Neoformalist Method

Neoformalism rejects the notion that art is a form of communication, but a vehicle that invites the spectator to defamiliarizes himself with his habitual perception of the world via cinema. This "approach" emphasizes leisure and relataebility.  I like this method of interpreting cinema because it emphasizes the viewer's personal experience while watching the film. With this approach, film is no longer constricted by psychology, sociology, linguistics, etc. I agree that when we categorize our analysis of film based on an ology or istic we are limiting our understanding of the film and ignoring essential aspects. Another idea I appreciated is that film is constantly in motion because realism is a set of conventions that conforms to a specific time period. For example, a 1900s audience would never look at The Wizard of Oz as a feminist film because that was not a relevant idea during that time. Now of course, everyone talks about feminism. But to make neoformalism work, we have to presume the piece of art exists outside of history in the context it was produced or watched. Therefore, we can say The Wizard of Oz was feminist (although I don't agree with that.) What I want to discuss more is the "Nature of Artwork" section of Thompson's essay. And "art as separate from the cultural framework because it requires a unique set of perceptual requirements" is a sentence I would disagree with. This breeches the question of what can we define as art and I would say art in its truest form is nature so nothing unique about that.