cinema Archives - Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio

How to make low-budget films with Artificial Intelligence – Early stages

Dario Riccio — Thu, 16 Feb 2023 17:13:23 +0000

I start this article (which I will divide into multiple parts) on the day of the Immaculate Conception: December 8th. I want to talk about the current state of artificial intelligence to assist with low-budget filmmaking. It will require some time, especially to try out various services, as I don’t want to make the usual sterile list. Also, because it will help us produce content for the films we will make in the near future.

I got the idea, albeit unintentionally, from Nicolas Perrier from the University of Lyon in France, with one of his posts on LinkedIn. Perrier is a skilled expert in innovation in augmented and virtual reality, and the post in question is about Plask; one of the many tools for creating 3D animations starting from a simple video. In practice, it’s Motion Capture without expensive and complex equipment. This technology may be of particular interest to us to produce animated videos at a fraction of the current cost, and even with actors remotely.

Plask example video

I’m also getting additional help, not just from Nicolas himself with his countless posts, but also from the website Futurepedia.io. It’s an “AI wiki”, featuring a selection of many tools currently available to the general public.

Let’s analyze some of these tools, specifically the ones that are useful in filmmaking. Both for writing and for technical production of videos, as well as for voices. We’ll evaluate the quality of the results, conduct experiments, and learn about their costs.

To better understand how to use them in our low-budget films, I decided to create a short film (with very low expectations, just for technical experimentation) using them as much as possible.

Making videos with artificial intelligence.

Let’s divide the services into three main categories: writing, video, and audio. Starting with the writing, having to have the idea first.

Film writing with artificial intelligence

We need a story. Created by an AI? Let’s see, writing tools are not lacking. And if you don’t agree, you can always argue in the comments.

How does GPT-3 work?

Most public AI writing services are currently based on GPT-3, which has 175 billion machine learning parameters. The alternatives are actually many: BigScience Bloom, a large-scale language that has recently been launched (with the advantage of being open source), or the German Aleph Alpha with its Luminous (with 200 billion parameters).

What are the parameters of an artificial intelligence?

Imagine having a task that requires predicting whether an image contains a cat or not. A machine learning model could be trained on many images labeled as “cat” or “not cat” to learn to recognize the distinctive features of cats.

To do this, the model uses a neural network, which is a set of interconnected nodes. Each node represents a computation performed on the input data. The parameters, or “weights,” are the values assigned to each node that affect the strength of the connection between nodes.

When the model sees a new image, these weights are used to perform a series of calculations that ultimately produce a prediction, such as “cat” or “not cat”. The number of weights used in the model is the number of parameters.

In summary, parameters are like “ajuste values” that influence how a machine learning model processes data to make a prediction, and are modified during training to improve the model’s performance.

A model with many parameters will have more opportunities to adjust its calculations to fit the training data, but it may also be more prone to overfitting, meaning an excessive adherence to the training data and a poor ability to generalize.

Other competitors of ChatGPT.

Other competitors are Nvidia with the Megatron NGL (huge, but not available to the public ), Google with their GLaM, LaMDA and PaLM (yes, they don’t leave anything out), OPT by Meta, AlexaTM by Amazon or various Chinese ones like Alibaba and its BaGuaLu.

To conclude, I mention GPT-J, another open source alternative to GPT-3.

Let’s quickly understand how GPT-3 works, using a rephrased response from the AI itself:

GPT-3 (Generative Pretrained Transformer 3) is a state-of-the-art language model developed by OpenAI. Utilizes a deep learning technique called “transformers“to generate human-like text based on a given input.

Here’s how GPT-3 works:

The model is trained on a large set of texts generated by humans, such as books, articles, and websites. This training process allows the model to learn patterns and structures of natural language.
When it receives an input, the model processes it using its layers of neural networks. When it receives an input, the model processes it using its layers of neural networks. Each layer performs a different task, such as analyzing the syntax, semantics, and context of the input.
The model then generates a response based on the input and its understanding of natural language. It does so by predicting the next words in the sentence, using the patterns and structures learned during training.
The model repeats this process several times, generating multiple responses to the input. These responses are then ranked and evaluated by the model, and the highest-scoring response is selected as the final output.

GPT-3 is known for its ability to generate text that is often difficult to distinguish from text written by a human being. It is used in various applications, such as language translation, text summarization, and text generation.

ChatGPT can tell stories for screenplay.

Let’s start directly with OpenAI’s product: ChatGPT. It is perhaps the tool of the moment; the first one to have made a leap towards the general public. It’s almost concerning how accurate and “real” it can be in conversations, but it has also been discussed too much and everywhere in the last few weeks.

I signed up for the OpenAI website and opened the chat to try talking to GPT-3 (I can’t imagine what GPT-4 will do next) by asking it to write me a story with some dialogues for a short digital graphic film. And well, it simply made it for me.

The story written by ChatGPT

This is the story as written by ChatGPT, with no modifications, translated into Italian (you can read the original in the English version of this article).

Title: The Lost City (click here to open)

Secret Cinema: immersive, but social

Dario Riccio — Sun, 27 Nov 2022 17:38:22 +0000

In this episode we meet Andrea Moccia, producer of Secret Cinema in London. A fantastic new way of filmmaking, in which the world of film is recreated in reality.

A beautiful mix of cinema and theater, which has been enjoying success since 2007. We will talk about the importance of sociality, how Secret Cinema works, the importance of finding new ways to revive movie theaters, and many other topics.

Link to article: https://www.darioriccio.com/secret-cinema-immersivo-ma-in-compagnia/

L'articolo Secret Cinema: immersive, but social è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

Che cos’è il cinema esperienziale

Dario Riccio — Wed, 19 Oct 2022 05:51:17 +0000

Immersivo, interattivo, non lineare, multi-sensoriale e algoritmico. Vediamo come il cinema del futuro sarà esperienziale e coinvolgente.

Articolo correlato sul mio blog: https://www.darioriccio.com/che-cosa-cinema-esperienziale/

L'articolo Che cos’è il cinema esperienziale è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

What is experiential cinema

Dario Riccio — Sat, 10 Sep 2022 11:03:00 +0000

As promised in the last article, we’ll continue to analyze the cinema of the future in its immersive form. Immersivity certainly linked to the experience it can create in the viewer. In this article we will therefore go on to talk about experiential cinema through old and new storytelling, first person, greater involvement of the viewer and the five senses, and more data and artificial intelligence.

What is a media, or “mediated story”

Cinema belongs to the “media” category. Also definable as “mediated story”, or “telling a story through something”. They can be a microphone and a speaker (radio), a film camera and a projector (cinema), a camera and a television (TV), a word processor and a printing press (newspapers). Any way of telling a story that is not “direct”, therefore different from traditional conversations, is defined as media.

Among these, there are the new experiential media to offer users potentially positive and beneficial results, increasing their involvement and above all empathy. The experienced experience makes them feel active and involved in the story, seeing, hearing, touching or experiencing situations never experienced before.

The characteristics of traditional cinema

Each media has advantages and disadvantages. Or, we could say, possibility and impossibility. Going into details, let’s quickly see the five peculiar characteristics of the media at the center of our attention: cinema.

Static and linear narrative structure
Single or dual mode
Episodic
Third person perspective
Passive audience

Static and linear narrative structure

It’s at the basis of cinema: a one-way narrative structure with beginning, development, climax and end. Fixed and static, it obviously cannot be changed by the viewer. Sure, there are Flashbacks or Flashforwards, but they don’t fundamentally change this approach to storytelling.

There is usually a causal chain: each passage narrated in the script leads to a subsequent passage which is a consequence of the previous one.

And the movies, of course, don’t change over time. Except for very rare cases of errors or problems occurred after the release of the film (for example Kubrick cut the last minutes of The Shining after its release in theaters), these remain the same from the moment of publication, and forever.

A good analysis was made in 1992 by Prof. David Pinault in Story-Telling Techniques in the Arabian Nights.

Non-linear structure in traditional cinema

Image made with Midjourney AI

In postmodern cinema there is actually a concrete attempt to modify this linear structure. Often attempts are made to “weave” the story, leaving the viewer to use intuition and irrational instinct to understand the film, while logic and drama are dissolved and diluted.

The linear structure often develops into a symphony composed of several parts with a non-linear structure. We will understand better in the following sections how this will develop even more in experiential / interactive cinema, forming various personalized narratives (which is reminiscent of videogames).

Single or dual mode

By this we mean that cinema involves a maximum of one or two senses, sight and hearing. Clearly the current cinema is always dual, as in the “single mode” category we can only insert silent films.

Over the years, various attempts have been made to improve the involvement of the other senses. We think of great directors who manage to convey the sense of taste to the viewer, for example in films such as Eat Drink Man Woman, Ratatouille or Mid-August Lunch. Clearly, it is a trick to our brains. But ultimately, cinema itself is.

Episodic

According to Prof. Jason Mittell in his book Complex TV: The Poetics of Contemporary Television Storytelling, current cinema and media are generally episodic; that is, they tend to develop around an event or a series of interrelated events. This is even more true, of course, in the world of journalistic media.

A story is told based on facts and events, real or fictional. It is told from the point of view of the narrator, which makes it easier for the viewer to enjoy but at the same time empathically distances him from the story.

Third person perspective

This perspective is an important feature in our analysis. In fact, although possible, in traditional cinema first and second person perspectives have always been little used. In the history of communication in general, it was abundantly used only in the radio of the first half of the 20th century.

Heart of Darkness, first-person radio adaptation

As an example, consider Joseph Conrad‘s Heart of Darkness. It was adapted for radio in 1938 by director Orson Welles (famous for having made Americans believe they were under Martian attack through the radio show War of the Worlds, in the same ’38). The goal was to have the protagonist tell the story in first person directly. Interesting how Welles himself, at the time new to cinema, tried to persuade RKO Pictures to make the film version.

