​

          Digital visual effects are now one of the most substantial facet of the digital revolution in filmmaking  and this has frequently generated a great deal of heated debate, with supporters maintaining that the use of DVFx supports the narrative, while opponents claim that the spectacle of these technologies undermines storytelling. Visual effects have a significant impact on the storytelling process of a film. The visual aspect of the narrative can interrupt audience’s subordination to narrative and affect the narrative flow by putting both the image and its fabricated character on centre stage. However, if they are used as a technical solution, visual effects can maintain narrative coherence, preserve the diegetic world and convey story information.

​

          Firstly, in the earliest years of exhibitions, the spectacle functioned to disrupt the narrative flow. Until 1906-1907, “the cinema of attraction” dominated the cinema. Tom Gunning presents how cinema itself was an attraction due to the fact that through an intriguing spectacle, it was providing pleasure, requiring spectator attention as well as arousing visual stimulation. The author claims that effects are tamed attractions. To illustrate this point, many techniques in early film, such as close-ups, were used rather as an attraction than as a way of supporting the story. For example, in ”Porter’s The Gay Shoe Clerk”, the aim of enlargement is exhibitionism as the lady lifts her skirt, in order for everyone to see her ankle. As discussed by George Melies, some films, especially trick films, were  just “a series of magical attractions” and were plotless. However, even plotted trick films such as  “Le Voyage Dons La Lune” (1902) intended to compromise spectator’s subordination to narrative motivation. In addition, audiences used to be more interested in the exhibited machines and technological wonders such as X-rays when they were going to the cinema, rather than in films

​

          Secondly, there is widespread agreement that DVFx halt the narrative flow by drawing  viewer’ s attention to the technology that created them. Kristen Thompsons investigates how the notion of excess, also known as surfeit, can create a tension between narrative and spectacle. Excess includes “all those diverse elements in a film that can escape its unifying structures: unmotivated stylistic elements, indeed, everything which is extra to narrative function on the visual (and audio) plane”.  Thompson states “the minute a viewer begins to notice style for its own sake, excess must affect narrative meaning”. Although the contradiction between knowing that one is being deceived and still immersing into the spectacle is relevant here, in those scenes from spectacular films comprised of computer imaging, the spectator’s curiosity with the mechanics of the image itself is enhanced significantly when images tend to be highly convincing or photographically correct. Due to this fact, visual effects disrupt the narrative flow. This occurs in particular in sequences of narrative redundancy. However, in some films, which include a considerable number of visual effects, such as “A.I”, visual effects work thematically and visually and computer-generated imagery does not outline spectacular value, but, in this case, represents the props of everyday life.

​

          In addition, classical narrative aims to preserve the “apparatus” of the filmmaker imperceptible, yet spectacle, realized by special effects, also aims to draw viewer’s attention to the film’s technology. Therefore, is there any possibility for effects to adapt to classical narrative?  A study by Kristin Thompson, discussed in her book, “Storytelling  in the New Hollywood’, explains the ways in which classical narrative has changed. She notes that the aim of displaying spectacular films is not necessarily a deflection of classical narratives. However, Thompson’s thesis argues that in the mid of 1990s, Hollywood films were unfavorably  influenced by “storycraft manuals”, which encouraged a script full of digital visual effects. Special effects propose a new kind of narrative which offers a new pacing, especially within action and science fiction films. Roger Warren Beebe claims this in “After Arnold: Narratives of the Posthuman Cinema”. This narrative does not assume the experiences of a single human character. In the same way, there is evidence to outline a turn to contemporary film narratives which shows an evasive structured “baroque”.  Norman Klein discusses about the electronic baroque of Hollywood and talking in particular about chase cartoon, he claims that “special effects film is a hybrid of both [elemental and dramatic stories and that]...in the mix, each tends to erase the other, leading to a very diminished sense of character”.

​

          Moreover, visual effects have the potential to lead to narrative interruption because spectacle is the antithesis of narrative. The statement that narrative and spectacular imagery are identical dominated the classical era, but now it is superseded and this can be demonstrated by technological thrill films  which are comprised of moments of heightened spectacle  as  “Terminator 2:  Judgement Day” (1991), “Starship Troopers” (1997).  Andrew Darley states that “spectacle effectively halts motivated movement”. Both, “invisible” and technically opaque special effects capture viewer’s interest for what they can dazzlingly depict and for how they realize it. The narrative cause is suspended especially in science fiction, horror and fantasy films. Special effects portray  fascinating images as well as display their own fabricated character. For this reason, the audience can become perplex when it comes to the precise ways in which an effect had been created. Laura Kipnis finds that the Hollywood narrative goal is represented by a linear story which is easy to understand, with a cause and effect structure and characters with clear personality traits. From this point of view, she suggests that new blockbusters are realized around special effects and the aim of special effects is not to help conveying a fascinating story anymore. The classical Hollywood narrative is described by Kristen Thompson, David Bordwell and Janet Staiger as “telling stories clearly, vividly and entertainingly”. However, the use of digital effects failed to commit to this narrative structure.

