An Investigation of Priming, Self-Consciousness, and Allegiance in the Diegetic Camera Horror Film
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Oxford Brookes University: RADAR An investigation of priming, self-consciousness, and allegiance in the diegetic camera horror film by Peter Turner A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of Doctor of Philosophy by Oxford Brookes University Submitted June 2017 Statement of originality Some of the discussion of The Blair Witch Project throughout this thesis has formed the basis for a book, Devil’s Advocates: The Blair Witch Project (Auteur, 2014). Some of the discussion of priming in chapter four was also used in a conference paper, Behind the Camera: Priming the Spectator of Found Footage Horror, delivered at The Society for Cognitive Studies of the Moving Image in 2015. Sections on personal imagining also formed the basis of a conference paper, Personal Imagining and the Point-of-View Shot in Diegetic Camera Horror Films, delivered at The Society for Cognitive Studies of the Moving Image in 2017. Finally, significant amounts of Chapter 3 and Chapter 5 will be featured in two chapters of an upcoming edited collection on found footage horror films with the working title [Rec] Terror: Essays on Found Footage Horror Films. i Abstract The main research question underpinning this study asks why and how the diegetic camera technique has become so popular to both contemporary horror filmmakers and audiences. In order to answer this question, this thesis adopts a mainly cognitive theoretical framework in order to address the mental schemata and processes that are elicited and triggered by these films. The concept of the diegetic camera is explored by analysing specific films and constructing an argument for the effects that this aesthetic and narrational technique can have on the cognition of viewers. Applying theoretical notions such as schema, priming, identification, recognition, alignment, and allegiance to the analysis of the focus films, I examine how the viewer’s mind works when watching these films. Another central concern of this thesis is the way in which mediated realism is constructed in the films in order to attempt to make audiences either (mis)read the footage as non-fiction, or more commonly to imagine that the footage is non- fiction. I demonstrate that the films under scrutiny create a sense of increased immediacy and alignment with the characters through various techniques associated with the diegetic camera. The concepts of identification and character engagement are interrogated by using cognitive concepts such as recognition, alignment, and allegiance (Smith, 1995). These individual concepts break down the notion of identification into distinct processes, allowing for a more rigorous examination of the notion of character engagement. The thesis also considers how priming and self-consciousness eventually affect the audience’s perception and cognition of the films, most significantly in relation to the theory of personal imagining (Currie, 1995). ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of illustrations..................................................................................................vi Acknowledgements..................................................................................................x 1. Introduction........................................................................................................1 1.1 Scope and significance: why do found footage films matter? 1.2 Approaching the diegetic camera 1.3 The corpus of focus films: found footage and the diegetic camera 1.4 Review of critical literature: diegetic camera horror, cognitivism and identification 1.4.1 Diegetic camera horror 1.4.2 Cognitivism and the processing of point of view 1.4.3 Towards a cognitive theory of identification and the diegetic camera 1.5 Genealogy of the diegetic camera horror film: faked representations, first person point of view, real death on screen, developments in camera technology, and the horror genre 1.5.1 Faked representations 1.5.2 First-person point of view 1.5.3 Real death on screen 1.5.4 Developments in technology and the impact on aesthetics: cameras, surveillance, and the dominance of mediated reality 1.5.5 The horror genre: history, aesthetics, and technology 1.5.6 Mimicked forms: documentary, reality television, and home video 1.6 Structure of the thesis and chapter outlines PART 1: Theoretical context 2. Narration and the diegetic camera.................................................................38 2.1 The diegetic camera and point of view iii 2.2 Issues of narration and enunciation 2.2.1 Self-consciousness 2.2.2 Tone and metatextuality 2.2.3 Performance 2.2.4 Sound and dialogue 2.2.5 Personal imagining 2.3 Realism 3. Developing