The illusion of realism in film

British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (3):243-258 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Gregory Currie, arguing against recent psychoanalytic and semiotic film theory, has defended various realist theses about film. The strongest of these is that ‘weak illusionism’—the view that the motion of film images is an illusion—is false. That is, Currie believes film images really do move. In this paper I defend the common-sense position of weak illusionism, firstly by showing that Currie underestimates the power of some arguments for it, especially one based on the mechanics of projection, and secondly by showing that film images exhibit neither garden-variety motion, nor a special response-dependent kind.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,662

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
185 (#67,672)

6 months
7 (#109,024)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Andrew Kania
Trinity University

References found in this work

Film, Reality, and Illusion.Gregory Currie - 1996 - In David Bordwell Noel Carroll (ed.), Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies. University of Wisconsin Press. pp. 325--44.

Add more references