Advertisement

Sensurround: 4D Theatre Space and the Pliable Body

  • Stacy M. Jameson
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter considers internalizations of surveillance, incorporated power, via mediums beyond the gaze and throughout public spaces that seem to purport a shroud of anonymity in darkness. For spectators at contemporary four-dimensional (4D) theatres (where three-dimensional (3D) films are joined with environmental, sensory, and physical effects), however, the space of film viewing is neither static nor safe. Contrary to traditions of alienation that theorize an active spectator via facilitating distance between the spectator and the film diegesis, 4D augments attention to the theatre space and the viewers’ body outside the film (via the negative parallax of 3D, the activity of smoke and bubbles, tipping seats, etc.) yet generates a docile visceral body responding automatically to a subtle physical choreography that is infused and diffused throughout the theatre and internalized by participants. Here surveillance is not an apparatus of the gaze, but rather a state of “immersion” with no distinction between inside and outside (the film, the theatre, or the body).

Bibliography

  1. Cline, E. (2011). Ready Player One. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  2. Eisenstein, S., & Gerould, D. (1974). Montage of Attractions: For “Enough Stupidity in Every Wiseman”. The Drama Review: TDR, 18(1), 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated from French by A. Sheridan. New York: Vintage Books, Random House, Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Gunning, T. (1994). An Aesthetics of Astonishment: Early Film and the (In)Credulous Spectator. In L. Williams (Ed.), Viewing Positions: Ways of Seeing Film (pp. 114–133). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Gunning, T. (2011). The Cinema of Attractions: Early Film, Its Spectator and the Avant-Garde. In T. Corrigan, P. White, & M. Mazaj (Eds.), Critical Visions in Film Theory: Classic and Contemporary Readings (pp. 69–76). Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.Google Scholar
  6. Huhtamo, E. (2013). Illusions in Motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jackson, M. (1987). Another Part of Me. In Bad. Los Angeles: Epic Records.Google Scholar
  8. Jameson, S. (2015). Gaming the Senses. In Strip Cultures: Finding America in Las Vegas (pp. 184–214). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kasson, J. (1978). Amusing the Million: Coney Island at the Turn of the Century. New York: Hill & Wang.Google Scholar
  10. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). The Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd..Google Scholar
  11. Mulvey, L. (2011). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In T. Corrigan, P. White, & M. Mazaj (Eds.), Critical Visions in Film Theory: Classic and Contemporary Readings (pp. 713–725). Boston/New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.Google Scholar
  12. North, D. (2008). Performing Illusions: Cinema, Special Effects and the Virtual Actor. New York: Wallflower Press.Google Scholar
  13. Oxford English Dictionary. (1989). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Prince, S. (2011). Immersive Aesthetics. In Digital Effects in Cinema (pp. 183–220). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Rothermel, D. (2009). Slow Food, Slow Film. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 26, 269–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sandifer, P. (2011). Out of the Screen and into the Theater: 3-D Film as Demo. Cinema Journal, 50(3), 62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Strauven, W. (2006). In W. Strauven (Ed.)., The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded Introduction to an Attractive Concept. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Tomasovic, D. (2006). In W. Strauven (Ed.)., The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded The Hollywood Cobweb: New Laws of Attraction. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Willis, S. (1999). Public Use/Private State. In Inside the Mouse: Work and Play at Disney World (pp. 180–198). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Web Sources

  1. 4DX. (2017). IT in 4DX: Audience Reactions. Retrieved April 2, 2018, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3lBj2IklJE
  2. Brownlee, J. (2016). A Brief History of Smell-O-Vision. Wired. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from https://www.wired.com/2006/12/a-brief-history-2-2/
  3. CJ 4DPLEX. (2011). 4DX! This Is 4D!!. Retrieved June 2, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4FMm6Jntfg
  4. CJ 4DPLEX. (n.d.). 4DX: Absolute Cinema Experience. Retrieved June 2, 2018, from http://www.cj4dx.com/
  5. Konow, D. (2013). Before THX: The Cinema Shaking Technology of Sensurround. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from http://www.tested.com/tech/455667-thx-cinema-shaking-technology-sensurround/.
  6. Science Daily. (2014). Identity Verification: Body Odor as a Biometric Identifier. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140204073823.htm
  7. The Engineer. (2007). Border Patrol. Retrieved April 18, 2018, from https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/26-november-2007/border-patrol/
  8. Wagstaff, J. (2016). Nose Job: Smells Are Smart Sensors’ Last Frontier. Reuters. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-smell/nose-job-smells-are-smart-sensors-last-frontier-idUSKCN0Z82SH

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stacy M. Jameson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Rhode IslandSouth KingstownUSA

Personalised recommendations