a cognitive approach to diegetic camera horror films..............68 3.1 Limits of psychoanalytic theories for diegetic camera horror films 3.2 Cognitivism and how we think about the diegetic camera 3.2.1 Priming for point of view 3.2.2 Heightened engagement in diegetic camera films 3.2.3 Encouraging empathy through information acquisition 3.2.4 Attention and cognitive participation: activating the seeking system 3.2.5 Alignment and allegiance with camera operators and charismatic killers 3.3 Methodology for the analysis PART 2: Analysis and Case Studies 4. Priming the spectator and mediated reality..................................................93 4.1 Defining priming 4.2 Viewer hypothesising 4.3 Representing mediated reality with the diegetic camera 4.4 Stylistic techniques 4.5 Creating mood and emotion 4.6 Conclusion iv 5: Camera operator interaction with viewers and profilmic subjects: The case of home movies...................................................................................................136 5.1 Recognition of camera operators and cinematography as performance 5.2 Alignment of information accumulation and cognitive and bodily response 5.3 Interaction with the viewer 5.4 Interaction between camera operators and profilmic subjects 5.5 Empathy, affective identification, and allegiance with camera operators 5.6 Allegiance with camera operators engaging in amoral behaviour 5.7 Conclusion 6: Problematic Allegiance with Charismatic Killers: Man Bites Dog, The Last Horror Movie and Zero Day...............................................................................172 6.1 Recognition of killers and amoral fascination 6.2 How the diegetic camera directs moral evaluations of characters 6.3 Empathy, the killer’s face, and the close-up 6.4 Moral Structure: Killers and camera operators 6.5 Conclusion 7. Re-definitions, classifications and summary conclusions...........................203 7.1 Re-definitions and classifications 7.2 Conclusions and contribution 7.2.1 The importance of priming 7.2.2 Self-consciousness and camera operator interaction 7.2.3 Allegiance with charismatic killers 7.3 Further areas of exploration 8. Bibliography...................................................................................................216 9. Television and Filmography..........................................................................240 10. Appendix A...................................................................................................246 TOTAL WORD COUNT: 83,671 v List of illustrations Figures 1.1: Heather Donahue in The Blair Witch Project. 1.2: Ángela Vidal presents While You’re Asleep in Rec. 2.1: Present time in Exhibit A as Gary King takes the camera towards the family television to show a group of friends what he has recorded. 2.2: Cut to the camera’s memory of the past when the camera was left recording on the beach on a family day out (Exhibit A). 2.3: Present time in Cloverfield as Hud decides to show a group of people what he has just recorded on his camera on a New York City street. He points the camera toward the ground before, pressing the stop button to stop recording and look back at the previously recorded footage. 2.4: Cut to camera’s memory of the past when Rob films Beth on a day out to Coney Island (Cloverfield). 2.5: POV of explosion far above Hud (Cloverfield). 2.6: Difficult to discern POV visuals (Cloverfield). 2.7: Difficult to discern POV visuals (Cloverfield). 2.8: Hud’s camera hits the ground next to one of his feet (Cloverfield). 3.1: Rob is ahead of Hud moving fast down a street (Cloverfield). 3.2: Rob is troubled by what he hears on the phone and caught in close up (Cloverfield). 4.1: First diegetic information presented in film is text informing audience that the diegetic camera in Exhibit A was found at a ‘murder scene’. 4.2: Text informing audience that the footage in Paranormal Entity 2 was found ‘alongside the remains of the six victims’. 4.3: The Blair Witch Project opening text. 4.4: Deliberately faint ‘Do not duplicate’ watermark in Cloverfield. 4.5: The origin of the footage is a ‘digital SD card’ in Cloverfield. 4.6: Opening text of Paranormal Activity. 4.7: Pixelating production company logo (Rec). 4.8: Visible camera in The Last Horror Movie. vi 4.9: Angela checks the framing with her camera operator in Rec. 4.10 and 4.11: Minor characters in Rec repeatedly glance at the diegetic camera. 4.12 and 4.13: The camera itself, and its primary function, are discussed in Rec. 4.14: Mike demands that Heather stop filming (The Blair Witch Project). 4.15: Hud films a heated exchange from a hidden position (Cloverfield). 4.16: Presenter Angela performs for the diegetic camera (Rec). 4.17 and 4.18 : Max directs his camera operator to get a shot over the edge of the building (The Last