[Agamben, Giorgio. 2009. What Is an Apparatus? and Other Essays. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bazin, André. 1967. My Total Cinema. In What is Cinema?, 16–21. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Beller, Jonathan. 2006. The Cinematic Mode of Production: Attention Economy and the Society of the Spectacle. Lebanon, N. H.: University Press of New England.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bellour, Raymond. 2012. Between-the-Images. Zürich, Dijon: JRP Ringier & Les Presses du Réel.]Search in Google Scholar
[Belting, Hans. 2005. Image, Medium, Body: A New Approach to Iconology. Critical Inquiry vol. 31, no. 2 (Winter): 302–319.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bolter, Jay David and Richard Grusin. 2000. Remediation. Understanding New Media, Cambridge, MA – London: The MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brown, William. 2016. Non-Cinema: Digital, Ethics, Multitude. Film Philosophy vol. 20, no. 1: 104–130.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brown, William. 2018. Non-Cinema: Global Digital Filmmaking and the Multitude. New York, London, Oxford, New Delhi and Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic.]Search in Google Scholar
[Foucault, Michel. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books.]Search in Google Scholar
[Foucault, Michel. 1983. This is Not a Pipe. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Langford, Michelle. 2015. Iranian Cinema and Social Media. In Social Media in Iran: Politics and Society after 2009, eds. David M. Faris and Babak Rahimi, 251–269. New York: Suny Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Marks, Laura U. 2013. Thinking Like a Carpet: Embodied Perception and Individuation in Algorithmic Media. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Film and Media Studies vol. 7: 7–20.]Search in Google Scholar
[Naficy, Hamid. 2001. An Accented Cinema. Exilic and Diasporic Filmmaking. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691186214]Search in Google Scholar
[Nagib, Lúcia. 2014. The Politics of Impurity. In Impure Cinema. Intermedial and Intercultural Approaches to Film, eds. Lúcia Nagib and Anne Jerslev, 21–39. London and New York: I. B. Tauris.10.5040/9780755694389.ch-002]Search in Google Scholar
[Nagib, Lúcia. 2016. Non-Cinema, or the Location of Politics in Film. Film-Philosophy vol. 20, no. 1: 131–148.]Search in Google Scholar
[Niazi, Sarah. 2010. Urban Imaginations and the Cinema of Jafar Panahi. Wide Screen vol. 1, no. 2: 1–14. http://widescreenjournal.org. Last accessed 05. 06. 2018.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rasmussen, Terje. 2014. Personal Media and Everyday Life: A Networked Lifeworld. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137446466]Search in Google Scholar
[Richardson, Joanne. 2000. Est-Ethics of Counter-Documentary. ARTMargins Online June 16. http://www.artmargins.com/index.php/featured-articles-sp-829273831/421-est-ethics-of-counter-documentary. Last accessed 14. 04. 2018.]Search in Google Scholar
[Romney, Jonathan. 2015. Taxi Tehran Review – Jafar Panahi’s Joy Ride. The Guardian November 1. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/nov/01/taxi-tehran-review-admirable-jafar-panahi-takes-to-the-streets. Last accessed 23. 06. 2018.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ryzik, Melena. 2010. Strange Bedfellows: Koch and London Critics Heap Praise on ‘King’s Speech. December 21. https://carpetbagger.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/strange-bedfellows-koch-and-london-critics-heap-praise-on-kings-speech/. Last accessed 12. 06. 2018.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rosen, Philip. 2014. From Impurity to Historicity. In Impure Cinema. Intermedial and Intercultural Approaches to Film, eds. Lúcia Nagib and Anne Jerslev, 3–20. London and New York: I. B. Tauris.10.5040/9780755694389.ch-001]Search in Google Scholar
[Schröter, Jens. 2010. The Politics of Intermediality. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Film and Media Studies 2: 107–124.]Search in Google Scholar
