wˌaɪl ðə tˈɜːm ɪz sˈʌmwʌt vˈeɪɡ, ʃiː jˈuːzᵻz ɪt tə dᵻskɹˈaɪb wˌaɪ ðɛɹ ɪz ˈeɪ "dɪzˈaɪɚ wˌɪtʃ flˈoʊz θɹuː ˈɔːl hˌuː wˈɔnt sˈɪnəmə æz ɐ lˈʌvɚ," wˌaɪ fˈɪlm kæn fˈiːl ɪɹˈɑːɾɪk, wˈɛðɚ sˈʌtʃ ɪntˈɛns fˈiːlɪŋz mˈeɪ biː ɛksplˈeɪnd baɪ ɐ sˈaɪkɪk mˈɑːdəl ʌv "tˈɛnʃən ænd ɹᵻlˈiːs," ænd wˌaɪ ðɛɹ ɪz ðˈɪs "fˈɪzɪkəl plˈɛʒɚɹ ʌv sˈɪnəmə" wˌɪtʃ sˈʌmtaɪmz mˈænɪfˌɛsts ɪtsˈɛlf ɪn æn "ɪɹˈɑːɾɪk ænd səbvˈɜːsɪv" wˈeɪ.
While the term is somewhat vague, she uses it to describe why there is a "desire which flows through all who want cinema as a lover," why film can feel erotic, whether such intense feelings may be explained by a psychic model of "tension and release," and why there is this "physical pleasure of cinema" which sometimes manifests itself in an "erotic and subversive" way.