It had what it takes to become one of the greatest films of all time and, perhaps, raise public awareness on issues that instead, misinterpreted, led to the Second World War the following year. But it was the use of the first person, in addition to the political themes little loved by the majors, that probably pushed Hollywood to not consider its feasibility. It was a drastic break from the rules, and the world wasn’t ready for it yet.

In fact, Coppola tried to recover in 1979 with Apocalypse Now, only freely inspired by the novel “Heart of Darkness” as it is set in Vietnam and not in Africa. It is certainly too late to assist peace in Europe and in the world.

First person in the history of cinema

There are some sporadic cases of filmic use of first-person narration, especially in its early years. Sometimes little known cases, but which somehow tried to change the way of seeing things. First of all I think of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde of 1931, better known in Italy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, by Rouben Mamoulian.

Other cases were William Dieterle‘s 1934 film The Firebird. Or even Lady in the Lake shot in 1947 by Robert Montgomery, and Dark Passage by David Goodis of the same year.

Two other examples, decidedly more modern, we will see shortly in the section on experiential cinema, as they are more useful for a comparison with the cinema to come.

I have cited only examples of works in first person, because talking about works in the third would be impossible or useless… They are practically almost all the films in existence. And then because, with a view to creating the cinema of the more experiential future, I believe that these ideas must be well taken into consideration.

Then you will tell me what you think, I’m interested in being closer to the technical world than to film criticism.

Passive audience

As we said, the story in the current or past media is told in the name and on behalf of the narrator. Whether it’s the writer or the director, the journalist or the speaker, everyone shows you what they want. Have you ever wanted to look at something to the side, or behind the camera, but the direction didn’t show it to you?

It happens particularly often with sport on TV, and it is perhaps for this reason that television itself is among the first media to have “progressed” towards a direction decided by the viewer. In Italy, as Wenner Gatta mentions, when the “Spidercam” was inserted on the football fields, the viewer could choose with the remote control whether to see the meeting with the classic direction or through the spider camera only. And from there, above all Sky has continued to develop technology a lot by exploiting multiple transmission channels for the same event.

After a study of the cinema that was, and still is, we are finally going to analyze the characteristics of the new cinema, projected towards the future, to also understand how to overcome the problems of the last 127 years.

The characteristics of experiential cinema: the future

The five characteristics that we will be able to find, all or in part, in the cinema of the future, according to what technology currently makes available, can be:

Immersivity
Interactivity, non-linearity and sociability
Multi-sensory presentation
Algorithmic, customized in real time thanks to data
First person perspective

Immersive Cinema

We already know some partially experiential media. We think of immersive virtual reality and augmented reality platforms. As we saw in the last article, these are fully inserted in the line of continuity between real and virtual world hypothesized by Paul Milgram.

Immersion means “enveloping the user in a real physical space using augmented or mixed reality on a portable or wearable device, also including haptic interfaces“.

I found one of the first practical examples in the paper “Situated Documentaries: Embedding Multimedia Presentations in the Real World“, by Tobias Höllerer, Steven Feiner and John Pavlik and taken from the International Symposium on Wearable Computers of 1999.

Researcher wearing the MJW system.
Image from “Situated Documentaries: Embedding Multimedia Presentations in the Real World“.

These “set documentaries” were entirely based on wearables, to integrate novels and documentaries in real-world locations. The system is very reminiscent of the current AR glasses, obviously with the technology available in 1999. It was a backpack with GPS tracker and 360 ° video camera (developed by Shree Nayar, of Columbia University), a type of handheld computer with graphics, audio and video, and augmented reality glasses capable of signaling in the real environment the points of interest. It was called MJW (Mobile Journalist Workstation).

The glasses could also reproduce rudimentary 360 ° videos superimposed on the real, and the gaze was the main aiming system. By staring at an object in the real world for at least half a second, it was selected producing related info and multimedia files. You could also travel in time by touching the desired year on the handheld display.

A great example of what augmented reality will be 20 years later. AR is in fact developing rapidly, becoming in common use since 2018 following the implementation in iPhones of the native ARKit api (which, by the way, I believe to date is the latest noteworthy innovation in the smartphone field).

The first point of our cinema will therefore be immersion. But certainly a different immersion from that seen so far. The basis will in fact be the story told, the cinema. We will not immerse ourselves in the world, we will not immerse ourselves alone or in virtual common environments. The immersion will be produced by the 360 ° screen, by the stereoscopy, and by the “hall”, or dome, with inside elements directly linked to the narrated story.

The writers will have to be really good, to develop plots that make the viewer feel “involved”, without being taken for granted. As is obvious, the first thing that jumps to my mind: to keep the protagonist of the story constantly seated, who must impersonate us spectators. It is at best a starting point that should not be underestimated, but above all the brain storming will be really interesting in the early days.

Interactive, non-linear and social

Word to the viewer; choice. These may be the keywords for the non-linear structure of experiential cinema; which is therefore more complex.

Although without particular rules, it maintains its own logic based on temporal sequence (or order), duration and frequency, which are the concept of division proposed by the French essayist Gérard Gennette in the field of literary fiction, then introduced in the field of film criticism by Andre Gaudreault and David Bordwell.

The order of events in the stories

In this section we open a general parenthesis on the stories; there are in fact characteristics in common with the future immersive cinema. Gennette clarified that the event could have occurred:

before the narration (analyses or flashbacks)

in the future (therefore only announced or expected, the prolixes).

Again, events can be narrated in a different order from how they happened (anachronia), used to make the story more compelling.

More rarely there can be a movement between one narrative level and another (metalepsis).

An example is the “author’s metalexy”, a sort of passage by the author from external to internal to the story, or conversely if a character becomes a narrator.

Another literary example is of the poet Virgil, who “kills” Dido in canto IV of the Aeneid, or Diderot who writes in Jacques the Fatalist: “Who could prevent me from marrying the Master and making him a beak?”. Both examples taken from Armando Mollica Bonivento‘s doctoral thesis at the Ca’Foscari University (in Italian), which I invite you to read for greater understanding.

The duration of events in the stories

So, after the order (event that happened before, future event, narration in order different from the real or passage between different narration levels), we have the duration. Also definable as the “rhythm”, the “speed” at which events are told.

We can mainly divide it into four types:

ellipses (very accelerated rhythm), with frequent chronological jumps;
synthesis (relatively fast pace), in which a story is summarized in its main points. They can be of variable length.
scene: relatively slow, it is the classic narration almost in real time. An example are the dialogues;
descriptive: no progress in history, we stop to describe a certain moment.

Clearly, these types can be combined. We can have, for example, a synthesis inserted within a dialogue.

The frequency of events in the stories

Frequency is nothing more than the relationship between how many times a certain event occurs in reality (even invented), and how many it is told. If, in practice, the same event is narrated several times (or the same statement of a character repeated).

I leave you the link to an interesting article on the issue, from which the following image is taken.

Lucie Guillemette and Cynthia Lévesque (2016), «Narratology», in Louis Hébert (dir.), Signo [online], Rimouski (Quebec), http://www.signosemio.com/genette/narratology.asp.

The cinema of the future has an intersubjective non-linear structure

After this long interlude, let’s try to understand why the story, or the screenplay, is decidedly more complex for the cinema of the future. In fact, all these elements must be inserted within an intersubjective non-linear structure. That is, the story can go back and forth in time, in an environment common to other viewers who may want to make different choices from ours.

Intersubjectivity is the biggest problem to be solved in writing new scripts. In fact, if interactivity is a concept already well known thanks to video games, interactivity in common between several people, with necessarily a screen that shows everyone the same images, presumes that a small democracy is created inside the room.

The intersubjective non-linear structure has a great advantage: it respects the viewer. It grants the right to choose one’s own story, to judge the morality of some scenes. The viewer becomes the center of the film as well as a part of it. The current cinema is definitely too one-sided, and if it has lived unchanged for so many years it is only for the simplicity (inherent in the characteristics) of using it as a means of political and commercial propaganda.

Thinking about the average use of cinema, which is also and above all a moment of relaxation and not very active entertainment, we must not however fall into the temptation to insert excessive “gamification”, transforming it into a video game. I mean, nowadays we go to the cinema to relax with friends or family, to spend time without thinking too much. And choosing implies thinking … This is why interactivity must be limited and not even mandatory, and it probably won’t be the top priority in creating the cinema of the future.

We will see in some future articles why interactive cinema has not been successful in, albeit few, past experiences. But it is related to this.

Multi-sensory presentation

Trailer of the film “The Piano” (in Italian “Lezioni di piano”)

Experiential media may seem like something new in recent years, but it’s not entirely true. For centuries, humanity has developed its peculiar characteristics, improving the technology available in small but constant steps.

Wearable devices to engage the senses

Image from chinaculture.org.

According to what was reported by the Prof. John V. Pavlik in the book “Journalism in the Age of Virtual Reality“, the first experience of” wearables “devices can be summarized in the Chinese invention of the ring / abacus, wearable measuring instrument dating back to the Qing dynasty of the seventeenth century.

Following in Europe, in 1780 the “pedometer” was developed, a step counter, to arrive in 1965 with the American attempt (unsuccessful) to create the first exoskeleton (Hardiman) to allow humans to lift up to 650 kg.

In recent years, developments have certainly been much faster, also thanks to the logarithmic scale of the technology that hardly stops once it has started. To understand, did you know that in 2004, just 18 years ago, the GoPro wearable camera came out … And that it even used 35mm film?

Cinema stimulates us physiologically and sensually

My body is not just an object among all objects, but an object sensitive to all others, which reverberates at all sounds, vibrates in all colors and gives words their primal meaning through the way it receives them.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty in Phenomenology of Perception

At the beginning of this paragraph I inserted the trailer for the film Piano Lessons, Jane Campion‘s 1993 masterpiece. I chose it as an excellent example of how current cinema tries, in more or less orthodox ways, to deceive the brain in order to involve senses not directly involved (touch in this case). I also invite you to review the last article which talked about Matthew Shifrin and his Legos for the blind.

