Explanation of Short Film "Newsreal"

In my Canadian Experimental Film and Video class we were given the option to create an experimental film or video as an end project and provide an accompanying 5-page explanation.

Here is a link to my video "Newsreal"



And here is a variation of my final paper:

Digital technology has been hailed for the popular access that it provides to various forms of art and communication. It is also hailed for its enhancements in narrative storytelling, cartography, space exploration, anatomical record, and military mapping. (Mitchell, 3-10) This praise of the digital medium has also been met with considerable criticism. While this technology allows a new freedom in imagery, it comes with the sacrifice of the indexicality of the image and its ontological properties. The very binary composition of digital imagery, while accommodating layered manipulation, nullifies the ontology of the image. My experimental video Newsreal (2008) reflects on this notion through my wilful manipulation of digital imagery for the purposes of indicating the instable concept of ontology found in the digital image.

To compliment the analysis of this film it would be beneficial to refer to the theories of Lev Manovich. Digital technology has been revered for its advancements in storytelling traditions (with video games for example), yet Manovich insists on condemning the privilege that narrative receives during discussions of digital cinema. Digital technology may provide means of advancement in the story-telling tradition, however it violates certain revered philosophies of photography and conventional cinema. One of the defining principles of conventional cinematic processes is that cinema stresses “the aura of reality ‘captured’ on film.” (Manovich, 299) That is to say that the basic ingredient of traditional cinema is reality, organized and configured for the exposure and “capturing” onto celluloid. The images on the film are impressions of what existed at one time, in one form or another. As Manovich articulates, “Cinema is the art of the index; it is an attempt to make art of a footprint.” (Manovich, 295) Similarly, William Mitchell tastefully describes the photographic image as “fossilized light.” (Mitchell, 24) With the digitization of the image, whether through 3D computer animation or the digitization of live-action footage, the traditional cinematic image not only loses its indexical relationship with reality but also loses its privilege as the only material from which motion-pictures can be produced. The common material of digital imagery what Manovich refers to as the “pixel”, but could more accurately be identified as the binary digit. The reduction of the motion-picture to a series of androgynous digits or pixels increases its plasticity. This plasticity renders the “given truth” of the photographic image obsolete. Without indexicality, an image does not bear an existential bond with its referent, and therefore is no longer reliable as an ontological representation of reality.

The purpose of Newsreal is not to condemn digital imagery for its lack of ontology. The purpose is merely to indicate towards this philosophy and its relationship with digital imagery. The film is comprised of three parts: A war newsreel, an advertisement, and a magic show. The idea was for the film to take the form of the various clips that would have been shown before a theatrical film screening in the 1940s. I chose this period for its distinct aesthetic (for I intended to emulate it) and for the period’s imagery anchoring in indexical representation of reality. Each in its own way, the segments comment on the manipulability of the digital, and how reality becomes only a small factor in the material constructs of the digital image. Generally, I used digital filters to modify the video so that it was sepia toned. Another digital filter makes the video appear as though it was actually being projected on aged film, complete with simulated scratches on the celluloid. Additional projector and phonograph sound-effects further the film-viewing illusion. This use of digital technology immediately attempts to deceive the viewer into thinking that what they’re seeing is photographic, and therefore indexical to reality. In actuality, the raw footage in the video has passed through multiple digitization processes. All footage (whether “real” or computer engineered) was mediated through a Panasonic digital camcorder. In the case of the magic show, which was originally recorded photographically, I recorded the footage from YouTube, which is itself a digital platform.

The first segment in the film is a found-footage video collage imitating a WWII newsreel. I recorded the (digital) audio from a British news reel depicting WWII aerial raids from YouTube. I then proceeded to collect footage of various flight and war simulation video games with my digital camcorder. The games include Star Fox 64 (1997), StarCraft (1998), Body Harvest (1998), Wing Commander (1990), and Axelay (1992). I then replaced the authentic WWII footage with my newly captured, digitally constructed, video game footage, also adding in an orchestrated soundtrack. The effect is a seemingly authentic newsreel consisting entirely of computer-engineered imagery. I was able to digitally manipulate artificially-produced contemporary imagery in a way that seems period authentic, and indexical to reality. This is evidence of what Mitchell calls the mutability of the digital image. What he refers to is the rapid manipulation of digital information through the simplistic alteration of digits. “The mutability of digital data” says Manovich, “impairs the value of cinema recordings as documents of reality.” (Manovich, 307)



The second segment of the video is razor advertisement. The advertisement also stands as a metaphor. While the advertisement is attempting to sell razors, it never shows the actual razor, the razor in action, or even the effects of the razor. So while you are meant to believe that this razor is worthwhile (since we are told it is), you never see why you must believe in its proficiency. The only visual cues that support the razor’s proficiency are found-footage intellectual montages of CGI sequences from Hollywood blockbusters such as The Incredibles (2004) and Star Wars: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005) which signify the act of shaving. All in all, there is nothing in this segment that is concretely indexical to the razor or its performance. One would not buy a product which they have not seen, and yet audiences accept illusions of CGI as believable representation of reality.



