CALL FOR PAPERS

We accept articles – in Polish or in English language – concerning subjects as announced below, as well as papers not strictly connected with the main topic of the volume, especially if they are related to history of Polish cinema, film theory or issues from the area of film and media studies that are underresearched so far. We also accept reviews of the books on film published in Poland or concerning Polish cinema and media.

No. 136 (Winter 2026)

THEATRE AND FILM: METAMORPHOSES

(submission deadline: August 31, 2026)

Over a decade after the first film- and theatre-oriented volume of Kwartalnik Filmowy (nos. 87-88, 2014), we find it hard not to reiterate the truism that cinema and theatre have always been closely related, regardless whether we approach this affinity (convergent or antagonistic) from a historical (diachronic mutual influences) or theoretical perspective (medium, method, conceptual frameworks, and transposability).

Convinced that the dynamic interface between film and theatre may continue to inspire both film and theatre studies or, in fact, their interdisciplinary convergence, we invite submissions for a volume with the subtitle “metamorphosis” as a guiding concept. We encourage contributors to approach this term in an inclusive and meta-critical way (as transformation, evolution, modification, or reconfiguration) in order to capture as fully as possible the changes that have recently reshaped the relationship between theatre and film, along with their coexistence in the broader field of the arts.

Sixty years ago, Susan Sontag concluded her well-known essay “Film and Theatre,” devoted to theatrical cinema and theatre incorporating film, with the words: We need a new idea. It will probably be a very simple one. Will we be able to recognize it? We hope that the submitted articles will outline such a new idea, whether through innovative ways of conceptualizing the relationship between cinema and theatre, critical reassessments of existing scholarship, reflections on new techniques of imaging and staging, or analyses of contemporary artistic practices engaging with the metamorphic material of theatre and film. We encourage contributors to consider the interrelation between theatre and film from as broad a perspective as possible – not only from a film and theatre studies standpoint (including narrative, thematic relations, technique, technology, media, and production contexts) but also from theoretical and philosophical perspectives (e.g., apparatus theory, dispositif, or metaphors revealing affinities between the two arts).

Examples of thematic areas:

• creators – problem-oriented approaches to artistic practices that innovatively reconcile theatre and film
• new perspectives on film adaptations of theatrical works and stage versions of film texts
• convergences of film and theatre methodologies – for example, quantitative methods as tools in film-theatre research
• film and theatre (film-theatrical) doctrines in critical and re-evaluative perspectives
• film-theatre hybridity – new media genres combining the materialities of film and theatre
• theatre-film self-reflexivity – the category of backstage film, films about theatre, performances about cinema
• film-theatre narratology – new narrative forms at the intersection of theatre and film, trans-medial narratives in theatre and cinema
• broadcasts and rebroadcasts (opera, theatre performances, concerts) – contemporary modes, aesthetics, and conventions
• streaming platforms and the distribution/dissemination of theatrical performances
• theatre’s opening to new media realities – e.g., augmented reality and virtual reality as extensions of immersive experience and participation
• the recording of theatrical performances – current approaches and debates
• film vs. theatre audio description – similarities and differences in methods and techniques
• animated film, puppet film, stop-motion animation as forms of theatre’s cinematographisation
• theatrical and film scenography – inspirations, exchanges, and cross-contaminations in scenographic practice
• editing, framing, shot – film tools on stage
• performative works in art history – addressing the interplay of film and theatrical strategies
• film and theatre acting in new perspectives – masks, personae, stars in a film-theatre framework
• generative AI tools in the film-theatre imaginary
• film-theatre intersections in the light of critical media theory
• film work by theatre practitioners and theatre work by filmmakers
• film as a source in theatre studies
• theatre and film through the lens of philosophical concepts

No. 137 (Spring 2027)

TIMES OF HORROR

(submission deadline: December 7, 2026)

Today, horror constitutes one of the most dynamically developing areas of popular cinema. Long treated as a reservoir of repetitive conventions and recognizable patterns, the genre is now undergoing a phase of intense growth and even more intense transformation. New generations of filmmakers have introduced previously under-represented perspectives – bringing the experiences of marginalized groups into the horror imaginary has not only expanded the range of themes, affects, and modes of representing the body and violence but has also reshaped the very rules that organize horror narratives. Consequently, current horror no longer merely reproduces its own conventions but rather subjects them to negotiation and reinterpretation.

The current stage of the genre’s development begs the question about the relationship between transformations in horror and the experience of our time. In a world marked by catastrophic imaginaries, sense of permanent polycrisis, and mounting uncertainty, horror cinema seems to function as a particularly sensitive seismograph of social anxieties. Is the contemporary flourishing of horror and transformations of its aesthetic and narrative a response to the “times of horror” in which we live? Or are we simply witnessing another phase in the genre’s evolution, in which horror redefines its own boundaries and tests new ways of representing fear? To what extent does current horror remain a tool of critical reflection on reality, and to what extent does it offer merely another, albeit particularly intense, form of escapism?

