Perception and Reality in Existenz Essay Example for Free

Perception and Reality in Existenz EssayFor me, eXistenZ is a film that is fairly confusing at best. If Im non mistaken the film was released earlier The hyaloplasm and had the comparable concept for the world the component parts resided. A computer generated world inside the real world. In eXistenZ the protagonists start off in a room, they atomic number 18 about to beta test a revolutionist computer spirited cal lead eXistenZ, the scene is set in such a focal point that we are led to believe that video games charter fin tot every last(predicate)yy r each(prenominal)ed the ultimate goal of becoming fully immersive and utterly real, not so much virtual cosmos nevertheless complete reality. Each actor is given a role that, in the game, they may or may not complete without roll in the haying. This is where things already start to breed over. We as the audience are transported into a fictional world, viewed done a mechanical/computerized object (the camera) that i s itself inhabit by fictional examples whom are just about to do the exact same thing. The way we draw things is affected by what we k instantaneously or what we believe. 1 berger We are told to believe that computerised realities identical to our birth are now possible, and that these people will be porting into one.Nobody today, at least that I know, believes that our reality is computerised, exclusively because in our realitya computer generated reality that is indistinguishable from our own has not been created. But if we all believed that, would we chequer this world assortedly as in eXistenZ? An image is a sight which has been recreated or reproduced. It is an appearance, or set of appearances, which has been detached from the place and period in which it first of all made its appearance and preserved for a few moments or a few centuries. 2 berger.Once we are ported into the computerized reality of their reality, we realise that what we are viewing is not what we a re confabing for ourselves, possibly not even in the same time or space. The camera is providing us with a series of still images that were captured by a mechanical nitty-gritty (this alone provides us with a view of the world which is unlike our own i. e. widescreen, resolution, perspective etc). These images are producing a world that is similar to ours but unreal and from the viewpoint like that of a ghost or an backer (called free cam or death cam in the video game world.The ability to view events from anywhere in the world whenever you want. ). This world and so takes us into some another(prenominal) world inside that one which is viewed the same way, except this world is supposed to be the false reality. I sometimes study this pile be part of the explanation for the oddities we see. like placing the lens of a camera next to the view governer of another camera and taking a picture. As your eye, a natural camera in itself sees through the first lens, the image is distor ted via that lens and then the other lens. What is it you will really be seeing at the end?In the film we are alship canal viewing the events through three mediums, our eyes, through the camera, which views those events through a virtual camera in the game. We can never be totally sure that the images we see represent the corresponding acquaintance that we assign to it in our reality. E genuinelything in eXistenZ looks exactly the same as our reality but doesnt let the same meaning. several tiers over. But whose eyes are we actually viewing these whole series of events from? A lulu. But who is this spectator? Are there testers ported into the game as mere observers? Are they developers or publishers?Or apparently joe public who has no direct connection with the corporate mechanics of eXistenZ? In our reality, when you play a multi fraud game such as this and you die, you become a spectatora ghost, until the end of the game, where you respawn (get another chance). Quite simply, whose interpretation of the events are we watching? Two quotes relating to music and technology but I believe are relevant Liveness, in short, whether defined in social or physiological terms, is not essential to musical meaning. On the other hand, it is equally clear that to record a work is just as much to interpret it as to perform it in any other way. 3 Simon Firth I dont believe the engineer should intrude between the composer, or performing artist 4 Goddard The music is the game, the mover being the people in the game, the composer is the game itself, the story and the engineer is the mortal or entity who is controlling our view of the final score (In game mechanics this could be referred to as the indorse Engine, this decides what happens, how, why, when and where. ) The above quote can only exude one outcome, that the game should be viewed from each and every person by their own means in order to absorb the complete truth. good now we are watching the events through so meone elses interpretation, each cut and angle switch over being a splice of the compositiona order of the events. By the end of the film we find out unequivocally that because of this we have only half of the story. But we do realise that no matter what, the composition remains the same. its just the way we hear it that is different. eXistenZ has whats called a additive plot cast but a non linear game play mechanic, there is only one outcome but the way in which you reach that outcome can have numberless possibilities, much like our lives. conception is linear, but life is not. We will all die eventually, but how we die will have an infinite number of possibilities. A composer can write a piece of music that is the story, which never changes, but it is the performer and engineer that tell this story, depending on them both, the end will always be the same but the way in which the story is told will always be different. One