Hostname: page-component-69cd664f8f-trbww Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-13T08:00:45.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Considering the filmmaker: Intensified continuity, narrative structure, and the Distancing-Embracing model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Kacie L. Armstrong
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-7601. kla78@cornell.edujames.cutting@cornell.eduhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kacie_Armstronghttp://people.psych.cornell.edu/~jec7/
James E. Cutting
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-7601. kla78@cornell.edujames.cutting@cornell.eduhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kacie_Armstronghttp://people.psych.cornell.edu/~jec7/

Abstract

Menninghaus et al. pose two open-ended questions: To what extent do formal elements of art elicit negative affect, and do artists try to elicit this response in a theory-based or intuitive manner? For popular movies, we argue that the consideration of their construction is prior to the consideration of the experience that they evoke.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Filmmakers rely on the ability of audiences to suspend disbelief and embrace the stories told on screen. However, the degree to which a viewer embraces a cinematic narrative, including both the positive and negative emotions associated with it, may depend more on the filmmaker than the observer. Here, we discuss filmmaker tactics in relation to the Embracing component of the model proposed by Menninghaus et al.

By the incremental adoption of well-orchestrated, seamless editing strategies that result in narrative immersion, filmmakers have cultivated an art that, in a sense, demands to be embraced. Indeed, David Bordwell (Reference Bordwell2002; Reference Bordwell2006) has described the result of such enhanced editing techniques as intensified continuity, that is, the use of rapid editing, increased close-up shots, and removal of extraneous narrative details to achieve a sense of narrational cohesion between shots and to render cuts less detectable by the average viewer. The details of these practices can be genre specific. For instance, action films, as compared with films of other genres, tend to feature shots that show fewer characters (Cutting Reference Cutting2015) and that are shorter in duration (Cutting et al. Reference Cutting, DeLong and Nothelfer2010; Reference Cutting, Brunick, DeLong, Iricinschi and Candan2011), tighter in scale (Cutting et al. Reference Cutting, Brunick and Candan2012), and higher in dynamic activity – car chases, gunfights, and physical altercations.

The implications of these stylistic conventions are twofold: they promote narrative transportation and they elicit overall positive affect in the viewer. In support of the former point, Bezdek et al. (Reference Bezdek, Gerrig, Wenzel, Shin, Pirog Revill and Schumacher2015) demonstrated that an increase in narrative suspense results in reduced activity in brain regions involved in peripheral visual processing, while brain activity associated with central visual processing and attention increases. In other words, the suspense experienced while viewing an action film, as driven by intensified continuity on the filmmaker's part, results in greater visual and cognitive processing of the fiction presented on screen, while reality beyond the screen goes unnoticed by viewers. Furthermore, once embraced, the rapid activity of films is linked to dopamine release (Grodal Reference Grodal2009), which is associated with reward and positive affect. This process supports the notion that the negative emotions potentially elicited by an action film (e.g., fright, nervousness, or surprise) are tempered by a subjective positive experience of the film overall.

It may seem counterintuitive that a film rife with car chases, hand-to-hand combat, thundering hooves, or explosions would elicit positive affect. To resolve this dissonance, we expand upon the fifth component of the Embracing factor of the Distancing-Embracing model: the “emotion-regulatory power of specific acquired genre scripts” (sect. 5). The tendency for filmmakers to utilize low-level elements of film (e.g., shot duration, shot scale, motion, color, and luminance) in a formulaic manner speaks to particular aspects of appraisal theories of emotion.

Specifically, the notion that affect depends largely on the degree to which the outcome of an event matches one's expectations, rather than mapping directly onto the valence of the eliciting stimulus itself (Scherer Reference Scherer, Scherer, Schorr and Johnstone2001) may illuminate why audiences are continually drawn to films that reliably provoke negative affect. A gunfight is generally not considered to be a joyous occasion; however, if a filmmaker has made clear through both narrative content and subtle editing cues that the film being viewed is an action film, the viewer taps into certain expectations of how the film should proceed, given learned conventions of the genre. When such expectations are satisfied, the viewer's emotional response should depend not upon the affective valence of the gunfight itself, but rather the fact that the gunfight has happened at all (and, importantly, that the gunfight was portrayed through established manipulation of shot duration, shot scale, and motion).

