The word “drug” can refer to many substances. Scientifically speaking, caffeine is a drug because it artificially affects how the human brain functions (i.e., producing the illusion of energy), and is addictive. Other drugs, such as LSD, can produce hallucinogenic effects. What about pictures?
Want to talk to a composer regarding your short film, animation, or media project? Tom Gurin is a composer for short film scores and soundtracks. Contact him online or email him at thomas.gurin@aya.yale.edu for information on his experience, current availability, and professional rates.
What is Meta-Cinema?
In today’s world, many people are addicted to feeds of pictures on Facebook, Instagram, and other media. This includes both taking photographs, and being the subject of one—not to mention the ultimate combo: the selfie. Meta-cinema is perhaps the motion picture industry’s equivalent of a selfie. Filmmakers are on both sides of the camera, and therefore we can simultaneously examine their portrayal of, and use of, the film medium. In Bellissima, Luchino Visconti shows how the narcissistic desire to be on screen, even through a proxy, is addictive and potentially destructive—like alcohol. In Blow-Up, Michelangelo Antonioni portrays photography as a substitute for sex, food, and personal relationships; he also brilliantly shows how it can be hallucinogenic. When viewed through this lens and in the context of the other two, Fellini’s 8½ has a few key differences which qualify it as a completely different type of film. Thus, examining these three films through the “film as drug” lens—that is, comparing each director’s portrayal and/or use of film to the effects produced by certain drugs—is surprisingly fruitful, and fundamentally distinguishes 8½ from the others.
Bellissima by Luchino Visconti
Bellissima portrays the desire to be filmed—even through a proxy—as the narcissist’s equivalent of alcoholism. There are many clues in this film indicating that Maddalena views Maria as a reflection of herself, and therefore Maria’s potential stardom as her own. Soon after the unwelcome acting teacher leaves them alone, for example, there is a scene in which Maddalena is combing her hair in the mirror. Her image is actually visible in two different mirrors simultaneously, but her true form is not in the frame. She ruminates to herself about how acting is just “pretending to be someone else.” She then turns to her daughter and begins combing her hair, saying “All combed back, like Mommy. How pretty!”
By compounding Maddalena’s narcissism and her interest in Maria’s image, Visconti strongly suggests that Maddalena’s urge to get Maria onscreen stems from her own – perhaps subconscious – desire to be made into an image. She wants to be filmed vicariously through her daughter.
In fact, Maddalena doesn’t just want screen time; she craves it more than anything else. Throughout the film, Maddalena appears frantic, desperate for her daughter to be the object of the camera. She is so desperate that she repeatedly neglects Maria. In the very first scene of the film, Maddalena actually loses her daughter in racing to be at the front of the line for auditions. When she finally locates Maria – the first interaction we see between mother and daughter – she hits her. “Look at the state of you,” she shouts, “you deserve to be smacked.”
Later, her husband points out that she’s even forgotten to feed Maria in her rush to prepare her for the screen test. In other words, Maddalena’s drive to place Maria in front of a camera – and thereby place herself in front of one, too – is so intense, so overpowering to her, that it sometimes outweighs her maternal instinct to nourish and look after the child.
Maddalena displays symptoms of alcoholism. She sacrifices her home and financial independence to satisfy her need and, as discussed above, she neglects her daughter’s wellbeing. Obviously, Maddalena is not addicted to alcohol. Maddalena’s addiction is to her own image. More specifically, she is addicted to the possibility of it being imprinted onto film. This is clear from her general obsession with seeing pictures of Maria. After their session with the photographer, Maddalena begs to see the negatives that same evening; she only gives in when she is fully convinced that it would be impossible. Later in the film, she goes to an editing room at Cinecittà and relentlessly implores Iris to let her watch Maria’s screen test. This time, she is successful, but finds the experience extremely depressing. For Maddalena and her family, the film medium is destructive in many of the same ways that an alcohol addiction would be.
Blow-Up by Michelangelo Antonioni
Antonioni’s Blow-Up adds to the “film-as-drug” metaphor by showcasing film’s capacity to color one’s perception of reality, like a hallucinogen. Antonioni exhibits this hallucinogenic effect in both his portrayal of film onscreen, as well as his own editing. Three characters in Blow-Up are addicted to film. The two nameless girls who show up in Thomas’s studio politely asking for “just a couple of minutes” are excellent examples. When he declines and eventually drives away, they run after his car shouting “Can we come back this afternoon!?” Sure enough, the girls return and are so desperate to be on the receiving end of his camera that they sleep with him. Afterwards, Thomas tells them to leave but one protests that “You haven’t taken any photos.” For Thomas, though, there is little or no difference between having sex and taking photographs. He is the third addict. His addiction is not to being filmed, but rather to the camera itself. There are almost no scenes in which he does not have his camera with him. Furthermore, we follow him over the course of two days, and yet we never see him eating. We are supposed to believe that he survives just by consuming the environment around him, by capturing pictures.
