Can you separate the film from the venue? Can you take the movie out of the theater? And if you do, what do you have in your hands? Does it work on its own, or are they too intertwined to untangle? These are the questions we're trying to answer in our two part series on the sphere in Las Vegas, and this is part two, where we'll be looking at the movie that was showing inside, Darren Aronofsky's Postcard From Earth.

Join us for our first ever movie review in this episode of The Implausipod.

Welcome to The ImplausiPod, a podcast about the intersection of art, technology, and popular culture. I'm your host, Dr. Implausible. And we're happy to have you here for this second of three parts. Yeah, I know, I said two parts in the intro, but it looks like it's going to take a little bit longer. There was a lot of threads to untangle from that first episode.

And if you haven't listened to that one yet, go to www. implausipod. com and take a look for episode 20, where we started off this review and come on back or just listen and then check it out after. It's all good. Whatever works for you. But to start off, I'll give you a bit of an outline of where we're going, I'll give you a bit of a recap of the film, and then we'll get into a more thorough review, and then a bit of a critique of the film and what it means for cinema at large.

And I think that'll wrap everything up. So to start off with, Darren Aronofsky's Sphere is a 50 minute pseudo documentary that's now currently showing only at the Sphere in Las Vegas, for reasons we'll get into shortly. It's a film that was shot specifically for the Sphere by a production company that was formed for this purpose, and it was shot on 16K cameras, and as such, the visuals in it are stunning.

We're treated to a view of the globe from a high up view, soaring through impossibly high peaks. passed, and using the full field of vision that's available to the viewers, we seem to be embedded within it. The multiple locations and environments from around the globe set the stage as literally the planet itself, and we're treated to an ongoing narration of the origins of life on the planet,

as told to a couple human explorers as they awaken from their deep sleep or cryosleep and are slowly brought up to speed on the surroundings that they now found themselves within. The narration we're treated to starts at the very origins of life on the planet and the development of the interconnectedness of the systems.

We could think of it as the extended cut of the Barenaked Ladies singing the Big Bang Theory theme song. Or echoing Carl Sagan's admonishment that in order to bake a cake from scratch, first you must invent the universe. And we see that within the film as well. I mean, not the universe part, but the baking, or at least heat.

Heat is a key theme throughout the film. There's an underlying critique of accelerationism and how this generates heat, but again, as we start working through from simple systems and singular cellular life evolving to multicellular life becoming more and more complex over time and filling our oceans and spreading across the surface of the planet.

The focus is very much on that complexity and the heat that it generates. The film goes through various sections or stages during this tour of the planet. An initial focus on the natural world and the environment, shifting to the human world and how we have evolved and changed over time, showcasing the multiplicity of the different cultures and societies

that live on the planet, and then how that changed with modernity, how we had a global culture, a monoculture that existed focused on fuel and energy and power. And while that did allow for further development, increased density of humans that came at a cost. And that cost was the increased heat that now exists throughout the environment.

And bookending all these visions are the sci fi elements that give us the thin wrapper of a narrative that surrounds the film itself. And I'll admit to having only a passing familiarity with other high def nature documentaries that have been filmed and showcased in recent years like Blue Planet or anything else that has a David Attenborough narration.

But I cannot overstate or stress enough how stunning the visuals are within this film. They are majestic and amazing. From the natural creatures, the schools of fish, the gecko, the spider, the elephants, the cheetah, the giraffes, everything that appears on screen is stunning and captured in intensely vivid detail.

And this includes the human ones as well, especially the non modern ones. The paper lanterns, the gathering water, the fields of rice or pepper or tea or what have you. These all come across in stunning and vivid detail. But alongside those human activities, we see that shift. And it shifts into human activities that are less working in concert with the environment and are more extractive.

