Internal and external readings tools of film: Viewing from within and beyond

Time of India

13-06-2025

Dr. Nithin Kalorth is an Associate Professor of Film and Animation at Bahrain Polytechnic, Kingdom of Bahrain, with over 15 years of experience in teaching, research, and media production. He holds a PhD in Mass Communication and Journalism, specializing in screen media, film studies, and visual culture from Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala. His teaching spans digital filmmaking, editing, and documentary production, with a strong foundation in visual communication and digital media theory. Dr. Kalorth's research focuses on OTT media, rural digital literacy, media pedagogy, and the intersection of technology and culture. He has edited multiple Scopus-indexed books and led funded research projects supported by ICSSR and Internews. His scholarly work contributes to film studies, global conversations on platform studies, digital inclusion, and visual communication. Actively engaged in institutional development, Dr. Kalorth was part of the founding faculty teams at the media schools of Bennett University and Mahindra University, where he played a key role in curriculum design and academic planning. He also contributes to quality assurance initiatives in higher education. He has served as a subject matter expert and curriculum consultant for both industry and academia, including organizations such as TCS and BITS. He is a jury member at international school film festivals, including in Oman, and is affiliated with networks like South Asian Media Studies and the Asian Australian Research Studies Network. LESS ... MORE
During film scholarship, one often begins by asking: How do I study a film? Is it through its story, characters, editing, and cinematography? Or is it through its relation to the world outside the screen — the people who made it, their social positions, or the cultural climate it emerges from?
Both paths are valid. Both are necessary. But they serve different purposes and stem from different methodological commitments. This blog is an attempt to provide a short guide for early film scholars on how to approach a film through internal and external readings — and how balancing the two can enrich our critical understanding, while also posing certain challenges.
Internal reading: Textual and narrative study
An internal reading focuses on what is inside the film — its narrative structure, cinematic language, mise-en-scène, sound design, representation, and genre conventions. This kind of analysis treats the film as a self-contained text, asking questions such as:
What story is the film telling, and how?
How are characters represented in terms of gender, class, race, or power?
What creative choices contribute to the film's tone or message?
How does editing, camera movement, and sound create meaning?
This method is often grounded in textual analysis, structuralism, or auteur theory, where the emphasis is on the artistry and internal logic of the film itself. It gives us tools to interpret how meaning is constructed cinematically, independent of external references.
External reading: Contextual and cultural study
On the other hand, an external reading steps outside the film's diegesis and narrative. It is concerned with the people and structures that create and circulate the film—production background, industry dynamics, sociopolitical climate, or the personal histories of those involved.
Here, the scholar may examine:
Who are the filmmakers, and what histories or ideologies do they bring?
How does the film respond to current events or social movements?
What is the role of the audience and reception in understanding the film?
Does the inclusion of certain actors, creators, or settings carry symbolic meaning beyond the narrative?
For example, a filmmaker may cast a particular figure as a symbolic act of solidarity or critique — and this casting might hold meaning regardless of the story being told. This external lens can bring forward symbolic justice, political commentary, or industrial critique that the narrative itself may not explicitly articulate.
When the two merge (or collide)
In practice, many scholars blend internal and external approaches — a hybrid mode that tries to contextualize films both as texts and cultural artifacts. This is often encouraged in academic study because it allows for richer, multi-layered analysis. The social media posts and comments on a film often encounter this merging which results in many 'ifs and buts' – which is fine for social media or general writing. But for a serious film researcher, it presents a risk: the lack of a clear methodological stance. Jumping between internal and external readings without a guiding framework can weaken the argument, leading to interpretations that feel speculative or inconsistent. A film may be politically radical in its story but conservative in its production context — or vice versa. As a scholar, the challenge is to acknowledge these tensions without reducing the film to either its text or its context alone.
Why this distinction matters
Understanding whether you're doing an internal or external reading — or deliberately combining both — is important for several reasons:
It helps clarify your critical position.
It keeps your methodology accountable.
It prevents the erasure of material realities in the name of pure aesthetics.
It allows room for ethical or political interpretations without overshadowing formal analysis.
Influences and related theoretical work
While this framework may seem intuitive, it resonates with some established scholarly traditions:
Cultural Studies (particularly work from the Birmingham School) has long argued that films cannot be separated from their social context and audience reception.
Laura Mulvey's feminist film theory bridges internal form (the gaze) and external ideology.
Reception Studies and Paratextual Theory (as seen in the work of Jonathan Gray) emphasize that meaning extends beyond the text.
Auteur theory, in contrast, places emphasis on internal coherence shaped by the filmmaker's signature but is now often critiqued for neglecting broader context.
However, this precise formulation — the division of internal and external film readings as two distinct but equally valid methodologies — is still underexplored in contemporary pedagogy. Framing it clearly can help students better organize their critical thought.
Final thoughts: A starting point, not a rule
Internal and external readings are not opposing camps. They are tools. One looks at the world within the film, the other looks at the film within the world. Early film scholars can benefit from experimenting with both approaches — but should always be conscious of why they choose one over the other, and what assumptions come with each.
Understanding this balance is not only an academic exercise. It is a political one. It shapes how we write about films, teach them, and engage with them as cultural texts. Let this distinction be your starting point, not your boundary.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author's own.