I wrote a thing on how the interactive film works best in terms of what it achieves on my main blog, thought it might be good here too for sharing. The original post is here.

I recommend having a look at this Korsakow film before you go any further, The Border Between Us; of all the ones I’ve watched so far this one is exemplary of how the format can be used. Many others come off as very vague, and don’t seem to grasp as any particular narratives.

I really love the idea of a form of documentary that asks the viewer to navigate through the content themselves, allowing them to choose what or what not to watch, and in which order to watch it. The segmented style of each nugget of media is odd, but it opens the opportunity to play more with sound and photographs rather than straight up video and sync sound.

The more I consider it though the more problems I encounter. The first and foremost issue is one of fluidity. If you’ve watched this kind of film before you will have probably found it can be quite jarring because of loading times between each segment.

This I find can be a fatal flaw in the software which can shatter an otherwise curious experience. Despite this, it remains as purely a technical flaw, and this can solved by higher bandwidth, or simply accessing the media locally for an immediate response time with each transition. However, this is not the flaw I am concerned most with.

Film, TV, and Literature are defined by their linear experience. A story is told, and the viewer or reader has no choice in how the story progresses. Everything is pre-determined by the author, or script writer. This is a defining characteristic of the mediums, and their strengths as invocative outlets that allow the viewer/reader to immerse their mind’s eye into a world or characters unknown to them prior.

We know this because everyone who indulges in any of these mediums will have particular characters they identify with, or worlds they hold adoration for. For me one might be The Doctor, the lonely time lord who’s life has spanned hundreds of years and who has seen the deaths of several companions.

Though I have no choice in the matter of his character, it remains that I have an investment in his character and I enjoy seeing him struggle and triumph in each episode. The fact that I have no control over this character or the story that follows him along makes me then question the purpose of interactive film as a story telling medium. If linear media is already so evocative, what can an interactive version do?

The interactive film seems a wannabe video game; something like a point and click with less fluidity between each segment. It offers fragments of an existing story in an order decided by you, the viewer. It allows you the opportunity to pick what you want to watch next, so you can ignore parts you might not be interested in.

At my most cynical I would accuse the interactive film of merely attempting to create the illusion of non-linearity. Only the order is altered, while the story fragments will always remain the same. Here, at least if you are considering the form for documentary like I am, there is an issue; the changing order only acts to potentially change the interpretation of the story, and this can depart from the truth you chase as a documentary film maker.

This is troubling for the film maker who wants to approach an idea of truth. On the flip side it offers some interesting poetic opportunities. The non-linear story, being one driven by the viewer, inexplicably becomes a container for their own experiences and ideals. It can become a lot more malleable from the viewer’s perspective. Perhaps this is the boon of the interactive film?

In that case, maybe the choice to allow for an element of control on the viewer’s part is an implicit agreement that authorial control is being thrown right out the window. When the elements of pacing, order, and ultimately interpretation are left to the end user, it would be a farce to believe that a single story will be prevalent, or at the very most, existent.

At this point though it feels wrong to even use the word narrative in relation to this form. Narrative suggests, well, a narrative. Even the term film has connotations of linearity and a logical chronology. A story that exists in this kind of medium is ethereal at best. Finally though I have to answer my own question; for what purpose would this medium best suit?

I think poetic, exploratory pieces would be the best suited for this form. To achieve a narrative would be an ideal, but not a goal. To provide a vibrant sound and visual scape however seems to do very well indeed.