speaking of 'adopting phrases without thinking' I think everyone is using
the term 'Cartoonish violence' a little too loosely without thinking. It's
all very well using the phrase 'cartoonish' as a metaphor for lack of
realism in a film, but before comparing it to every violent scene shot in
any kind of fantastic/unreal setting, it should be pointed out that even the
term cartoon is not a true representation of the art form it is supposed to
represent. 'Cartoon' is merely a Disneyfied notion of an animated short (or
feature) which is intended for a young audience, due to comedic content and
pleasing imagery. The whole point about violence in cartoons, such as in
Chuch Jones or Tex Avery, WarnerBros. features is the comedy/entertainment
gained from the ludicrous nature of the extreme violence done to a character
who survives. This surely cannot be compared to a slightly 'dreamy',
stylised portrayal of vioplence in a film. In particular, the cop in
Resevoir Dogs does not survive in the next shot, the wife that is raped in
Clockwork Orange doesn't dust her self off to be as good as new and none of
the people murdered in NBK comes back to life. (plus in the case of the last
two films, the book and screen plays respectivley were far superior to the
films!) So until the violence in these films prove to be truly 'Cartoon' in
the comedic sense, it should not be used to compare what is going on in some
highly stylised graphically violent films.
(sorry it's a bit of a rant but i'm fed up reading all of this rubbish going
back and forward when it's not accurate!)
Nichola Dobson
Dept Media And Communication
Queen Margaret University College
Edinburgh
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Barker <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: Violence as phony. . .
> Gary Norris is another who is adopting phrases without thinking
> carefully enough about the meanings. he accuses Tarantino of
> 'sensationalism' and 'extorting responses'. Just on sensationalism, can
> I suggest you read Thomas Boyle's BLACK SWINE IN TH SEWERS OF HAMPSTEAD
> - I am not making up that title, I wish I had that much nous - which
> brilliantly demonstrates the hypocritical elitism which underlay the
> emergence of that concept as a language for rejecting the popular press
> in the early nineteenth century.
>
> Given the prevalence of moralising refusers of films, I would have
> thought that film academics have a responsibility to be a tad more
> cautious, if not analytic, in their ways of talking about films.
>
> Martin Barker
|