This is the magic of cinema. Art in this sector has reached unimaginable heights, even if you try to think about how to go further. How to materially stimulate the other senses. Although already in the 1940s, the philosopher Siegfried Kracauer wrote:

The material elements that appear in the films directly stimulate the material layers of the human being: his nerves, his senses, his entire physiological substance.
Siegfried Kracauer

How to involve the five senses in the cinema

How then to involve the five senses, or at least more than two, in cinema? It will be necessary to proceed in stages, as technology allows it. So let’s consider the experiments done in the past, to later understand how WE can engage the five senses for our viewers.

Touch

William Castle in 1946

Meanwhile, the touch: William Castle, in 1959 shot the horror The Tingler. He inserted a vibrating device called “Percepto!” Into the seats of some cinemas, which was synchronized with the action. Castle himself was an evil genius … Before the screening of Macabre in 1958, he had everyone deliver a $ 1,000 insurance policy in the event of death or fear during the film. Then during the 1959 film House on Haunted Hill, he let a phosphorescent skeleton enter above the stalls. Based on a pulley system called “Emergo“.

And finally there is “Illusion-O“, launched with the film 13 Ghosts: all the elements in the frame, with the exception of the ghosts, were subjected to a blue filter. The ghosts instead had a red filter, and were superimposed on the frame. The audience received cards with red and blue filters: looking through the blue filter, you couldn’t see the ghosts. Through the red filter, however, they could be seen.

Still on the touch, obviously the modern 4D cinemas that we all know have the entire vibrating chairs, as well as ropes that touch the legs, fans for the wind effect (hot or cold) and sprinkles of water for humidity.

Smell

Smell: a strategy was adopted by John Waters for the 1981 film Polyester. This is the “Olorama” system, basically cards with scratch numbers. Each number has a smell (rose, pizza etc …), which can be smelled at the required moment (a small number appeared on the screen).

Creation of the cards for the Odorama system

Another 1960 attempt was Smell-O-Vision, used only in Scent of Mystery produced by Mike Todd Jr (son of the famous Mike Todd Senior, author of Around the World in 80 Days). Smell-O-Vision involved the introduction of up to 30 evocative smells into the stalls through tubes that led to individual seats in the room, with perfume bottles held on a rotating drum.

Today a company has taken up the concept in a modern industrial production, called Olorama. With whom it would be nice to collaborate; objectively, the system seems much more functional than smelling cards (then actually reused only in a couple of children’s films).

The criticisms he received are interesting. According to the Times, some viewers complained of delays between the smell and the scene, others found the scents mixed in an unpleasant way, Henny Youngman said he didn’t understand the film because he had a cold.

Other inconveniences to pay close attention to are nausea and headaches caused by too strong and persistent fragrances, possible discomfort, distractions and heavy air.

For the sake of completeness of information, I quote Walter Reade Jr‘s AromaRama. Key difference with Smell-O-Vision? Simply, the AromaRama used the air conditioning system for the diffusion of aromas. Cunning.

Eating with another is a way of saying: “I’m with you, I like you, let’s form a community together”.
Thomas C. Foster

Taste

We have seen touch and smell, taste is obviously lacking. Although progress has been made towards systems of “transmission” of taste (through objects to be licked), I do not think they are yet developed enough and, above all, we are not yet ready to welcome them. And I don’t know if we ever will …

However, during some screenings of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, Wonka chocolates were provided to the spectators. And from this I had the idea of directly providing the screened food, really to the spectators. A double advantage: for the identification in the film, and for the cinema economy and customers who would respectively sell and buy better food than popcorn and Coca-Cola.

I soon discovered how this idea is not exactly original: in 2012 in London, more precisely in Notting Hill, Edible Cinema took place. It was a collaboration between the Soho House team, organizer Polly Betton and experimental food designer Andrew Stellitano. Basically, each present had numbered bags and glasses containing food and drink, on the armchairs there was also a menu explaining the meals, and a woman appeared on the side of the screen during the film to indicate the time to eat or drink each number.

Algorithmic, customized in real time thanks to data

In a data-centric society, cinema cannot stand by and watch. Of course, in respect of privacy and possibly without using this data for not very noble purposes.

A great use could come from the geolocation inside the dome, to eventually send different signals to the different spectators. But, above all, it will be possible to take into account the direction of the gaze of the latter to understand what is more interesting, and to have a more passive “input device”, and therefore less tiring, due to the interactivity we have just talked about.

Other anonymized data, such as physiological responses moment by moment, may be useful for the development of subsequent films and evaluate the reactions of the audience. Which, in a subsequent development of experiential cinema, can also be exploited within the same story (for example, interactively manage volumes to increase or decrease human reactions).

Women’s Aid, a prime example of algorithmic interactive advertising

At World Women’s Day in 2015, an interactive blow-up depicting the face of a woman victim of violence was installed in the Canary Wharf business center in London. A face detection camera was used to update a counter and change the image whenever a passerby paid attention to the advertisement. It was a typical example, albeit in the advanced advertising sector, of using data to modify the result obtained.

Look At Me: Women’s Aid Interactive Billboard

Artificial intelligence for storytelling

Already today many stories are created with artificial intelligence, as for example the American Associated Press does. The Times also created an algorithmic robot, the QuakeBot, which automatically acquires data from the U.S. Geological Survey, the US organization of earthquake analysis, to automatically write the complete article with magnitude, epicenter and time. The human editor only has to verify its correctness and publish.

These robots, these artificial intelligences, are led to the development of increasingly engaging, interactive and multisensory stories. What will be fundamental for the cinema of the future, to assist human screenwriters in the writing of increasingly complex and autonomously unmanageable stories.

Furthermore, they will be able to exploit the data present in the world, and in the cinemas themselves. To create “tailor-made” stories for the target audience.

Artificial intelligence itself is, and will increasingly be, used in technical video production. Google, for example, has the Jump compiler (well described in their own paper), which deals with the union, stitching, of 16 high quality video streams to obtain a complete 360 ° VR video. The main result obtained was the elimination of much of the latency, to therefore increase the sense of reality of the image shown.

Ultimately, AI will certainly be the center of attention. And, to avoid controversy, it must also be used with lead gloves, focusing on privacy and the importance of the human being.

First person perspective

We already know some partially experiential media. We think of immersive virtual reality and augmented reality platforms. As we saw in the last article, these are fully inserted in the line of continuity between real and virtual world hypothesized by Paul Milgram.

These are clearly in the first person, as the real protagonist of the story is ourselves. Experience is given by contact (although still virtual), and by direct observation of objects and events in the ways we like best.

Experiential cinema will often have to be in the first person. This is unlike most of the present and past films, which instead aim to tell us stories with eyes outside the story. But ours will be a different first person: we will be the spectators, the main character. Recently, in 2016, the film Hardcore, directed by the Russian musician Ilya Najšuller, had a good success. Evidently producing cinema from a cultural background outside of it helps to take risks and innovate it.

Italian trailer of the movie “Hardcore”

The whole Hardcore is shot in first person. I believe the success is well deserved, and it is a good point of reference for the cinema to come. A way of narrating video games, which invites us into someone else’s life, looking at the world through his eyes. Well, I think the only difference is that it will have to be our life, inserted in the new cinema. I know, it’s scary, but the writers shouldn’t tell us that either …

I also want to mention another film, not entirely in first person (the protagonist can be seen in various scenes, removing the effect of total identification) but which has a decidedly more constructed and engaging plot than Hardcore: Enter the Void, from 2009, directed by Argentine director Gaspar Noé.

Enter the Void Italian Trailer

Two films that I recommend you see, first because it will be a special and different experience. Second, to get a taste (albeit reduced) of what cinema will be like in a few years.

To identify everyone in the history of experiential cinema

How can you build a film for many, which can realistically represent the life of each of them? Once again, the writers will have to do a great job of multiple introspection. By creating engaging but generalist stories, inserting characters who will also be new to the protagonist in the story. No known relatives, perhaps a distant cousin we didn’t know we had. Nothing more.

In 2015, on the occasion of the fourth international conference on Design, User Experience and Usability in Los Angeles, Aaron Marcus collected in a very useful book a series of information on the current relationship between computer science, the virtual world and human beings. Based on the assumption that each of us has our own culture and knowledge, the design (and therefore who creates it) must leave us the freedom to experiment, to have doubts and thoughts, it must build a world accepted by all the personal cultures of the spectators and, at the same time, propose his own idea of the universe.

We want and need to reflect, to understand. And this absurdly leads to the hyperrealism, that is, to a construction of the virtual world that is very faithful to the real world, in which to experience and be present in the first person.

The importance of sociality in the cinema of the future

We have seen, speaking of the first-person perspective, that technology now allows us to decide a place, at a given historical moment, and live virtually in it. But one thing will be important: we will have to live it with others.

Sociality is a theme that should not be underestimated: there is no life alone. To reconstruct the real in the virtual, other human beings (and living beings in general) must therefore necessarily be present. And a concrete interaction with them.

Basically, reality is an inherent concept in our mind. Many things are real to you and me, while others are only real to one of us. The “mediated” reality has an inherent complexity in this, mainly because it must be able to reproduce a synthesis of our personal realities.

Let me explain better with an example: Aurora has a habit of calling her mother in case of problems. In her reality, her mother is always present. He gives her advice, embraces her, offers her constant support. Marco, on the other hand, has a bad relationship with his mother. She has always had problems, she has tried for years to help her but to no avail.

