Newsgroup: it.arti.cinema
Titolo: mini-saggio (in inglese): modi di vedere un film

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/jcb0102.doc
maitre Aliboron
-- 
UFVORCVLPS: Sin City / La diagonale du fou/ Dodgeball / The
interpreter / Heat / The Forgotten / Batman Begins / Hello, Dolly! /
Girl with a pearl earring / Germania anno zero / Madagascar

 
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Students/jcb0102.doc
Ways of Watching Films
Outline and discuss in detail the differences between various ways of
watching films: a) at the cinema; b) on video-recordings; c) on DVD
(Digital Versatile Discs); d) when they are broadcast on television.
In this essay I will discuss the differences between the ways of
watching films both technically and socially.  I also try to deduce the
best method of watching films.
"It is important to consider the significance of the time spent watching
films not just in terms of 'quantity' but also in terms of 'quality'."
Sylvia Harvey (1996:241)
Firstly let us discuss how the cinema differs to the other ways of
watching films.  The obvious difference is that the cinema displays
films projected onto a huge screen in a darkened public auditorium
compared to video, DVD and television broadcasts of film that are
obviously viewed on a much smaller screen.  John Ellis comments on
differences between cinema and broadcast television regarding the
attention paid to the film.
"Cinema offers a large scale, highly detailed and photographic image to
a spectator who is engaged in an activity of intense and relatively
sustained attention to it. Broadcast TV offers a small image of low
definition, to which sound is crucial in holding the spectator's
attention.  The spectator glances rather than gazes at the screen;
attention is sporadic rather than sustained." (1982:24)
If this is true then Ellis is suggesting that watching a film in the
cinema engrosses you in the film and has your undivided attention,
whereas broadcast TV does not.  This is true in some cases but in some
occasions, the spectator may have started watching television to
specifically watch the film in which case it may then indeed capture the
viewer's undivided attention.  
Robert Kolker suggests that there are other things going on as the
spectator watches a film on TV:
"As a television viewer, one watches and takes part in multiple
narratives: the main program, the commercial interruptions, and the
domestic dramas going on in the room, all of them folded one within the
other.  In this way, television becomes a kind of communal experience,
though different from film and the movie theater." (2002:212)
This seems to suggest that Kolker sees television as having too many
distractions compared to cinema, as you can't give it your full
attention.      
Cinema is of course the first opportunity of viewing a film.  As the
film is shown in the cinema before anywhere else, people may not know
much about the film if they have not read a review or only seen the
teaser trailer.  In this way, the narrative is an enigma and the only to
satisfy curiosity is to go and watch the film.  That isn't to say that
people can watch a film on TV and not know what it is about, but chances
are that if someone is watching it closely, then it is because of the
publicity by trailers for it on TV or a segment on it in a TV guide.  
Cinema is also seen as a more social occasion, as you make the effort of
going to see the film and at a time you want to see it.  Unless you have
a VCR, you don't have the luxury of seeing a film as and when you wish.
"There is hardly any chance of catching a particular TV programme
'tomorrow' or 'next week sometime' as there is with cinema film." (Ellis
1982:111)
Video recording can be seen as the answer to this problem.  Ellis
suggests that home video is a way of moving a film's place of time:
"There is evidence (like all evidence in this area, not particularly
reliable) that home video is overwhelmingly used as a 'time shift'
phenomenon, moving a particular broadcast programme to a point when it
is convenient to watch it."(1982:111-112)
Although applying to TV in general, this can also apply to TV broadcast
films.
Another difference between watching films on television and the other
media is that (although this doesn't apply to BBC broadcasts) films are
interrupted by advertisement breaks.  Ellis states:
"TV's process of segmentalisation of its flow contrasts again with
cinemas emphasis on the single unitary film." (1982:126)
He may be referring to serials as being segments of the same storyline,
however this is also the case when the flow of a movie is broken up with
adverts.  David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson illustrate this point by
referring to segmentalisation in other media:
"If you are listening closely to a song on a CD and the music is
abruptly switched off, you are likely to feel a little frustrated.  If
you start reading a novel, become engrossed in it, and then misplace the
book, you will probably feel the same way.
