Now that I've got "Experimental Film" by They Might be Giants in my head

[capri0mni]

I'm wondering.

Mostly, the term "experimental film" just seems to mean:

"Visually Record Stream-of-Consciousness images in a deliberately weird way, and use that to make some sort of point regarding humanity proving that I'm smarter than everyone else in the room."

But -- since "Experiment" actually has a specific meaning:

1. To observe
   
2. To formulate a question about your observations
   
3. To come to a tentative answer to your question, in the form of an hypthesis -- i.e. "And idea you can test."
   
4. Design the test for your idea.
   
5. Run the test.
   
6. Observe the result to see if your tentative answer was right.
   
7. If it is, ask someone else to run the test, and see if the answer is still right.
   
8. If it's not, then:
   
9. GoTo 1.

So -- What would a real (scientifically) experimental film be like? What sorts of things could a cinematic scientist test by using film as a medium?

What sort of hypotheses are lurking out there?

Comments

[rob_t_firefly]

The framing plot of Mystery Science Theater 3000 referred to all the bad movies as "experiments." The movies were being administered to their audience by a mad scientist who was trying to drive them crazy with bad movies.

In my estimation the term "experimental" in regards to films refers to their production; the filmmakers are conducting the experiment by making and showing it. The hypothesis may be something like "we can do ___ and have the result be a (good/interesting/disturbing/entertaining) film that conveys what we want;" in this sense any film that doesn't follow the standard theatrical storytelling conventions could be deemed "experimental."

Another hypothesis, especially in the early days of any FX method, could be "we can do ___ and the result will look like we did ___ instead." Someone had to conduct the first experiments along the lines of "if we use models, backdrops, and strings just so, will the audience look at the screen and see flying rocket ships in space?"

In either of these cases, the film itself is the experiment and the audience are the test subjects. Whether the filmmakers' experiment is a success or not depends on the audience's reaction.

[capri0mni]

In either of these cases, the film itself is the experiment and the audience are the test subjects. Whether the filmmakers' experiment is a success or not depends on the audience's reaction

Yes. But. I don't think most experimental films are actually created in this way -- or at least, with that much care and thought (i.e. changing just one element at a time, and then actually observing the results, and going back to repeat the experiment with something else changed). From what I've seen, if the result doesn't fit the initial hypothesis, it's the audience that's considered to be faulty (aka "philistine").

I'd love to see some sort of real experimental films conducted -- maybe testing to see how much information the audience needs in order to construct a link of cause and effect between a sequence of events, and whether or not that changes as we go through different stages of maturity. But that would require quizzing the audience as they leave the theater, at the very least.