the theatre% &t is o$ co rse not so $amiliar a condition to the actor who is led to belie!e by his pro$ession that the camera sho ld persistently centre his contrib tion, especially since we ha!e created o$$#screens systems to e'cessi!ely promote the actor and s rro nd him with a"ents and mana"ers, a sympathetic prod ction system and a Press and p blicity or"anisation who appear to need his p blic relations power% & ha!e had actors complain that they are too m ch s b+ect to the insistence o$ the $rame, that their mo!ements are too bo nded by the demands o$ the composition, that they ha!e to arran"e their contrib tion to be s bser!ient to a tree, a still li$e, a li"htin" space, shadows, dar(ness, !ario s de!ices o$ in!isibility, that & am more interested in their le"s, $eet, body, their "i!en physical anatomy, the way they wear and shape their clothes, the physical space they occ py, the "est res they ma(e, the pose they ta(e, their wei"ht on the $loor, their relationship to a wall or a ceilin", rather than their $ace or their interpretation o$ a psycholo"ical role, or their s(ill at interpretin" a narrati!e imperati!e% &t is tr e & ta(e many o$ my c es and precedences $rom paintin" where there are other considerations than h man per$ormance, b t & belie!e the actor sho ld ta(e his contrib tion in association with a sense o$ ensemble with the world and certainly ensemble with the cinematic lan" a"e% 0e ha!e de!eloped a cinema where the identi$ication o$ an actor7s emotional and psycholo"ical per$ormance is considered to be the (ey to an a dience7s response% *his is limitin", red cti!e and ndersells the !is al potential o$

cinematic *he tyranny o$ the

lan" a"e% camera

&$ the tyranny o$ the actor is di$$ic lt to accept, then the $o rth and last tyranny is perhaps e!en more o$ a blasphemy ## $or it is the tyranny o$ the camera% 0e ha!e to "et rid o$ the camera% *he camera is a recordin" de!ice% &t "i!es s an ima"e o$ the world that is mimetic, it reprod ces what we p t in $ront o$ it% *he camera is not a painter% &t has entered the cinema eB ation too hi"h p the Dichter scale ## say at Dichter si', where it wo ld ha!e been better to ha!e entered at Dichter zero ## which o$ co rse is contradictory beca se there wo ld ha!e been nothin" there, which o$ co rse is what my proposition is all abo t% *wo B otations% -ne $rom PicassoA @& do not paint what & see, b t what & thin(%@ *he second $rom 5isenstein, certainly the "reatest ma(er o$ cinema, a $i" re yo can compare with 1eetho!en or 3ichelan"elo, and not be embarrassed by the comparison, and there are $ew cinema#ma(ers yo can ele!ate to s ch hei"hts% -n his way to 3e'ico, 5isenstein, tra!elin" thro "h Cali$ornia, met 0alt =isney, and s ""ested that 0alt =isney was the only $ilmma(er beca se he started at "ro nd zero, a blan( screen% *he connection between the two B otations is s ""esti!e% *here is a necessity in a c rio s way to bypass the lazy, mimetic, passi!e recordin" eye ## h man or mechanical ## and + mp strai"ht to the brain, the ima"ination, the seat o$ creation% /nd it is s ""ested that we ha!e now the tools, and we can easily ima"ine the tools we shall ha!e tomorrow, to ma(e this happen% 0e sho ld not want a cinema o$ appropriation, o$ mimesis, or reprod ction o$ the (nown world, not e!en a cinema o$ !irt al reality, b t a cinema o$ !irt al nreality% *he Denaissance contrib tion to the modern world in !is al terms is s ally co ched in terms o$ $ore!er and $ore!er s ccess$ lly reprod cin" reality% 8rom Giotto to 3asaccio, $rom 3asaccio to ?ccello, $rom ?ccello to Daphael, $rom Daphael to Gior"ione ## yo can choose yo r own chain o$ e!er#risin" realism% &t has been an pward s ccess story in "ettin" painted ima"es to loo( more and more li(e the nat ral world ## the "rad al controllin" o$ the technolo"ies o$ chiarosc ro and scale, sc lpt ral modellin", linear perspecti!e, aerial perspecti!e, anatomy, in order in the end, to reprod ce what we already ha!e aro nd s% &s that s ch a s ccess story. Sho ld not the ener"ies ha!e been spent in more worthwhile, in!esti"ati!e p rs its, to p rs e the possibilities o$ the in!enti!e h man ima"ination, probably the most comple' and sel$#re"ardin" phenomenon in the ni!erse. *he real world is always "oin" to be more real, more e'citin", more terri$yin", more dan"ero s, more appealin" than the world that can be reprod ced by the camera% Sho ld there$ore cinema eschew ambitions o$ ill sionistic recreation o$ the (nown world ## its ma+or p rs it ## and attempt to man $act re the ima"inati!e world alone. 3y militant response then to the c rrent circ mstances o$ a dyin" aesthetic technolo"y called cinema, +olted into the necessity o$ acceptin" the no!elties o$ inter#acti!ity and the re!italised possibilities o$ m ltimedia, is to sha(e o t these tyrannies o$ the $rame, te't, the actor and the camera, and try to place prod ct in the $irin" line o$ these polemics%

