Film essayist explains 5 reasons why films don't look ‘real’ anymore

The filmgoing experience is a lot different today than it was in the previous millennium. These days, you’re more likely to see something on your big screen at home than at the local metroplex, and the films you’re seeing rely far more on computer-generated imagery than those from 25 years ago.

There is also an ineffable feeling that movies made in the ‘90s and before looked and felt more “real” than those made today. Most people outside the movie industry simply chalk that up to the fact that movies contain far more computer-generated elements than previously and are rarely shot on film anymore. However, according to a thoughtful YouTube documentary by video essayist Tom van der Linden, there is a much deeper reason why films no longer feel as real as they once did. A big one is the theory that we experience films with more than just our eyes and ears, and these days, movies lack a sense of touch.

In his latest video essay, “Why movies just don't feel ‘real’ anymore," van der Linden, the creator of Like Stories of Old series on YouTube, gives five big reasons why films such as the recent Jurassic World Rebirth, the seventh in the film franchise, don’t feel nearly as immersive as the original Jurassic Park from 1993.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

1. Perceptual realism

van der Linden argues that older films feature more deep focus, meaning that objects in the background remain in focus, so we feel more immersed in the movie. Being able to clearly see objects in the background of a scene allows our eyes to scan around and get a real sense of space, just like in real life. However, today’s films often feature the object in the foreground in sharp focus against a blurry background, which is quite different from how we perceive things in the real world.

Quoting American philosopher and university professor Noël Carroll, van der Linden notes, “[Deep focus, long shot compositions like these] invite the audience to scan the frame for meaning in a way that was more analogous to the way we perceive affairs outside the movie theater […] That is, they were more realistic because they were more like ordinary perceptual experience."

2. The ‘cinematic look.’

The differences between Jurassic Park Rebirth and the original also starkly emphasize the importance of realistic environments. In the original, dinosaurs existed in a real-world environment. In Rebirth, the dinosaurs appear in an overly cinematic, digitally exaggerated version of Earth that pulls us out of a feeling of immersion.

Also, digital manipulation allows filmmakers to go back and tinker with shots in the editing room, so they often don’t commit to an idea, whether it's camera position, lighting, or background on the day of filming. Then in the editing room, they use digital tools to change backgrounds, alter performances, and create camera movements that didn't happen on the set. “The over-manipulation of modern imagery, and the resulting feeling of fake-ness even when they contain real locations or real practical effects, is part of a bigger issue ... that’s the amount of post-processing that’s done on movies nowadays, and the more general shift from filmmakers having to make sure an image was exactly as they wanted it before rolling the camera, to them being able to make more, if not most of those decisions after the fact in post-production," van der Linden says.

3. Indexicality (or the difference between film and digital)

Indexicality is a big word for the idea that, when movies were shot on traditional celluloid film, the images were an authentic representation of reality because light physically struck the celluloid, creating an image. But these days, most films are made with digital photography, which lacks film's indexability because it uses sensors that convert light into an image. This means that no matter how real the image appears, it is nothing more than a digital manipulation of reality, rather than something physically created in the camera.

There is also a difference in how both look on screen. Film has a more natural look because the physical shutter in the camera creates motion blur, making action appear to move more smoothly. Film also has a grainy look, while digitally shot images can exhibit pixelated noise. Digitally shot films look sharper, whereas those on film appear to be warmer.

4. Haptic Visuality (feeling with your eyes)

Here’s where things get a little surreal. Philosopher and writer Laura Marks believes that when we watch a film, it isn’t just something we experience with our eyes and ears, but with our entire bodies. She calls this “haptic visuality.” Haptic perception, according to psychologists, is a combination of the different ways we perceive touch. Older films, shot with a deeper focus and a grainy film feel, provide a richer haptic environment for our senses.

5. Cinematic qualia (what it’s like)

van der Linden argues that today’s films lack qualia, a Latin term meaning “what it’s like.” To illustrate his point, he compares the gritty, sweaty shots of Sorcerer (1977), starring Roy Scheider, with a similar scene in a humid, tropical environment in Rebirth, and the difference is striking. In Sorcerer, the actors struggle in a realistic environment, whereas in Rebirth, the flat lighting and vanity makeup make the characters appear comfortable.

Ultimately, van der Linden doesn’t point to one reason why films don’t look as real as they did 30 years ago; it’s a combination of changes in the medium and execution over the past few decades.

"This deep immersion doesn’t so much arise out of a single image, as much as it is created over the course of a carefully constructed continuation of them,” van der Linden concludes the video. “With each shot, each scene, building on the other, creating sensory dynamics and feedback loops that map out spaces, add details and textures, and that, in combination with attention to other aspects of filmmaking, you know, make-up, wardrobe, set dressing, sound design, music, and so on, can make a story come alive in a way that feels more immersive, more vivid, and more impactful than the sum of its various technical parts. And that’s what we’re going for, right? To be transported, to be moved, to be touched. To feel like we just watched something meaningful, that we just experienced something real."