We invite submissions addressing recent developments in horror, with particular emphasis on genology. We are especially interested in contributions that reflect on the current transformations of horror, as well as analyses of its deconstruction, reconfiguration, or hybridization with other cinematic forms, along with how the genre responds to contemporary social and cultural tensions.

Examples of thematic areas:

• times of horror: the present – horror as a reflection of current anxieties and social conflicts; the past – horror as a way of working through the past/history; the future – horror as an attempt to confront what is yet to come (apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic)
• horror as a hybrid and transmedial genre
• folk horror, body horror, queer horror, eco-horror, techno-horror, political horror – (new) subgenres or merely new thematic inflections?
• horror revisions: new readings and reworkings of genre classics; adaptations, reboots, remakes – faithful renditions or creative betrayals?
• horror and metaphysics: horror cinema and transformations in religious sensibility and so-called new spirituality; current forms of satanic horror; horror and questions of evil and transcendence
• horror and humour: meta-play with genre conventions, self-reflexivity, camp, grotesque, absurd; the limits of taste and aesthetics
• horror and national cinema codes: local and regional variations (J-horror, K-horror, giallo, New French Extremity, Ozploitation, Éire horror, etc.); horror as a tool for negotiating national and social identity
• horror from the perspective of the affective turn: fear, anxiety, dread, unease, disgust, tension; trauma as both theme and aesthetic strategy
• formal and stylistic strategies in contemporary horror: narrative solutions and visual codes; the role of editing and sound in producing affective and physiological responses in the viewer
• the audience of modern horror: empirical research perspectives; distribution channels (cinema, streaming, digital platforms, film festivals)
• horror production: the genre as industry, production and marketing strategies, authorial perspective
• nobilitation strategies: relations between horror and art cinema; post-horror, elevated horror, arthouse horror
• transformations of monstrosity: representations of disability and neurodivergence; reinterpretations of classic monstrous figures (e.g., the vampire, the werewolf) from queer, gender, and disability studies’ perspectives; horror in the context of posthumanism and transhumanism

No. 138 (Summer 2027)

BETWEEN SPECIES: CINEMA AND ANIMALS

(submission deadline: March 8, 2027)

The presence of animals in film history, as in history generally, remains elementary yet overlooked. We can the use of non-human beings in filmmaking as one field of their capitalist instrumentalisation. Film depicts animals in largely naive, romantic, and inevitably anthropomorphised ways. Such depictions serve, on the one hand, as compensatory examples of the human longing for a lost interspecies community. On the other hand, such depictions attempt to ease the remorse that stems from the marginalisation, objectification, and exploitation of animals.

Society grows ever more sensitive to the fate of non-human beings. Audiences show greater awareness of animal feelings, emotions, and needs, and greater concern for animal well-being. This sensitivity can be seen not only in our everyday coexistence with other species but also into cinema. Filmmakers increasingly seek solidarity with other living beings and create “ecological” and even “vegan” cinema (Anat Pick). But what does such cinema mean? By what means do filmmakers pursue this aim? Is such solidarity even possible?

Researchers increasingly try to transcend the anthropocentric paradigm of research on culture and its texts. As part of these attempts, we propose a reflection on inter- and multispecies cinema. Inspired by Éric Baratay’s famous works, we invite authors to write a “different history” of film or cinema that considers the “animal point of view.”

Attempts to apply the achievements of animal studies and human-animal studies to film studies still remain initial and exploratory. Therefore, we propose a broad spectrum of issues. Our interest covers empirical approaches, which concern practices towards animals on film sets, as well as textual and interpretative approaches, which focus on on-screen representations of the animals. Our interest also covers both case studies and more general theoretical reflections on human-animal relations across the cinema. We also would like the essays to include ethical reflection on how people treated, approached, and positioned other living species in filmmaking.