Cinematic

benchmar(s

&t is an arro"ant ass mption to thin( we can ma(e c lt ral benchmar(s, si"ni$icant arte$acts with which to meas re the state o$ a total practice% 1enchmar(s, & s spect, are made only a$ter the e!ent% =id =ante (now that he was ma(in" pro$o nd si"ni$icance with @*he =i!ine Comedy,@ a wor( that sel$#con$essedly s ""ests an attempt to nite the an"els in their hea!ens with the stones on the road. =id the !an 5yc( brothers in Ghent with their triptych o$ the @/doration o$ the 4amb,@ or 3ichelan"elo, with his !iew o$ (nown belie$s on the Sistine ceilin", (now that they were both man $act rin" wor(s that wo ld attempt to p t e!erythin" in one place, ordered, systematic and comprehensible. 0o ld Sha(espeare and Cer!antes ha!e (nown that their c lt ral contrib tions wo ld occ py the same sort o$ si"ni$icance% /nd did Goyce in writin" @?lysses,@ the most in$l ential b t least read o$ the 20th cent ry7s no!els, (now that, by "atherin" to"ether e!ery (nown trope o$ narrati!e and storytellin" and e'position o$ e'perience in words, and thereby ha!in" to in!ent a new sort o$ word e'position to realise it ## did he ha!e conscio sness o$ the bench#mar( he was ma(in". &t maybe that the $irst total cinema masterpiece benchmar( was 5isenstein7s @Stri(e,@ made in 1929% 8rom the start o$ cinema on the 20th =ecember 189: to 5isenstein7s @Stri(e@ in 1929 is !ery nearly 28 years ## the len"th o$ a "eneration% &$ the new post#cinema#cinema be"an on 31st September 1983 ## ntil now ## that is 20 years somewhere between ne't * esday and ne't 0ednesday ## we ha!e 8 years to "o to ma(e the $irst masterpiece bench#mar( o$ the new !is al technolo"ies% *he * lse 4 per S itcases pro+ect hopes to address and answer and $ind, in a deeply in!esti"ati!e way, some answers to some o$ these concerns and an'ieties% &t certainly re!ol!es aro nd, and desires to e'ploit, interacti!ity and m lti#media% *he pro+ect is man $act red $or e'ploitation in the cinema, on tele!ision, on one or more websites, as a serio s collection o$ =>=s and in association with a library o$ boo(s, with lin(s to the ma(in" o$ theatre and opera, e'hibitions and installations in m se ms and "alleries% *o date, a$ter 13 months o$ man $act re, there are three ho rs o$ hi"hly wro "ht cinema material shot, edited, and hope$ lly to be pro+ected on ,= tele!ision, tho "h as yo will see toni"ht, two ho rs e'ist ## beca se the ind stry is slow to ta(e ad!anta"e o$ the re!ol tion aro nd s ## on 3:mm $ilm% *here are two p blished boo(s, a play per$ormed in German at the 8ran($ort )ational *heatre, and soon to be rehearsed and per$ormed in 12 cities in ,olland, and two e'hibitions, one in 3ilan and one c rrently in Ghent% &n the ne't thirteen months, there will be three new e'hibitions # in 5n"land, 4eipzi" and 1erlin, two theatre prod ctions in 4ille and 1remen, and three more ho rs o$ ,= material, brin"in" s p to se!en episodes in the 1E#episode * lse 4 per sa"a% *he ambition is to ma(e an inte"rated prod ct !iable and comprehensible in di$$erent $orms $or the $irst decade o$ the 21st cent ry, that centres, as its cement and s perstr ct re, aro nd the li$e and times o$ its central character * lse 4 per, whose acti!ities are m lti$ario s, tho "h perhaps li(e s all, he is a pro$essional prisoner% 3atchin" the atomic n mber o$ rani m, his li$e#history co!ers 92 years% ,e is 92 tomorrow, the 29th September% *he whole pro+ect is an attempt to ma(e a "atherin" to"ether o$ today7s lan" a"es, to place them alon"side one another and "et them to con!erse, and as $ar as cinematic lan" a"e is concerned, to $ind ways o t o$ the abo!e stated tyrannies%

