Materiality in Film and its Social Impact

In the book The Stuff of Bits, a sentence that jumped out to me early on was a quote from MIT Media Lab founder Nicholas Megroponte: “… a change from atoms to bits is irrevocable and unstoppable.” Immediately in my head, I began to think about the transformations that the world has undergone during my life. We shifted from bookstores to Amazon to eBooks, from numerous media stores selling physical media to digital downloads and streaming platforms, and from in-person instruction/ interaction to distance education degree programs. Among books, media, and education, the most rapid and dramatic has been the  shift from physical to digital media with the rise of numerous streaming platforms. This fundamental shift within the industry has led the majority of physical media companies to eventually fade away.

What is interesting, however, is that although there is a clear shift taking place from atoms to bits, there are many boutique distributors, communities, and individuals that remain fervently loyal to physical media. Some people cite ownership concerns in the age of streaming or video/audio quality concerns due to streaming’s use of compression. Others have nostalgia for the tactile nature of browsing and discovery in the aisles of somewhere like a Blockbuster. For the purpose of this essay, I would like to 1) focus specifically on the medium of film, looking both at physical media (vhs, dvds, blu-ray, etc.) and streaming (Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, etc.); 2) take a deeper look at the materialities of information representation within this medium; and 3) briefly discuss film communities that resist the “irrevocable and unstoppable” shift from atoms to bits as well as their motivations for doing so.

The year is 1997, it’s Friday night and you want to surprise your special someone with the perfect movie. You stop by your local blockbuster on the way home from work and walk down the aisles looking for that perfect movie that both of you can enjoy. You walk over to the new release aisle but it’s been a pretty slow couple months in the box office and you’re not too keen on anything. An employee sees you wandering and asks a simple question, “Can I help you find anything?” The employee uses their personal experience and knowledge to walk you through some solid picks and even takes you over to the staff picks section that covers a wide range of genres and includes a personal description of why that movie was featured. After a few minutes of back and forth, you decide on a movie and come home ready to go. After eating dinner you wave your movie in hand with a sparkle in your eyes and tell about how you ended up finding this perfect movie. You pop it in your disc tray, dim the lights, press play, and watch the movie.

The year is now 2020, it’s Friday night and you want to surprise your special someone yet again with the perfect movie. You sit down with them on the couch and open Netflix on your smart tv and begin to scroll through options… up, down, side to side… trending now, popular on Netflix, because you watched Queer Eye. You had an idea in mind so you scroll to show your partner and immediately the trailer begins to autoplay. After 15 seconds you hear a slow groan from your partner. “Ughh this looks dumb. I am really not in the mood.” You frantically scroll faster and faster through the selections and numerous recommendations based on other movies you’ve seen. “Can you slow down? I can’t even read the titles of the movies!” Thirty minutes later you are still scrolling, your partner is reading something on their phone, and you don’t feel any closer to finding something to watch. “Ok let’s just rewatch an episode of Modern Family. It’s getting late and I don’t want to start a movie at this point.” You feel a little defeated but by this time you’re used to it and besides Modern Family was a decent watch anyways.

Now let’s take a closer look by comparing and contrasting these two experiences. In both situations of playing a dvd movie and streaming a movie, either film ultimately being viewed is entirely digital … it’s all bits. There is, however, a perceived difference by users due to the differing material forms in which the digital data are represented. On one hand, there is a piece of paper stuffed into a plastic box with a name, cover art, and description included. There is a certain tangibility behind it. This box can be pointed out, picked up, passed around, discussed over, and read. and For all intents and purposes the disc inside is irrelevant. You could imagine an empty box that you scanned at your television to unlock streaming to have those same bits travel from a faraway server to your television rather than from your disc to your television. Even in this situation of “streaming” from an empty box, the box alters our perceptions of materiality due its tangibility and how it impacts our exploration, discovery, and discussion of films. The material way in which a movie is presented to us has an effect on how we watch it and our relationship with it. The effort and intentional investment of physically moving to bring something from a store to home creates a different relationship with the movie versus the casual low-stakes relationship we have with streaming… it doesn't matter if it doesn’t work… I can always flip to the next option.

A fundamental difference in information representation between the given examples is in relation to curation of information. In a brick and mortar store, customers accept a level of constraint on the number of movies available due to the limited physical space of a store. On the other hand, customers may view the catalogue of a digital streaming platform to be virtually limitless due to its abstract location within “the internet.” In reality, there are physical and cost constraints in both movie rental stores and streaming platforms like Netflix. Behind a slick, clean interface, streaming is data intensive and relies on a vast physical infrastructure that requires immense amounts of energy. Beyond the limitations of physical server infrastructure, Netflix carefully chooses what content to feature based on a combination of data and costs of gaining temporary rights to stream. This means that it could be in a bidding war to gain exclusive rights over a popular series or movie. It is important for Netflix to purchase the rights to content that is financially sustainable and this may lead to securing the rights to safer, algorithmically proven content in lieu of more obscure films. This may also lead to a padding of content that is less desirable and inexpensive to secure rights to in order to give an appearance of an endless library of content. Although there are limitations in the selection of films within a brick and mortar store primarily due to the size of the store, rights to content is not leased like in streaming. Discs are purchased and although popular options are often highlighted due to the desire to fulfill demand and succeed as a business, it isn’t so expensive to throw in a copy or two of some of the more obscure films and cult classics.

Curation of films within streaming platforms is primarily done through algorithms that scan through your behavior, habits, and history in order to suggest additional content. Curation of films within movie stores, although limited by physical space, is not prohibited by the costs of negotiating rights for movies and typically includes a more human approach towards organizing information. There are often staff selections that include detailed descriptions as to why a movie was personally chosen. There are employees who are more than willing to defend their picks and make suggestions based on a customer’s personality and interests. For regular customers, employees often build a relationship with customers and are able to quickly identify a personal queue that aligns well with their customers.

The move from human curation and personal suggestions to algorithmic recommendations impacts us at an even deeper level because human curation and suggestions build the infrastructure in which conversations can take place. It is impossible to have a conversation about why a movie was a 83% vs 96% match assigned to you by a blackbox algorithm. In all reality, that information is irrelevant for a human. On the other hand a staff pick section and personalized curation by humans provide much room for discussions, stories, and debates to arise in relation to movies. This ultimately can build relationships and trust among individuals within a community.

Lastly I would like to briefly discuss people and communities that embrace physical media in the age of streaming through purchasing and collecting films. The purchasing and collection of films is a design activity in itself. It represents a snapshot of someone’s personality, and it is something that people frequently enjoy sharing with others within film communities. This action is an intentional rejection of streaming platforms such as Netflix that automatically curates and “designs” for you through algorithms that collect information about your actions and behavior. Netflix, however, is unable to curate for you based on your feelings, intentions, or goals. Maybe there is a movie that you would otherwise dislike (according to the algorithms) but have a comforting childhood memory of watching it with a sibling. The problem is that Netflix’s algorithm is unable to differentiate between a human’s nuanced feelings, intentions, or goals and their actions and behavior recorded on the platform.