Because the times in film production change, a change in reception is also necessary. In Frampton’s theory, film is no longer a photographic reproduction of a past performance. This is not simply be-cause nowadays there are countless assumed realistic film images which were never shot as they are presented later. Frampton concedes that film uses material of the real world but finally – and hence his theory is one of reception – this material becomes its own world with its own processes and even its own thoughts. To draw a consistent picture of his theory he developed a kind of unique language to speak about film.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. DISCUSSION OF THE TERMS OF FILMOSOPHY
2.1 Film-being
2.2 Filmind
2.3 Film-thinking
3. FINAL COMMENT
4. IMAGE SEQUENCES
4.1 Sequence one
4.2 Sequence two
4.3 Sequence three
4.4 Sequence four
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY
5.1 Literature
5.2 Internet Sources
5.3 Film Sources
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines Daniel Frampton’s theory of "Filmosophy," which proposes a radical departure from traditional cinematic reception by treating film as an independent, thinking entity rather than a mere reproduction of reality. The author investigates how this approach redefines the interaction between the medium and the spectator.
- The conceptualization of "Film-being" as an autonomous, anthropomorphic reality.
- The function of the "Filmind" in creating and controlling the film-world.
- The mechanisms of "Film-thinking" and its differentiation from human cognitive processes.
- The practical application of Filmosophical terms to David Cronenberg’s film 'eXistenZ'.
- A critical assessment of Filmosophy as a new framework for film analysis.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 Film-being
“How is the film-world is created and reconfigured?”4. This question is a major component of Filmosophy, and is what Frampton discusses in the second chapter, basing the discussion on several writers from the twentieth century and what he calls the film-being. It is one of his most general terms because it comprises the being of film with all the aspects the filmgoer5 perceives while he is experiencing the film. It is firstly the union of the sound and the images presented to the filmgoer, and secondly the content and style of presentation. For example: “why do we see this character, at this moment, from this angle?”6.
The most important step in understanding Frampton’s thoughts about Filmosophy is to think of all these named aspects as one. The major critique against common reception theories, like narrative, aesthetic or technical reflections, is that they do not conceive film as one medium that consists of all these. Appreciating the technical language or the narrative structure might help to understand the way a film is constructed, but does not help to explain the filmgoer’s experience where form and content are experienced as one.7 This unity implicates also that the well-defined positions between author, film and filmgoer are more permeable. Questions for the intention of the director are absolutely irrelevant because the film itself is the final being that the filmgoer experiences in its entirety. That this is also true for the filmic content itself, Daniel Frampton gives several examples. In his opinion, there is no difference for the film-being if there is an impersonal or personality-full narration.8 A personal narrator as an acting figure might give the filmgoer the impression that he stands closer to what is being shown, but in any case this is nothing more then the filmic world, so the film-being is that which is talking. So in this regard, there is no conceptual difference if the filmgoer does feel duped by the film, or if he sympathises with a role, or if the filmic world might scare him.
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: Introduces Daniel Frampton's manifesto "Filmosophy" and argues for a shift from viewing film as a mediator to seeing it as an autonomous entity that thinks.
2. DISCUSSION OF THE TERMS OF FILMOSOPHY: Explores the foundational concepts of the theory, specifically the autonomy of film-being, the role of the filmind, and the distinct nature of film-thinking.
3. FINAL COMMENT: Provides a critical reflection on the strengths and limitations of applying Filmosophy as a new method for interpreting cinematic works.
4. IMAGE SEQUENCES: Presents specific visual examples from David Cronenberg's 'eXistenZ' to illustrate the theoretical concepts discussed in previous chapters.
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lists the academic literature, internet sources, and film sources consulted for the research.
Keywords
Filmosophy, Daniel Frampton, Film-being, Filmind, Film-thinking, Cinematic Reception, David Cronenberg, eXistenZ, Media Studies, Visual Literacy, Film Theory, Phenomenology, Film Experience, Film Analysis, Moving Images.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this research paper?
The paper focuses on Daniel Frampton's theory of "Filmosophy," which challenges traditional film theory by arguing that cinema should be analyzed as an autonomous "thinking" medium.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The work explores the anthropomorphic nature of film, the concept of the filmind as the creative force behind a film, and the unique, non-human way in which films "think" and process information.
What is the author's primary research goal?
The goal is to explain Frampton's neologisms and demonstrate how they can be applied as a practical, yet radical, new way of understanding and analyzing cinematic reception.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The paper employs a theoretical analysis of film philosophy, synthesizing concepts from authors like Deleuze and Sobchack, and tests these theories against the film example 'eXistenZ'.
What does the main body of the text cover?
It provides an in-depth examination of the technical terms "film-being," "filmind," and "film-thinking," followed by a sequence-based analysis of Cronenberg’s film.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
Key terms include Filmosophy, film-being, filmind, film-thinking, and cinematic reception.
How does Frampton differentiate the "filmind" from a human mind?
Frampton argues that the filmind is not a human consciousness but a structural and spiritual force that originates from within the film itself, independent of the filmmaker's intent.
What role does the film 'eXistenZ' play in the study?
The film serves as a practical case study, allowing the author to apply abstract Filmosophical terms to concrete scenes to clarify how film-thinking manifests visually.
What does the author conclude regarding the viability of Filmosophy?
The author acknowledges Filmosophy as a creative and refreshing approach that revives film science, yet warns that it risks becoming overly fragile if it drifts too far from concrete analysis into abstract rhetoric.
- Citation du texte
- Martin Thiele (Auteur), 2009, Filmosophy - About Framptons Radically New Way of Understanding Cinema, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/127134