Considerin"

the

tyranny

o$

the

te't

&n the $irst place, tho "h it still be"s my an'io s B estionin" o$ the creation o$ a !is al medi m thro "h te't, the s bstance o$ @*he * lse 4 per S itcases@ was written o t indeed in words, albeit with a te't o$ some comple'ity that ma(es it loo(s more perhaps li(e a !ertical and horizontal m sical score than a con!entional $ilm#script% &t is not an adaptation o$ a boo(, or a play, or any phenomenon that saw li"ht $irst as literat re o$ any description% -n the ar" ment o$ @&$ it itches, scratch it@ ## the te't there$ore is m ch in e!idence% & "i!e yo $reB ent doses o$ the te't on screen% *here is a !ery necessary content reason $or this, since it soon becomes e!ident that the $ilm is happenin", so to spea(, as it is written, and is, in essence, the deliberate prod ct o$ a writer, tho "h B ite how that shapes p, & do not want to re!eal + st yet, $or that wo ld "i!e away the whole containin" conceit o$ the thin"% *e't s ally shapes the cinema narrati!e and certainly pro!ides the cinema dialo" e% Con!entional cinema see(s to conceal that written te't al ori"in% &n the * lse 4 per S itcases there is no hidin" o$ these ori"ins, and the $ilm is so $ ll o$ narrati!es that narrati!e is o$ten ne"ated by e'cess, and certainly narrati!e is constantly interr pted and $ra"mented by side#bars and listin"s and s b#narrati!es, as to ma(e con!entional narrati!e contin ity problematic% Since it wo ld seem te't and ima"e are a pair, o$ten o$ neB al stat s, and there is m ch e!idence to s ""est they ha!e co#e'isted in paintin" $or m ch o$ its history # do not try to brea( p the neB al, neasy marria"e b t see( to e'ploit it% /c(nowled"e that most o$ the ima"es seen in cinema be"an as te't al descriptions, deliberately se te't as ima"e, employ calli"raphy and typo"raphy to de$ine te't as that !ery thin"% Contemporary ad!ertisin" has made o$ the combination o$ te't and ima"e, an art o$ its own, and cinema mi"ht do well to imitate and de!elop its e'ploits% Considerin" the tyranny o$ the $rame

/bel Gance with his $ilm @)apoleon@ in 192; de!eloped a three#screen pro+ection, and intimated possible ways to se it% 0ide shot, medi m shot, close# pC bac(, $ront and sideC landscape, portrait, still#li$e% *o synchronise three 3:mm pro+ections in 192; was not so easy and the technolo"ical e'periment essentially stopped with Gance% *here was a wait o$ some $orty years be$ore the technolo"y and th s the possibilities o$ the lan" a"e co ld be res rrected% *here was a spate o$ $ilms in the 1980s where it became not ncommon, more than once associated with mo!ies $eat rin" Ste!e 3cH een, b t noticeably the de!ice was a decoration to the narrati!e not s bstantial to it, and rarely added more than retinal e'citement% Special $eat re e!ents li(e the *o(yo -lympic Games with lar"e s ms o$ money to e'hibitionistically $la nt, en"endered essentially non#narrati!e m lti#screen e'periments, by o$$erin" only more sheer retinal stim l s and pattern#ma(in", and s ch lan" a"e is now the stable diet in pop concerts and !ideo#walls, tho "h rarely str ct red in other than ill strati!e and decorati!e ways% *he con!entional cinema cinema still cannot per$orm m lti#screen pro+ection, and ntil s ch time it can and will, the sin"le screen can s $$ice to be spliced, split and $ra"mented% 3 ltiple screens imply a sense o$ choice% &t is not easy to loo( at all screens with eB al attention sim ltaneo sly, choice $or ma+or attention has to made, tho "h those choices can be cond cted and orchestrated by the director%

