The Zoom in Popular Cinema: A Question of Performance

Paul WILLEMEN’s article The zoom in popular cinema: a question of performance (London: Routledge Publisher, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 2013) is about zoom in popular cinema. Zoom is seen as a rhetorical tool, indicative of a discourse performance, and therefore evokes a long-debated theory of literature, namely the question of 'announcement marks' associated with narrative performance. The writers of this article gave examples of Turkish films in his article. This films are Tarkan film series of Kartal Tibet who is the famous Turkish actor.

It makes the article more interesting. In this article, it was stated that films such as the Tarkan series were more concerned with the use of the zoom in such films than with an attempt to identify the specificity of the Turkish versions of the Italian films.

The author Paul WILLEMEN stated that film theory took off from literary theory in the 1960s, approach-ing film as a cross between literary narrative and theatre, which accounts for the emphasis on character, plot and performance in much of the film criticism of the period.

Get quality help now

writer-marian

Verified writer

Proficient in: Free Essays

4.8 (309)

“ Writer-marian did a very good job with my paper, she got straight to the point, she made it clear and organized ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This idea is significance and remarkable.

The author wrote the opinions of the other author such as Wlad Godzich who discusses the question of oral literature in terms that throw a different light on the apparently interruptive intrusions of the narratorial agency. He discusses pre-industrial oral cultures via the introduction of the book and print technology to written cultures, and he warns against a common misconception. The words of the opposition 'written versus oral, ' he writes, would lead us to believe that, by contrast to the cultures of the book, in 'oral culture' most people were text pro-ducers.

In the article, it was stated that it demonstrates a narratorial performative development, this should be noted that in the fabric of zooming, filmic discourse, the presence of the audience implies a recognition of theatrical performances, as well as a recognition, the existence of 'living, , for example, the spatial tendency of actors on the stage, thus the sound-Projection techniques and recourse. Like some aspects of the actor style in Turkish, there is a feeling that zoom acknowledges the viewers’ presence in a way that transforms the performance space into a public space rather than just a customized diegetic space.

In his article the author finalized that the zoom, like aspects of actorial performance, re-activates the question of the public sphere and its re-configuration consequent to the triumph of capitalism in the second half of the twentieth century (the previous notion of a public sphere related to the 300-year-long struggle of the rising bourgeoisie to gain control of the spaces of governance previously mono-polised by the court) as well as raising the question of what happens to modes of discourse in the process of modernisation itself.

I think that Willemen’s idea that meaning is the most important force in human beings helps explain some of the disorder and discontent in the world film industry today. Many filmakers make effectively movies. Because they are caught the main idea in their films. I have also found that Willemen’s idea that zoom is the important term in films and it helps the film makers understand the behavior of film lovers. I have most of friends who nor known the zoom. In conclusion, I would strongly recommend Willemen’s article to my friends who like the films. Because well-made film is life itself. The film teaches a real life for us. Therefore, I recommend my friends who love movies to read this Willemen’s article. I want to finish my words as the author says; 'Movies are the virtual world of human life.'