After the moon landing, Gene Youngblood described the planet as entering a new era, which he called the “paleocybernetic age”. He believed the world was becoming a “videosphere” – a vast global closed circuit. This was made evident by the live broadcast of the “giant leap for mankind” on small television screens worldwide. This significant shift also impacted the big screen of the cinema, which quickly became “obsolete as a communicator of the objective human condition”. However, it encouraged cinema to explore its full potential, ultimately enabling the development of a distinct language and independent modes of fruition, separate from those of previous media (Youngblood, Expanded Cinema. New York and Vancouver: Dutton, 1970). Critical and historical studies on Expanded Cinema have often focused on its borderless and interdisciplinary nature, while neglecting the experiments related to the specificity of the medium of film. Shortly after the release of Culture: Intercom and Expanded Cinema. A Proposal and Manifesto by Stan VanDerBeek (Film Culture, 40, 15–18, 1966) and before the publication of Youngblood’s celebrated volume, Sheldon Renan attempted to shed light on the phenomenon in the last chapter of his book An Introduction to American Underground Film, pointing out that in the practice of Expanded Cinema “there has been a progression toward complexity. And there has been a progression toward simplicity” (Renan 1967, 104), and that these two progressions had produced two seemingly contradictory meanings of Expanded Cinema.