Aurora’s reality requires a loving and very present mother, on the contrary that of Marco rejects her. The writers of the new cinema will therefore have to be able to fall into hyperrealism, without causing moral incidents with any of the spectators. How is this resolved? Important characters may, or perhaps should, be ambiguous. An ambiguous character that allows everyone to “accept” it by mixing their own inner reality with that reproduced and therefore “mediated”. In short, see them as you wish.

Ultimately, the “static” part of the real world, such as trees and houses, is always there. And easily reproducible. On the other hand, the human part, the social part, represents a definitely more complex choice, even if not insuperable.

L'articolo What is experiential cinema è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

Immersive cinema is the future

Dario Riccio — Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:27:00 +0000

https://www.darioriccio.com/podcast-player/435/il-cinema-immersivo-e-il-futuro.mp3

Current cinema, a modern derivation of the ancient analog, has five characteristics: static and linear structure, dual mode, episodic, mainly in third person and not interactive. We will see later what each of these voices means, while I continue to think about what the cinema of the future will be, about immersive cinema, and how to make a good prototype.

I started this article on a Swiss train, and finished it at Barcelona’s charming Espai Joliu. I love trains, being able to work or relax while moving between two locations. Among my corporate benefits is the general season ticket for all means of transport in Switzerland: my luck. A few days off from work, I take the opportunity to reach Domodossola (the first Italian town across the border), or wander the length and breadth of the country of the Helvetians, which reserves surprises and magical corners almost everywhere.

Trains in Spiez, Switzerland

How important is immersion in the cinema of the future

I am part of the line of thought, now increasingly in vogue, which imagines a single evolution for cinema: immersive cinema. According to purists, or “traditionalists”, cinema must be left as it is. But we have already seen that, after all, they are not necessarily right.

As you may have noticed, I am not at all cadenced in publishing articles on my blog. I don’t like online editorial plans, I prefer quality over quantity, avoiding in-depth articles only to come out “Friday at 7”. This article took me days of research, maybe more, and clearly blogging is not my primary activity, but it has resulted in a roundup of ideas and characters that I hope will be a definitive answer to the question: how will the cinema of the future be?

Few have seriously tried to innovate it, and in this article we will get to know some of them. Certainly not for lack of a market. Rather for lack of resources, lately more and more projected to the lucrative, and more manageable, virtual world.

This article follows from: Innovating modern cinema

Advantages and disadvantages of modern cinema

I reflected on the advantages of cinema as it is conceived today:

It can be used on the move, even here on the train.
Other actions can be taken, delegating the mere role of companion to the audiovisual.
It can be used in company.

I ask you for other advantages, I really want you to comment. Turning to the disadvantages:

The methods of use have been updated little for decades.
It is not able to “fill” all the senses of the viewer.

So let’s create a system, using already existing technology, able to minimize these disadvantages.

Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of modern cinema

1) You can watch cinema on the go

Clearly, “old style” cinema by definition is destined for theaters. However, in order to recover costs, a production must be usable by as many people as possible. A good substitute for the small screen are virtual reality viewers, which allow you to view stereoscopic 360 ° videos.

2) You can do other things while watching a movie

Here virtual reality, at present, shows all its limits due to the complete isolation it creates. Bypassing this limit is perhaps possible with augmented reality, or with a serious upgrade of existing virtual reality technology.

3) You can watch a movie in company

By designing an update of the cinema system intended as a “cinema”, for decades there has been a technology used above all in scientific dissemination: the fulldome, ie projections in a dome. However, the same system is not new to film experimentation, even by great masters of the past.

4) The methods of use have been updated little for decades

The first disadvantage of cinema is rather an observation. If, on the one hand, great directors or companies have brought immense innovations in shooting methods (think ofAvatar di Cameron con una Motion Capture all’ennesima potenza, o alla Industrial Light & Magic che insieme ad Epic ha dato il là ad una seria Virtual Production), poco si è fatto per le sale.

The transition from film to digital, without wanting to diminish it, is comparable to the change of our home TV. Best quality, lower distribution costs, maximum stereoscopy but otherwise everything as before.

5) It is not able to “fill” all the senses of the viewer.

A century ago, a great innovator, today’s cinema fails to offer that “something more” compared to other more modern tools.

When looking at an iPad or modern TV, the field of view covered by the image is approximately 25°. The cinema screen, on average, covers a field of view of 50° on the 360 of the sphere (it depends a lot on the position in the room). It is necessary to increase it, if you really want to return to offer that “wow” effect, due to the immersion, which is worth the trip and the ticket.

The acoustics are already very good; Dolby Digital systems allow excellent immersion. What is missing is still the feel, the smell and, why not, also the taste.

Why virtual reality is not popular

I’ve been trying to figure out why you never want to put a helmet on, and a recent University of Glasgow paper / survey by Laura Bajorunaite, Stephen Brewster and Julie R. Williamsoncertainly helped.

The paper deals specifically with the use of VR viewers in public transport, which in itself is a place of frequent cinematic use. But the discourse is expandable, with the necessary adaptations, a little more generally.

At the base there are clearly reasons of personal safety, but also of comfort. Social acceptance is also still a long way off, making VR users “stupid” in the eyes of other passengers. Progress is still being made to make one’s virtual world more integrated with reality.

For example, occasionally throwing an eye to the real world with the cameras installed on the viewer, or having indications on the positioning of other human beings in real space, can reassure us. A complete Virtual Reality must be avoided in favor of Augmented Virtuality; as already defined in 1999 by Prof. Paul Milgram in its line of continuity from real world to virtual world.

Virtual Reality Continuum, by Paul Milgram

I invite you to read the paper to learn more, but the concept we must take into account is that total immersion is a problem.

Immersive cinema

New York World’s Fair of 1964, with To The Moon and Beyond‘s “Moon Dome” in the foreground. Photo by Doug Coldwell from Wikipedia.

We have already covered the history of fulldome cinema in detail (article available here), but To the Moon and Beyond, is considered by many to be the first immersive film in history. The first to cover a 360 ° field of view, filmed with the Cinerama technique using a single fish-eye lens, on 70mm film at 18 fps, and projected onto the roof of a large dome about 30 meters high.

If its use was still somehow “didactic”, we moved away from the astronomical canons to bring instead a greater involvement towards the issues of transport. The film also influenced Stanley Kubrick, hiring its creators as VFX consultants for the legendary 2001: A Space Odyssey. Lester Novros and our next protagonist: Douglas Trumbull.

Douglas Trumbull, a mission: to save cinema

Douglas Trumbull. Image by Jorge Ferrer from Wikipedia.

Douglas Trumbull was a man with a great idea:movies can be more realistic and more immersive than they already are.

I would have liked to meet him in person, he was a myth for me. I tried to write to him a couple of times, offering to visit him at his Trumbull Studios in the countryside of Massachusetts, but unfortunately I got no reply. Perhaps the addresses I had were no longer current, perhaps he was too busy as well as old. I don’t know, the fact is that he is no longer with us except through his studies that still have the time to change the history of cinema.

He was one of the greatest experts in the world of special effects, first analog and then digital. Creator of amazing graphic masterpieces in the top of last century Hollywood production (2001: A Space Odyssey, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Star Trek …). After starting to smell the decay of traditional cinemas, he devoted his entire life to finding a solution. Which he too found in immersive cinema, as a true pioneer.

A scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey

Perhaps due to his analogue habit of always finding physical and real ideas rather than creating a new app or a new system to monetize users’ time while they are alone or at home, Douglas was a multinational craftsman. He certainly had art in his DNA: his father, Donald (Pappy Trumbull to friends) had been involved with VFX since the 1930s. Not officially accredited, he worked on The Wizard of Oz from 1939.

It was during the filming of 2001: A Space Odyssey that, only 25, Doug created the legendary psychedelic color stream “Slit Scan” based on the technique developed shortly before by John Whitney for Vertigo.

Slit Scan effect in 2001: A Space Odyssey

Immersivity is the future of cinema

I report part of an interview made by Filmmakermagazine.com to Trumbull himself.

If you look at the industry, it is moving more and more towards immersive experiences. Take virtual reality, for example; the problem is that people don’t want to wear the headset. Immersiveness is what TV cannot offer; when 3D took off, everyone started making 3D TVs. But now nobody makes them anymore.

I think the problem was miniaturization. When you look at a 3D image on the big screen, you have a 6 foot (1.82 meters) figure standing in front of you, while when you put it on a TV screen you have like a 6 inch (15 cm) figure. When I took the projects we were working on and played them on the TV screen to see what they looked like, the effect was completely lost.
Douglas Trumbull

Magi Pod: innovating the cinema

Douglas Trumbull in his later years developed with Trumbull Studios a system that united many of the key points for the renewal of cinemas. A redesign of both shooting and projection systems. At its core, 120fps 4K projection solves a problem Kubrick already denounced over 50 years ago: 24fps blur is obnoxious and unrealistic. For this already 2001: A Space Odyssey was shot at a high framerate, although almost no room was equipped for reproduction.

Trumbull wanted to bring back the magic he himself felt in visiting the curved screens of the Cinerama in childhood. But technically there were many problems to be solved.

Troubleshoot 3D projection

To begin with, stereoscopic projection requires halving the framerate (or doubling the projectors, which would be uneconomical). This means 60 fps projection per eye.

Then there is another, more concrete problem: in 3D films both images (right and left) are recorded simultaneously. But they are then projected one after the other, alternately (right, left, right, left eye etc …). There is therefore a small difference that is not visually perceptible, but not negligible from our unconscious. Solution? Record the two images with a distance of 180 degrees / shutter, then alternately, as they will then be projected. This solves a second problem, which concerns the “cinematic look”.

The high framerate is not in fact used in cinema because it makes the product too similar to video and TV. Trumbull then concluded to increase the flicker effect originally given by the cinematic 24 fps thanks to the recording of the left and right frames of the stereoscopy with 180 degrees / shutter distance. In addition to reducing the luminance of the screen (in the Magi equal to 14 FtL, less than 50 lux), but not reducing the gain of the screen itself.

