Print

---

Hello

I would like to unsubscribe please. Thank you.

 

Damian Kozak

 

 

Użytkownik Automatic digest processor napisał:
>There are 10 messages totalling 353 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
> 1. horror (4)
> 2. self-conscious film and The Horror
> 3. Film on film and self-conscious film (2)
> 4. interracial sex in hollywood films. (2)
> 5. Films on Filmmaking
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:30:53 +1000
>From: Katy Stevens
>Subject: Re: horror
>
>>
>> Recently I caught a glimpse of the old Texas CM, which was just stupid.
>
>Such an astute and nuanced response. Your following comments
>certainly did nothing to support your already reductive position on horror.
>
>I\'m not interested in a slinging match here as clearly we are going to get
>nowhere particularly interesting considering your blind bias toward the
genre
>(assuming the only valuable elements/films within horror are those which
>"transcend" it) but I wanted to at least be counted as another voice in
support
>of the value of horror (and I\'m talking \'pure\' horror, not \'thriller\'
diversions
>which water down the viscerality and affect). That you could so solidly
reject
>such a large and (aesthetically, politically, culturally...) diverse genre
in
>spite of the body of theoretical work exploring its significance and
import(as
>diverse as this also is and well noted by another member of the list) is a
>pretty clear signal that your preconceptions are unsusceptible to the
influence
>of debate.
>
>And me being such a fervent fan and attendant scholar... ;)
>
>Katy
>>Exorcist\' and all other horror cinema which wakes me up and creates an
artistic
>and intellectual stir>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 08:31:32 -0400
>From: Susanna Chandler
>Subject: self-conscious film and The Horror
>
>It is difficult to imagine what it is about TCM which *stirs* someone into
a state which transcends stupidity, if not horror. Yet, an emotional
stimulation, is an emotional stimulation, is an emotional stimulation.
Perhaps the ultimate in hack movies is what it takes to counteract against
the culturally deadening effects of consumerism on art, or just plain old
entertainment.
>
>An excellent film about horror films is Gods and Monsters. It speaks to our
poetic Vietnam Veteran, the relationship of materialism to horror, and how
the destruction of love creates monsters. James Whale brought monsters to
the screen who were far more memorable and moving than any of the *normal*,
otherwise happily domesticated, people. The Dr. Frankenstein\'s of this
world, worked as the dark link between our twisted ambitions and psyches,
and the terrible outcomes this can bring about.
>
>Have just discover Whale Rider is still playing in town, will definitely
see that over Kill Bill.
>
>Best, Susanna Chandler
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 06:43:50 -0700
>From: "Rutger H. Cornets de Groot"
>Subject: Re: Film on film and self-conscious film
>
>-Hollywood Ending
>-C\'est arriv=E9 pr=E8s de chez vous
>-Blair Witch Project
>-Snake Eyes=20
>-In the Soup
>
>And there are many oldies too: The Last Tycoon, and
>the one cited in the beginning of Scorsese\'s journey
>(I forgot the title).
>
>Rutger
>--- Nader Tubbeh wrote:
>
>---------------------------------
>
>Hi. I\'m writing a paper on films that deal with
>filmmaking itself, or the nature of filmmaking, such
>as Fellini 8 1/2 or Godard\'s "Contempt". If anyone
>could help me to gather some titles, be it text on the
>subject or examples of films in this small category, I
>would be thankful. I\'m also interested in finding
>films that are self-conscient, that disengage from the
>story to show that the viewer that what they are
>seeing is pure text. Thanks.
>
>Nader
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan
>Online=20
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
>http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 06:47:14 -0700
>From: "Rutger H. Cornets de Groot"
>Subject: Re: Film on film and self-conscious film
>
>--- Patricia Molloy wrote:
>> I\'d also include Haneke\'s Funny
>> Games come to think of
>> it.
>>
>Patricia,
>
>Can you explain why?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Rutger
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