Drugs have the capacity to do more than just cause addictions, of course. Some—including the ones in which Thomas partakes towards the end of the film—can produce hallucinations or otherwise alter one’s perception of reality. This is the effect which Thomas’s photographs eventually produce in him: a grainy and confused version of reality. In this way, Antonioni portrays these photos as potentially hallucinogenic, and uses his own film to create a similar effect in the audience by way of editing. He especially highlights this ability during the final scene of the film, when the mimes are playing tennis. Introducing the clearly false sound of the ball being hit back and forth can be read as Antonioni’s way of dramatically revealing his magic trick, reminding the audience that film is not necessarily a truthful medium. Antonioni portrays film as hallucinogenic in Blow-Up, and proves the point by using his own film to blur reality to the point of uncertainty.
Otto e Mezzo by Federico Fellini
Fellini, on the other hand, does not compare film to a drug in 8½. On the contrary, he portrays a physical and psychological purification. There are a few key differences which lead to this distinction. For example, Fellini does not portray film as addictive. Guido is neither addicted to filming (quite the contrary), nor to being filmed. We see him eat. Furthermore, there is no sense of hallucination. Although Fellini uses film to blur the boundaries of reality, as Antonioni does in Blow-Up, he produces the effect of a dream or daydream, as opposed to a drug-induced hallucination. This is because the incongruities which confuse reality during 8½ can be attributed to Guido’s naturally wandering imagination. For instance, consider the scene in which Saraghina dances the rhumba for a young Guido and his childhood friends on a beach. There is no apparent diegetic source of music, yet Saraghina reacts to its beginning with surprise, and proceeds to dance perfectly in time with the beat. Although Antonioni used a similar technique at the end of Blow Up, the context is entirely different. In Blow-Up, the false sound shatters the cinematic illusion of truth. In this case, however, Fellini uses Guido’s memory as a shield: we are seeing through his mind’s eye, which means that although the music reminds us that the film is not telling the truth, it does so only insofar as Guido’s imagination is inventive. Fellini uses film to produce the effect of dreams, daydreams, and distant memories instead of outright hallucinations. Although the difference is subtle, it is very clear in 8½.
In fact, 8½ can even be read as a method of rehabilitation; as a cleanse. Guido himself spends a significant portion of the movie attempting to literally extract toxins and illnesses from his body. Sweat rooms and saunas play a huge role in the film. Guido even drinks mineral water that he hopes will draw out the illness. He never, however, puts drugs into his body. In addition to attempting to extract toxins from his body, Guido spends the film trying to extract material for an upcoming shoot out of his mind. The whole film is essentially a stream of consciousness from Guido’s point of view—that is, Fellini’s point of view. Huge swaths of film are devoted to playing out daydreams and fantasies. It feels as if Guido and Fellini are simultaneously purging their brains, removing any blockages from their creative pathways. They simply want to breathe again.
Conclusion
In the first two films, Bellissima and Blow-Up, characters find themselves addicted to the act of making an image, or to being made into one. They find that these activities give them a rush of chemicals to the brain which can substitute for things like sex, food, or personal relationships. Furthermore, in Blow-Up, Antonioni takes it a step further and shows the audience that film has the capacity to blur reality. Antonioni’s portrayal of Thomas’s grainy photographs as hallucinogenic reflect his own use of film to confuse his audience’s perception of reality. Read through the lens of drugs, 8½ is a completely different type of movie from the previous two. There are no drugs in the film, and Fellini uses the film to produce the illusion of a daydream rather than a hallucination. It is the story of a director seeking to clear his head.
However, the very fact that all three of these films were made supports the hypotheses of Bellissima and Blow Up: that filming and being filmed can be dangerously addictive. One could even view both films as warnings. However, in making these films, Visconti and Antonioni may have fallen prey to the very danger which they sought to highlight. Perhaps they and Fellini simply could not resist the temptation to put themselves, or at least their industry, on display in the cinematic equivalent of a modern-day selfie. As Fellini said, “I am Guido.” Is meta-cinema, then, a product of the addiction?
Hire a Composer for Your Short Film
Tom Gurin is a short film composer who works closely with directors to develop and produce scores that elevate their projects. He studied music at Yale University and in Paris. Click to contact a music composer for short films now!