Specialist Study Area: Spectatorship
Spectatorship is a Specialist Study Area for Section B: American Film since 2005 on the first exam paper Component 1: Varieties of Film and Filmmaking, where you may be asked to discuss spectatorship in relation to Christopher Nolan's Inception and Matt Ross' Captain Fantastic.
Central to the study of film is an exploration of the ways in which films 'address' individual spectators through, for example, particular shots, aspects of mise-en-scene, editing, music and performance as well as broader concepts such as narrative and genre to engage the spectators' interest and emotions. Films (particularly those we would describe as mainstream) are generally constructed to provide the spectator with a particular viewing position, most often aligning the spectator with a specific character (frequently the central protagonist) or point of view. This alignment by the filmmaker raises questions about how ‘determined’ spectators' responses to a film are and how far spectators can and do resist the position they are given. Key to any discussion of spectatorship, then, is a consideration of how far spectators are passive or active in their responses to film and how far particular social and cultural factors, as well as the specific viewing conditions in which a film is seen, influence spectators' responses. As a general rule of thumb it is safe to say that mainstream Hollywood movies frequently only require passive engagement from the spectator whilst independent films (those outside of the mainstream) more commonly encourage active spectatorship; though, as you will see with Inception (the mainstream film we are studying for this section) this is not always the case.
Alongside being able to distinguish between active and passive spectatorship you should be able to discuss:
- how the spectator is in dynamic interaction with film narrative and film features that have been designed to generate response
- reasons for the uniformity or diversity of response by different spectators - think about 'why' spectators may respond the way that they do
- the impact of different viewing conditions on spectator response
- narrative, visual, musical, performance, genre and auteur cues in relation to spectator response
- the possibility of preferred, negotiated, oppositional and aberrant ‘readings’ of film from spectators
The theories outlined below will be split into those that are considered 'passive' and those that are described as 'active'. Regardless of this distinction, you may find it useful to consider some of the following when watching both Inception and Captain Fantastic, whilst exploring your role as a spectator.
Firstly, you may find it useful to isolate specific scenes from the films which triggered particularly strong responses from you (or others) whilst watching. These responses could be emotional/visceral (you cried or laughed, you became angry, you felt disgust or terror, you had a violent or instinctive response that felt out of your control) or intellectual (the scene provoked you to think more deeply about or contemplate/consider an issue or theme, or the scene made you question beliefs or values that you have). Whilst it is not necessary to do so, you may find it useful to distinguish between emotional responses and visceral responses; the first may include your feelings towards what is happening (crying, feeling angry) whilst the second may focus more on immediate responses such as those provoked by, for example, 'jump scares'. It is, however, perfectly valid to group any discussion of emotional and visceral responses together. You may find it useful to list some responses (emotional/visceral and intellectual) that you experienced whilst viewing Inception and Captain Fantastic - these will certainly form part of any essay you write on spectatorship as a topic.
You should think carefully about exactly what provoked the responses outlined above. These reasons roughly fall into one of two categories; the response may be personal to you, triggered by a past experience that is referenced on screen through the narrative or a character's actions OR your response could have been deliberately triggered by the director through his or her manipulation of some aspect of film form (editing, for example, or sound) and is likely to be experienced universally by the majority of spectators watching the film. It is important to appreciate that both are equally valid and that in many instances it will be a combination of both manipulation of film language by the director and a personal connection felt by the spectator that will provoke the response.
Often spectator responses to films are directly linked to the ways they have been positioned with certain characters (an idea also worthy of discussion in any essay about narrative). We have talked extensively about certain aspects of film language that are used by directors to position the audience with characters (close ups, POV shots, voiceover) and it is certainly worth arguing that our responses are frequently guided by how far we have been positioned 'with' or 'against' certain characters. This positioning with or against characters can be, as mentioned above, as a result of some personal connection the spectator feels (the character is experiencing something that the spectator can relate to) or as a result of the ways in which the director has manipulated some aspects of film form.
Equally, spectator response can be directly related to the construction of the film's narrative. Often a filmmaker will deliberately manipulate narrative structure to, for example, withhold narrative events and therefore create a sense of mystery or suspense for the audience. Alternatively, spectators can be privy to narrative events that certain characters are unaware of, placing those spectators in a more privileged position than the characters. You should, then, consider the ways in which the plot or story reveals narrative information to the spectator and the ways in which this may generate particular spectator responses.
