For the sake of this post, I checked out two different examples of hypercinema. Both very different from one another in a multitude of ways regarding how they tell their narratives and how to use cinema language. The first example I looked at was Bear 71. Bear 71 is a mix of audio narration, video, and an interactive map to create a truly unique experience and form of storytelling about a bear and its journey through the wild and how technology and colonization has affected both it and other bears quite negatively. Because of the clever combination of all three of those storytelling elements, Bear 71 manages to take the tale of a bear in the wild that could be considered mundane or something that would not be that engaging and makes it a fantastic and one of a kind experience that resonates on a level that the story would not have if it was told any other way. The use of cinematic techniques like narration and select video clips make it a compelling piece of pseudo cinema that impacts the viewer on a similar level as a traditional non-interactive form of filmmaking.
The next example was Seance. And this was quite a trip. Through the use of hypercinema techniques, you click and hold on the screen and a video appears out of thin air with bizarre editing and focus that is purposely made to be disposable due to how each video is seen is a random combination of random clips that is put together differently each and every time the site is visited. The concept is beyond bold and I appreciate it quite a bit. But I wasn’t too fond of the end result because it was just far too strange for me to really latch on to in any kind of meaningful way. But it definitely qualified as hypercinema nonetheless.