Psychoanalysis v. Phenomenology. But the distinction isn’t so clear. The horror film ‘mirrors’ social anxieties; in the film, the possessed mirror reflects personal anxieties. The film’s formal structure sways between the real and the surreal, collapsing yet another boundary. Some contemporary horror films, as I have argued ad nauseam, blur the lines between reality and fiction; this is most commonly found in found footage films, but as I have recently argued (rather poorly, in retrospect), there now emerges a horror cinema that exists at the intersection between the realism offered by The Blair Witch Project and a kind of ‘traditional formalism’ that is symptomatic of fiction. I’m still not sure what this blending suggests, but it seems I wasn’t too far off in calling it the latest trend.
(I should reiterate that more than any other genre, the horror film is in an invariable state of reinvention. The western, I think, and science fiction are more grounded in a homogeneous syntax and grammar, or at the very least their iconographies are consistent: the elements of the plot are consistent throughout its history, with some minor variations in style. With the horror film, the genre lacks a singular identity: the trends range from monster movies to slashers. Current work on horror cinema-including my own research-places the horror film in a post-modern phase, where previous incarnations of the genre are alternatively eulogized or satirized: Scream, for instance, employed the slasher by making fun of its conventions and by mocking the ways it is received by the post-modern audience. Conversely, films like The Blair Witch Project are more aggressive in their interrogation of the post-modern spectator by using this realism to engender interactivity with the text. I think, however, that there is a sudden turn away from artifice and back to something that I can’t provide a name for.)
Unlike Blair Witch, the ‘realism’ in Oculus is diegetic. The characters employ the usual clichés of paranormal investigations - ranging from the conventional (thermometers) to the illogical (obscure instruments of detection) - to unveil the mirror’s inner spirits. The joke of this realism forcefully appears in a brief line of dialogue: after having a traumatic experience as a result of the mirror, one character asks (I might be paraphrasing): “Mind saying that for the camera?”
But more on this diegetic realism: films like The Blair Witch Project respond to digital-era fears of being unable to recognize fact from fiction. This fear is externalized in found footage (i.e. the fear is strongest if the viewer is unable to see past the indicators of artifice [narrative structure, for example]). In Oculus, the fear is internalized: the characters’ reflected fears-by means of hallucination-compromise their perception of reality, and indeed the viewer’s, too.
Most disturbingly, however, Oculus challenges epistemology. At the beginning of their ‘investigation’, the characters engage in this exchange: Tim attempts to explain the phenomena by means of psychoanalysis. Kaylie eschews such structure: she takes the position of the phenomenologist: the mirror’s strange power trivializes attempts to rationalize the phenomena. The two approaches are intertwined: psychoanalysis profits from the Freudian mirror reflecting what we’ve suppressed, and yet the phenomenon of the mirror is still ‘indescribable’ - bringing this back to phenomenology. I feel the film ends ambiguously, although some might disagree. For me, this ambiguity underscores this blurred distinction of approaches. In the end, the film mirrors my greatest fear: maybe I just can’t know.
(I should reiterate that more than any other genre, the horror film is in an invariable state of reinvention. The western, I think, and science fiction are more grounded in a homogeneous syntax and grammar, or at the very least their iconographies are consistent: the elements of the plot are consistent throughout its history, with some minor variations in style. With the horror film, the genre lacks a singular identity: the trends range from monster movies to slashers. Current work on horror cinema-including my own research-places the horror film in a post-modern phase, where previous incarnations of the genre are alternatively eulogized or satirized: Scream, for instance, employed the slasher by making fun of its conventions and by mocking the ways it is received by the post-modern audience. Conversely, films like The Blair Witch Project are more aggressive in their interrogation of the post-modern spectator by using this realism to engender interactivity with the text. I think, however, that there is a sudden turn away from artifice and back to something that I can’t provide a name for.)
Unlike Blair Witch, the ‘realism’ in Oculus is diegetic. The characters employ the usual clichés of paranormal investigations - ranging from the conventional (thermometers) to the illogical (obscure instruments of detection) - to unveil the mirror’s inner spirits. The joke of this realism forcefully appears in a brief line of dialogue: after having a traumatic experience as a result of the mirror, one character asks (I might be paraphrasing): “Mind saying that for the camera?”
But more on this diegetic realism: films like The Blair Witch Project respond to digital-era fears of being unable to recognize fact from fiction. This fear is externalized in found footage (i.e. the fear is strongest if the viewer is unable to see past the indicators of artifice [narrative structure, for example]). In Oculus, the fear is internalized: the characters’ reflected fears-by means of hallucination-compromise their perception of reality, and indeed the viewer’s, too.
Most disturbingly, however, Oculus challenges epistemology. At the beginning of their ‘investigation’, the characters engage in this exchange: Tim attempts to explain the phenomena by means of psychoanalysis. Kaylie eschews such structure: she takes the position of the phenomenologist: the mirror’s strange power trivializes attempts to rationalize the phenomena. The two approaches are intertwined: psychoanalysis profits from the Freudian mirror reflecting what we’ve suppressed, and yet the phenomenon of the mirror is still ‘indescribable’ - bringing this back to phenomenology. I feel the film ends ambiguously, although some might disagree. For me, this ambiguity underscores this blurred distinction of approaches. In the end, the film mirrors my greatest fear: maybe I just can’t know.
No comments:
Post a Comment