The End of Cinema – A Medium in Crisis in the Digital Age

It is quite apparent that any capturing through filming shows an interpretation of the world, as we remarked above.

Roger Odin, De la fiction (2000), 162.

Laurent Jullier, L’Écran post-moderne: Un cinéma de l’allusion et du feu d’artifice (1997), 37. Quoted in Odin, De la fiction, 162.

Quoted by Odin, De la fiction, 108.

On this topic see, for example, Paul Ricoeur, Oneself as Another, trans. Kathleen Blamey (1992 [1990]).

Some members of OULIPO would speak here of “plagiarism by anticipation” (we would never think such a thing of course!). François Le Lionnais, for example: “Occasionally, we discover that a structure we believed to be entirely new had in fact already been discovered or invented in the past, sometimes even in a distant past. We make it a point of honor to recognize such a state of things in qualifying the text in question as ‘plagiarism by anticipation.’ Thus justice is done, and each is rewarded according to his merit.” Our emphasis. François Le Lionnais, “Second Manifesto,” in Oulipo: A Primer of Potential Literature, ed. and trans. Warren F. Motte Jr. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1986), 31.

Alexandre Arnoux, “J’ai vu, enfin, à Londres un film parlant,” Pour Vous 1 (22 November 1928): 3.

Jean-Pierre Chartier, “Art et réalité au cinéma. I.–Le cinéma inventé deux fois . . . ,” Bulletin de l’IDHEC 1 (May 1946): 4. The authors thank Laurent Le Forestier for having brought this article to their attention.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid.

André Bazin, “Le cinéma est-il mortel?,” L’Observateur politique, économique et littéraire 170 (13 August 1953): 24. We quoted the second sentence in the previous chapter. Our emphasis on the expression “second birth.”

Pierre Leprohon, Histoire du cinéma, vol. 1, Vie et mort du Cinématographe (1895–1930) (1961).

Edgar Morin, The Cinema, or the Imaginary Man, trans. Lorraine Mortimer (2005 [1956]).

Just before the authors submitted the manuscript for this volume to its initial French publisher, Frank Kessler informed us that he had found the following in Christian Metz’s notes for his seminar on Rudolf Arnheim in 1982 concerning the distinction to be made between cinema as reproduction technology and cinema as a means of artistic expression: “Étienne Souriau at the Filmology congress in 1955: there was a double birth of cinema; a technological invention does not found an art but requires the art to be reinvented.” Personal e-mail to André Gaudreault, June 14, 2013. Our emphasis.