​

          On the one hand, DVFx  tend to draw attention to themselves because of their distinctiveness and dazzling spectacle they display. The idea of adjusting the tension between spectacle and narrative has become of vital importance due to the rise of special effects. The “blockbuster film”, which is crammed with visual effects, represents the transformation of spectacle within late twentieth century visual culture. From 1980, when special techniques improved, their usage in blockbusters became substantial. Such films, which are exemplified by “Blade Runner”(1982), “Robocop”(1987), “Total Recall” (1990) suggested that film equals narrative. In contrast, from the start of new century digital images technologies dominated this new genre and in doing so it affected the traditional concerns with the storyline. This does not imply that such films are not in a narrative form anymore, but that due to the uniqueness of special effects, the visual display demands credit and examination as an aesthetic element in its own right. Even though effects are created to achieve the highest standards of photorealism in order to preserve the diegetic action without sabotaging the spectator’s subordination to narrative, just to analyze if the images meet these standards completely can distract the audience from the narrative flow.

​

          On the other hand, the usage of effects is a process which aims to heighten the spectacularity that works with the narrative, provides story information, aims to establish the diagetic world. Shilo McClean demonstrates how DVFx are used in storytelling. She proposes  8 categories of effects outlined by the narrative and stylistic uses of DVFx : documentary, invisible, seamless,  exageratted, fantastical, surrealist, new traditionalist. The invisible category intends to express perfect veracity and not to draw attention away from the narrative. When it comes to seamless effects, storytelling is vital in order to understand the dvfx because they are noticeable. The exageratted usage provides cognitive improbability,while the action recalls perceptual realism. Fantastical effects depict an improbable realm, but it is extended into perceptual realism. The audience allow the dominance of narrative context when the films includes a sense of verisimilitude. Surrealist usage reveals conceptual statements which highlight key themes of the narrative. For instance, The eternal sunshine of the spotless mind includes surrealist effects to explain the notion of remembrance and forgetting. Taken into consideration the plot of the film, Clementine’s digital erasure has a deep significance. Even though the effects work is not something extraordinary, as a narrative achievement is remarkable. Afterwards, the visual effects can support the story.

​

          However, visual effects do not always serve as spectacle if it is impossible to notice them. The usage of visual effects has the potential to maintain story coherence and to support the diegetic world. Invisible effects are intentionally undetectable and visual effects artists recognize that if they can be noticed, they unsuccessfully meet the criteria. For example, in “Adaptation” (2002), visual effects are used to remove the eye-blink of a woman who telegraphs the results of a car crash in order to preserve viewer’s engagement to the storyline. In the same way, absolutely concealed effects adapt to the narrative setting by using matte paintings to extend location or change the weather. Another example is represented by “Rabbit Proof Fence” (2002) where it is used digital relighting to change the time of the day. By doing so, it heighten the realism and conveyed verisimilitude. Visual effects support the narrative integrity. In the dramatic comedy, ‘The Dish’ (2002), the sky replacement used to change the weather, engage the audience in the action of the story. The first shot, displaying two actors, took place on a cloudy day, but the shot with only Sam Neill was filmed on a sunny day. Thus, visual effects can effectively support the storyline.

​

          Similarly, the spectacular usage of visual effects does not necessarily halt the narrative coherence by drawing attention to the image and fabricated characters. In contrast, it can establish the diegetic world. Fantastical usage displays an improbable realm with the outcome of perceptual realism. It also supports both the spectacle and the storytelling process. For example, in “Babe” or “Lord of the Rings”,  visual effects work effectively with the narrative in order to broaden the real world and turn it into fantasy, but it preserves the narrative integrity at the same time. When the images recall perceptual realism, viewers are likelier to belief in the fiction and pay closer attention to the narrative. However, the fantastical category does not imply only science fiction or spectacular films. Spectacular effects answer to Stephen Prince’s concern  about “perceptual realism and the referentially unreal”. For instance, “Forrest Gump”, a comedy-drama film, rely on fantastical effects. Still, in “Jurrasic Park” the narrative is itself fantastical. In the same way as  in “Babe”’s case,  the effects used in “Forrrest Gump” exploit the real world display to express a fantastical tale.

​

          In conclusion, the 8 categories of effects used in storytelling investigated by McClean demonstrate that digital effects improve the spectacle that supports the narrative. Visual effects play a substantial role in preserving the narrative integrity by realizing CG shots such as object removals or sky replacements. Even spectacular special effects can work effectively with the narrative when they recall perceptual realism. The tension between spectacle and narrative ocurrs when visual effects present such a unique and dazzling spectacle, that the story expressed is not longer the principle reason for viewers to watch the film. Visual effects had a significant impact on classical narrative by proposing a new kind of narrative, where some films rely on special effects and the aim of effects is not to help expressing a fascinating story anymore. The technical virtuosity implied in the spectacle can draw audience’s attention away from the storyline to the technology that created the effects. However  as Shilo McClean claims, “When filmmakers and effects artists create visual effects using the common ground of narrative function instead of focusing on technical details only, it enhances the likelihood that the effects will work thematically and visually. When something is used not only because it is a technical solution but also a narrative tool, the contribution it makes to the story overall can add to the expression of the film’s themes.”

​

​

 

Harvard References:

 

• McClean, S. (2008) Digital storytelling: the narrative power of visual effects in film. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.,pp.1-15, pp.41-69 pp. 69-103​

• Gunning, T. (2006) 'The Cinema of Attractions: Early Film, Its Spectator and the Avant-Garde', in Strauven, W. (1.) The Cinema of Attractions Reloaded. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 381-388​

• Darley, A. (2000) 'Visual digital culture: surface play and spectacle in new media genres', London and New York: Routledge,  pp. 102-124