THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CINEMA’S MOTION FORMS: FILM THEORY, THE DIGITAL TURN, AND THE POSSIBILITIES OF CINEMATIC MOVEMENT A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF CINEMA AND MEDIA STUDIES BY JORDAN SCHONIG CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2017 The filmmaker considers form merely as the form of a movement. —Jean Epstein Contents LIST OF FIGURES iv ABSTRACT vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii INTRODUCTION MOVING TOWARD FORM 1 CHAPTER 1 CONTINGENT MOTION Rethinking the “Wind in the Trees” from Flickering Leaves to Digital Snow 42 CHAPTER 2 HABITUAL GESTURES Postwar Realism, Embodied Agency, and the Inscription of Bodily Movement 88 CHAPTER 3 SPATIAL UNFURLING Lateral Movement, Twofoldness, and the Aspect-Perception of the Mobile Frame 145 CHAPTER 4 BLEEDING PIXELS Compression Glitches, Datamoshing, and the Technical Production of Digital Motion 202 CONCLUSION OPENING CINEPHILIA; or, Movement as Excess 263 BIBLIOGRAPHY 280 iii List of Figures Figure 1.1 Stills from A Boat Leaving Harbour (Lumière, 1895) and Rough Sea at Dover (Acres and Paul, 1895)………………………………………………………………………..64 Figure 1.2 A myriad of bubbles in Frozen (Buck and Lee, 2013)……………………………....79 Figure 1.3 A featureless character digs snow in a SIGGRAPH demo of Frozen’s physics engine …………………………………………………………………………………....80 Figure 1.4 Various blocks of snow collapse in a SIGGRAPH demo of Frozen’s physics engine …………………………………………………………………………………....80 Figure 2.1 Linear markings in Umberto D (De Sica, 1952)……………………………………104 Figure 2.2 Harold Russell lights his cigarette in Best Years of our Lives (Wyler, 1946)………….109 Figure 2.3 Harold Russell and Hoagy Carmichael in Best Years of our Lives…………………...113 Figure 2.4 Deep-focus composition in Best Years of Our Lives………………………………..116 Figure 2.5 Mouchette pours coffee in Mouchette (Bresson, 1967)…………………………….126 Figure 2.6 Mouchette tosses the metal top in Mouchette……………………………………...128 Figure 3.1 Lateral-view abstraction in Berlin: Symphony of a Great City (Ruttman, 1927)………163 Figure 3.2 Lateral camera movement and pulsing visual rhythm in Mauvais Sang (Carax, 1986) …………………………………………………………………………………..167 Figure 3.3 Spatial unfurling in Mauvais Sang and Holy Motors (Carax, 2012)…………………..168 Figure 3.4 The rhythm of blurred fence slats in The Cranes are Flying (Kalatozov, 1957)……..173 Figure 3.5 The lulling rhythm of unfurling fence slats in All My Life (Baillie, 1966)…………174 Figure 3.6 Lateral camera movement and visual rhythm in Gerry (Van Sant, 2002)………….175 Figure 3.7 Five frames (with soundtrack) of blurred motion in La région centrale (Snow, 1971) …………………………………………………………………………………..183 Figure 3.8 Rorschach-like juxtaposition in Georgetown Loop (Ken Jacobs, 1996)……………...195 Figure 3.9 Rorschach-like juxtaposition projected upside-down in Disorient Express (Jacobs, 1996)…………………………………………………………………………….198 Figure 4.1 A compression glitch in Strangers on a Train (Hitchcock, 1951)…………………...205 iv Figure 4.2 A compression glitch in Strangers on a Train……………………………………....205 Figure 4.3 A compression glitch in Margaret (Lonergan, 2011)……………………………....205 Figure 4.4 A compression glitch in Margaret………………………………………………....205 Figure 4.5 A compression glitch in Vertigo (Hitchcock, 1958)…………………………….....209 Figure 4.6 A visualization of “motion instructions” or “motion vectors” that constitute a P- Frame…………………………………………………………………………....232 Figure 4.7 Movements of figures “break through” space in “Evident Utensil” (left) and “Psy— Gangnam Style Datamosh” (right)…………………………......................................237 Figure 4.8 A face wears an image like camouflage paint in “Evident Utensil”……………......238 Figure 4.9 A single P-Frame with motion vectors visualized and the “blooming” that results from repeating that P-Frame multiple times, from Umberto D (De Sica, 1952)…....241 Figure 4.10 The figure melts downward in a “blooming” effect in “Evident Utensil”…….......241 Figure 4.11 The “trail” effect in “Evident Utensil”…………………………………………...242 Figure 4.12 “Geometric chronophotograph of the man in the black suit” (Marey, 1883)……..242 Figure 4.13 Perspectival movement rendered unrecognizable in Monster Movie (Murata, 2005)..250 Figure 4.14 Glitched multiple exposures in Lossless #2 (Baron and Goodwin, 2008)………….255 Figure 4.15 Shadow in Lossless #2…………………………………………………………….255 Figure 4.16 Snakelike Busby Berkeley configuration in Lossless #5……………………………256 Figure 4.17 Horizontal trails in Lossless #3…………………………………………………....257 Figure 4.18 A pan’s pixel stretch in Lossless #3……………………………………………….257 v Abstract This dissertation reworks a set of central debates in film theory by analyzing the aesthetics of cinematic motion. Providing a corrective to classical film theory’s preoccupation with the materiality of photography and more recent debates over the ontological separation of analog and digital media, I locate the uniqueness of cinematic experience in the aesthetic possibilities of cinema’s inscription of motion. Through the phenomenological analysis of Gestalt structures and patterns of