A Film by Any Other Name….

What are the necessary conditions that compose the art of film? Are they something that can easily be defined, or are there gray areas that overlap with other art mediums? If we look at the real definition, which states that for a given thing to be x certain (necessary) conditions must be met, then the answer seems simple. In order for a film to be considered a “film,” it must a) be a detached display, b) maintain the possibility of movement, c) be a type of the token, and d) keep its status as not intrinsically a piece of art in itself.


A) Detached Display- For a film to be a detached display, it must be impossible for the audience to orient themselves according to the images projected on the screen. Though these may be real places (for example Big Ben in London, England) we cannot determine the spatial location of the landmark without a map, compass or GPS. In class we viewed the movie Vertigo. Though it takes place in Northern California, we cannot automatically orient ourselves in the direction of the Redwood Forest or San Francisco as Scottie moves from location to location.

"An Example of Detached Display in Vertigo"

B) Maintain the Possibility of Movement- A film must always keep the possibility of movement on the table, even if it is merely bluffing the viewer. As long as one is viewing the film, there is always a question as to whether it will move or not. In class we watched the film La Jetée, which was primarily composed of individual frames until a fleeting moment towards the end of the film, where a woman wakes up.

                                    "Example of Possibility of Movement at 18:01"

C) Type of the Token- When a film is a type of the token it is not THE film. This raises questions such as whether any version can be called THE film, and if this even exists in the physical sense.  The DVD of Duck Soup is not the film Duck Soup but merely an imprint or shadow of the film itself. This is a rather difficult concept to grasp as it almost treats the piece of art in the abstract.

"Is this THE Film? Example of Type of Token"

Looking at the final qualification for the real definition of film, a copy of the film (say a DVD, VHS, or film canister) is not a work of art in and of itself. For example, no one would ever think of displaying a physical copy of Night of the Demon in an art gallery (barring that it was being shown for its cover art). One simply needs to peruse the five-dollar bin at Walmart to find another copy if one’s original copy happens to break. It is not irreplaceable. At least, not until a famous artist makes it a ready made and signs his name on it (I'm looking at you Duchamp).