The Realism of Emotions Perceived in Watching a Film

Abstract
Art has always desired to create emotion, to go beyond mechanical perception of visual,
acoustic, tactile or olfactory receptors. Looking at the film art of our days, we can see how
this manages to attract viewers of any age, culture or education, at the cinema or at home, in
groups of friends or just in the solitary company of the screen. The affective reactions
triggered in these perpetual, complex and diverse audiences, are a reliable source of
information worthy to be analyzed in depth. This article starts with an initial issue: are the
emotions of the viewers real or not?

Introduction
Image representation, in any form we encounter today, has become a common element, an
attachment of the daily modern world, exploited in almost any type of artifact and spread to
almost all the parts of the world. The film has represented one of the first forms of motion
picture, occupying the first place in popular art and entertainment. It has adapted and built
for itself an industry, with branches in types, styles and trends. The power of motion picture
and its applicability has been proven by taking over a role of conveying the information,
amplified with the development of digital technologies. Thus, its presence, whether as a
form of entertainment or communication, has found a major role in the society context. The
present day pursuits in the field are focused on the transition to three-dimensional and
immersive, on one hand, and to the human receptor, in the sense of interaction. The last
years have shown an increased interest for relevance in relation to the person. Both in the
field of communication and entertainment, the researches had in view the profile of the
receptor, the consumer, respectively the viewer. In what's concerning the film studies, the
direction is the same, going towards interdisciplinary cooperation in view of this
desideratum. The cognitive approaches of the film theorists have in mind an expansion of
the classical discussions about the film structure, seeking answers and ties referring to the
mental processes of the spectator, and especially his emotions.

Throughout its history, the film has been studied, discussed and applauded from the
perspective of its most conspicuous feature: the power of presenting visually the
surrounding reality. In this article we desire to look beyond this remarkable characteristic, to
a perceptive medium which is not reduced just to the visual, even though this has been an
extraordinary discovery and has been discussed for over 100 years. The film is a perceptive
medium from an affective perspective, too. The presence in the movie of human characters,
or with traits resembling people (animated fictional characters) and by placing them in the
context of narratives in which emotional traits are present, the viewer does not only
recognize images, but also emotions. He perceives not only visually, but also emotionally.

In order to study in depth the theme of the realism of emotions perceived in watching a
movie, we will begin by defining a supra-category of the movie: the narrative perceptive
medium.
The Narrative Perceptive Medium
A narrative perceptive medium can suggest the existence of a motion picture, but it doesnt
stop to the visual perception. It can be bi-dimensional or tridimensional, representational or
immersive, taken from reality or created entirely.

In what sense perceptive medium? The attribute with which we have defined it doesnt refer
just to the fact that it can be perceived, but contains also the capacity to expose perceptive
representations as they are received by human sensors. Perception is a mental process which
represents the relationship fundament of a human being with any environment, whether it is
real or fabricated. Human perception, with the help of different receivers, makes mental
representations of the reality. The essence of a perceptive medium refers to the property of
encoding information with a coding key that the human receiver can decipher naturally. A
perceptive medium will form similar representations with those at the mental level. The film
is an audio-visual perceptive medium first of all, in the sense that it shows images and
sounds like they will be perceived by a spectator from the environment.
Even though in a broad sense, perception refers to the recording and interpreting sensorial
stimuli, in psychology, the term infers a series of mental processes through which a person
perceives, organizes and interprets not just sensorial information, but also intellectual and
emotional information. The film, as a perceptive medium, is written both at the image level
and at the level of psychological representation in a way that can be deciphered naturally by
the viewer. Any child could understand that the character is sad or angry, excited or bored,
through the simple perception of the story on the screen. This is the reason for which I added
the attribute of narrative to define a perceptive medium. A random representation of
images can produce different cognitive processes that will select randomly from the
presented information and will make preferential psychological perceptions. The story,
irrespective of the conveying method, arranges the cognitive processes and becomes a
suitable context for the apparition of orderly affective answers.