The magic show sequence is not only significant to this thesis in form, but also metaphorically. After all, performed magic can be seen as an illusory play which deceives viewers into believing what they see is real. The announcer emphasizes this by declaring, “If you don’t think seeing is believing, here’s a performer that will prove it!” Similarly, digital imagery creates illusory reality through manipulated presentation. In keeping with the theme of Newsreal, I decided to take a further step and manipulate the actual footage of the magic show. In order to emphasize the lack of ontology in the digital image I superimposed an animated clip of Winston Churchill’s face over-top of the magician’s. Thus, it is Winston Churchill’s magic show, and the digital effects employed force audiences to except it as the given truth of the image. This superimposition of digitally animated imagery over raw footage supports Lev Manovich’s claim that ontological footage becomes only one building element in a layering process when cinematic process becomes digital. Manovich adds that “cinema can no longer be clearly distinguished from animation. It is no longer an indexical media technology but, rather, a subgenre of painting.” (Manovich, 295) In a welcomed coincidental irony during the magic show, the narrator reassures the audience that “these pictures...are continuous and there are no camera tricks.”



As proven by the above examples, Newsreal reflects on this notion that the very binary composition of digital imagery, while accommodating layered manipulation, nullifies the ontology of the image. Through my wilful manipulation of digital imagery Newsreal indicates the instable concept of ontology found in the digital image. Thus, while this digital technology allows a new freedom in imagery, it comes with the sacrifice of the indexicality of the image and its ontological properties.

Bibliography:
- Mitchell, William J. The Reconfigured Eye : Visual Truth in the Post-photographic Era. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994.
- Manovich, Lev. “Digital Cinema and the History of a Moving Image: Cinema the Art of the Index”, The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001

Meta-Fiction in the Controls of Metal Gear Solid 2

With the semester’s essays completed, I spent a good part of the past week playing through Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (I’ve heard good things of the series in general and wanted to see for myself). I’ll have to admit that it took me a long time to become even remotely comfortable with games controls (I’ve never been a fan of the PS controller) and even now I’m not entirely sold on them. At points I found that one of the main challenges presented to me were navigating with these controls. In reflection of my previous blog entry, I tried to figure out why I found these controls so difficult and frustrating.



Last time I wrote about how the first-person shooter genre succeeds in putting the player within the subjective perceptual realm of the in-game character. MGS2 is primarily in third-person, however it offers the option of assuming a subjective first-person mode for investigating environments, and shooting from a vantage point behind the character’s gun.

What struck me instantly was the distinction between these two modes. The third-person view distances the player from the character, while the first-person view provides a very subjective look into the character’s experience providing extra ambient effects such as wind, breath and heart-beat noises. Several segments of the game offer the use of an in-game directional microphone that is used in the first-person mode. When using the directional microphone, the player can only hear what the microphone is pointing at, and if the player isn’t careful, they can miss out on important plot points if they do not point the microphone at specific events.

The third-person mode is seen from a fixed or preset camera position. This is unlike many Nintendo brand games that I’m used to (with the free-roving retro-posited, or player- controlled camera). An example of my preference can be seen here in Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. This game uses a system in which the camera is easily situated behind the character, at the player’s control. The game also has an optional first-person mode for environmental investigation and arrow-shooting. Since the camera is usually situated behind the character Link, the player shares directional continuity with the character. In the same sense as the first-person shooter, the player becomes more immersed in the character’s physical functions.
MGS2 offers no control over camera angles. The camera has fixed positions and movements that are only affected by character movement. Because of this, the player never becomes immersed in the character, instead assuming the position of an omniscient puppet-master. In Zelda, control directions are always relative to the camera position, so you press up to move Link up, and press down to move Link down. In MGS2, you have no control over the camera but the control directions always stay the same, so you may have to press up on the control stick if you want to move Snake or Raiden down. I immediately saw this as negative, however I did not understand the complete implications of this control scheme until I beat the game. I would argue that the control scheme in MGS2 is a means of meta-fiction which meshes well with many of its narrative elements.



While MGS2 is by no means the first video game meta-fiction (most games address the player when teaching game rules and control functions), it effectively utilizes the video game control functions as a means of further expressing certain plot themes. From this point on I will be spoiling crucial plot surprises from the game.

Metal Gear Solid 2 develops a theme in which the main character Raiden must face questions surrounding the basic truths of his existence (offering a parallel between “real world” military training and “VR” training). Throughout the course of the game, Raiden learns that the woman he loves is a spy gathering information on him, that his commanding officer (whom he corresponded with only over transceiver) was only an AI digital representation, and that his entire life was manipulated by an international organization in an attempt in forming him into a perfect soldier. Raiden’s body is also filled with nano-machines that come to betray his sensory perception. In short, Raiden’s entire life has always been under the control of forces outside of his own. It is my belief that the game’s control scheme purposefully distances the player from the in-game character as a means of indicating the player as a controller of Raiden’s life-actions. Several sequences in the game help to back up this theory. For example, Raiden’s commanding officer Colonel Campbell radio’s Raiden shouting "Raiden, turn the game console off rightnow! ... Don't worry, it's a game! It's a game just like usual. You'll ruinyour eyes playing so close to the TV." This reference to the construct of the game suggests the canon’s willingness to include the player as a recognized controller of the in-game character’s events.



So while I found the game’s controls disruptive, I think more immersive controls would have minimized the distance between the player and the character, thus eliminating this meta-fictitious element of the game’s narrative.