        Such feelings arise because our experience of artworks is
patterned and structured.  The human mind craves form.  For this reason,
form is of central importance in any artwork, regardless of its medium."
(2004:48)
This would be a strong argument to suggest television broadcasts of
films to be the worst of the 4 methods of viewing, however it is free,
once the licence fee is paid.
Other than cutting, which I will discuss later, Bordwell & Thompson
state that,
"Broadcasters also use "time compression", a device that speeds up the
film slightly so more commercials can be squeezed in. Even "premium"
cable channels snip out nudity and use redubbed lines of dialogue."
(2004:21)
There are also technical differences that make the experience of
watching a film different in each of its methods.  In 'The Oxford Guide
To Film Studies', Robert P. Kolker suggests these technical aspects have
a part to play in the viewer's attention:
"The conditions of its viewing are not the same.  The kind of
concentration made possible in a darkened cinema where a high-resolution
image is projected on the screen is not the same as the bright busy
living-room or the comfort of the bedroom, where a small, low-resolution
image is projected from behind onto a cathode ray tube." (1998:12)
John Hill discusses the loss of resolution and therefore picture quality
between viewing a film on TV and video compared to cinema:
"The viewing of film on television or video inevitably involves a drop
in technical quality.  This has various aspects and includes a certain
loss of quality in sound, colour range and resolution (from 3,500 to
4,000 lines of resolution to 525 lines of resolution in the United
States and 625 in Europe).  There is also the vexed question of aspect
ratio.  Whereas the aspect ratio of television is normally 1.33:1,
films- since the advent of widescreen processes in the 1950s- have
characteristically been shot in much more rectangular ratios (such as
1.85 or 2.35:1).  In order to accommodate films to a television format,
'panning and scanning' techniques ironically developed by the film
industry itself) have been adopted, which lead not only to a loss of
much of the original image, but also to a degree of 'remaking' of films
as well."(1998:606)     
Kolker also discusses this issue of aspect ratio in the same book:
"The image and the ways in which we attend to it are different.  The
television or videotaped image are not only smaller, but more square.
The sides of the image are lost on most transfers of film to video
(almost two-thirds of the image of the original was filmed in anamorphic
wide screen and then 'pan and scanned' for videotape).  The difference
in size, resolution, and response creates a different textual
construction for televisual as opposed to theatrical viewing." (1998:12)
This is demonstrated in fig.1, from the website 
www.hometheaterhifi.com
.
Figure 1
Some films have been said to lose a lot of the tension by 'panning and
scanning'.  In some cases this taken into account.  John Hill states:
"…Filmmakers have increasingly had to acknowledge that television is a
film's ultimate destination and stick to safe action areas while
filming." (1998:606)
Therefore the film is sometimes shot with all of the action in the
centre of the screen, do that they don't lose any action when the sides
of the image are taken off.
Nowadays, these problems are being rectified as widescreen TVs are more
widespread and letterboxing has become increasingly popular since 1985
when it was first introduced.  Hill states:
"With the growing acceptability to audiences of 'letterboxing' (whereby
films are shown in their proper aspect ratio), some of the problems
associated with panning and scanning are beginning to be overcome."
(1998:607)        
Some however find they prefer the full screen option, as the black
masking is distracting and prefer the image to fill their screen,
particularly if it's a small TV set.
Other differences between cinema and other media include things being
added when released on DVD or video or cut out.  Television broadcasts
often drastically cut material out of films that they feel is
unsuitable.  In cases like this, it can damage the impact of the movie.
A good example of this is The Exorcist.  When it was re-released a few
years back, the film was the original cut and when it was released on
DVD and video, it was the same version as in cinemas.  However when the
film was broadcast on TV in America, many of the lines in the film were
dubbed over and scenes were cut, as they were deemed unsuitable.  This
happens quite regularly especially in the case of horror films due to
the often violent nature of the genre.
In some ways a release of a film onto DVD or video can sometimes be a
'better' version than the one shown in cinemas.  Examples include a
version of The Exorcist dubbed as "The Version You've Never Seen" which
featured the infamous "spider-walk" sequence (fig. 2) and other cut
scenes, this was released as well as the original theatrical version.
