FILM IS LIKE A TINY ESCHATOLOGY
Joel Feinberg, in his 1958 paper "Psychological Egoism", embraces a similar critique by drawing attention to the infinite regress of psychological egoism. He expounds it in the following cross-examination:
"All men desire only satisfaction."
"Satisfaction of what?"
"Satisfaction of their desires."
"Their desires for what?"
"Their desires for satisfaction."
"Satisfaction of what?"
"Their desires."
"For what?"
"For satisfaction"—etc., ad infinitum.[14]
The point of view varies, but most would like to have time on their side to judge a work they are sitting through. It is not so much that the viewer gets board easily, but it is a feeling of uneasy from a fact that they might not be spending their time wisely. When they have an idea of their personal apocalypse then it will seem to all snap into place (hence the satisfaction of diarists and bloggers). Film has always been like this and even when challenged by the ten minute time limit often found on the on line sites a person will sit through a short film…or long…with an idea that they are staving off the inevitable end. They will often check how long the film is and then decide to get ‘sucked in’ or not on how this film with entertains, distract, or instruct within the given time limit. There is a fundamental act of satisfaction that the filmmaker might have unsuspecting parasites on and within his pov. What is the subject? The subject has importance in relation to how that person will end and whether it is a glimmer on their horizon.