The oil derricks in an oil field, which is possibly near L. A. I don't have all the locations here. The sulfur mining or other mineral mining, the strip mining that takes place. And then the impacts of the human presence. The garbage, the slums, the desertification, the rust. These all come across too as we shift back to our sci fi story near the end and the departure for space in arks so that we have a positive message that Darren Aronofsky calls protopian, that we can solve the challenges in this case by using off world travel to depart while humanity, or well, sorry, while the earth heals itself and we look for new homes where humanity might dwell.

And we conclude with a reference to a seed technology that the Travelers bring with them, whereby the planet can be replenished and restored and a livable environment can be brought with them. It's a beautiful film, even if it is a little bit short, and perhaps we need to have a more thorough review of it, so come back with me in just a quick sec.

So, from a review perspective, I'm shocked by how many of the moments from the film are still burned into my memory. The swirling colors of the luminary stairs are visible in my mind's eye, and while perhaps the images of nature scenes and cityscapes have somewhat blurred with all the other similar ones, I can still recall some of them vividly.

The elephants were incredible. And the striking animals were unforgettable as well. I cannot stress enough that the visuals are amazing. Where the visuals fell down was in some of the rendered elements, where they didn't quite fit in, and that was a little jarring. The spaceships blasting off from the surface felt as if they were from a video game a generation or two behind the current state of the art.

And this came across on some of the other parts as well. This is subjective, I realize, and I'm only going from my memory from the one viewing a month ago. Though I would say I would go back if I'm in Vegas again. I think it'd be neat to give a, give it a second look. With respect to the rendering, perhaps that's just the nature of the beast with a 16K video on this side of screen that any imperfections will come through.

And similarly, as we have the shift from regular definition TV to HDTV. And we had to revise our expectations about what was going to be on screen. We need to do something similar here. And right now we don't necessarily have the technology to do it. Now, this is something that might be fixable in the near future.

We know that technology and production will catch up to it. But right now there's a few elements where it kind of seemed a little bit lacking. The screen itself that this is shown on though, again, superlatives don't quite capture how impressive this screen is. The audience is lulled into a false sense of the scope of it initially, as the show starts with a lit rectangle against the curved lines of the wall.

But as the film proceeds, it soon expands to encompass the entirety of the audience's vision. This totalization of the viewing experience, for lack of a better word, is different than the experience of modern VR systems, more akin to an immersive experience like with The Cave and other non helmeted VR experiences.

Perhaps the first experience one has with an IMAX going from a standard film screen to an IMAX is somewhat close to this, but this feels like a jump from an HD home theater to IMAX, like there's several evolutionary leaps in the technology taking place all at once. The ability of the film to encompass the entirety of one's perception, to extend off to the edges of the peripheral at the corners of our eyes and upwards, as we roll our heads and necks back in some yoga stretch is wondrous.

The wind was the biggest takeaway for me. Perhaps the same could be achieved by pointing a USB connected hairdryer at my face while playing a video game, but the effect in the middle of the movie was stunning, while the combination of surround sound and haptics, the rumble pack that's in the seat made the charges of the elephants or the rumble of the liftoff of spacecrafts shake directly through me.

It was the feeling of wind blowing through the wisps of the hair on my head and flicker along my arms and beard that struck me most directly. This is the most tangible link between the theater and the film. The one that I hadn't experienced in a simulated way in any other venue before. We've had haptics in other places.

We've had those other sensory experiences, but the totality of the vision and the totality of those other senses being extended and adapted into the filmic experience here into the cinema experience is what really kind of threw me over the edge. Now I mentioned that totality before and I hinted at it a little bit in the previous episode as well.

This idea of total cinema that Andre Bazin came up with in the 60s. Now I'll quote Stephen Shaviro here from his work on the cinema of absence. He says, quote: 

"half a century ago, the great film critic, Andre Bazin, described what he called the myth of total cinema. In Bazin's vision, the history of film could be seen as a progressive movement toward an ultimate goal, quote, a total and complete representation of reality, the reconstruction of a perfect illusion of the outside world and sound, color, and relief. A recreation of the world in its own image and image unburdened by the freedom of interpretation. of the artist or the irreversibility of time." 