The entire Magi patent aims to increase audience involvement: it translates into projection in the Magi Pod.

A small cinema, 70 seats ll in the best viewing area; toroidal silver screen (curved both horizontally and vertically) with 3x gain to increase contrast and therefore immersion; 32 speakers for enhanced surround effect; rotary subwoofers capable of reaching 1 Hertz, creating a “4D” effect with the absurd vibrations.

Trumbull’s years of experience leading the technical departments of the biggest blockbusters, in a single, magical, immersive cinema. If knowledge must always go forward, it cannot be ignored in the design of the cinema of the future.

Cross reflections in fulldome cinema

By designing a fulldome cinema, the differences with the Magi Pod are many and fundamental. The Magi does not in fact fill a dome, but only a part of it. And you cannot simply “enlarge” the field of view to compose 360 degrees. There is a first big problem: cross reflexes.

Anyone who has worked with high gain projection screens will have realized that a silver, 3X amplified screen is a kind of mirror. Reflecting both the light coming from the outside and the same image projected from one side to the other in the case of a convex screen. A problem that also experienced Steven Spielberg’s 1991 production, Back to the Future: The Ride; fulldome re-proposition of the original Back to the Future.

By limiting the radius, and keeping the spectators within an optimal viewing angle (therefore in central positions) the problem is reduced to almost zero. But a complete sphere must necessarily be a white screen with a reflection ratio of less than 1, or the solution is still to be studied. And in this case we will certainly have to do practical experiments in the near future.

Immersion in the cinema of the future

In fact, almost every previous study we talk about in this article is in some way linked to the digital world. But, as you may know, I am a staunch supporter of sociability and the return to real life.

The room will have to resemble a space and time machine, where you will enter a totally new dimension for the duration of the screening, and from which you will come out with a complete experience. Above all, in company.

The world is heading towards the conquest of space, which will initially be within the possibilities of a select few. Others will want to try new experiences, and they will have to do so while necessarily being on the ground.

Five senses for immersive cinema

The viewer will have to be the protagonist, so the narrative will also have to change. We remember well: without disturbing the intuition, the sixth, we still have five other senses.

Henry Jenkins, from http://henryjenkins.org

Today’s dual cinema manages to cover only two of them: sight and hearing. And, especially for sight, we can do a lot to improve the situation. Reading the number of Wired Italia of December 2021 (magazine that is always full of interesting ideas) I found this paragraph in an article by Henry Jenkins (lecturer at University of Southern California, director of the comparative media studies program at MIT in Boston for more than 10 years; not the last of the arrivals):

I am convinced that the metaverse will not be the future both because devices such as Oculus viewers are terrible (especially for those who, like me, wear glasses), and because it is not the visual experience that guarantees the highest level of immersion, but that audio and haptics, as evidenced by decades of studies and pioneers such as Metthew Shifrin and Nonny de la Peña.
Henry Jenkins

Jenkins’s idea, similar to mine in many ways, intrigued me to get to know musician Matthew Shifrin.

Matthew Shifrin: Legos and the cinema of the future

Matthew Shifrin is a young musician, blind from birth. Since he was a child, a Lego enthusiast, these allow him to experiment, touch, “see” without eyes. Thanks to touch, and therefore also to Legos, he can understand how the world works; as did. According to his eloquent example, he will never know what the Statue of Liberty is like without climbing it. And climbing the Statue of Liberty can be problematic… Therefore, a small Lego statue perfectly fulfills its function.

It is his thirteenth year of life. At the door rings Lilya, family friend. She approaches Matthew with light steps, looks at him and says cheerfully: “I have something for you!”. Matthew, confused, smiles at her as the woman places a package in her hands. The child opens it, touching a sheet entirely written in braille: these are the instructions for building Lego structures by himself.. His eyes shine, he is so happy. And he wants to get to work right away.

Lego for the blind

The story leads him to found, years later, “Lego for the blind“. An association, with its website, where you can download instructions like these for about thirty Lego products. And convinces the same company to include them in new products. He also created a system to help the blind to climb the rocks, really brilliant.

Definitely an interesting character; but you may be wondering why we talk about him in an article on the cinema of the future. I understand you, I was so taken by his story that for a moment I did it too. Then I remembered where I wanted to go.

In his TEDx Talk at Suffolk University, starting at minute six, he explains it well and in a very funny way.

Blind people in the cinema of the future

The point is: if the world manages to be immersive for a blind person, cinema can never be immersive in a similar or equal way to the real world if it is not for a blind person. The fact that the cinema of the future can be enjoyed in a better way also by people with disabilities, can only be an excellent and stimulating side effect.

While studying singing and accordion at the New England Conservatory in Boston, he continues to look for ways to make modern life more suitable for people like him.

In episode 3 of his Blind Guy Travels podcast, Matthew describes going to the movies with his friend Ben. The need to have Ben to describe the visual part of every single scene, and even thus not have a complete idea of the whole, leads him to create with his university a tactile device for the cinema.

With the support of the New England Conservatory’s Entrepreneurial Musicianship Department, Matt and his business partner have developed a programmable vibrating vest integrated with technology that mimics the sensations of overturning, flying and falling. This allows a new audience to effectively follow the Marvel Daredevil saga, a blind lawyer who becomes a superhero at night.

A few days ago I wrote an email to the conservatory asking for more details on this system, unfortunately without receiving an answer. I plan to comment on this article if I have any news in the future, it is interesting.

We will talk about experiential cinema

I have ready an analysis of the characteristics of current cinema, and of how they evolve in experiential cinema. How the latter is interactive, immersive, algorithmic and other important studies for the purpose of creating our cinema of the future.

But I decided to end the article here, it was getting too long and dispersed. I have already copied the text into a new WordPress post, which I will complete as soon as possible and publish.

I renew the invitation to comment, to share doubts and criticisms, and above all to participate in this innovation if you like it. You can also write to me, my address is dario.riccio@gmail.com. See you soon!

L'articolo Immersive cinema is the future è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

Influencer marketing for cinema

Dario Riccio — Mon, 18 Apr 2022 13:09:53 +0000

21st Century. Earth. The world of influencers. If we had said 50 years ago, that in a few decades there would be more talkers than auditors, someone would have smiled at us.

How marketing was born

The progressive decrease of media censorship in the Western world, which began in 1766 in Sweden and has spread to the present day (at least, until a few years ago…) has favored the birth of a large number of publishers. The number of publications increased considerably, newspapers were increasingly present and communication became a real branch of the economy.

Ancient newspaper

Until the 90s, the situation was still manageable and predictable by a marketing employee. There were some local and some national publications. First on paper, then on radio and finally on TV. With a brief exploit of newsreels, when the radio frequency image was still a future dream. The medium changed, but the language remained similar all in all.

Advertising agencies were born in the period of the industrial revolution, when for the first time the supply of goods exceeded the demand. It was therefore necessary to find buyers for this sea of products, to convince them that a product was better than its competitors. Initially, in the 19th century, it was still quite simple, even though there wasn’t a past to draw on. It was then tried with some paragraphs on printed paper, some posters in the corners of the cities and the product was brought to the knowledge of most.

Théophraste Renaudot

The first advertiser in history, founder of the French weekly La Gazette in 1631, was Théophraste Renaudot. A visionary close to the poor, who in addition to having founded what we can consider the first modern magazine in history, also created a sort of temporary agency to reduce the poverty of the most needy.

Finally, returning to advertising, the higher the budget, the more local newspapers where one could advertise. Up to being able to afford nationals, or even better to expand to other nations. Basic.

But what about cinema? How were films advertised in the last century?

Marketing for cinema in the twentieth century

Film advertisers of the early years (first from French, then New York and finally Hollywood), began by copying theatrical advertising, only to understand that they had to conform to traditional industry communication.

In fact, initially the idea was to sell “an experience”, not a product. The cinema was sold more as one would sponsor a nice trip, rather than as a nice car.

Not least, early film production was not very regular, with no precise predictions as to whether, and when, the film would be distributed. Without having big ideas about the future proceeds and the best duration of the projections to maximize profit.

Today it may seem absurd, but we must consider that at the time there were not many data to draw on. It was a new world, made of experimentation.

Cinema from product to lifestyle

Poster of the movie “Bicycle Thieves”

Having to sell a product by definition unnecessary discouraged even the best advertisers. No one had the physiological need to see this or that film in particular, nor a film in general. After numerous experiments, and gradually, it was realized that an experience had to be sold; a community had to be created. This need to see the movie, had to be somehow linked to the primary needs of man.

It was necessary to create in the public urgency, FOMO, to buy a product that could only be appreciated later.

And to do this, it was important to leave a strong and proper message to society.

Changing the lifestyle, creating movements, ideologies. Having a very strong impact on the society of debt and consumerism, deliberately wanted by the United States government after the Second World War to revive the fortunes of a severely tested economy.

That consumerism that managed to improve the lifestyle of Americans first, and then of Europeans, until about the 80s of the last century when the “American dream” ended. Cinema supported this dream, and the cinema communications workers wanted to break into the hearts of the population.

Collectibles and community marketing maturity

So not just living rooms, not just TV rights, not just VHS and DVD. The culture of “gadgets” developed, collecting, image rights on any object with the shape or name of your film or of your protagonist.

After these first tortuous decades, cinema marketing finally achieved the desired results. Cinema created fashions, and then followed them. Starting in the 1950s, there was a great crisis: the birth of TV caused a strong loss of turnover for cinemas. But Studios were getting closer to their audience, starting to design films that followed the current trends. Motions of rebellion, fun, fashion, rock ‘n roll… All to be able to conquer the public, if not in the hall, at least on home TV.

TV itself then went from being a disadvantage to a great advantage. In fact, the use of advertising in motion and trailers turned out to be ideal for cinema; who then, is none other than the precursor of that same daughter and traitor television.

