Is 1945 a rupture or a model?
Postwar Europe is a crucial constellation, not the sole birthplace of the time-image.
The current verifiable sample contains 75 researchers across English-, French-, German-, Italian-, Spanish-, Portuguese-, Chinese-, Japanese-, and Korean-language contexts. It is not a global census but an extensible map with explicit inclusion criteria.
These are bounded scoping-review estimates, not precise global totals. Citation counts, one-off terminology, or database hits do not automatically establish research depth.
Do not first ask who is closest to Deleuze. Ask which problem each interpretation changes, what it sacrifices, and what it opens.
Postwar Europe is a crucial constellation, not the sole birthplace of the time-image.
The time-image reverses the subordination of time to movement without abolishing the movement-image; local shifts can occur within one film.
Adding countries is insufficient; world cinemas must be allowed to modify the taxonomy itself.
Fixed labels invite mere example-hunting; an open taxonomy requires new concepts to transform existing relations and explain across cases.
The neuro-image, no-time-image, and interface theories test the boundary, but no third regime has achieved consensus.
No. Non-linearity can serve nostalgia, trauma markets, control, or paralysis; ask who may see, who must wait, and whose past is preserved.
Test at least four layers—sensory-motor relation, actual/virtual circuit, audio-visual connection, and regime of truth—instead of labelling slow shots.
Filter by system, history, body, digital, death, and Chinese-language research. Affiliation is not nationality, and studied region is not author location.
75 verifiable researchers
Reconstructs the Cinema books as a time machine of signs, time, truth, and thought, extending the inquiry toward the ethico-political relation between world and time in audiovisual culture.
Offers one of the clearest guides to Deleuze’s taxonomy of cinematic signs and connects the time-image to the ethical problem of restoring belief in this world.
Rejects the reduction of films to illustrations of philosophy, arguing that cinema independently creates problems of time and subjectivity that compel philosophy to invent concepts.
Consolidated the early English-language field through The Brain Is the Screen and foregrounded the immanent relation among image, screen, brain, and thought.
Reconstructs the complete taxonomy through cineosis and proposes the three passive syntheses of time as a generative account of nine time-image signs.
Uses ciné-system, TransSemiotics, and ciné-ethics to turn taxonomy into an open relational system generated across bodies, technologies, sound, space, and affect.
Reads the transition as a move from organic totality to gaps, fractures, and the impossibility of thought, keeping philosophy in close contact with films.
Mounts the strongest challenge to mapping movement-image and time-image onto two epochs divided by 1945, prompting later accounts in terms of tendencies, polarities, and analytical regimes.
De-centres Europe through national and world cinemas, allowing films from Hong Kong, India, Korea, Argentina, Iran, and elsewhere to modify the taxonomy rather than merely fill it.
Argues that there are as many routes to the time-image as there are films, opening the concept to religion, genre hybridity, digital bodies, and local aesthetics while exposing the risk of over-expansion.
Emphasizes the persistence of the movement-image in modern and contemporary cinema, shifting the field from historical replacement to coexistence, mixture, and local transformation.
Proposes the intensive-image to connect movement, time, body, sound, and space, contesting a rigid assignment of classical and modern cinema to separate regimes.
Develops an aesthetics of sensation in which colour, rhythm, movement, desire, and molecular bodies make time felt as bodily tension and intensity.
Develops haptic visuality, extending the past in intercultural and diasporic cinema from mental memory to skin, food, fabric, sound, and multisensory embodiment.
Studies dreams, hallucination, trance, ecstasy, and altered states, focusing on how sound, colour, and rhythm induce states in viewers rather than merely represent them.
Reads musical moments as temporal interruptions that reorganize space, body, and history, while warning that interruption can also reproduce gendered, racial, and class conventions.
Uses performance and affect to show sensory-motor crises within American genre cinema, challenging the confinement of the time-image to European art film.
Develops cinemasochism as an ethics of relinquishing interpretive mastery and allowing cinematic intensities to traverse the body, making passivity a condition of perceptual reorganization.
Extends the crystal-image to photography, resisting the view of the photograph as merely a frozen or dead past and opening it to virtual futures and depths of recollection.
Brings time into documentary, archives, and social memory, examining how waiting, retrospection, archival recomposition, and sound relations construct nonfictional time.
Proposes the neuro-image: viewers no longer see only through a character’s eyes but move through brains, networked memories, and informational landscapes.
Proposes the no-time-image, reading digital media’s wish to resist fading, wear, ageing, and material death as a negative illumination of the time-image’s materiality.
Uses the digital human assemblage to study how effects fork bodily age, identity, and temporal direction, turning bodies into continuously rewritable data composites.
Uses the quasi-interface to show that crystalline relations can inhabit screens-within-screens, digital surfaces, object networks, and layered interfaces without depending on mirror imagery.
Extends the time-image into video, installation, electronic art, and interactive media, asking how databases, storage, interfaces, and computation produce time.
Develops digitime to examine how digital technologies rewrite cinematic time, mnemonics, and the frame, bringing media infrastructure into temporal analysis.
Conceptualizes the death-image through disappearance, finitude, coexistence of past and present, and future nonexistence entering the present—not as a label for films about death.
Co-edited the 2025 Death-Images issue, defining the death-image as a constellation of heterogeneous strategies and retesting Cinema 2 through films made after 1985.
Co-edited the Death-Images issue, placing life, death, history, and post-1985 cinema within an open time-image research agenda.