)ew di"ital technolo"y minimises Gance7s di$$ic lties, tho "h as s ""ested with a sin"le screen a"enda% @*he * lse 4 per S itcases@ endea!o rs to tilise and de!elop a m lti#screen lan" a"e in the !ario s ways /bel Gance anticipated and certainly to ta(e it beyond% S perb steadiness, immac late $ramed ed"es are di"itally edited on ,i"h =e$inition tape at increasin" near real#time editin" speeds% 1e$ore, d rin", a$terC past present $ t reC $ast, slow, slowest, repetitions, reprises, across screen de!ices o$ inn merable contin ities, de!elopin" a lan" a"e that eB ates more with h man e'perience in its interactions between reality, memory and ima"ination% -ne o$ the "reatest potential e'citements is the ability and $reedom now to $ashion the $rame to s it the content% >ery cr dely, a sna(e tra!ellin" across the "rass s ""ests a lon" horizontal $rame, a "ira$$e, a tall !ertical one% /nd morphin" s ch a sna(e into s ch a "ira$$e can be accomplished with hands#on ease% *he $rame can be c t and cropped with !ario s layers o$ density, o!erlap and metamorphosis% Pre#Denaissance paintin", ha!in" no imperati!es to depict the real, played with s b+ecti!e scale, and with condensed and sim ltaneo s time, both considerations bein" rele!ant to the dictates o$ theolo"ical ideals% Christ, at the 4ast S pper, bein" the most important $i" re at the table, was depicted physically lar"er than his disciples% /dam and 5!e were tempted, ate the apple, pl c(ed the $i" lea!es and were e'pelled $rom the Garden o$ 5den all in the same interconnected sin"le space% *hese are e'pressionistic de!ices lon" e'plored by paintin", and to a certain e'tent by $lo rishin" comic#boo( arts, and certainly with renewed interest in the last 1:0 years a$ter the lon" years spent p rs in" the chimera o$ reprod cin" the apparent reality o$ the eye, real time and tr e scale% *he di"ital re!ol tion technolo"ies can re#e'plore these iss es to ma(e ## to se a con!enience concept#word ## an animated c bism% 3a(in" $or a God#li(e biB ity, yo can see both sides o$ the wall, insides and o tsides, downstairs and pstairs, macrocosm and microcosm, all at the same time% *he historical (ey mar(ers to a philosophy o$ the mo!in" ima"e can be pro$itably re!isited and re!italised # 3 ybrid"e seB ential photo"raphy, = champ7s ) de =escendin" a Staircase, and 3arey7s m ltiple#ima"e $encers, dancers and athletes can res me si"ni$icance% *he &t is no $rame lon"er the a has passi!e tyranny +ail o$ o$ come $o r ri"ht the ali!e% an"les% actor

Considerin"

*he tyranny or con!entional dominant contrib tion o$ the actor has been considered $or some time in the $eat re $ilms & ha!e made o!er then past twel!e years within bo nds o$ what co ld be described as a cinema o$ passionate detachment% &t can be characterised by bein" sparin" o$ close# ps, a desire not to c t the body nless absol tely necessary, and to be aware o$ the h man $i" re as a stron" compositional element within a sel$#conscio s $rame, any "est res or actions that are not sympathetic to the !is al composition within a $rame, will probably be re+ected or simply not seen, or i$ considered a !al able contrib tion, re#shot, or re$ormatted to "i!e them !is al compositional si"ni$icance% *he camera !iews & normally employ wo ld rarely be person orientated% 8or e'ample & wo ld ne!er se an o!er#sho lder shot in a two#way con!ersation and !iewpoints are constr cted $rom the ideal position o$ the camera not the eye#line or !iewpoint o$ the character% &n @*he * lse 4 per S itcases,@ the se o$ the actor has been ta(en $ rther in s ch