Examples of thematic areas:

• the use of different species in various film genres
• film depictions of specific animals and species in general
• images of animals from a transmedia perspective (travelling motifs, iconic figures, and recognisable symbols)
• animals in film from a transnational and transcultural perspective
• animal vs. human “movie stars”; animals as “extras” or “decorative elements” in film
• between cuteness and monstrosity – representations of animals reproduced by the film medium
• CGI and animation and the issue of surrealism/hyperbolism in presenting animals in cinema
• audiovisual content co-created with animals and/or addressed to animals
• film representations of non-existent/extinct animals (cryptozoology and zooarchaeology)
• cinematic uses of animal materiality (for example, meat, skin, fur, or antlers)
• film as a medium of the “anthropological machine” (Giorgio Agamben)
• examples of speciesism (Peter Singer) in film
• ethics, animal rights and welfare at the filmmaking process
• film as a tool for activism, spreading awareness about the fate of animals, and their empowerment
• strategies for approaching the “animal point of view” through film and audiovisual means
• anthropomorphisations of animals and animalisations of humans as strategies for blurring – or reinforcing? – the differences between human and non-human animals
• anthropocentric entanglement of film studies theories
• ecocriticism, posthumanism, postcolonialism, new materialism, and other paradigms for examining human-animal relations in cinema

No. 139 (Autumn 2027)

SURREALISMS

(submission deadline: May 31, 2027)

Throughout the century since the publication of André Breton’s first Manifesto of Surrealism, the meaning of the term has undergone constant transformations, interceptions, and reinterpretations. Early on understood as a closed pool of works made by artists linked to the interwar avant-garde, it is currently treated more openly and metaphorically: as a specific style, a creative or political attitude, even a particular way of thinking about the world. Today, we no longer perceive surrealism as a closed chapter in the history of the avant-garde. New generations of artists and researchers employ this strategy, and demonstrate that surrealism matures alongside our ever-changing reality. Surrealism can therefore constitute a living, constantly evolving form of reflection on both individual (un)consciousness and the dynamic transformation of the social world.

Cinema is one of the media in which methods of representation that go beyond realism are employed – it has been associated with the world of dreams and fantasy since its very beginnings, whilst also constituting one of the areas of the surrealists’ work and itself drawing on surrealist aesthetics and poetics. But does surrealism in film mean the same thing in the 21^st century as it did in the times of Man Ray, Salvador Dalí, and Luis Buñuel? And can we still speak of a single surrealism, or rather of a wealth of different schools, currents, and approaches to surrealism? How does classic surrealism relate to cinematic neo-baroque, magical realism, and Afro-surrealism? How is our understanding of the term evolving in an era of rapid technologically-driven changes?

In the upcoming issue of Kwartalnik Filmowy, we invite reflection on creative strategies that disrupt realism in various ways and for various purposes. We are interested in surrealisms that transcend Eurocentric historical definitions and are understood in a broadened sense: as aesthetics, narrative devices, ways of organising the viewer’s experience, and tools of social criticism. We wish to explore how filmmakers challenge the principles of realism, psychological plausibility, and the logic of cause and effect to depict contemporary reality and the experience of it in new ways.

Examples of thematic areas:

• surrealism as a way of recounting the experience of the modern world – between the destabilisation of the concept of truth and the perception of reality, and affectively charged and radically subjectivist forms of imagery
• surrealism as a tool of social criticism: distorted depictions of society, anti-capitalist, anti-establishment, anti-institutional, and anarchist surrealism, surrealism as a form of satire, the political contexts of surrealism
• surrealism as a reaction to the experience of oppression, exclusion, and violence – a form of escapism or the only available language for narrating traumatic experiences
• the affects of surrealism: between surrealism as an expression of despair and disillusionment with the world, and as a form of celebration, play, and exploration of the world’s boundlessness and ambiguity
• new forms of surrealism: Afro-surrealism, magical realism, neo-baroque, and others
• contemporary surrealist cinema in the face of technological change: new technologies and the internet as a surrealist space, social media as a distorting mirror, algorithmic surrealism, AI hallucinations, and other digital forms of derealisation (digital errors and glitches, virtual realities, AI aesthetics)
• cinematic techniques for creating a “surrealist effect” at the level of form (e.g., imagery, editing, sound, special effects) and content (e.g., intradiegetic distortions of cause-and-effect relations, the principles of “common sense,” comprehensibility, and psychological plausibility)
• surrealistic elements in various areas of contemporary filmmaking: arthouse cinema, so-called film d’auteur (e.g., David Lynch, Spike Jonze, Alejandro Jodorowsky, Yorgos Lanthimos, Terry Gilliam, and Boots Riley), and their infiltration into popular media (television, streaming)
• surrealism in relation to various forms, types, genres, and formats of film and television (e.g., documentary, mind-game film, horror)
• surrealistic imagery in animation (e.g., supernaturalism, the grotesque, and deformation)
• surrealist oneirism as a language of altered states of consciousness (hypnosis, dream, trance, psychedelic states, and other forms of unstable perception) – in relation to the psychological and psychoanalytic tradition (e.g., Freudian or Jungian symbolism)
• the dialogue between contemporary cinema and the legacy of surrealism: direct references and implicit connections with other visual arts, historical developments in surrealist film aesthetics
• surrealism today: between the avant-garde and the mainstream of audiovisual culture
• the scope of the concept of “surrealism” and its usefulness in contemporary film studies