Co-edited the Death-Images issue, advancing intersections among the time-image, disappearance, material images, and contemporary cinema.
Systematizes perception, affection, recollection, and thought in Living Images, establishing a major Chinese-language entry into Deleuze’s theory of cinema.
Moves from thought-image to the conditions of thought = image, linking non-chronological time, non-representation, and non-identity to virtuality.
Connects time-crystals, neuro-images, deepfakes, and algorithmic politics, using negativity to revise one-sided optimism about becoming and virtuality.
Highlights the spatial problem of the time-image in Chinese lectures: any, heterogeneous, and multiple spaces undo the natural unity of action and space.
Challenges language- and representation-centred film theory through the cinematic body, intensity, and passive feeling, anticipating affective and post-cinematic turns.
Connects the history of modern film style with time, narration, and Deleuzian modernity and is a recurring contributor to the central edited collections.
Approaches Deleuzian film philosophy through space, globalization, and national cinema; part of the verifiable core edited-volume sample.
Brings work on difference, perception, and philosophical aesthetics into the Cinema books as an important early interdisciplinary voice.
Situates Deleuze within film-theory history, the Bazinian tradition, and world cinema, helping locate his place in cinema studies.
Provides rigorous philosophical grounding through work on event, literality, and Deleuzian concept creation.
Extends cinematic experience through space, travel, architecture, and affective mapping within the embodied turn organized by Afterimages.
Approaches cinema through Deleuze’s image of thought, literature, and philosophical expression, contributing to cross-media dialogue in the core collections.
Connects Deleuze–Guattari studies, cultural studies, and film analysis as an organizer and contributor in the English-language field.
Places historicity, time, and cinematic thought within a longer trajectory from Romanticism to modern culture.
Approaches Deleuzian cinema through folds, worlds, and multiplicities, representing the encounter of Francophone philosophy and film studies.
Contributes work on Deleuze in modern thought, art, and architecture to the early formation of the cinema–brain–thought field.
Studies writing, montage, and Blanchot-inflected thought in audio-visual relations, a key point of entry from Francophone film theory.
Studies digital cinema, materiality, and modes of image existence, contributing to the turn from the time-image toward digital ontology.
Participates in the foundational English-language edited discussion of Deleuzian film philosophy, thought, and audiovisual form.
Approaches Deleuze through affect, gender, embodiment, and film form, extending the experiential dimension of the original taxonomy.
Contributes to the foundational Brain Is the Screen discussion through cinema, time, and philosophical concept creation.
Develops the space between images across cinema, photography, video, and installation, a key reference for intermedial time and spectatorship.
Uses gender, space, and Deleuzian film concepts in the central edited collections, extending embodied and political analysis.
A recurring contributor across core collections, linking maps, space, writing, and Deleuzian film philosophy.
Connects Deleuzian philosophy with aesthetics, war, and contemporary art, grounding political and visual-cultural extensions of film philosophy.
Represents sustained Lusophone work connecting Deleuzian film philosophy with education, thought, and Latin American moving images.
Places Deleuzian film philosophy within the reciprocal risks of seeing, speaking, and thinking, while connecting film aesthetics, political images, and contemporary media at Paris 8.
Treats movement and time as zones of interference between cinematic and philosophical practices, showing why the Cinema books are neither film history nor applied philosophy.
Reads Deleuze through relations among sound, sensation, and thought, treating cinema as an audiovisual practice that reorganizes perception rather than a merely visible object.
Offers an early Francophone account of how Deleuze turns cinema, movement, and time into philosophical problems across the two Cinema books.
Brings becoming, embodiment, and affect into concrete film analysis through a feminist method that also tests the taxonomy against gendered spectatorship.
Reworks cinematic perception, common sense, and temporality through Black feminist and queer theory, testing Deleuze against racialized visibility and Black femme subjectivity.
Asks what cinema does for Deleuze’s philosophy itself, organizing interval, disaster, duration, and the crystal-image into a thought of the world.
Uses Marker, Resnais, and Second World War images to study untimely affect, memory, and cinematic ethics, linking the time-image to irreducible historical trauma.
Studies bodies in postdigital cinema through suspense, time, and affect, treating the body not as time’s container but as a surface where temporal difference happens.
Distinguishes philosophy’s creation of concepts from cinema’s thinking in blocks of movement/duration, then develops the cinecept through Godard–Miéville’s audiovisual practice.
Carries the cinematic outside and out-of-field into digital images, information, noise, and control, testing how digital media can both close and compel thought.
Derives a method of film analysis from Deleuze’s transformation of structuralism and extends relational, semiotic, and differentiating structures into platform images.
Provides an open Spanish-language route through movement-image, time-image, and labyrinthine image relations for Latin American readers.
Connects Deleuze, cinematic narrativity, video, and new media in Lusophone scholarship and built a durable image-research node through N-Imagem at UFRJ.
Advances Japanese Deleuze studies through the interpenetration of body, image, and becoming and contributed to the Japanese reception of Cinema 2.
Connects philosophy of life, moving images, and East Asian Deleuze communities through research projects, regional networks, and close-reading courses on Cinema.
Offers an early Japanese-language account of the image’s monism/dualism and of the overall structure of the Cinema books.
Differentiates layers of croyance in the Cinema books, clarifying narrative belief, relation to the world, and the ethics of modern cinema.
Extends the Cinema books in Korean scholarship toward spectator-images, network-images, and contemporary Asian cinema, updating the taxonomy through spectatorship and digital culture.