BIRTH OF A NOTION: A Filmmaker's Perspective on the Development of Interactive Narrative Home Authors: Jim Bizzocchi New Media and Justine Bizzocchi Learning Copyright 1995 Dada Processing Jim Bizzocchi This paper is excerpted from a longer document co-authored by Jim Bizzocchi, Justine Bizzocchi, and Mike Quinlan for presentation at the WRITE 95 Conference (Writers' Retreat on Interactive Technology & Equipment) sponsored by the University of British Columbia, Emily Carr Institute of Art and Design, and the Centre for Image and Sound Research in June of 1995. In the full paper an appendix includes documentation of a series of explorations into existing interactive multimedia product undertaken by the authors in conjunction with Vancouver filmmakers early in 1995. Abstract Introduction Background: Film and Linearity New Narrative Forms New interactive media are in the early stages of development, particularly as Abstract regards the invention of narrative forms and devices. The wealth of cinematic experience with narrative in a linear format can inform explorations of narrative in a non-linear, branched environment. Embedded within the film narrative tradition is a wealth of examples of filmmakers who consciously incorporated non-linearity, and even branching, into their narrative structures. The paper first outlines a number of these examples from film history. In the second section, the paper posits the key issues and questions that writers must address as they seek to develop compelling and immersive experiences in new media. Topics covered include suspension of disbelief, interface design, models of branched narrative, layering of information, system "learning", and transitions. Our goal in this endeavor is not to translate existing film esthetics into the new medium. Both evolution and revolution are essential in the growth of a new medium's esthetic. In developing their analysis, the writers drew upon the contributions of a number of Vancouver filmmakers who took part in a series of discussions about narrative in interactive media. A summary of these discussions is included as an appendix to the paper. Back to top of page Introduction Film is by far the predominant form of narrative entertainment in twentieth century North America (including in this definition of film is its related forms of production and distribution: television and video). Older narrative forms, books and theatre, have by no means disappeared, but they do not approach the pervasiveness of the new medium. Now, on the brink of the 21st century, a new form is emerging that may succeed in overtaking film and television. Interactive multimedia in the form of computer games is already challenging the economic returns enjoyed by film's box office take. This is happening despite the relatively small number of households that have systems that can run the games. Whether this success will continue to grow depends in part on whether the creators of new media product can diversify the content to include a range of narrative or story-based experiences. To do so, authors must find unique methods to provide a rewarding emotional and immersive experience, at least equal in impact with film and television. This project grew out of a few assumptions. The first is that the new interactive medium is in the early stages of development. In particular it is a medium that has not yet found its own set of narrative forms and devices. Second, film is one of the key "parents" to this new medium, and has a particularly rich narrative arsenal. In addition to the mainstream theatrical film tradition, film has a wide variety of alternative and collateral streams within which concepts of narrative form have been explored. Experimental film, video art, documentary film, commercials, and even rock videos are but a few examples of the panorama of cinematic variations, each with their own sets of narrative styles and explorations of narrative devices. A conclusion that we drew from this is that the wealth of cinematic experience with narrative in a linear format could inform some interesting explorations of narrative in a non-linear, branched environment. Since the Vancouver film community is a particularly vital and eclectic group of cinematic artists, we decided to engage them in this process. The observations of the Vancouver filmmakers are distilled in the appendix to this paper. The paper itself is in two parts. First, the authors review existing film narrative form for some clues to possibilities in an interactive branched multimedia environment. Second, we turn our attention directly to the emerging interactive environment itself to outline some of the issues of narrative form and esthetics that the authors feel will become critical. Our goal in this endeavor is not to translate existing film esthetics into the new medium. That would be a dry and ultimately pointless exercise. Any new medium has to find its own esthetics on its own terms. Certainly part of that process is adapting esthetics from older media in new contexts, but part of it is also breaking free from the limitations of the older esthetics. Film, for example, borrowed much of its sense of narrative form from live theatre. Many pre-cinematic narrative concepts remain vital in today's cinema. However, film narrative form could not reach its full potential until it broke free of the restrictions of the theatre. This combination of evolution and revolution of esthetic is a necessary part of the growth of any new art form. In this process we have tried to strike a balance between respecting the lessons of the existing medium and perceiving the emerging possibilities inherent in the new one. Back to top of page Background: Film is, on the face of it, a completely linear platform. A film is designed to be started at the beginning and rolled through to the end. A film viewer is not Film and expected to violate this concept by stopping and starting the projector. Linearity Neither is he or she expected to reorder the sequencing in ways that might be more interesting or more satisfying. Even the migration of cinema material to video platforms, where the nature of the hardware and the software is more amenable to temporal manipulation, has not significantly challenged this assumption of linearity. Traditional cinematic storytelling is founded on the rock of continuity construction, with its assumptions about "real" (i.e. linear) time. Concomitant with this is a set of assumptions about the passivity of the film audience and the surrender of their rights to participation, volition and even cognition to the will of the cinematic artist. Closer examination of film esthetics and film history can reveal a different perspective. Embedded within the film narrative tradition is a wealth of examples of filmmakers who consciously incorporated non-linearity, and even branching, into their narrative structures. Filmmakers have shown themselves to be ready to adapt and to push narrative form in the service of telling the story they wish to tell. Linearity has never been a sacred boundary to a film artist with something to say. Basic Film Tools On one level, some of the basic narrative tools that all filmmakers take for granted are in fact non-linear ones. Flashback is the most obvious example. Filmmakers feel perfectly free to introduce a backwards (or even forward) jump in time into an otherwise completely linear film or sequence. Cross cutting is another example of non-linearity. Filmmakers since D.W. Griffith's time have felt free to tell two different stories once, cutting back and forth as the narrative impels them to do so. It is interesting to note that the precise purpose of this device is to allow the audience to actively compare two different stories while creating some kind of internal synthesis. On an even more fundamental level, it can be argued that any montage construction is by definition a non-linear cinematic form. Accumulation of image is substituted for temporal linearity. The place where the images are accumulated is within the mind (or the heart) of the audience, where an active synthesis of image leads to an emotional or cognitive narrative synergy. Eisenstein recognized the active role of the audience in this process when he referred to montage as a "collision" of images within the viewers perception. Multiple Visual Tracks Some narratives have moved filmmakers to explicitly tell two or more visual stories not by cutting back and forth between them, but by breaking the screen into two or more subframes and showing different plotlines (or different views of the same plot) within each frame. This practice is seen as early as Abel Gance's Napoleon, and continues today. More recent theatrical film examples include Thomas Crown Affair, The Longest Yard, More American Graffiti, and Woodstock. This purely visual device places great emphasis on the audience's ability to quickly assimilate different narrative threads, actively choose which of the subframes to pay closest attention to, simultaneously track the others, and constantly synthesize the different information tracks into a single coherent narrative stream. It is difficult to reconcile this with a description of the film viewer as a non-interactive and passive recipient of a purely linear storyline. Narrative devices Some films use a parallel psychological pluralism to develop different interpretations of the same event. The classic example of this variation on narrative form is Rashomon (redone as the western film The Outrage). Other films have made use of both intensive flashback and intensive flashforward as a narrative device. A familiar example of this is A Christmas Carol, which borrows its narrative structure from the Dickens novel. Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction also place reliance on these techniques. Perhaps one of the most intensive examples is the film version of Slaughterhouse Five, where an explicit temporal non-linearity is intrinsic to the film's narrative structure (as it is in the novel upon which it is based).