The illusion of realism in film

British Journal of Aesthetics 42 (3):243-258 (2002)
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.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/bjaesthetics/42.3.243
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,411
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Christoph Hoerl (2015). Seeing Motion and Apparent Motion. European Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):676-702.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

75 ( #64,848 of 1,924,755 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

15 ( #52,463 of 1,924,755 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.