Looking at the definition for a narrative perceptive medium, we choose a representative for
our study: fiction movie, because it has a global impact and it is already a watched and
common form among any socio-cultural category. I have opted for a film because it is a
perceptive medium limited in certain norms, and for fiction because it is narrative and can
have structures with real or entirely simulated reference. The affective answers occur as a
response to a psychological perception developed by the movie narration. The film theories
have debated the uncertain position of the realism of the emotions, due to their
manifestation in the case of fictional situations, naming the phenomenon as a paradox of
fiction. Kendall Walton supports the hypothesis of some emotions1 caused by imagination,
called quasi-emotions, and Noel Carroll2 and Gregory Currie3 have defended the version of
the realism of these reactions. Offering a definition for the term realism, both in what's
concerning the visual representations, and the psychological representations, we will suggest
a solution for this paradox of emotions in the presence of fiction. The conflict connected to
the authenticity of the emotional responses could be resolved by the fact that we will admit
the realism of affective answers as valence, but not as intensity.

The Issue of Film Realism

In film theories, realism has been regarded from different perspectives. Each one refers to an
aspect of perception, motivating or denying the possibility of a fictional image in being
realistic. Based on the reference system for the term reality and the definition adopted for
the term realism, opinions in film critique vary.

For Arnheim4, the movie records an exact copy of reality, where the real image can overlap
identically with the one on the screen. Realism can come from the simple fact that images
have a real reference, irrespective of the way in which they are built on the screen.
Moreover, their interpretation on the screen is a beneficial factor by organization and
abstracting, resembling to the perceptive processes in the real world 5. For Bazin6, this aspect
is not sufficient and it must be supported by a presentation that will sustain realism through
other perceptive methods. Long close-ups, concise editing, field depth and involvement of
unprofessional actors mark the boundaries of realism in the movie. Kracauer 7 continues the
approach of Bazin related to the uniqueness of realism in the movie and develops a
comparison between memory, as mental representation and picture, as physical
representation. His analogy finds a series of differences, among which we can mention the
fact that photographic image is more detailed in reproducing the image compared to a
memory. Instead, the memory as opposed to the picture, can include affective, significance
and context information.

After the 70s, some philosophers and film critiques moved from photographic analysis of the
realism to a phenomenon called reality of impression. Christian Metz8, Jean-Lois Baudry9
and other representatives of psychoanalytic theory formulate automatically an implication
of the viewer by using this phrase. The impression of experienced reality by the audience
while watching the movie, will gradually take the form of ideological manipulation come
from the cinema. The realism of psychoanalytical theory will move towards the idea of
illusion, where the audience experiences the images on the screen without thinking too
much about them.

In opposition, the cognitive theory and the contemporary writers speak about a perceptive
realism, which is based on the interpretation of the reality at a psychological level. Gregory
Currie10 and Noel Carroll11 argue in favor of realism in the fact that a viewer uses the same
recognition patterns of the environment both in the movie and in reality, without being
necessary an additional learning in recognizing the images on the screen.

The film as a representative of the supra-category defined as perceptive medium, finds its
place among the cognitive theories related to realism, but sustains at the same time the
importance of referring to a real object.

Visual Perceptive Realism

In Greek etymology, the term 'eikon' means an exact representation of reality. The image
realized this way has the attributes of the physical object and refers to it, getting the name of
referential image. The projection of such an image on a certain support makes a
representation.

The studies in neuroscience show that human perception is intermediated and processed,
conveyed by the brain in a selection of information which is structured and considered
reality. The access of a person to the surrounding reality takes place by visual perception,
which assumes the realization of mental representations. The adaptability to the
environment through these stable visual receptors, makes the referential images, obtained
by visual perception, to be considered real. Distinguishing the realism of perceived images
comes from a series of cognitive processes which differentiate the surrounding reality,
automatically associated with the idea of reality, from other perceived images, which the
cognitive processes include in reproductions of reality. That which we perceive visually,
controlled by a good functioning of cognitive processes, transforms into the concept of
reality. The environment has the properties which we know due to some cognitive processes
which interpret the visual perceptions and the created mental representations. So, we will
approach the term realistic just comparatively with a correct cognitive interpretation of a
mental representation.

The images that reproduce reality are referential images, which we perceive though, through
the angle of the same cognitive processes. The images perceived in the film are recordings of
reality which guide us to a physical reality. The mechanisms of film recording have been built
in such a way that they present a similar image with the one we know through visual
perception. A copy of a reality can be an X-ray or an infrared image, but it doesnt resemble
what we perceive visually. The film has the advantage of reproducing some images from
reality in a way that resembles visual perception. A sequence of images that capture just
infrared radiations or electromagnetic radiations is not less realistic. Their interpretation
though is not an usual function of the cognitive processes and may require a bigger effort or
a learning process. The pleasure and easiness with which we recognize on the screen some
images that are similar to the reality which is perceived visually is one of the first privileges
which make the film so popular.