>http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 07:14:42 -0700
>From: ramesh
>Subject: Re: interracial sex in hollywood films.
>
>I find that the 1950\'s were very frank in the dialog about interracial sex
>in American films. Sirk ( Imitation of life, All that heaven allows)
pointed
>at interracial love as a laudible way of becoming a social norm. Films like
>cassavetes shadows were also very normal about the existance of and
>attitudes towards interracial love. Even the southerners got into the act
>with films like To kill a mockingbird.
>
>I guess it reflected the attitudes of the post war Beat generation and the
>jazz clubs of harlem.
>
>I then see a concious movement in popular films in the sixties (that
>coincides with the beatles generation and the fall of phil spector...or
>louis armstrong/ miles davis from pop culture grace) towards justifying
race
>based love (ie gentle or active discouragement of love between the US
>concept of race(white/black) while simultaneously glorifying "intra race"
>love as an all pervading force..ie, the WASP falls gloriously in love with
>an Italian on the wrong side of the tracks in a show of rebellion in Love
>Story..,The scions of the jets and the sharks go at it in The West Side
>Story, A middle class WASP falls in love with Michael Corleone in The
>Godfather ).
>
>It\'s difficult to say wether the industry thought it was taking baby steps
>in racial reconciliation by doing this or if it was sublimating the impulse
>of people to fall in love outside (what are really) artificial and mutating
>racial boundaries in the US(after all the meditteranian "races" were just
>recently "white" in the sixties), by starting relatively close to the
shades
>of "white" in the spectrum. Maybe it tried to do both, thus effectively
>postponing debate until the society was willing to show more maturity.
> The effect however was to put the elephant in the room amidst a deafening
>silence on the issue of race in film.
>
>Ramesh.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:01:33 -0400
>From: "Shaw, Dan"
>Subject: Re: interracial sex in hollywood films.
>
>UmFtZXNoOg0KIA0KICAgIFVubGlrZSBIYXluZXMnIGhvbWFnZSAiRmFyIGZyb20gSGVhdmVuIiwg
>U2lyaydzIG9yaWdpbmFsICJBbGwgVGhhdCBIZWF2ZW4gQWxsb3dzIiB3YXMgc29sZWx5IGFib3V0
>IGFnZSBhbmQgY2xhc3MuLi53aXRoIHVwcGVyIGNsYXNzIHdpZG93IEphbmUgV3ltYW4gZmFsbGlu
>ZyBmb3IgaGVyIHlvdW5nZXIgZ2FyZGVuZXIgaHVuaywgUm9jayBIdWRzb24uICBJIGRvbid0IGV2
>ZW4gcmVtZW1iZXIgYSBwZXJzb24gb2YgY29sb3IgaW4gaXQuDQogDQpEYW4gU2hhdyAgDQoNCgkg
>DQoNCg==
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:13:16 -0400
>From: Andrew Lesk
>Subject: Re: horror
>
>Quoting Katy Stevens :
>> > Recently I caught a glimpse of the old Texas CM, which was just stupid.
>>
>> Such an astute and nuanced response. Your following comments
>> certainly did nothing to support your already reductive position on
horror.
>
>And thank you, Katy, for your reductive judgement.
>
>> I\'m not interested in a slinging match here as clearly we are going to
get
>> nowhere particularly interesting considering your blind bias toward the
>> genre (assuming the only valuable elements/films within horror are those
which
>> "transcend" it) but I wanted to at least be counted as another voice in
>> support of the value of horror (and I\'m talking \'pure\' horror, not
\'thriller\'
>> diversions which water down the viscerality and affect). That you could
>> so solidly reject such a large and (aesthetically, politically,
>> culturally...) diverse genre in spite of the body of theoretical
>> work exploring its significance and import(as diverse as this also is and
>> well noted by another member of the list) is a pretty clear signal that
>> your preconceptions are unsusceptible to the influence of debate.
>
>Thank you for avoiding "slinging matches" by stating that I have "blind
bias"
>and am "unsusceptible to the influence of debate." But then again, I
presume
>that you haven\'t actually read what I\'ve written or you would be as
willingly
>negligent.
>
>For those of you, like Katy, who wish to dismiss my comments again, I will
>state them again:
>
>1) I have seen horror films (Halloween, TCM etc). I think they are, by and
>large, worthless entries. And why? Well....
>2) The supposed "art" of such films is not to be confused with "craft",
that