directions, which & belie!e, and certainly many o$ the actors belie!e, "i!es "reater scope to their contrib tion, whilst still holdin" them $irmly within a space that denies orthodo' actor dominance% -ne o$ the ma+or metaphors o$ the pro+ect is the sayin" that there is no s ch thin" as history, there are only historians, that history, in e$$ect, is a hi"hly s b+ecti!e b siness recorded with !ested interests% )apoleon co ld ha!e beha!ed li(e this, or li(e this, or li(e this% *hat this con!ersation co ld ha!e been deli!ered li(e this or this or this% *hat this interpretation o$ the e!ent co ld ha!e been melodramatic or sentimental, melancholic or yet a"ain pathetic% ConseB ently we ha!e tried to "i!e a cinema a dience alternati!es, certainly in (eepin" with the interacti!ity choices laid down in o r ambitions, b t also to demonstrate that there is no sin" lar !erity% 0e ha!e o$ten "i!en these interpretations sim ltaneo sly or o!erlaid them with one another in a c bist#li(e phenomenon, editin" and layerin" techniB es which co ld probably only be achie!ed with the help o$ the new technolo"ies% Con!entional cinema editin" in tr e c t#and#paste chronolo"y style, "i!es yo one e!ent at a time seB entially% *he cinema has ne!er been "ood, nli(e the theatre $or e'ample, at sim ltaneity% *he narrati!es as a conseB ence o$ten beha!e li(e m sical scores, deliberately $ ll o$ repeats and reprises, !ariations on a theme, ret rns to e'plore thematic areas $ rther and in "reater detail, o$ten sin" di$$erent actors to play the same role, to interpret the same material% So m ch is this a characteristic that, within the dramas themsel!es, the actors are o$ten !iewed as actors, tho "h stayin" inside the $ilm and not o tside o$ it% 0e see their a ditions% 0e o$ten show di$$erent ta(es o$ the same action, a characteristic o$ cinema rarely seen by !iewers b t e'tremely commonplace to actors themsel!es and certainly to all those in!ol!ed in the ma(in" o$ a $ilm% So altho "h the con!entional !irt osity o$ the actor on screen is denied or at least abro"ated to eradicate the tyranny o$ his contrib tion, a respect and an ac(nowled"ement $or the actor7s essential presence is certainly championed, e!en e'tra!a"antly championed% Considerin" the tyranny o$ the camera

*he spectr m o$ !is al possibilities in the man $act re o$ the mo!in" ima"e is lar"e, and traditionally the $eat re $ilm only ses a small section o$ that spectr m, s $$icient to realise an ill sionist drama% 3i'ed !is al "enres in the cinema are not common% & s ppose the combination o$ li!e action and the cartoon, noticeably celebrated in a $ilm li(e 0ho 8ramed Do"er Dabbit is an e'ample, tho "h it was an e'periment not o!er#enth siastically copied, and it was a drama that a$terall p rs ed ill sionist conceptions, another window#on the world constr ction, and any *e' /!ery sel$#conscio s anarchies, any brea(in" o$ the $rame techniB es, stayed within those con!entions% *he days o$ strict adherence to the Platonic !erities, obser!in" sin" lar time, sin" lar place, sin" lar treatment and sin" lar s b+ect, are lon" "one, and eclecticism is le"itimate and hono rable% &t wo ld be di$$ic lt to see how it co ld be otherwise in an in$ormation a"e with enco ra"ed encyclopaedic thin(in"% *he s permar(et o$ !is al and dramatic possibilities is h "e% & belie!e cinema sho ld seize the opport nity to shop !i"o ro sly in the s permar(et% 0atchin" !irt ally any $o r min tes o$ C)) )ews demonstrates what tele!ision has been doin" $or a lon" time, sin" a whole ran"e o$ comm nication lan" a"es sim ltaneo sly% *he introd ction o$ more and yet more m ltiple pict res, lines o$ mo!in" te't, titles, s b#titles, inter#titles, animated dia"rams, animated maps, insert tal(in" heads, split screen con!ersations, has not noticeably created apople'y in !iewers, and tho "h c rio sly & s spect conscio sly naware o$ the "est re, it is