Although viewer expectation is a product of the viewer's mind, whether such expectations are met rests in the control of filmmakers. In fact, recent evidence suggests that filmmakers may drive the satisfaction of audience expectation by visually amplifying the structure of established narrative trajectories. For instance, the darkest moment in a narrative, defined by Keating (Reference Keating2011) as the protagonist's emotionally lowest point occurring at about three-quarters of the way through a film, tends to be the visually darkest moment on screen (Cutting Reference Cutting2016). This finding suggests that filmmakers carefully construct a visual mood that encourages viewers to experience the negative emotions that are prescribed by narrative formulas, thus corroborating the viewer's learned expectations and, consequently, infusing negative emotions with positive affect.

Finally, consider the nature of filmmaking: Is it a theory-based art form or one that is implicitly executed? Bordwell (Reference Bordwell2002) describes the practice of continuity editing as having taken decades to cultivate, likely through cultural transmission across generations of filmmakers (Cutting & Candan Reference Cutting and Candan2013; Cutting et al. Reference Cutting, DeLong and Nothelfer2010). In other words, through trial and error since the conception of film, filmmakers have learned to expertly accommodate human perceptual and cognitive mechanisms through the manipulation of low-level cinematic features (even without explicitly grasping the psychology behind their practice). Certainly, if one were to ask a filmmaker if she intentionally times shot duration to promote positive affect in her viewers, she would likely deny the role of any conscious knowledge of perceptual psychology in the success of her craft.

Perhaps, then, filmmakers appeal to affective experience via manipulation of the formal elements of film. They tacitly and intuitively build a visual foundation that fosters a clever interplay between the positive and negative emotions that are essential to the enjoyment of art. In effect, the embracing of artwork and its resulting negative emotions is not primarily the work of the viewer, but, rather, is the domain of the artist, who adheres to established artistic practices to carefully hone her work in service of a fundamental goal: to move her viewers.

References

Bezdek, M. A., Gerrig, R. J., Wenzel, W. G., Shin, J., Pirog Revill, K. & Schumacher, E. H. (2015) Neural evidence that suspense narrows attentional focus. Neuroscience 303:338–45. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.06.055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bordwell, D. (2002) Intensified continuity: Visual style in contemporary American film. Film Quarterly 55(3):1628. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/fq.2002.55.3.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordwell, D. (2006) The way Hollywood tells it. University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutting, J. E. (2015) The framing of characters in popular movies. Art and Perception 3(2):191212. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1163/22134913-00002031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutting, J. E. (2016) Narrative theory and the dynamics of popular movies. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 23(6):1713–43. Available at: http://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1051-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cutting, J. E., Brunick, K. L. & Candan, A. (2012) Perceiving event dynamics and parsing Hollywood films. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 38(6):1476–90. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1037/a0027737.Google ScholarPubMed
Cutting, J. E., Brunick, K. L., DeLong, J. E., Iricinschi, C. & Candan, A. (2011) Quicker, faster, darker: Changes in Hollywood film over 75 years. i-Perception 2(6):569–76. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1068/i0441aap.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cutting, J. E. & Candan, A. (2013) Movies, evolution, and mind: From fragmentation to continuity. The Evolutionary Review 4(3):2535.Google Scholar
Cutting, J. E., DeLong, J. E. & Nothelfer, C. E. (2010) Attention and the evolution of Hollywood film. Psychological Science 21:440–47. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610361679.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grodal, T. (2009) Embodied visions: Evolution, emotion, culture, and film. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, P. (2011) The plot point, the darkest moment, and the answered question: Three ways of modelling the three-quarter-point. Journal of Screenwriting 2(1):8598. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1386/josc.2.1.85_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (2001) Appraisal considered as a process of multi-level sequential checking. In: Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research, ed. Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T., pp. 92120. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar