film/ cinema의 fixed seat은 movement가 없다. spatilaity도 없다. physically. 그러나 virtual movement, spatiality는 있다는 주장들이 많다. aesthetically in permanent motion. 이거랑 PM내 포인트랑은 완전 다르다. 나는 virtual movement말하는 거 아니고 re-embodied movement말하는 거다.
The spectator occupies a fixed seat, but only physically, not as the subject of an aesthetic experience. Aesthetically he is in permanent motion as his eye identifies with the lens of the camera, which permanently shifts in distance and direction. (110)
Practices associated with expanded cinema take inquires into the physical and aesthetic mobility of spectatorship and the localised construction of meaning far beyond mainstream cinema and its boundaries of cultural expectation (the frame). (110)
Paul Sharits “Epileptic Seizure”에 대한 분석 good.
The narrative space of film is collapsed into an encounter with the lived space of watching. What is interesting here is that Sharits’s work combines the locatedness or context of the image with violent narratives of possession and control already, as it were, embedded in the image. The audience is made captive and shown its captivity , creating the potential for a narrative space that disrupts the architecture of the image in cinema.
PM 에다가 적용해라.
Expanded cinema, as we have seen elsewhere in this volume, is very much concerned with restructuring the relationship of production and consumption in film and seeks to challenge this ‘theatre of production’ that positions the spectator as fixed and subordinate to the controlling effects of the image. Yet it does so not just in terms of establishing the mobile spectator celebrated by theorists of postmodern film, but in order to create conditions in which the living and very physical (even bodily) force of this image-architecture can be fully interrogated-not by creating a ‘self-sufficient narrative world upon the screen’ but by exploring the narrative space of cinema itself. It is here that expanded cinema is situated. (115)