becomin" common now $or the screen itsel$ to be sel$ re$erenced with $i'ed company lo"os ## which really do demonstrate to the !iewer that he is watchin" a screen, and not merely what is con!eyed thro "h it% 0e ha!e de!eloped habits o$ !is al selection% 4ar"ely we ta(e what we want% 0e can i"nore 5n"lish#lan" a"e mo!in" te't o$ stoc( mar(et reports in *o(yo, whilst we $oc s o r attention to watch animated dia"rams o$ h rricanes in 8lorida, tho "h peripherally we are aware that comm nications o$ the world are comin" at s $ast and $ rio sly% 0hilst $eat re $ilms, ,ollywood#style and art#ho se style, ha!e been p rsin" the strai"ht and narrow, tele!ision has been re!ellin" in comm nication s(ills $or a lon" time% Godard s ""ested that @0e loo( p at cinema, b t down at tele!ision@, a pointed re$erence at anatomical reality, b t also at snobbish sloth% &t is c rio s that cinema so lon" re"arded as a ! l"ar medi m by the traditional arts has adopted its own snobbisms in the $ace o$ competition% &t is a commonplace now that post#prod ction is e'tremely sophisticated and permeates practically e!erythin" we see on screens ## not + st the biB ito s dinosa r that is so belie!able, children are con!inced they e'ist somewhere o tside G rassic Par( and demand to see them at the zoo, b t clandestinely, polishin" p politicians, se'in"# p entertainers, erasin" mista(es, chan"in" colo rs, bri"htenin" "loomy days, and o$ co rse the opposite, addin" blood and smo(e, transposin" "rie$ and pain $rom one location to another to s it p blic relations and political e'pediency% 3any years a"o, altho "h admirin" the techniB e, we were shoc(ed at the way nwanted politicians disappeared $rom o$$icial So!iet Politb ro photo"raphs, s ch technical manip lations now are commonplace% *he ethics are decidedly problematical% 1 t the lan" a"e, almost what we co ld call an anti# camera lan" a"e, is e'traordinary% 3y $ascination and inclination, bein" interested in process and wishin" to demonstrate that process, as well as to "i!e yo end#res lts, sol tions and clos res, is to se it% &$ & am ma(in" a pro+ect whose central metaphor is @there is no s ch thin" as history, there are only historians@, & need to se it% /nd indeed e!ery possibility o$ comm nication by !is al ima"e is sed% =rama elaborated, Che(o!ian, (itchen#sin(, !a de!ille, pantomime, cinema#!erite, s r!eillance, operatic, melodrama, soap#opera, stripped down to a blac( bo', wor(ed p to a =a!id 4ean e' berance, pastiche amate r theatricals, tal(in" heads, stand# p comic% /nd s ch ses o$ the actor7s trade are interspliced and elaborated with animated maps and dia"rams, cartoon simplicities and cartoon comple'ities, static and animated te'ts, m ltiple typo"raphies and m ltiple calli"raphies% *his is an anti#=o"me $ilm% &t e' berates and celebrates new cinema lan" a"e% 8inale Cinema died on the 31st September 1983 when the zapper or the remote control was introd ced into the li!in"#rooms o$ the world% Cinema as o r $athers and $ore$athers (new it was a passi!e elitist medi m, made e'pensi!ely $or the patronised many by the condescendin" $ew, with a distrib tion system that has made its own prod ct !irt ally n!iewable% )ow we can brea( the monopolies, really start with an art o$ the mo!in" ima"e with !iewer participation that can tr ly empower the ima"ination, di!ersi$y interminably, cater $or all, and not patronise a diences% 0hat was cinema. Dows and rows o$ people sittin" still Iand who in any other h man occ pation sits still $or 120 min tes.J, all loo(in" in one direction Ithe world is all aro nd yo # not + st in $ront o$ sJ, in the dar( Iman is not a noct rnal animalJ% 0ith a cinema with characteristics li(e this, perhaps the sooner dead, the better% 4et s rid cinema o$ the $o r tyrannies o$ te't, the $rame, actors and the camera%

1 t what are we tal(in" abo t anyway. 6o ha!en7t seen any cinema yet, all we ha!e seen is 108 years o$ ill strated te't, and, i$ yo ha!e been l c(y, perhaps a little recorded theatre% )ow a cinema o$ what yo thin( and not what yo lazily see is tr ly possible% 4et s seize that nettle and be"in the art o$ the mo!in" ima"e all o!er a"ain% 5!ery medi m needs constant re#in!ention% 4et s now re#in!ent that cinema% 0e can% 0e now ha!e the most amazin" new tools to do so% )ow we need the desire and the co ra"e% /nd this new medi m o$ the mo!in" ima"e will almost certainly not be e'perienced in those stran"e hi"h# street pieces o$ architect re called cinemas% So#called cinema was in!ented in 189:% &t too( 29 years, with 5isenstein7s @Stri(e@ in 1929, to ma(e the $irst benchmar( masterpiece o$ this new aesthetic#technolo"y o$ $ilm% &$ a )ew 3o!in" &ma"e aesthetic#technolo"y was baptised on 31st September 1983, then we still ha!e a $ew year7s "race to in!ent its $irst benchmar( masterpiece% 0ell#aware o$ the dan"ers o$ the discrepancies o$ what & say matchin" with what & ma(e, & o$$er yo the $irst toe in the water o$ an ocean o$ possibilities in the m lti# media, interacti!e pro+ect o$ @*he * lse 4 per S itcases@ ## cinema, tele!ision, 0eb site, =>=, library ## as a candidate $or that benchmar( position%

Cinema 3ilitans 4ect re 1988