Post-Event Cinema Discourse: Concept, Functioning, Case Study

Cover Page

Cite item


The problems of the organization and functioning of post-event cinema discourse are discussed in the article. Post-event discourse is shaped by the viewers and represents their response statements in a communicative interaction with the movie; it reflects the processes of perception and understanding of the film by the audience. It is discussed that if there is a real event underlying the film, the film itself becomes a post-event discourse, forming or reinterpreting the ideas about what happened depending on the cultural and historical context. The results of an empirical study that implements a case study methodology are presented. A thematic analysis of the post-event Internet discourse, expressed in the statements about a particular film (“T-34”), has been carried out. A thematic map that revealed the structure of the post-event cinema discourse and its simplified versions, due to the genre features of the film has been developed. It is shown that viewers not only interpret the plot of the film, but also rethink the events behind it, express the effects of influence, raise topics for discussion that are not directly related to the film. The structure of post-event discourse changes depending on the characteristics of the audience. It has been revealed that the significant part of the audience perceived the film in accordance with the original function of cinema as “entertainment”. This determined both the peculiarities of its understanding and the effects of the impact, mainly emotional. Another part of the audience discovered the cognitive implications of the film and demonstrated a more complex structure of post-event discourse organization; understanding the film in a broader context contributed to the comprehension and actualization of additional themes. It is assumed that the unfolding post-event discourse in the process of communicative interaction of the viewer with the film contributes to the formation of discursive reality.

About the authors

Tina A. Kubrak

Institute of Psychology of Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
SPIN-code: 4443-1814

Ph.D. in Psychology, is research fellow in Laboratory of Speech Psychology and Psycholinguistics

13 Yaroslavskaya St., Moscow, 129366, Russian Federation


  1. Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405.
  2. Borisova, O.S. (2011). Reprezentatsiya Revolyutsii v Sovetskom Kinodiskurse: FilosofskoAntropologicheskie Smysly. Ph.D. in Philosophy Thesis. Belgorod. (In Russ.)
  3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
  4. Busygina, N.P. (2009). Nauchnyi status metodologii issledovaniya sluchaev. Moskovskii Psikhoterapevticheskii Zhurnal, (1), 9–34. (In Russ.)
  5. Dijk, T.A. van. (2000). Yazyk. Poznanie. Kommunikaciya. Blagoveshchensk: BGK named after Baudouin de Courtenay Publ. (In Russ.)
  6. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
  7. Grebenshchikova, T.A., Pavlova, N.D., & Afinogenova, V.A. (2016). Modifikatsiya intentsional’nogo prostranstva v postsobytiinom internet-diskurse. In A.L. Zhuravlev, N.D. Pavlova & I.A. Zachesova (Eds.), Psikhologiya Diskursa: Problemy Determinatsii, Vozdeistviya, Bezopasnosti (pp. 201–219). Moscow: Institut psikhologii RAN Publ. (In Russ.)
  8. Khokhlov, V.A. (2010). Velikaya Otechestvennaya voina v sovremennom rossiiskom kino: prodolzhenie v fentezi-budushchem. Novyi Istoricheskii Vestnik, (23), 67–74. (In Russ.)
  9. Kubrak, T.A. (2012). Spetsifika psikhologicheskogo vozdeistviya kinodiskursa. In A.L. Zhuravlev & N.D. Pavlova (Eds.), Psikhologicheskoe Vozdeistvie: Mekhanizmy, Strategii, Vozmozhnosti Protivodeistviya (pp. 202–222). Moscow: Institut psikhologii RAN Publ. (In Russ.)
  10. Kubrak, T.A. (2016). The problem of information and psychological security in cinema discourse. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 9(47), 8. (In Russ.)
  11. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
  12. Latynov, V.V. (2013). Psikhologiya Kommunikativnogo Vozdeistviya. Moscow: Institut Psikhologii RAN Publ. (In Russ.)
  13. Pavlova, N.D., & Grebenshchikova T.A. (2017). Intent-analiz postsobytiinogo diskursa v internete. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 10(52), 8. (In Russ.)
  14. Stake, R.E. (2005). The Art of Case Study Research. London: Sage.
  15. Tuckett, A.G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary Nurse, 19(1–2), 75–87.
  16. Vasilenko, I.V. (2015). Kul’turnyi Diskurs v Regional’nom Mediapole: Lingvisticheskie Parametry. Ph.D. in Philology Thesis. Velikii Novgorod. (In Russ.)
  17. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zhizhek, S. (2014). Kinogid Izvrashchentsa. Kino. Filosofiya. Ideologiya. Ekaterinburg: Gonzo Publ. (In Russ.)
  18. Zhuravlev, A.L., & Pavlova, N.D. (2012). Predislovie. In A.L. Zhuravlev & N.D. Pavlova (Eds.), Psikhologicheskoe Vozdeistvie: Mekhanizmy, Strategii, Vozmozhnosti Protivodeistviya (pp. 5–8). Moscow: Institut Psikhologii RAN Publ. (In Russ.)

Copyright (c) 2019 Kubrak T.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies