This week we\u2019ve moved on to the topic of “biomorphism,” which refers to the dimension of life and sensuous interactivity in a film-world \u2013 the liveliness that\u2019s found between the passivity of the object-world (the geomorphic) and the human activity of the subject-world (anthropomorphism).<\/p>\n
Here is where a film depicts objects as alive, or animals as social, like us, or humans as animal-like. I’ve argued that this is where everything ultimately happens \u2013 in the action and interaction between sensorial bodies, things that can perceive and respond to other things. The geomorphic and the anthropomorphic are two ends of the continuum that stretches across the biomorphic field of possibilities.<\/p>\n
But since we\u2019ve already dealt with nonliving things (chapter 3) and with humans (chapter 4), we\u2019re focusing here on living, animate things \u2013 or what film depicts as living, animate things. Nature films, wildlife documentaries, animation, horror and monster movies, and certain kinds of science-fiction are the genres that most commonly engage this biomorphic realm in the most interesting ways.<\/p>\n
This week we’re looking particularly at nature and wildlife films; next week, at films that depict human interactions with animals. But, of course (as we’ve seen with Winged Migration<\/em>), it’s impossible to depict nature without engaging and interacting with it.<\/p>\n Here are some clips from films discussed in the first half of the chapter.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n