Hi Evgeni,
as I'm still (!) engaged with research dealing with paranoia and
conspiracy in film, the question of surveillance is of obvious
relevance and interest. You certainly ask some pertinent questions. I
haven't seen the Bourne Ultimatung yet - though I'm acquainted with
the rather good original tv serial from the 80s these remakes/sequels
are based on, as well as having watched the Bourne Supremacy, which
was entertaining but quite forgettable.
If it were so easy to just track and, if necessary, eliminate someone
someplace on the globe, how come the CIA, Special Forces, NSA etc.
etc. haven't been able to catch Osama Bin Laden yet?
This whole technological surveillance 'utopia' (or dystopia,
depending on your POV) strikes me as a very American thing. If you
look at the history of intelligence agencies, espionage and the
secret services and compare those in the US with those in the former
Soviet Union, you will find different traditions at work. The
Americans have always been gung-ho about cost-intensive technological
(especially visual) surveillance and intelligence-gathering, while
the Soviets/Russians tended to focus on (linguistic) human
intelligence: what is called 'trade craft': the legwork and hands-on
type of dirty work (sexual blackmailing, etc.). Which was/is
presumably also driven by budgetary considerations.
From a filmic POV, the viewer is provided a feeling of (infantile-
narcissistic) omnipotence, while at the same time reassured that
surveillance is, after all, visible to him/her, while, in a post-
Foucault movement, reassured that the Big Other's all-perceiving gaze
guarantees his/her own existence within the field of the symbolic.
Does this make sense?
H
> greetings, i'm new to the list so pardon me if this was already a
> topic of discussion. i'm more on
> the "philosophy" side of the equation, so pardon that as well. i
> went to see the final installment
> of the bourne films - Bourne Ultimatum - which, as i expected, was
> visually entertaining but
> nothing more, a rather banal and paranoid idea but, and here is my
> main question, i also happened
> to watch Das Leben der Anderen (Lives of Others) a day before (it
> just came out on DVD in the US)
> and i found myself wondering about a number of issues related to
> the representation of
> surveillance. in the bourne film we see, as in many other films
> lately, a kind of a surveillance
> paradise where bosses in Virginia are able to track and actually
> observe the movements of their
> agents in London. so here are some questions that i'd be happy to
> engage with anyone interested
> (note that i'm still mulling over these ideas and haven't done any
> actual research or serious
> thinking for that matter):
>
> 1. what is the actual state of surveillance compared to that in the
> films like Bourne Ultimatum?
> it seems rather easy to locate anyone of the globe, track their
> movements, send instant txt
> messages to an army of disposable assassins - i wonder if there is
> a good study of actual
> capabilities and a comparison with a kind of imaginary surveillance
> utopia.
>
> 2. while Das Leben der Anderen leaves one (among other things) with
> a kind of nightmarish feeling
> of being watched, even if a hero is partially redeemed in the end,
> most of American
> representations of surveillance function on the bases of a kind of
> "perverse utilitarianism" - as
> long as we are saving OUR lives, it is ok, not very comfortable but
> for the sake of security - in
> fact, the whole premise of Bourne films is this stepping over the
> line, not the line itself. what
> does this dream (if it is as unrealistic as i suspect) tell us
> about contemporary western society?
>
>
> evgeni v. pavlov
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ______________
> Got a little couch potato?
> Check out fun summer activities for kids.
> http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities
> +for+kids&cs=bz
>
> *
> *
> Film-Philosophy salon
> After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message
> you are replying to.
> To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to:
> [log in to unmask]
> Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
> For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
> *
> Film-Philosophy journal: http://www.film-philosophy.com
> Contact: [log in to unmask]
> **
*
*
Film-Philosophy salon
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
*
Film-Philosophy journal: http://www.film-philosophy.com
Contact: [log in to unmask]
**
|