Key Takeaways

• Discomfort in film can be created through restraint rather than shock or spectacle.
• Limited cues and slow pacing encourage viewers to actively interpret meaning.
• Narrative withholding sustains attention by delaying clarity and resolution.
• Long takes shift focus from rapid plot to subtle visual and auditory details.
• Restraint invites critical engagement rather than delivering emotional guidance.

Alexander Apostolopoulos is a New York based tax attorney who has spent close to 15 years advising public and private companies on complex, high value transactions. A graduate of Yale College and Harvard Law School, where he earned his JD magna cum laude, Alexander Apostolopoulos has represented clients in acquisitions, dispositions, IPOs, spin-offs, and private equity investments. He has served as a tax partner at a major US multinational law firm and previously practiced at Sullivan & Cromwell. His work includes optimizing tax structures, drafting transactional documentation, and advising on strategic restructurings, including high profile IPOs and multibillion dollar mergers.

With experience navigating intricate financial frameworks and regulatory environments, he brings a structured analytical perspective to discussions of how filmmakers use discomfort, distance, and restraint to shape audience attention.

How Films Use Discomfort and Restraint to Hold Viewer Attention

Some contemporary directors use restraint to hold attention. Filmmakers such as Michael Haneke, Ulrich Seidl, and Veronika Franz and Severin Fiala often sidestep standard suspense and tidy arcs. Here, “discomfort” denotes sustained unease produced by controlled pacing, limited cues, and unresolved narrative space, rather than shock or spectacle.

When scenes unfold slowly, viewers may notice elements that fade into the background, such as small gestures, ambient sound, or subtle lighting shifts. This restraint often reduces the usual guidance of music, explanatory dialogue, and reaction shots. That can help one feel more active. Instead of delivering emotion on cue, the film leaves room for the viewer to supply meaning.

In Haneke’s framing, restraint can function as a critique of what he calls “barrel-down” cinema, a style he sees as taking power away from the spectator. He argues for insistent questions over quick answers and for clarifying distance rather than forcing closeness. In that model, discomfort is not a side effect but a method that keeps the viewer alert to what images and stories try to do.

These choices are particularly evident in Seidl’s work. Critics often describe his scenes as stylized tableaux held for uncomfortable lengths, creating a strategic detachment that keeps the audience at a measured distance. Instead of emotional intimacy, the frame can feel clinical and observational, asking viewers to sit with what they would avoid.

Franz and Fiala, by contrast, often build tension through closeness inside the domestic space. In Goodnight Mommy, the story remains largely confined to an isolated house, where still framing and stark interiors make familiarity feel unstable. They have also described aiming for near-silence and using only precise tones, which shifts the focus of tension to pacing and subtle sounds rather than overt signals.

Haneke also uses restraint through narrative withholding. In discussing The White Ribbon, he explains that the use of a narrator and black-and-white imagery creates distance and distrust, reminding viewers that they are watching an artefact rather than “reality.” This kind of distancing prompts the audience to watch closely because certainty does not arrive on schedule.

Rather than emphasizing story beats, these films can change how viewers process time. A “long take” is a shot that plays out continuously on screen, and it can be static or moving. When a shot remains uncut long enough for duration to become noticeable, meaning can accumulate from texture, silence, and small shifts instead of rapid plot turns.

Compared with payoff-focused suspense structures, restraint can keep uncertainty active by limiting confirmation. Instead of building toward a single release valve, the films may sustain tension for minutes of ordinary action, allowing unease to arrive through delay. The pacing can seem “flat” only if the viewer expects escalation to announce itself.

It helps to name this approach without turning it into an audience rule. Some viewers find the absence of guidance frustrating, while others see it as an invitation to engage more critically. The more accurate claim, grounded in these filmmakers’ stated aims and critical descriptions, is that the film aims to provoke interpretation rather than to settle it.

A viewer can treat discomfort as a tool rather than a warning sign. Paying attention to how a shot withholds information, how a sound returns, or how a space keeps shifting meaning turns watching into a critical practice. Instead of asking only whether a film feels satisfying, the viewer can ask what its restraint reveals about distance, control, and what the film expects viewers to notice.

FAQs

What does “discomfort” mean in this filmmaking context?

Discomfort refers to sustained unease created through pacing, silence, and limited narrative cues. It relies on restraint rather than shock to hold attention.

How does restraint keep viewers engaged?

By withholding clear emotional signals and quick resolutions, restraint encourages active interpretation. Viewers must pay closer attention to subtle details and context.

What role do long takes play in sustaining attention?

Long takes make the passage of time noticeable and allow meaning to build gradually. They shift emphasis from fast plot developments to texture and atmosphere.

Why do some directors avoid traditional suspense structures?

Avoiding tidy arcs and clear payoffs can maintain uncertainty for longer periods. This approach prioritizes interpretation over immediate satisfaction.

Do all viewers respond positively to restrained filmmaking?

Reactions vary, as some viewers find minimal guidance frustrating. Others appreciate the invitation to engage more critically with the film.

About Alexander Apostolopoulos

Alexander Apostolopoulos is a New York City tax attorney and member of the New York State Bar Association. He earned his BA from Yale College and his JD magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, where he assisted Professor Elizabeth Warren during her work with the Congressional Oversight Panel for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Over nearly 15 years in practice, he has advised on IPOs, mergers, acquisitions, spin-offs, and private equity transactions, including representations involving Enfusion Inc., Cano Health LLC, Ritchie Bros., BlackRock, and Accel-KKR.