The degree of the reality of film images is given by the resemblance with the mental images
created through visual perception of the environment. Taking in account that we cannot talk
of just a perceptive reality, the reference we have in judging realism is related to our own
mental images. If the visual receivers would perceive the environment in another spectrum,
creating a different type of mental representations, the film, as we know it now, would no
longer be realistic. Of course, we talk of a subjective, preferential, aligned realism to the way
of visual perception of humanity. The images given by a microscope are also realistic, but
deciphering them is hard, both as image, and as meaning. So we will use the term reality as
that mental representation created through the visual perception of the environment.

The legit question is: what happens in the case of fantastic movies, SF or cartoons? From
experience we can state that they produce affective reactions in the viewer. But to what
degree are they authentic, if the viewed representations are totally fictional and without an
equivalent in the real world? The film is interpreted by the viewer as being realist through
the angle of accuracy with which it can show on the screen a mental representation. The
supernatural heroes, talking objects, animals with human characteristics, imaginary places
created by the imagination of some authors, all of these are new mental images, found
nowhere else in the viewer's experience. Even so the implication of the audience is an
enthusiastic one, if we look just at the growing number and visualizations of productions that
involve stories or imaginary constructions.

The lack of fidelity in showing these representations on the screen has a margin of flexibility,
in which the viewer can abstract and interpret successfully images different than his notion
of reality. The process of visual perception recodes the images and helps the viewer to
interpret to some degree the images that occur on the screen and dont have an equivalent
in his reality reference system. Cartoons are such instances, where the perception and
interpretation of some images without real reference is natural, even in small children. The
existence of affective references known to the perception of the viewer, helps him in
interpreting the images without known visual reference. For example, a monster that shows
certain feelings through his facial features, sounds or gestures, becomes a character. He is no
longer a representation with no real reference, but by transposing an affective valence to
him, he obtains a bridge with the reality known by the viewer.

If we define the realism of some images reported to the mental representations with a
degree of correspondence of 100%, than any image that doesnt have a structure perfectly
consistent with that of mental representation taken from reality, is not realistic. Instead, if by
realistic we refer to a characteristic that can define an image in a smaller percentage of
correspondence with the real mental image, to the limit where it can be understood and
associated with other known forms, then we can regard animations as realistic productions.
We notice that the realism of some perceived images can have a margin of flexibility, where
we can still understand by abstracting that particular image. Reference is done to the mental
image taken as a reference of reality and the power of cognitive processes to decode the
images that dont have a reference in reality.

Affective Perceptive Realism

One of the reasons for an easy interpretation of representations without real references is
the affective perception. Film is a perceptive medium in the sense in which it can reproduce
psychological mental representations. I have mentioned that the nature of a perceptive
medium refers to the property of a medium to code information with a coding key which the
human receptor can naturally decipher. Realism in such a medium is not owed exclusively to
the presence of a certain type of image and sound, but to their way of order that produces
psychological representations. The genuineness of identifying some images in the film can
expand to the psychological structures, which later will generate a series of emotions in the
viewer.

Watching a film is most of the time the way in which a viewer gets in contact with what it
means a new experience, a different life, a world which is more or less similar to the one he
knows. The fictional narrative film has proven throughout the years the power to attract
people in the cinema halls and not only; a multitude of enthusiastic viewers, willing to watch
stories and most of all to experience sensations that go beyond the realm of everyday life.
The force with which the images and the sound manage to involve the viewer in a fictional
world is a special one, different than the stories in literature or theatre. This is due to an
indisputable advantage: perception. Due to it, the audience doesnt just understand and
listens to a story, but manages to get actively involved in an immersive experience. The
crowded cinema halls and the generous consumption of mass productions through various
other channels, are empirical proofs of the attraction that the film has.