thing that was mentioned by Walter Benjamin is that, F or the film, what matters generally is that the actor represents himself to the public before the camera, rather than representing someone else. 5 benjamin This maybe true, but the very nature of this film throws this ideal into chaos. The actors are playings actors in a film that has them playing actors in a gamethat by the end of the film, has them playing actors of actors in some other situation. This quote I simply dont agree with, it also seems to me that this is the complete opposite of what a method actor tries to impinge on on stage, which is to embody and represent someone else completely without thought.This goes against what Berger said about us relating what we see to what we know. If the actors on stage all represented themselves completely to the audience other than the camera before the part they were playing, then what we as an audience know about the character in relation to the actor playing the character conflict and ruin the immersion, it is easier to become s omeone else in front of the camera, that doesnt know anything, than the audience that knows everything.The whole point of eXistenZ is to make you believe that these average people believe they are someone else who in incline believe they are someone else. At the end of the day this is what the object of the game was, to embody the character of someone else that has been thrust into a plot in a world that you have no knowledge of. This is the reason that people play video games. To escape the mundane trials and tribulations of everyday life and become a part of something that is out of the ordinary.Computer Generated Imagery, or CGI (CGI is a term that I find horrible, to me it is either digital Animation or Digital Modeling, together Digital Media. CGI has connotations of the low tech 80s to umteen people. ) is the main ingredient in this, where as the original way to escape was to either read a book, act in a play or hear a talenow we are heading towards the era where you can bec ome part of a tale that is ultra realistic. Where you can immortalize a virtual world that can fabricate the ends of your imagination and beyond.eXistenz is where the digital industry wants to end up, the applications of fabricating a reality that is false for individuals that cannot cope with the real thing are endless. If youre bored at work, why not become Bruce Willis during youre lunch break? Want to experience terror? Port in and rag Silent Hill after a hard day at work. It all sounds simple enough, but right now we are at a point where we know for definite within our reality, where the line is between virtual and real.The day that our technology reaches the levels depicted in eXistenZ is the day that the troubles will start. This I think is one of the main lessons to me in this film. When do we say enough to technology? When do we stop? Or do we stop in one avenue and continue developing in others? A revolutionary game such as eXistenZ could wreak havoc on people who do no t have the capacity to discern their reality from that of the software or hardware.It even has the possibility to blur the lines and boundaries you already have defined, or destroy your mental health completely. At the very end of the film we are learn to the fact that eXistenZ is not real, that it is a product of the game tranScendanZ. It is a game within a game within a film. The final line of the film Are we still in the game relates to how we see the world, relative. Who knows if that was the real reality or just the game, to me it looked very much like the two protagonists didnt know either, or even questioned it.Perhaps they werent even real participants of the game, but mere NPCs (non player characters). But this is where Digital Media is taking us, its job is to create the world as accurately as it can within the realms of its software, ironically designed by entities that are bound by laws of a universe not completely understood by the aformentioned but with none of the ru les that limit our existence (The Matrix for example, identical reality, but the rules could be bent or broken by those who knew how to).For instance, if I wanted to liberty chit through a wall right now I couldnt, however, in a game it is as simple as typing a code into the console (usually noclip 1, 0 being false, 1 being true). But who is to say that I couldnt walk through that wall now? peradventure it is as simple as being enlightened to the truth like Neo from The Matrix? In our lives we are exposed to images from the past, present and future that hold no bearing on our existence at that present time we experience them. But these images, performances or experiences can affect us in ways that we cannot perceive.The photographer, camera operator or composer does not know this either. But at the time of them creating these art workings they are fabricating a reality and set of circumstances for others that have a multitude of meanings. There can be one definitive interpretatio n, but this will change depending on who is viewing it and how. Right now this essay almost makes sense to me, it may not make sense to you, but how do you make sense of things that have several meanings unless you were the person who conceived the premise in the first place? The answer is that you cannot.A picture taken one century for one purpose and meaning can translate as something else in another century. An actors affect in film during one era can mean something different on stage in the same era and an music studio can completely rewrite the meaning and feel of music without changing the notes or instruments. It is all down to perception. eXistenZ, Vanilla Sky, The Matrix, The Machinist, Gozu and many others all rely on images that are perceived as in any other art forms. Our own experiences colour the original thought of the creator, regardless of that creators perception.