Many other films have been released with extra footage in order to
entice people into seeing what they missed in the cinema.  This is quite
a common occurrence in teen comedy films such as the American Pie
trilogy (fig. 3), Road Trip and Old School.
Figure 2
Figure 3
There are many differences in the ways people can watch a video; for
example, there are, or at least were, different formats of video.  These
include V2000 introduced by Phillips, BETAMAX introduced by Sony and
finally Video Home System (VHS) that was introduced by JVC and
Matsushita.  Although VHS was not the best quality, as BETAMAX was, it
dominated the market due to the higher recording capacity.  
There are different ways in which people watch a video.  If someone
hires a film for one night then the chances are that they will pay it
closer attention as they wont have the opportunity to rewatch it
multiple times.  If people buy a film without having seen it then the
first time they watch it, they would probably give it more attention.
However, video rentals are not always the same version as the theatrical
version either:
"What about rental video? Doesn't that conform to the original
theatrical release? Often not.  Directors occasionally revise films for
video release, as Sam Raimi did with The Evil Dead by eliminating a
crudely animated shot of lightning striking a tree (and depriving many
fans of their favourite shot).  Songs are often replaced in video
release, largely because the rights could not be negotiated.  Some video
rental chains force distribution companies to prepare softer versions of
R-rated films." (Bordwell & Thompson 2004: 21)
For a few years new formats were being tried and tested such as
laserdisc and Video CD.  Although laserdiscs were essentially the same
as DVD, they were much bigger and so scratched and jumped a lot.  Video
CDs required multiple discs to hold films and so never really took off.
DVD had all the qualities and none of the flaws.   
For the past few years, DVD sales have dominated the market. When DVD
first arrived, it boasted much higher picture quality, infinitely
clearer sound and special features.  DVD is a digital medium and opts
for direct access to particular parts by use of chapter stops compared
to the serial access of video by rewinding and fast forwarding.  They
also allow for more storage space and are available on portable players,
computers and video game consoles.  Robert Kolker states:
"The introduction of DVD, which are the size of CDs and can store
enormous amounts of digitised material, will make movie watching even
more of a portable experience than it is now with videotape." (2002:219)
Although DVD has special features, many people have said that they
either only watch them once or twice or not at all.  Essentially DVD is
the new format for home viewing and so is still going to be viewed on a
TV screen.  Many things make it a closer format to cinema but due to it
being shown in the privacy of your own home, still has the distractions
of video (except for tracking problems with old tapes).  For years
people have been trying to make a home viewing more like cinema with the
help of surround systems, and large flat screen TV sets.  Many people
turn the lights off when watching a film possibly to simulate the
experience of being in a cinema, but when you can stop, pause, rewind
zoom in and fast forward, it can break the flow of the movie as would
someone knocking the door or the phone ringing.
It is for reasons like this that home viewing will never be the same as
going to the cinema, even with channels like Sky Box Office, where you
get charged to watch a fairly recent film, you still have the
distractions. You can invite friends over to watch a film but it's not
the same as making a point of going to see a film.  However being able
to stop and start when you like may appeal to some.  Home viewing and
cinema each have their pros and cons, but essentially it is up to the
viewer how they view it.   I believe that DVD is as close as we can get.
For now.   
   References:
o       Ellis, John (1982): Visible Fictions: Cinema, Television, Video.
London: Routledge
o       Bordwell, David & Kristin Thompson (2004): Film Art: An
Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill
o       Hill, John & Pamela Church Gibson (ed.) (1998): Oxford Guide To
Film Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press
o       Harvey, Sylvia (1996): What is Cinema? The Sensuous, the
Abstract and the Political, in Christopher Williams (ed.), Cinema: The
Beginnings and the Future. London: University of Westminster Press
o       Kolker, Robert (2002): Film, Form, and Culture. New York:
McGraw-Hill 
-- 
UFV:Wise Girls(DVD)/Die Nibelungen/Cyrano e D'Artagnan
D'Artagnan e i tre moschettieri/La vendetta della maschera
di ferro - 
http://www.albertofarina.tk

 (Digital Versatile Discs); d) when they are broadcast on television.
e) guardare un divx in modalità "always on top" mentre si è al computer,
magari in mIRC
-- 
stamina (chiocciola) email (punto) it