Cinema Marketing – Recommended Reading

Books in English

For more informations, there are various studies about marketing in cinema. Some more focused on the practical part, a kind of how-to, like Movie Marketing: Opening the picture and giving it legs by Tiiu Lukk (Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, 1997), Open Wide: How Hollywood Box Office Became A National Obsession: Inside the Blockbuster Movie Factory by Dade Hayes and Jonathan Bing (New York: Miramax books/Hyperion, 2004) or Marketing to Moviegoers: A Handbook of Strategies Used by Major Studios and Independents di Robert Marich (Boston: Focal Press, 2005).

Other works are more theoretical, ideological. Like Global Hollywood 2, by Toby Miller (London: British Film Institute, 2019), which studies the influence of cinema, especially American, on global society.

Studies available for free in PDF

An important 2013 study by Sheldon Hall, freely downloadable from this link (Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive website), entitled “Jerry Pickman: The Picture Worked. Reminiscences of a Hollywood publicist”, cites classics such as The Greatest Show on Earth (Cecil B. DeMille, 1952), Shane (George Stevens, 1953) or Psycho (Alfred Hitchcock, 1960) and famous people like Adolph Zukor or Alfred Hitchcock, while highlighting the human aspect of marketing.

“Doctor Strangelove” poster

It reminds us that film advertising has its uncertainties, but it is also a human endeavor involving individuals such as Jerry Pickman, the great advertiser who died in 2010 and has dedicated over 50 years to marketing in film. Whose dedication can turn even an ordinary film into an extraordinary success. Last but not least, this seemingly unique vision of the film business shows us how film marketing developed on an industrial scale in the early 1980s, when the concept appeared that “now you sell movies like you sell hot dogs, as everyone does”.

A final reading tip comes from Stanley Kubrick. It is interesting to see marketing through the eyes of a director, to understand how art and business can be reconciled. “Stanley Kubrick and the Marketing of Dr. Strangelove” (1964, PDF downloadable here). Sometimes these interests converge, often not. In this text Peter Kramer, drawing on the archives of the London University of the Arts, describes how Kubrick was directly involved in the American marketing of Doctor Strangelove, from the earliest stages. To the point of committing to neutralize any competitors.

During the production and the first promotional campaign of the film, the famous director was very skilled in self-promotion; although the marketing materials used for the marketing campaign following the release of the film had focused on common topics such as celebrities, comedy and sex.

The beginnings of Social Media Marketing for cinema

Toronto Silent Film Festival

In 2013, the Toronto Silent Film Festival was among the first to use Instagram to promote itself. The method was studied by the Canadian marketing agency Cossette, and it was very different from the usual ones: they uploaded frames of silent films on the American social network, which by scrolling the page went to compose the film in the eyes of the user. Original method, although it did not acquire a large following due to the premature state of the social network at the time.

Out of curiosity, here are the accounts: tsff_1, tsff_2 and tsff_3.

Also in those early years of social media, people were looking for ways to bring traditional promotion to them. Think of trailers, which however sometimes had to be drastically reduced given the duration limits of the videos. With today’s eyes, once again ineffective systems even if used. As if to say, “at least I’m on social media”.

The film becomes functional to marketing

Similarly, more functional campaigns began to be designed. Staying on the subject of Instagram, the film about Steve Jobs of 2013 saw his official account, with pieces of the movie, frames, short videos and photos with meaningful phrases. In the same years, new aspect ratios for films began to be experimented, at least indie ones, without renouncing much-felt criticism from cinemascope purists.

All to get closer to the public, who changed habits: from TVs and PCs, the most used screens became those of smartphones. An attempt was made to use the square format, as did Xavier Dolan in the movie Mommy. To then quickly switch to the portrait format, able to fill small portable screens in the best possible way and reduce the distractions of the spectators.

In recent years there has also been a shift to real blockbusters in vertical format. Long-lasting vertical videos, however, can be less usable, or cause loss of concentration, given the lack of filling of our peripheral vision. Equally, the Russian director Timur Bekmambetov ~~in 2021 realized his V2. Escape from Hell with scenes in portrait format, using the screenlife technique (show images as if they were taken from a smartphone, even in selfie mode)~~ [UPDATE: this is a typo, it was just an idea later abandoned to make the film vertically], and following the series distributed in 2019 exclusively on Snapchat Dead of Night.

Already an exclusive Snapchat film distribution, it shows the many attempts that directors, producers and companies were, and still are, making to approach the modern world.

The importance of human sociality

The era of influencers

What was missing in the early years of social media was, paradoxically, the social side. People want to know other people, not see advertisements. They want to communicate, feel empathy for someone, feel less alone. This led to the natural evolution of social media marketing: the beginning of the era of influencers, and of influencer marketing for cinema.

Today is the era of influencers. Which, among other things, are also becoming increasingly important in the world of culture. It is no longer a film critic, a trade magazine or an important media who sanction the success of a production; also due to the increasingly marked lack of that ancient journalist / reader trust, lost after decades of partiality (for almost always economic interests) of the publishing world. And that continues to destroy itself even today, as evidenced by the attitude of many users on issues such as the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

Instead, it is people on social networks who are listened to with confidence; first and foremost the influencers, but also those who count less, “normofollowed” users who break even more forcefully in the hearts of friends and relatives.

In short, if Gianni says I have to see this film … It means that I have to see it.

The actors / influencers

So is influencer marketing suitable for the film industry? Of course, reviews in traditional media such as print or television and radio still play an important role in gaining publicity for films and television productions.

However, we have seen that the role of traditional media in cinematic communication has waned in favor of more genuine interpersonal communication (the good old word of mouth, technologically revisited).

The best-seen “advisors” are cinema enthusiasts, independent. They usually know their audience, first of all because they are similar to them and also because of the continuous interaction through chat, comments and quotes. The confidence given by having communicated directly, privately, with one’s “myth” is unparalleled (those of you who have been to dinner with a famous person can more or less understand the effect). And they often know how to offer original perspectives that no one else can give.

Now, let’s take it one step further. Let’s imagine for a moment that the influencer we are following, with whom we are actively speaking, is an actor in the same film. Or, let’s say, even just a technician. And who, like a friend, makes us follow the various stages of production, behind the scenes, even asks us for opinions on the story and, if we were experts, on the technique for the production of the film itself. How would that end? We would certainly get a discount or some advantage, given the “friendship” between us. Were it also the t-shirt, the hat, the keychain, even the possibility of being present on the set or at the premiere, or being part of the cast perhaps with an appearence. The possibilities are endless, as will the desire to go and see “our” film. The film in which a friend participates. The film we took part in ourselves. And what do you think, wouldn’t we tell everyone? Here, this is the heart of social media marketing for cinema. The marketing of trust, the return to word of mouth and closeness between people.

The importance of engagement among influencers

There is great collaboration in the influencer community. First of all they are colleagues, and among colleagues we understand each other. Then there is a mutual convenience to get to know each other, especially to be seen together. The fans of one become fans of the other, the possibilities for earning and growth become more numerous.

So, once you are full of influencers in your production, it becomes almost automatic to involve outsiders. Other people who also need to be emotionally involved. Then, invitations to the VIP area and front rows to previews, dinners with the crew. As for the fans, but the activities must obviously be more “personalized”. The influencer is used to being considered important, and it is therefore more complex to make him feel “better” than others.

It is important to have your actors interviewed by other influencers, similar to the old press. Also target cinema-savvy bloggers, podcasters and Youtubers. They too will be happy to be able to create interesting content, and at the same time make themselves known by the fans of their little stars.

Certainly personalities connected to the film industry are important, but we absolutely must not limit ourselvesto these. There are many people, many influencers, even small ones, who adapt for various reasons to that particular product we are making. And, as a result, their audience will be targeted.

Another advantage is that all of this is cheaper than advertising in the past. It requires more effort, mental but also physical, but with the choice of the right people upstream, the results can be unimaginable.

Only one ethical doubt remains: a good actor, but not very capable of socially involving an audience, may no longer have the possibilities he had in yesterday’s world.

Does influencer marketing for cinema have a future?

This is just a final parenthesis … Because here we are planning the future, and it is right to be critical. I’m not here to sell you social media, but to think together.

By now the Elites have understood very well the importance of social media. This could perhaps be bad, because those in charge always have an ancient idea in mind: the people are idiots. For heaven’s sake, I could almost say it’s true. We let ourselves be turned around like socks every day by the various propaganda (just think of this period, I write during the invasion / special operation in Ukraine, the name changes with respect to the speaker).

What’s the problem, aka luck, in all of this? That among billions of people, every now and then someone drinks a glass too much and starts thinking. And an article comes out in some strange blog or semi-unknown social profile. What others, even just 10 people, read. And if something is patently absurd, and that article denounces it … These people share it. And then again, and again, in a logarithmic scale of shares that leads to filling the web in a few days.

I was saying, problem and luck. Luck, because there is no longer the popular myopia of the past. Eventually, many things become clear even though the politics of politically correct leads to not reacting. We stay quiet, but at least we know. Problem, because this scheme is artificially reproducible. And those involved in political propaganda know this well … We therefore arrive at the paradox that it is no longer the journalists funded by the System who tell us what the System wants us to know, but our own friends. Reporting fake news, or rejecting real news but it is not good to disclose.

Will this be a problem for social media? I’m afraid yes, in the future. It will take time, but like print and TV yesterday, friends online will lose our trust one day. Socially, it is worrying on several fronts. But from a business point of view, let’s start thinking about what comes after the era of influencers.

And we keep the quality. Which, beyond all marketing, is the key to success.

L'articolo Influencer marketing for cinema è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

Fulldome video: the cinema of the future?