End quote. And Shaviro here, quoting directly from Bazin, I think really can help convey what it is we're talking about here. This idea that all our senses are extended.

And this is why I say that this film cannot be dissociated from this cinema. That the experience is so intertwined with it that there's no way really to see the film outside of the movie theater. But I'm wondering what other movies might be like. We know that film can drive adoption of technologies.

And this is a key part of Bazin's point as well, that the technologists, allured by the idea, that mythic idea of what cinema could be, worked on the new technologies to develop it and bring it about. Quoting from near the end of his article. The guiding myth then, inspiring the invention of cinema, is the accomplishment of that which dominated, in a more or less vague fashion, all the techniques of the mechanical reproduction of reality in the 19th century.

From photography to the phonograph, namely an integral realism, a recreation of the world in its own image, an image unburdened by the freedom of interpretation of the artist or the irreversibility of time. And we'll explore this mythic idea more fully in a few weeks time, as it ties directly into my research.

But for now, let's ask ourselves, what else might show up on the sphere? I'm sure, I'm absolutely certain, that they've approached other filmmakers to produce content for this, and I'm sure that there's a host of filmmakers that are more the auteur type that would be Relishing the opportunity to produce something for this theater that, you know, allows film to be done in new ways.

In a recent short bit posted on his YouTube Tested channel, Adam Savage talked about how he'd like to interview Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas about how what they did in moving away from L. A. and moving into San Francisco to found Zoetrope and ILM changed the way film was done, how they were able to march to a beat of a different drummer.

And so filmmakers like them can pursue opportunities to bring their vision of film to new theaters and new places. So will we see something like that happening in the future with the Sphere and the cinema within? I hope so. That would be fantastic. The way James Cameron and his work on Avatar really drove the adoption and expansion of 3D within cinemas.

And how we've seen the move to have more and more Hollywood films shown on IMAX quality screens, the same as we've seen with Oppenheimer and other Nolan films and other filmmakers producing content that would work in an enhanced way in those capacities, in those screens, a place where 3d glasses are no longer needed.

And perhaps that's what we need to get into is that there's ideas that are working towards developing this total cinema and virtual reality. The way it's been implemented multiple times is like a parallel thread to that. Like the goal is the same. Representations, reconstruction of the perfect illusion of the outside world, again, end quote.

But, but they both have barriers to it. One requires a two billion dollar building and specially designed films, and one requires you to wear headsets on your head and it feels kind of weird and awkward. Neither of them really approaches that. So, we continue looking for that sense of being entirely in a new place, in a new space in a new experience and something we haven't seen or felt or had before.

So this ultimately leads into my critique is that Postcard from Earth is so inextricably intertwined with the site that it's currently showing at that there's no way to extract the film. from the location, that watching it even on a, you know, 4k ultra screen is going to necessarily feel somewhat minor.

There isn't enough of a story there, and it feels like there could be a little bit more if they extended the runtime just a little bit, perhaps a half an hour, they would be able to more fully commit to a story arc. As it is, it's just bookends, and thin ones at that. The movie is okay, and the structure is interesting.

That continual acceleration that we're feeling in the heat that keeps on rising throughout the film. Figuratively, of course, that is something that probably could tie to the sphere, but wasn't actually felt. There could have been a little bit more plot, and the theoretical links that underpin The problem, which is real, but the solution, the idea of what we've seen in what's called Extropianism, or what Timnit Gebru calls the TESCREAL, you know, and that using a space ark, which, you know, that's been theorized before, whether it's in Project Persephone here on Earth, or as seen in films or TV series like that.

The Expanse. Is that a solution, though? We don't really have another place to go to. We can't let the Earth heal while we are absent. And so this protopian vision that Darren Aronofsky provides isn't necessarily dealing with the problem. It's allowing us to run away from it and hopefully come back when everything's fixed.

