Subject: |  | Re: 4.28 Zimnik on Derrida |
From: | | [log in to unmask][log in to unmask]
6908 151 59_CINEMA AND OTHER ARTS - VI Domitor International Conference11_Sergio [log in to unmask], 13 Feb 2000 12:29:59 +0100689_iso-8859-1 CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
CINEMA AND OTHER ARTS
>From March 21st to 25th 2000 the University of Udine, in Italy,
organizes a unique event in the field of film studies:
the VI "Domitor" International Conference.
Following the last editions in New York, Paris and Washington D.C., the town of Udine, in Italy, will be, from March 21st to 25th the host of the biennial Conference of "Domitor", the worldwide association that gathers the best film history researchers and scholars, specifically of the so called "early cinema".
The films of that age have been forgotten for a long time, having become somehow invisible. [...]38_13Feb200012:29:[log in to unmask]
7060 34 32_Re: Shane versus American Beauty18_Krzysztof [log in to unmask], 13 Feb 2000 15:22:45 +0100498_us-ascii At 11:52 pm 12/2/0, Jeremy Bowman wrote:
>_Shane_ simply exploits some of the moral sensibilities that are already
>present in the viewer, and that seems to me to be an honest cinematic
>device. But _American Beauty_ does something much more sinister: it tries to
>plant *new* moral sensibilities in the viewer for political ends. I think
>that is dishonest, and makes for bad art into the bargain. Happily, it
>fails. (It failed with me, anyway.) [...]51_13Feb200015:22:[log in to unmask]
7095 98 38_Re: American Beauty versus The Insider15_Gustafson [log in to unmask], 13 Feb 2000 13:10:10 CST626_- I have been a long time watcher on this list but haven't yet
contributed.
I found American Beauty to be one of the most cohesively complete
movies I've seen in ages. As for being cinematically adroit -- that
simple, almost stark, cinematography spoke volumes. Lester's character
floats high and free in the beginning and the end. Yet almost every
shot in between confines the characters.
The picket fence confines Carolyn in her perfect yard (and life).
Lester is first seen confined by the window pane.
Characters are framed, and confined, by office cubicles, cars, and
video frames. [...]44_13Feb200013:10:[log in to unmask]
7194 35 10_Re: vision13_Julie [log in to unmask], 14 Feb 2000 12:40:16 JST774_- A more mainstream example is Spike Lee's Crooklyn. The distorted vision
comes with the young girl's experience of her visit to her suburban
relatives.
Julie Turnock
Hamamatsu Japan
>From: "lynda tenter" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>To: "film philosophy" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: vision
>Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 19:39:24 -0500
>
>Does anyone know of any films made which purposely blur the camera view, or
>do other things to create the view of someone near or far sighted (at
>length and with a thematic purpose, not just for a small bit of scene)?
>Any films which take a romantic view on it?
>
[...]41_14Feb200012:40:[log in to unmask]
7230 28 10_Re: vision17_Edward R. [log in to unmask], 13 Feb 2000 23:40:38 -0500616_iso-8859-1 Out-of-focus cinematography and racking focus are not unusual in classical
Hollywood cinema to represent the POV of drunken or otherwise disoriented
people--especially when losing or regaining consciousness.
In addition, Hitchcock uses the effect at certain moments: I believe in
_Stage Fright_ the protagonist dresses in a costume that includes
spectacles, and she can never quite see hers‹H„w |
Reply-To: | | Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]> |
Date: | | Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:10:17 EST |
Content-Type: | | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
|
|
|
Intriguing review but can anyone help me out a bit with the passage below:
<< Right when 'democratization', or that which goes by this name, has
made such 'progress', thanks precisely to those technologies that we just
talked about, when it progressed to the point that classical totalitarian
ideologies collapsed, in particular those represented by the soviet world,
the neo-liberal ideology of the market economy was no longer capable of
measuring up to its own power, right at that moment, the field has opened
up to the form of the return to oneself that is called 'small nationalism',
the nationalism of minorities, regional and provincial nationalism,
religious fundamentalism, that often goes with it and also attempts to
reconstitute nation-states; >>
The phrase I'm struggling with is "the neo-liberal ideology of the market
economy was no longer capable of measuring up to its own power." Derrida's
argument turns on this phrase but it seems so inactive. If democratization
"progressed to the point that classical totalitarian ideologies collapsed,"
how could it open onto small nationalism "right at that moment?" It was a
progression, no? And right at what moment? It couldn't be right at that
moment when the Soviet Union crumbled if indeed one can trace it to a moment.
Just look at the Me Decade or such films from its early years as Last Tango
in Paris, The Mother and The Whore and, I cannot resist, Some Call It Loving.
It appears, then, that this incapability on the part of the market economy
and small nationalism cannot fully explain one another. It appears as if
there has to be another "step" in between, some sort of registration of the
incapability. Can anyone delve a bit further into how neo-liberal ideology
spun out of control? What specific factors were at play in turning from
democratization to small nationalism?
Kevin John
|
|
|
|
|