Dario Riccio — Sat, 05 Mar 2022 10:25:43 +0000

We can describe the cinema of the near future with three simple words: low budget technology. I do not want to say that large international productions will totally die, on the contrary they will allow the industry to experiment with the latest technologies and innovate the world. But the same technologies are opening the doors to a new revolution: the one that bypasses the big Studios.

A more democratic cinema

Virtual Production (I also had to write the entry on Wikipedia Italy ), motion capture, internet, digital and above all low-cost training, allow you to no longer be blocked by heavy budgets. Even new directors, or technicians, can have their say with a sustainable model. In the past, low-budget often meant super-low-gain. Without the support of public funding (which especially in our latitudes bring forward only Chippuò‘s friends and relatives), it was impossible to think of producing a cinematographic work, even a medium-level documentary, without losing thousands of euros.

All this reflected on the costs to the public, dictated by the large lobbies that made it inconvenient for many poor families to enjoy the Seventh Art. A day at the cinema for a family still has a cost comparable to months of Netflix. The benefits of digital distribution are enormous, but this isn’t meant to be the only method.

Personal skills are more important than budget

The capabilities of Unreal Engine 5

A great one-man-band, today he can potentially create a movie on his own. And above all, a good quality film. The participation of influencers can even help with distribution (I’ll do an article on this soon, now that I think about it). It was unimaginable until a few years ago, right?

Of course, it has always been possible to make no-budget cinemas. Thousands, perhaps millions, of young directors have done so in the past. But we were talking about very different results: without rooms worth tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars (Red et al.), Without international studies, without huge teams of specialized technicians (which were rare and expensive, given the inherent difficulties in training), he was at the maximum possible to create films that are not on the market and of a quality tending more to the low level than to the medium. Technical quality, but also limitations in storytelling caused by the technical impossibility of reproducing many ingenious ideas.

Today, this is no longer the case. A well-armored computer, with a top graphics card and a real-time render engine (among which the most popular in the cinema field, Unreal Engine, is distributed free of charge …) allows you to obtain 3D graphics that have little to envy to the big . And they can make small producers grow a lot in the cinema of the future.

Technologies for the cinema of the future

Let’s move on to analyze some of the technologies that could help us in the new cinematic use. Initially I expected to insert more than one already in this article, but given the length of time I preferred to limit myself to talking here about the fulldome video, promising myself an article in the coming days that will continue the discussion.

A planetarium

Fulldome video

Fulldome video projection is a technology that I have supported for years. It is the visualization of a video projection on the roof of a dome, to have a hemispherical overview. One of the best ways to feel “inside” a story, without using (and introverting) virtual reality viewers.

Brief history of planetariums

The technology is far from new. It is in fact used for scientific dissemination in planetariums all over the world. The oldest dome-shaped construction known today dates back to 500 BC, built by the Etruscans. The history of art, and the visit to churches and ancient structures in every corner of the world, teaches us how this form has often been used in various eras to represent the sky, Paradise and the firmament.

Extract from the book

To know the first “working” planetarium (I mean, in motion), we had to wait until 1229 when Frederick II of Swabia, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, he brought back to Italy a tent with a domed roof on which a mechanical planetarium was hung: a clockwork mechanism, with a globe in the center (representing the Sun), from which some arms that support the planets then known depart. To learn more about the history of mechanical planetariums, this book from 1965 is interesting (the reading is free and open).

The main disadvantage, or difference, of the first planetariums was the depiction of the sky in reverse: the observer saw the solar system as if it were outside it, and not on the Earth. This was still the case in 1774 when the astronomer Eise Eisinga built, by himself, what is today the oldest planetarium still in operation. You can visit it if you pass through the city of Franeker, in the Netherlands.

Farnese Atlas. Source: Lalupa

Between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the innovations were many and rapid. The birth of Carl Zeiss in 1846 drastically increased the quality of optical instruments (which before then were produced without preliminary design, let’s say “by trial and error”).

We then moved on to ever more precise mechanical planetariums, and the Atwood Globe in Chicago made history. A metal dome of about 5 meters built in 1913, with 692 holes to represent the stars, and a lamp to represent the Sun. For the first time, the concept of the planetarium was the modern one: the viewer saw the sky, as if it were on Earth under the real celestial vault.

The first modern planetariums

During the twentieth century, the evolution continued, the planetariums went from rare instruments available to kings and scientists, to places of scientific dissemination open to all.

The first projection planetarium was built by Zeiss, which in 1923 tested the first Carl Zeiss planetary projector in its 16-meter dome. Even today, obviously updated, they are used by some large planetariums as an alternative to digital systems. In the following years, planetariums opened in Munich, Rome, Moscow, Stockholm, Milan, Hamburg and the first non-European: the Chicago planetarium. This went on all over the world until 1983, the year of the digital turning point. The turning point, which led me to talk about planetariums in an article on the cinema of the future.

How the fulldome video was born

Here we are at a fundamental point: how the fulldome video was born.

1983, we said. We are in the States, in Richmond. More specifically, at the Virginia Science Museum. Here the world sees a digital video projector in a planetarium for the first time. It was different from the projectors we are used to today: the Digistar I, manufactured by Evans & Sutherland, used calligraphic projection. I admit to being ignorant on the subject, never in my life have I had anything to do with this technology. And the short Wikipedia entry isn’t much helpful. Of course, it was a vector (therefore, by definition, unrealistic and poorly detailed) and monochromatic (created by a single laser beam) projection. Can anyone help us understand the principle of operation in the comments? It would be interesting, out of pure historical curiosity.

The fact is, then the 90s arrived with the first DLP and LCD projectors. In 1996, Japan’s GoTo Inc. gave birth to the Virtuarium, specifically designed for projection of stereoscopic scientific videos in a planetary dome. Two years later, Sky-Scan introduced SkyVision, the first fulldome digital animation.

The equipment was still prohibitively expensive, but we were close to what is now a digital fulldome planetarium. And that it could become the cinema of the future.

Cheap fulldome cinema: is it possible?

The problem with digital planetariums was the cost of the equipment. A high resolution and good contrast video projector in the 90s and 2000s had very high costs, tens or hundreds of thousands of euros. Even more so with a good fisheye lens able to project on a hemispherical surface without noticeable distortions. To solve the problem we must therefore go back a little, indeed a lot … On October 20, 1939, when New Yorker James S. Conant submitted to the patent office what would become three years later the patent US2299682A.

Fulldome projection with convex mirror

The patent dealt with a shooting and projection system (photographic, for the time) that we could define as “Newtonian”, from the name of the inventor of the reflection telescope. The technique was not used in planetariums until 2003, when Paul Bourke, an Australian university professor, retook it to adapt it to the then growing business of small digital planetariums.

Image from: paulbourke.net

The principle is very simple: the image is projected through a classic lens for flat screens (a normal video projector, so to speak) towards a convex mirror very similar to the surveillance mirrors that until a few years ago could be seen in the corners of every supermarket. This mirror then deflects the image towards the dome ceiling, allowing it to maintain the right proportions.

To maintain good details, it is important to avoid secondary reflections due to ghosting as much as possible. This is why we usually avoid cheap surveillance mirrors, preferring (better to say, necessitating) first-surface mirrors. They are mirrors with a reflective surface (silver, usually aluminum or silver), superimposed on a support. The opposite of what happens in normal mirrors (called second surface) which have the reflective material behind another transparent such as glass or acrylic (to protect it). For more information, the mirror manufacturer Abrisa has written an interesting article on the differences between the two types of mirrors.

The problem with these mirrors is the delicacy, and the risk of blackening of the same (which must therefore be treated periodically). For the purposes of a fulldome projection, silvering with aluminum, less expensive, would also be good, since the system used for Newtonian telescopes has scientific needs of a very different nature (to maximize the frequencies of the reflected light spectrum).

Doubts of the scientific community

The Planetarian magazine, edited by the International Planetarium Society, in the March 2001 issue published various comments about the probable use, in the future, of planetariums as a place of entertainment unrelated to scientific purposes. Interesting Ken Miller, when he mentions the owner of a small cinema who, after trying various technological innovations, claimed that the cause of a bad income is always a bad movie, a bad script and a bad acting. The message counts, not the medium. And in this I agree in part. I can argue from my experience that the same message by a better medium remains a better message.

Will the cinema of the future be fulldome?

In this article it is still too early to give a definitive answer. In the coming weeks we will analyze other details and other technologies, but I remain fairly convinced that the fulldome can be a great compromise in the 21st century. Technology has accustomed us to increasingly immersive tools, and investments in virtual reality and augmented reality in recent years are pushing in this direction.

I was very excited about virtual reality, but lately I’m starting to think that its future may be less rosy than expected. I await Apple‘s entry into the sector to get a clearer idea, for now the main sponsor is Meta Inc., a.k.a. Facebook, a company that despite common opinion has never stood out for its ability to predict future. A company that has grown thanks to a single good idea of its founder Zuckemberg and his ability to attract investments, but which has subsequently developed only thanks to the acquisition of good, almost alternative ideas that work well in the same sector.

Virtual reality will still have a good success for the purposes for which it was initially designed. It has strong potential in gaming and in cultural and educational contexts, and its media push may serve to increase interest in an innovation of storytelling in images to get closer to a “collective virtual reality”.

As I imagine the situation to date, it will be augmented reality that will take us the most time during the day. An analysis on the use of AR for interactivity in the cinema of the future will also be fundamental.

As usual, I would be very happy if we could create a debate. I therefore invite you to comment, criticize or give new ideas under this article. And thanking you, I give you an appointment in the next few days for a next trip.

L'articolo Fulldome video: the cinema of the future? è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

How to innovate modern cinema

Dario Riccio — Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:30:00 +0000

Costs, TV, the Internet, social life. There are so many reasons why people no longer go to the cinema today. But modern cinema can be taken advantage of.

Let’s review the history of cinema, analyze moviegoers over the last century, and look for solutions to the biggest problem in modern cinema.

