Within Film Studies and Philosophy accounts of superficiality and cinema are few and far between. If there is any talk of it at all, more often than not, it is decidedly hostile. A similar sense of skepticism is reserved for superficiality’s conceptual relatives: hollowness, depthlessness, slightness, slimness, thinness and, of course, flatness. A superficial reading is one that pays little attention to detail. A slight film is a film without weight. A thin story lacks substance, or worse, conviction, a tale that could not withstand the most cursory analysis. “Flat” is another word for dull. Similarly, in critical theory depthlessness has lately become a byword for a lack of historicity and affect; while shallowness has long been associated with inauthenticity. Indeed, even those scholars who appear to be appreciative of surfaces, foremost among them Gilles Deleuze, turn critical when it concerns the cinematic apparatus: the single, isolated plane is a prison where time is “caught” (2005, p. 105). In contrast, discussions of depth are far more common and, in comparison, positively congenial. An in-depth reading is a detailed or close reading, one that gets to the heart of the matter. A deep film or story

中文翻译：

---

导论：电影哲学的表面

在电影研究和哲学中，关于肤浅和电影的描述很少而且相距甚远。如果有任何谈论它，通常情况下，它肯定是充满敌意的。类似的怀疑也被保留给了肤浅的概念亲属：空洞、无深度、轻薄、纤细、纤薄，当然还有平坦。肤浅的阅读是一种很少注意细节的阅读。轻微的薄膜是没有重量的薄膜。一个单薄的故事缺乏实质内容，或者更糟糕的是，缺乏信念，一个经不起最粗略分析的故事。“平坦”是沉闷的另一种说法。类似地，在批判理论中，无深度最近已成为缺乏历史性和影响力的代名词。而浅薄长期以来一直与不真实联系在一起。事实上，即使是那些似乎很欣赏表面的学者，其中最重要的是吉尔·德勒兹 (Gilles Deleuze)，在谈到电影装置时变得批判：单一的、孤立的平面是一个“抓住”时间的监狱（2005 年，第 105 页）。相比之下，关于深度的讨论要普遍得多，相比之下，更令人愉快。深入阅读是详细或仔细阅读，可以触及问题的核心。一部深刻的电影或故事