Various film theories have come together to explain this phenomenon. One of the debates
speaks about the paradox of fiction. Nothing of what a viewer perceives on the screen is real,
in the sense in which the story is fictional, the same with the characters in the movie, but
many times the strong feelings and the sensations occurred in the presence of these stories
seem very real to the audience. The pithiness and authenticity of some emotions like
suspense, melancholy, enthusiasm, fear, accompanied by natural reactions like laughter,
tears, thrills lead to an oddness due to their manifestation in front of fictional images. In a
mysterious way, the viewer takes part in the action on the screen in spite of the lack of real
events and being aware of this aspect. The theoretical solutions for this paradox have taken
in account the aspects which make this situation contradictory, denying the realism of
affective experiences of the viewer. Kendall Walton laid the groundwork of the imagination
theory in perceiving some representations, supporting the idea of some quasi-emotions due
to some imaginary realities. These are some real affective answers that occur due to a game
of imagination. Their interpretation in the context of a simulated reality makes the viewer to
perceive them as real.12

Noel Carroll is the main opponent of the idea, stating the fact that emotions can be real in
spite the fact that the audience experiences fictional events. The feeling of fear in watching a
horror movie cannot be controlled by will, and subsequently it is real. The refuse or the
desire of a viewer to feel emotions during a film is not a valid choice that could pertain to his
will, so consequently the affective answers for Carroll are real and function according to
reality. The cognitive theory in the movie sees emotions as being a real answer 13 to mental
constructions. Mental convictions related to characters or actions admitted as fictional,
generate authentic emotions. Another support of the sincerity of the affective answer comes
from an equivalent stated by Gregory Currie. He offers the perspective of some affective
answers caused by thoughts about real people and situations, positioning these cognitive
reflections as an object of emotion.14

A third approach is represented by the followers of psychoanalytical theory and supports the
hypothesis of an illusion which the viewer lives in the context of watching the movie. Based
on the theory of philosopher Coleridge about mistrust suspension, this theory states that
the viewer could take in consideration the realism of perceived images, like in the case of an
illusion. Erasing the border between referential image and its reference in this approach has
been totally rejected by the other film theorists.

The Realism of Emotions in the Film

Adopting the idea of the movie as narrative perceptive medium, which has the property not
only to transpose accurately images like those perceived visually, but also similar
psychological representations with those perceived naturally, we can consider the realism of
emotions. They occur as an answer to the psychological perception created by the film
narration. The realism of psychological representations is important, because it will
determine the emotions and their nature. The film characteristic as a perceptive realist
medium, so much argued throughout history at the level of visual image, can be extrapolated
also towards psychological representation. I have noticed its effects along the evolution of
cinematography through numerous empirical proofs of emotions lived during the film. If the
perception creates the mental representations, in this case it can create also psychological
representations, which will be expressed in different affective answers.

We will not refer to emotional answers caused by characters and actions in themselves, but
in the same way as Currie, we will take in account mental objects of emotions, i.e.
psychological representations. He states that thoughts connected to what we see on the
screen cause emotion, but we want to define more accurately what these thoughts
represent, what causes them and how they are created. Emotion occurs due to an affective
perception which has a psychological representation as an object. Cognitive processes, or
thoughts, are an important factor in interpretation, as they intertwine with affective answers.

Carroll is right to support the realism of emotions triggered when watching a film in the
sense that the perception of their valence is real and automatic, not being stopped by the
will of the viewer. At the same time, Waltons intuition about quasi-emotions can find an
answer in the sense that expressed affective answers, even though real as valence, dont
have an intensity equivalent to their being experienced in reality.

Thus we go back again to the concept of reality. The manifestation of an identical emotion
with the real one would assume triggering factors and creating processes perfectly
connected with the real ones. The same way as the visual image, certain properties of the
film manage to transpose with some accuracy a psychological representation, as it is
perceived in reality. The film contains psychological representations created by the narration,
which in turn are built through realist perceptive images. Even though psychological
representations will not involve all the senses at the base of perception, to generate an
identical emotion in manifestation with the one in reality, they will be enough perceptively
realistic so as to generate realistic emotions. These will be similar in valence with the ones
expressed in reality, but smaller in amplitude. The valence of an emotion represents the
type, defining character, the 'pigment' of an emotion, being most of the time divided into
two categories: positive and negative.