It is worth considering other factors when discussing spectatorship. Look at the themes or issues that are presented in the film and think about the ways in which they may relate to you as an individual, or society as a whole. Often our responses to a film may change if the themes covered feel particularly prescient at the time you are watching (your response to a film focusing on the devastating effects of a virus, for example, may be very different when viewed during a real pandemic). Where you view a film may also affect your response. It is likely that watching a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster on a handheld device such as a smartphone or tablet may elicit a wholly different response than watching the same film at a large screen cinema such as the IMAX. There are now multiple ways in which spectators can view films (on-the-move via mobile devices, at the cinema, at home on large flatscreen high definition televisions, streamed) and each of these offer slightly different viewing experiences which can influence the audience's response.
Finally, you should consider whether responses to films are uniform or whether viewers responded differently to the same material. An awareness of the ways in which others may respond, even if their responses may be different to your own, is crucial in any discussion of spectatorship. A hegemonic response, to mainstream Hollywood films in particular, is not uncommon but it is also likely that spectators may react differently to the films they watch. It is crucial that you consider why this may be the case.
Once you have considered the above it is worth looking back at Inception and Captain Fantastic and asking yourself the following questions:
You should think carefully about exactly what provoked the responses outlined above. These reasons roughly fall into one of two categories; the response may be personal to you, triggered by a past experience that is referenced on screen through the narrative or a character's actions OR your response could have been deliberately triggered by the director through his or her manipulation of some aspect of film form (editing, for example, or sound) and is likely to be experienced universally by the majority of spectators watching the film. It is important to appreciate that both are equally valid and that in many instances it will be a combination of both manipulation of film language by the director and a personal connection felt by the spectator that will provoke the response.
Often spectator responses to films are directly linked to the ways they have been positioned with certain characters (an idea also worthy of discussion in any essay about narrative). We have talked extensively about certain aspects of film language that are used by directors to position the audience with characters (close ups, POV shots, voiceover) and it is certainly worth arguing that our responses are frequently guided by how far we have been positioned 'with' or 'against' certain characters. This positioning with or against characters can be, as mentioned above, as a result of some personal connection the spectator feels (the character is experiencing something that the spectator can relate to) or as a result of the ways in which the director has manipulated some aspects of film form.
Equally, spectator response can be directly related to the construction of the film's narrative. Often a filmmaker will deliberately manipulate narrative structure to, for example, withhold narrative events and therefore create a sense of mystery or suspense for the audience. Alternatively, spectators can be privy to narrative events that certain characters are unaware of, placing those spectators in a more privileged position than the characters. You should, then, consider the ways in which the plot or story reveals narrative information to the spectator and the ways in which this may generate particular spectator responses.
It is worth considering other factors when discussing spectatorship. Look at the themes or issues that are presented in the film and think about the ways in which they may relate to you as an individual, or society as a whole. Often our responses to a film may change if the themes covered feel particularly prescient at the time you are watching (your response to a film focusing on the devastating effects of a virus, for example, may be very different when viewed during a real pandemic). Where you view a film may also affect your response. It is likely that watching a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster on a handheld device such as a smartphone or tablet may elicit a wholly different response than watching the same film at a large screen cinema such as the IMAX. There are now multiple ways in which spectators can view films (on-the-move via mobile devices, at the cinema, at home on large flatscreen high definition televisions, streamed) and each of these offer slightly different viewing experiences which can influence the audience's response.
Finally, you should consider whether responses to films are uniform or whether viewers responded differently to the same material. An awareness of the ways in which others may respond, even if their responses may be different to your own, is crucial in any discussion of spectatorship. A hegemonic response, to mainstream Hollywood films in particular, is not uncommon but it is also likely that spectators may react differently to the films they watch. It is crucial that you consider why this may be the case.
Once you have considered the above it is worth looking back at Inception and Captain Fantastic and asking yourself the following questions:
- What is it in each film that has stimulated responses from the audience?
- How have Christopher Nolan and Matt Ross created deliberate effects?
- How much of the audience response to Inception and Captain Fantastic is personal and individual?
Spectatorship Theories - The 'Passive' Spectator
Comments
Post a Comment