This article describes the “hypnotic” feeling when watching the film inside the theater and the lost emotion when leaving the theater. In the cinema, the darkness envelops us like a cocoon, and with the relaxation of postures, the freedom of our bodies is awakened, which illustrates modern “eroticism”. Meanwhile, the only light in the cinema is the film on the screen. Inside the darkness, we are “glued” to the images and let our emotions and attention be drawn to the plots, making us feel dazed when leaving them. The author also introduces the “two bodies” theorem to explain why we can be fascinated by the film twice in the cinema. While the narcissistic body is immersed in the overwhelming “mirror”, the perverse body is amazed by the surroundings. These elements all together create an intimate and intriguing cinema experience.
After reading the article, I understood why we love to have a cinema experience despite the higher cost than streaming media at home. Also, what I found interesting is that the PowerPoint in our lectures has white characters with black backgrounds, just like what is in the cinema, and that darkness can make us more concentrated on the lecture materials in a similar way as cinema does. Besides what is mentioned in the article, I think another reason why watching films in cinemas is that it revokes our memories and nostalgic feelings in the age of streaming films at home, making the whole experience ritualistic and fascinating.
—Liu Yuhan 3036126654
I appreciate that you draw a visual reference between the lecture and Barthes’ commentary on the movie-going experience, particularly the darkness of the movie theater space itself and that of the screen after the movie is over. Could you clarify your point on “modern eroticism” regarding Barthes’ text – is this your understanding of a particular section or the text in its entirety? To clarify, be more specific in using “I” and “we.” For example, do you mean “we” as a general movie-going audience in Hong Kong? Do you see the “two-body theorem” still relevant to the contemporary movie-going experience?