That's kind of like leaving your apartment when it's on fire and hoping it's all put back together by the time you come back. It's probably not going to work. You might need to stay and actively work on, you know, putting out the fires. So this is, I guess, why it's a little bit of a letdown. 

I love the film, I think it works within the context of the sphere, it's an amazing way to sell the cinema, and perhaps to show to other filmmakers what can be done, so that James Cameron, or George Lucas, or someone of that ilk who wants to expand the realm of possibility of what's able to be done on a cinema, could bring their works to it.

Honestly, George Miller, I would fly back to Vegas to see Mad Max Fury Road redone for the Sphere's screen. It would probably be too intense to actually watch, but something like that, if it's in the future, would be amazing. So the end result is that Postcard from Earth, as it's showing, In the Sphere, in Las Vegas, in 2023.

Gets us closer to that idea of total cinema, but as Andre Bazin said, it's still a myth. Yes, film can drive technological development and technological adoption, both within theaters and at home, but there's still some options that haven't been uncovered. The tech behind the production isn't necessarily there yet to allow us to see the rest of it as we can see with.

The rendering of some of the images, some of the special effects within the film, the stuff that was in camera was fantastic, but the stuff that had to be added to it wasn't necessarily able to match the visual fidelity of the rest of the film. But if these are the only critiques, then these are minor ones, I know, at least from my point of view.

I know the gentleman that was sitting next to me was very pressed throughout the film, especially the second half, as the environmental message was being brought to the forefront more and more, and the critique of, like, the oil industry was more prevalent. And he departed as soon as the credits rolled.

Now, again, I can't say, but he seemed to be visually upset and shaking at certain points. But, we all bring our own experiences into cinema. And that can influence what we get out of it as well. Maybe he was just not down for the 50 price tag and the 6 bottled water and the rest of the Costs that were associated with it.

And I guess that would be the other critique is, you know, the price point or this is definitely at a premium from my point of view as an experience. Overall, it was fantastic. It was sublime.

Now, if you've made it this far, thank you for joining us on this journey as we try and address the question of theater versus film. I made this episode in two parts for a number of reasons, and as I stated, it's going to extend into a third. First and foremost is I'm conscious of a comfortable length for podcast listening.

I'm generally aiming for 15 to 25 minutes as I feel that's kind of my ballpark ideal of what I, as a listener would want to hear started to get away from me for a bit and I wanted to take a conscious effort to reign it in before the episode lengths started to creep up. I'm not interested in producing audio books or at least not in this format.

And the longer episodes just require more, more of everything. More research, more recording, more editing, more transcribing, more everything. In a way that seems to take longer than two shorter episodes would, despite setup, task switching, and all the other activities combined. So I'll try and keep it down, or break them up like this going forward.

The second reason is that I wanted that distinction, that the theater and the film, the art or the installation, the form or the content, to help address how particular. Something like Postcard From Earth is tied to its site and how much the site might need Specially filmed content we address that a little bit in the context of the review while that latter question can't quite be answered yet But I think the jury is out on the first one as we've discussed and third as I hinted at In the beginning, this two parter became three.

I was originally working on the topic of worker replacement through automation, which is central to a lot of discussions that are happening right now, as a separate episode. But as I was going through my notes, throughout our discussion on this fear, it was becoming an obvious reality through my visit.

So, join me in a few days for part three of our series, as we discuss what I'd like to term échanger, I won't go into detail about what that is next time on the Implausipod. In the meantime, join us soon as the next episode should be up this weekend as we continue looking at the 2023 Doctor Who specials with Wild Blue Yonder, and after that we'll return to some of the questions raised by the Sphere.

Once again, I'm your host, Dr. Implausible. It's been a pleasure chatting with you today. You can reach me at drimplausible at implausipod. com. All research, writing, editing, mixing, recording, and music is by me, and the show is licensed under a Creative Commons 4. 0 share alike license, and no generative AI tools or LLMs have been used in the production of this show.

Take care, and we'll talk to you again soon. Have fun.