The Return of “Materiality” in Digital Cinema: A Generative Existence
ZHANG Xiao-hong1,2,3, LI Jun-bao4
1. Shaoguan University, Shaoguan, Guangdong, 512005; 2. Xiangmihu International Institute of FinTech, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518031; 3. Institute of Global Communications, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518060; 4. School of Media and Communication, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518060
Abstract：The deep integration of digital technology is driving a structural transformation in the “materiality” of cinema. Unlike traditional celluloid film, which relies on the physical substance of chemical emulsion and mechanical projection, digital cinema is grounded in binary code. Characterized by its editability, reproducibility, and interactivity, it dissolves traditional material boundaries while simultaneously giving rise to a new form of “materiality” that profoundly interweaves the virtual and the tangible. This new form pertains not only to the textural quality of the image surface but, more significantly, to a fundamental shift in its mode of existence: while rooted in algorithmic structures and dependent on material infrastructure such as servers and sensors, it is continuously activated, dynamically constructed, and gradually evolves into a “techno-cultural” complex within specific contexts of dissemination, interface interaction, and reception. Consequently, its essence can be understood as a “generative material existence” that unfolds in time, establishes itself through relations, and realizes itself in interaction. The “materiality” of digital cinema is not a simple replacement of traditional materiality; rather, it is an interwoven fusion arising from the mutual penetration and co-action of artistic expression, technological logic, and cultural practice. It urges the study of “materiality” to move beyond the static dichotomy of virtual versus tangible or material versus informational, and instead focus on the constitutive, processual, and relational dimensions of the “thing” within the digital media environment, providing a crucial perspective and a necessary theoretical framework for grasping the complex interplay between art and technology in the digital age.
张晓红, 李俊保. 数字电影的“物”性复归：一种生成性存在[J]. 《深圳大学学报》（人文社科版）, 2026, 43(1): 121-130.
ZHANG Xiao-hong, LI Jun-bao. The Return of “Materiality” in Digital Cinema: A Generative Existence. , 2026, 43(1): 121-130.
[1] (英)伯特兰·罗素.哲学简史[M].崔人元译.南京:江苏凤凰文艺出版社,2023.466. [2] 胡勇. 一种中道自由主义:托克维尔政治思想研究[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007.99. [3] (德)康德.导论[M].庞景仁译.北京:商务印书馆,1990.65. [4] 王恒,黄裕生.时间性:自身与他者——从胡塞尔、海德格尔到列维纳斯[M].南京:江苏人民出版社,2023.22. [5] (英)维特根斯坦.哲学研究[M].汤潮,范光棣译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1992.207. [6] Theodor W.Adorno. Aesthetic Theory[M].Minnesota: Univ-ersity of Minnesota Press,1997.99. [7] (美)迈克尔·弗雷德.艺术与物性:论文与评论集[M].张晓剑,沈语冰译.南京:江苏美术出版社,2013.412. [8] 陈佑松. 从现代艺术到后现代艺术——以物性为中心的范式转型[J].文艺理论研究,2014,(5):26-34. [9] (英)尼古拉斯·盖恩,(英)戴维·比尔.新媒介:关键概念[M].刘君,周竞男译.上海:复旦大学出版社,2015.107. [10] (英)唐·伊德.技术与生活世界:从伊甸园到尘世[M].韩连庆译.北京:北京大学出版社,2012.53. [11] (英)伊恩·霍德.纠缠小史:人与物的演化[M].陈国鹏译.上海:文汇出版社,2022.5. [12] 许煜. 论数码物的存在[M].李婉楠译.上海:上海人民出版社,2018. [13] (法)吉尔·德勒兹.弗朗西斯·培根:感觉的逻辑[M].董强译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2017.198. [14] Laura Marks.The Skin of the Film: Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses[M].Durham:Duke University Press,2000.1. [15] Mark C.Taylor. Intervolution: Smart Bodies, Smart Things[M].New York: Columbia University Press,2021.xiv. [16] 刘铮. 从“纠缠”到“缠绕”:“身联网”时代的人—物关系特征及身体的弃置效应[J].现代传播(中国传媒大学学报),2024,(6):1-8. [17] 傅修延. 物感与“万物自生听”[J].中国社会科学,2020,(6):26-48. [18] (英)罗伯特·科尔维尔.大加速:为什么我们的生活越来越快[M].陈恒,黄公夏译.北京:北京联合出版公司,2018.336. [19] (德)卢茨·科普尼克.慢下来:走向当代美学[M].石甜,王大桥译.上海:东方出版中心,2020.4. [20] Matthew Flanagan. Towards An Aesthetic of Slow in Contemporary Art Cinema[ED/OL].https://16-9.dk/2008/11/slow-in-contemporary-cinema/,2025-12-01. [21] 唐伟胜. 物性叙事研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2023.5. [22] Laura Mulvey.Death 24X a Second:Stillness and the Moving Image[M].London: Reaktion Books,2006.144.
2026, Vol. 43 
粤公网安备44030502007936号