In reality, our perception is consistent and continual. It creates real psychological

representations by the fact that we are immersed completely in this medium. The emotions
that occur from these extremely authentic representations are real emotions of great
intensity. We perceive in reality a car accident: in this case all the senses are involved,
including audio-visual and psychological perception. The image of the broken car will be real
because we not only perceive it with a part of the senses (immersion) but because we
associated it with an indexed image as reference reality (it is not fictional). In the same way,
the psychological representation (with all the complexity of affects and cognitive processes)
of the accident will be real because it is associated with a real event, and will generate highly
intense emotions. Even in the lived reality, the difference in intensity of the emotions
depends on the personal implication in the real event. Emotions are different in case we see
anothers accident in front of us or if someone dear is involved in one. The valence can be to
some degree similar, but the amplitudes will be different. The same way as in the case of
visual perception, immersion in a medium can deceive the sensorial receivers which create
the psychological representation. The more immersive the experience, the more credible
visual and psychological representations are. If their content is similar to the one we perceive
currently and we call it reality, then the deep immersion generates a similar experience with
reality, by entirely involving the perception. This case will create psychological
representations similar to the real ones.

In a complete immersion in an identical medium with the surrounding one (if it were possible
to build it) we can as well believe that psychological experience is reality, taking in account
that we establish the reference just by comparison with a set of perceptions come from our
environment. In conclusion, the more immersive the medium in the sense that involves more
perceptive senses, the more the emotion will be closer to reality as amplitude. In a virtual
reality emotions are stronger in amplitude, but can have the same valence as in the case of
watching a film. If the standard of real emotions is the way in which they are created and
express themselves in reality, then the exact replication of the process of triggering the
emotion according to this standard will create real emotions.

Conclusions
We see a perspective in which a medium which we so often and naturally consume as a film,
TV series, video youtube, narrative video gave, etc. can create some authentic perceptions
not just visual, but emotional also. As this amplitude of presence and immersion of narrative
perceptive mediums grows, new questions arise related to the role these will play in the
future. In the light of these things, we can perceive that the influence of motion picture, in a
suitable form, can expand in the direction of assuming a different role, that of researching
the human psychology.

Biography
Ronella Sezonov has a PhD in Cinematography and Media, completed within the Bucharest
UNATC. She is an assistant lecturer at the Cinematography class at the same university and
coordinates an online video production agency. She is passionate of the interdisciplinary
potential of audio-visual productions, their influence in perfecting the research of affective
answers in viewers and the role they might have in the field of artificial affective intelligence
(affective computing or emotion modeling).

Bibliography:
1
Kendall L. Walton, (1978) Fearing fictions, Journal of Philosophy 75 (1):5-27.
2
Carroll, N. (1996). Theorizing the Moving Image, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.
78-117.
3
Currie, G. (1996). Film, reality, and illusion, in David Bordwell, Noel Carroll (ed.), Post-
Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies. Madison, Wisconsin : University of Wisconsin Press. P.
325-344
4
Arnheim, R. (2004), Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye, Berkeley
and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 2004, Cap III-XIX
5
Bohlinger V., (2010), Arnheim on the ontology of the photographic image, in Higgins S. (Ed),
Arnheim for Film and Media Studies, New York: Routledge, 2010. Cap 14.
6
Bazin, A. (2005): What is cinema, Volume 1, Berkeley, Los Angeles, CA; London, England:
University of California Press; p. 9-41
7
Kracauer, S.; Levin, T.Y., (1995). The Mass Ornament: Weimer Essays, Thomas Y. Levin (Ed),
Harvard University Press, p. 50-62
8
Metz, C.,(1974) On the impression of reality in the Cinema, in Film Language: A Semiotics of
the Cinema, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 3-15
9
Baudry, J.L.,(1986). The apparatus: Metapsychological approaches to the impression of
reality in cinema, in Philip Rosen (ed.), Narrative, Apparatus, Ideology: A Film Theory Reader.
New York, Oxford: Columbia University Press, p. 299318.
10
Idem reference 3. Currie, G. (1996). Film, reality, and illusion, in David Bordwell, Noel
Carroll (ed.), Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies. Madison, Wisconsin : University of
Wisconsin Press. P. 325-344
11
Idem reference 2. Carroll, N. (1996). Theorizing the Moving Image, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, p.78-117.
12
Kendall L. Walton, (1978) Fearing fictions, Journal of Philosophy 75 (1):5-27. Kendall L.
Walton, (1990), Mimesis as Make-believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts.
Cambridge, MA, London, UK: Harvard University Press, Cap. 1, 2, 5, 7.
13
Carroll, N. (1990). The Philosophy of Horror: Or, Paradoxes of the Heart. New York:
Routledge. Cap. 2, p. 59-88
14
Currie, G., (1990).The Nature of Fiction. Cambridge (UK), New York (USA), Melbourne
(Australia): Cambridge University Press, 1990. Cap 5, p. 182-215