Link to article: https://www.darioriccio.com/en/innovating-modern-cinema/

L'articolo How to innovate modern cinema è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.

Innovating modern cinema

Dario Riccio — Wed, 02 Feb 2022 21:26:19 +0000

https://www.darioriccio.com/podcast-player/717/how-to-innovate-modern-cinema.mp3

On a break from work in the Swiss mountains, under the gray sky of early February, I lose myself thinking about modern cinema. What he sees in empty halls (and no, Covid is only partially involved). The one that sees series work more than feature films. Hollywood, like Bollywood or our Cinecittà, bet everything on this. But can modern cinema really go on like this? Or, at least, do we really want to lose a place for fun, socialization, so important as the cinema was in the last century?

A brief history of modern cinema

When Rossellini was at the “Modern Cinema”

I remember fondly when my father told me about the “Patini” cinema in Castel di Sangro, our hometown, in the days of his childhood. Born in 1937, immediately after the World War II the situation in Europe was anything but rosy. There was so much to rebuild, we lived in a climate of constant tension due to the Cold War.

The United States was the only power in shape, and mass cinema could only come from there. True, we were in the McCarthyism with not very clear rules. This name comes from Senator Joseph McCarthy, who persecuted and imprisoned hundreds of progressives in 1953/54. In a climate of collective political hysteria, every innovative idea was associated with the Communists. Characters such as actor Charlie Chaplin, directors Jules Dassin and Joseph Losey were forced into exile. The rebels, out of all the “Hollywood Ten” (10 screenwriters who appealed to American freedom of expression), rightly ended up in the cage. Walt Disney and others escaped by denouncing colleagues… If you can dream it, surely you can (which then, this phrase is from Imagineer Disney Tom Fitzgerald, not Walt as is commonly thought).

The cinema of the United States to conquer the world

Despite this, America came out with its head held high. The history of cinema teaches us that the major film companies joined forces under the MPEAA (Motion Picture Export Association of America) to subdue opponents in the international market, and the government of the country led by Roosevelt first and Truman then, took advantage of its hegemonic power to circumvent foreign protectionist laws.

But was it all easy? In fact, no. In any case, the public had to be convinced, it was necessary to give them serious reasons to reach the theaters TV grew in importance every year, and for this reason the focus was on technological and stylistic innovation. Among these, color was a cinematic exclusive. This Italian article by Domenico Palattella is interesting, from which I quote:

Color must in fact be understood as the natural evolution of black and white and of Cinema as art, because if Cinema is the art of reality, color also had to necessarily rise to enhance the emotions that only this Art can offer in a way so penetrating, yesterday as today.
Domenico Palattella

Color films increased from 20 to 50% of productions in the early 1950s, becoming almost all in the 1960s. The Kodak Eastman Color film (and, before that, Ferraniacolor in Italy), which cut costs, came to the rescue for its cheapness; but it was only a consequence of what the market was asking for at the time.

Another innovation was the change of format. The 4:3 TV ratio gave way to the more eye-catching panoramic format. Then again, young people were drawn to the new drive-ins. There was a real competition, TV vs Cinema. The baby boom convinced filmmakers to look for every valid way to seduce young people, obviously also by producing TV series: they have always been popular. But the cinema, intended as the theater, was not left to itself.

Attendance at Italian cinemas throughout history

I was saying, my father… He was dying to go to the cinema, and Italy was not America. There was very little money, and 100 lire for a child was really a lot. So he saved himself, and yes… Sometimes you could access the Patini Cinema for free by making eye contact with the owner. But what a desire to go to the cinema!

Is this still the case today? How is the attendance rate of cinemas around the world evolving? For Italy, Istat comes to the rescue. A 2018 report photographs the situation from 1993 to 2017. In this period, the percentage of people who went to the cinema more than 7 times in a year has dropped by almost 20%. On the contrary, the percentage of those who went at least once, has risen. Maybe, only to remember if the place hasn’t changed a bit. This increase was helped by the increase in the female audience (which, strangely, previously seemed less fascinated by the big screen).

Other important data? More and more over-65s go to theaters: from 6.3% in 1993 to 15.2% in 2017. Positive or alarming figure? I’m honest, I can’t convince myself of the answer. To close this quick overview (if you’re curious, read the report), the main reason why you don’t go to the cinema is (coincidentally): “I prefer to watch movies at home”.

Modern cinema costs too much

And unfortunately it is boring now.

But let’s go back a little. Let’s enter our virtual time machine, and let’s go into the first half of the 1900s. Even in Italy, in 1940 on average each inhabitant went to the cinema 8 times a year. In 1950 thirteen, to reach a peak of about 17 times in 1955. From there, a steady decline. 10 admissions per year in 1970, 4 in 1980 to stabilize at around two or less in the last 30 years. Causes? TV (and to follow the internet), but also ticket prices constantly increasing until 1990. And, I might add, lack of real innovation in an increasingly innovative world. Don’t get me wrong: in production there are, and many. It is in the fruition that innovations are lacking, and perhaps it is even more important.

Cinemas in the United States from 1930 to today

A look beyond the ocean? The US market is certainly more authoritative than the Italian one, not least because of the numbers. But it is no different… At the beginning of the 1930s (about 35 years after the opening of the first movie theater, in 1894), over 70% of the population went to the cinema at least once a week. 70%! This percentage dropped to around 40% in 1935, to then exceed 60% again in 1944. Since then, a continuous loss of spectators: in 1950 it was 30%, in 1960 less than twenty. And it was the 1964 the year that, in the US market, marks the stabilization of regular cinema-goers at about 10% of the population.

A clear reason, even in the States, was the price of the ticket. Hollywood has always been an industry whose rulers celebrate themselves as superior to the “plebs”, no matter what you think. And in lean times, they would never have given up part of their millionaire earnings. If there were fewer spectators, the price goes up. Simple. Too bad it’s a dog biting its own tail.

Movie theaters create sociality and sharing

Money was not the only reason, however: there was also a social reason (which returns cyclically): during the Great Depression, in the 1930s, cinema was a way to escape the cold, heat and loneliness. Movie theaters brought together strangers, who one next to the other shared the only social moment available to all.

3D movies, the only real innovation in recent years

I remember the period when stereoscopic cinema, “3D films”, made a comeback the last time. Not many years ago, I was in the middle of my film academy (2011, good times). Here, it could be a little breath of freshness. But the idea was rejected, officially because it didn’t work. However, between the need to accustom the public and the time necessary to update theaters and productions, the real reason for not reaching results was (once again) the will of the cinema world to speculate on customers.

Stereoscopy, on balance, was not a way to offer users more. It was a way to dramatically increase the cost of the ticket. And I myself, as much as I loved seeing some films in 3D, often preferred the 2D version just to avoid the 12/13 euro entry. How many like me?

The final solution: unique and economical experience

So, is there a solution? In my opinion, yes, and there are those who support me with more authority. Well, I get off the pedestal: I support him. I will tell you about it in the next few days, my break is over, but it is basically a question of returning to making cinema a unique, unrepeatable, fun, social and, last but not least, budget experience.

Do we want to reform cinema? Let’s make a revolution together? Great things always start from the bottom… And we are in the period when it is easier to do so.

Article F.A.Q.

What is McCarthyism?

This name comes from Senator Joseph McCarthy, who persecuted and imprisoned hundreds of progressives in 1953/54. In a climate of collective political hysteria, every innovative idea was associated with the Communists. Characters such as actor Charlie Chaplin, directors Jules Dassin and Joseph Losey were forced into exile. The rebels, out of all the “Hollywood Ten” (10 screenwriters who appealed to American freedom of expression), rightly ended up in the cage. Walt Disney and others escaped by denouncing colleagues… If you can dream it, surely you can do it (which then, this phrase is fromImagineerDisney Tom Fitzgerald, not Walt as is commonly thought).

How did American cinema conquer the world?

The history of cinema teaches us that the major film companies joined forces under the MPEAA(Motion Picture Export Association of America) to subdue opponents in the international market, and the government of the country led by Rooseveltfirst and Trumanthen, took advantage of its hegemonic power to circumvent foreign protectionist laws.

Why did color cinema develop?

The public had to be convinced, it was necessary to give them serious reasons to reach the theaters. TV grew in importance every year, and for this reason the focus was on technological and stylistic innovation. Among these, colorwas a cinematic exclusive.
Domenico Palattella: “Color must in fact be understood as the natural evolution of black and white and of Cinema as art, because if Cinema is the art of reality, color also had to necessarily rise to enhance the emotions that only this Art knows how to offer in such a penetrating way, yesterday as today”.

Is modern cinema too expensive?

In Italy, in 1940 on average each inhabitant went to the cinema 8 times a year. In 1950 thirteen, to reach a peak of about 17 times in 1955. From there, a steady decline. 10 admissions per year in 1970, 4 in 1980 to stabilize at around two or less in the last 30 years. Causes? TV (and to follow the internet), but also ticket prices constantly increasing until 1990. And, I might add, lack of real innovation in an increasingly innovative world. Don’t get me wrong: in production there are, and many.It is in the fruition that innovations are lacking, and perhaps it is even more important.

Why hasn’t 3D cinema spread?

The idea was officially rejected because it did not sell. However, between the need to accustom the public and the time necessary to update theaters and productions, the real reason for not reaching results was (once again) the will of the cinema world to speculate on customers.
Stereoscopy, on balance, was not a way to offer users more. It was a way to dramatically increase the cost of the ticket. And I myself, as much as I loved seeing some films in 3D, often preferred the 2D version just to avoid the 12/13 euro entry. How many like me?

In what year did the first movie theater open?

The first cinema hall opened in 1895 in Paris, France, by the Lumière Brothers.

L'articolo Innovating modern cinema è apparso primo per Future of Cinema - by Dario Riccio.