movement unique to the moving image—what I call cinema’s motion forms—I demonstrate the various ways that cinematic motion is distinct from natural motion perception. By analyzing several of cinema’s motion forms shared across analog and digital cinemas, and revealing their logics of experience, I provide a fresh look on a set of problems of film theory. Each chapter pairs a phenomenological analysis of a particular motion form with an intervention in a film theoretical argument or assumption. The first chapter, “Contingent Motion,” challenges realist film theory’s historic emphasis on the photographic index by examining the perceptual affinities between the “wind in the trees” phenomenon of early cinema and the fascination with hyperrealist depictions of water, fire, and hair in recent computer animation. The second chapter, “Habitual Gestures,” focuses on sequences in postwar realist cinema that depict characters engaged in household chores and ordinary tasks, and argues that their reality effects are based around encounters with forms of bodily movement. The third chapter, “Spatial Unfurling,” explores the perceptual effects of flatness and visual rhythm shared by certain forms of camera movement in order to rethink the intuition that the moving camera virtually moves the spectator through the film’s world. And the fourth chapter, “Bleeding Pixels,” examines the visual qualities of digital video’s compression glitches in order to elucidate logical aporias endemic to the analysis of digital cinema. Through these case studies, this dissertation argues for the motion form as not only a neglected aspect of cinematic experience but also as an analytical tool for rethinking film theory. vi Acknowledgments Each page of this dissertation is marked by an insurmountable debt, not least of which is owed to the members of my dissertation committee, Dan Morgan, David Rodowick, Tom Gunning, and Noa Steimatsky. First and foremost, I wish to thank Dan Morgan, my committee chair. Working with Dan has proven to be an irreplaceable part of my development as a scholar. It is only with the aid of his intellectual generosity, his curiosity, and his confidence in my intuitions that this dissertation could have even been conceived. At the same time, his insistence on clarity and argumentative rigor taught me the value of checking my intuitions, stepping outside of myself, and considering my reader. Put simply, any intellectual development I’ve had as a scholar I owe to Dan’s devoted guidance. David Rodowick, meanwhile, kept me afloat with his unwavering enthusiasm and good spirit; so much of this project’s development was fostered by his steady and reliable encouragement, not to mention his unmatched attention to detail. Throughout my time working with him, David has remained a constant source of light. To Tom Gunning I owe a model for endless intellectual curiosity and a way of seeing the wonder in the everyday. Sitting in on one of Tom’s lectures or having a conversation with him was for me an instant cure for writer’s block, and what’s more, a reminder of what drew me to film studies in the first place. Any trace of sincerity and passion in my writing I owe to Tom. From Noa Steimatsky I learned to always question my assumptions and trust my instincts that things are often more complex than they seem. Her inimitable way of speaking and writing about films, and her unquestioned commitment to maintaining the integrity of her aesthetic experiences, proved and continues to prove to be an inspiration to me. I could not have asked for a more thoughtful, generous, and inspiring group of people to have worked with. Moreover, I cannot think of a group of scholars whose work I admire more. This dissertation in many ways has emerged vii directly from their ideas and ways of thinking about moving images; it merely continues a conversation that they have started. Apart from my committee, I owe a special debt to faculty I’ve had the fortune of working with and learning from during my time at both the University of Chicago and the University of Pittsburgh. Richard Neer has proved time and again to be a tremendous wellspring of ideas and an enthusiastic interlocutor. His way of speaking and writing about aesthetic experience across a range of media has profoundly shaped my thoughts about moving images. Salomé Skvirsky has generously offered a keen and critical eye to drafts of my work and has made innumerable insights in workshops and in conversation. More broadly, my work has benefited from conversations and brief exchanges, both in and out of the classroom, with Robert Bird, Dominique Bluher, Allyson Nadia Field, Patrick Jagoda, James Lastra, Yuri Tsivian, Takuya Tsunoda, and Jennifer Wild. At the University of Pittsburgh, my early graduate school education was shaped by seminars with a range of faculty in the Film Studies program. Randal Halle, Marcia Landy, Adam Lowenstein, Neepa Majumdar, and David Pettersen deserve special mention. Much of the enthusiasm that marked my first two years of graduate school and which propelled me throughout the remaining years I owe to them.