I live in a university town, and it’s pretty widely agreed upon that academia’s reaction time to what’s happening in the world can be rather delayed. So you can imagine my surprise when I found out, in a Washington Post article today, that some film schools are starting to offer courses geared toward creating content specifically for cell phones. I guess it’s time for me to snap to!

I personally have a difficult time imagining myself watching (or even wanting to) any kind of video on my cell phone, but I’m going to set that personal preference aside for the sake of the post. What I’ve really been curious about for a while, now, is what this content might actually be. Die Hard super-shrunk? Please no. Today’s article (”Filmmakers Face Some Big Challenges on Tiny Cellphones”) brought me up to speed, and even calmed my fears, a bit. Here’s an excerpt, detailing some of what’s being done by News Corp.’s Fox network, as well as the Sundance Institute:

Clearly, the medium must do more than shoehorn videos made for bigger screens into cellphones. Rather, producers will have to craft their work to reflect the unique qualities of cellphone video: its mobility, the short attention span of its audience, the growing ease with which users can send videos from one device to another.

It’s not surprising that early efforts at mobile video have some of the same irreverent, sometimes racy, qualities of YouTube. Amp’d Mobile, the wireless service that originally produced “Lil’ Bush,” has rolled out a number of sophomoric shows like “Swing Shift,” in which a former producer of “The Howard Stern Show” gets people to do disgusting things.

The Sundance filmmakers are targeting a more highbrow audience, but they’re also producing snack-size videos that viewers might be inclined to share. Ms. Faris and Mr. Dayton, the directors of the cinema hit Little Miss Sunshine, are doing a short that shows classic slapstick moments, like people slipping on banana peels, in super-slow motion.

The drawbacks of the medium are obvious, from tricky lighting and sound issues to a overall loss of detail. But maybe there’s a silver lining when it comes to the creative process, even in the eyes of people who, like me, scoff at the idea of watching anything on a two-inch screen. Think about this: Cellphones could provide a way for more people to see short films, an utterly underappreciated form that I love. Sadly, not everyone can get to good film festivals, where shorts have been relegated. What if every fourth person on the bus was watching a well-made short?

Another creative plus is that there can be great freedom within boundaries and restrictions. Think of poetry created within set forms. Think of music. When we’re restricted, we push ourselves creatively. The Post article says that filmmaker Maria Maggenti “…found it liberating that, when producing for the small screen, she didn’t have to focus on the details that movie makers obsess about.”

That’s something I can get behind. Not that I don’t love and appreciate the detail in great films, but I’m all about creating new forms that push artists in new, interesting ways. I’ll just have to see if I can get versions of these new shows and shorts for my laptop.