movies (and other artforms the creation of mechanical reproduction) seem uniquely posed as the only art that takes the machine, and creates spirit and life. I mean, you couldn't say the same about painting or sculpture? Or even writing

Unless of course we see tools in general as technology or machines, in which case all art is the creation of spirit through the junction of man and machine

But then we have to see the twig and antler bone as just as technical as the cinematic apparatus, or perhaps the cinematic apparatus as just as simple and 'natural' as organic material

How does the detached antler or twig differ from its previous state connected to nature, which is not capable of creating art. Maybe the act of deadening the object is tantamount to the artistic process?

You kill the deer, use the stick and the charcoal dust from the fire you used to cook it to paint an image of it, you create from the literal ashes the artistic representation

Is this a violent act, human imposition of created spirit over the natural one? Or is it an honoring, reviving the spirit of what you must subsume so as to make it live forever?