>is, the putting together of such films (the people who work on the sets,
etc).
>3) People are beholden, in their arguments supporting the study of schlock
>horror films, by volume. It seems to me that if such films were few, they
>would end up largely ignored. They may indeed constitute, by their very
>numbers, a genre. Fine. Yet that it is a genre and a subject of study does
>NOT mean that schlock horror films yet have any merit *simply because of
those
>academic studies.* The argument for study-means-merit puts the cart before
the
>horse. This ties into the volume argument: one might argue that McDonald\'s
>makes might good food based on "billions sold." (And indeed, that is what
>McDonald\'s does.)
>4) Arguments that mistake the thrill-of-it-all as meaning that it does have
>worth is really misleading. Being able to respond to something emotionally
>does not mean that the object of such a response constitutes "art." I could
>get hit in the head by a rock; the pain and anger I would feel does not
>constitute the makings of "art."
>5) I don\'t consider "The Exorcist" and "Alien" to be horror films. I am
>speaking largely of slice-and-dice films that attempt to dress themselves
up as
>something they are not. They are repetitious, formulaic, and dull. They are
>made solely for profit.
>6) I am well aware of theory, as I majored in it. I am also aware that
theory
>has a tendency to create objects of study in a fashion not unlike self-
>fulfilling prophecy. Like the repetitious studies of repetitious horror
films.
>
>Andrew
>
>
>Andrew Lesk
>
>http://courses.ece.utoronto.ca/eng252yl0101
>http://www.andrewlesk.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:23:00 -0400
>From: "Shaw, Dan"
>Subject: Re: horror
>
>Dear Andrew:
>
> What you seem to decry, then, is films in the "slasher" subgenre of =
>horror...which, with a few exceptions (like Halloween), I agree are =
>cheap and exploitative. While Ridley Scott\'s "Alien" can be classified =
>as sci-fi (though its sequel, James Cameron\'s "Aliens" is certainly of =
>the Bug Eyed Monster type), all major lists of good horror films feature =
>"The Exorcist" as an archetype. =20
>
>Dan
>
>
>5) I don\'t consider "The Exorcist" and "Alien" to be horror films. I am
>speaking largely of slice-and-dice films that attempt to dress =
>themselves up as something they are not. They are repetitious, =
>formulaic, and dull. They are made solely for profit.
>
>Andrew
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 12:15:30 -0400
>From: Andrew Lesk
>Subject: Re: horror
>
>Quoting "Shaw, Dan" :
>> What you seem to decry, then, is films in the "slasher" subgenre of
>> horror...which, with a few exceptions (like Halloween), I agree are cheap
and
>> exploitative. While Ridley Scott\'s "Alien" can be classified as sci-fi
>> (though its sequel, James Cameron\'s "Aliens" is certainly of the Bug
Eyed
>> Monster type), all major lists of good horror films feature "The
Exorcist" as
>> an archetype.
>
>You may be right, Dan, but then I would have to call into question the
basis
>for this: how can one compare a film like "The Exorcist"--finely directed,
>acted, edited, produced, scored...intelligent, nuanced, "about"
something--to
>(to use my favourite current whipping boy) the new TCM? UNLESS...unless
those
>studying/classifying the horror genre are one of two minds: (1) They are
>attempting a study of the "subgenre" slasher flicks and need to drag in
quality
>films in order to bolster their claim to study; or (2) They realize that
films
>like "The Exorcist" are really more of a serious drama study but don\'t
know how
>to account for some of the special effects. I would tend to put "TE" in the
>same category of American films such as "Raging Bull" or "The Ice Storm."
That
>the girl in "TE", in her state of possession, is violent etc does not mean
that
>the film either revovles around or is wholly dependent upon such moments
(in
>perhaps the way that slasher films are). The "Alien" saga I would group
with
>thrillers such as "Starship Troopers."
>
>Andrew
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 12:56:30 EDT
>From: Richard Armstrong
>Subject: Films on Filmmaking
>
>--part1_134.269614f1.2cc41c3e_boundary
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Nader,
>Day for Night (Truffaut),
>Living in Oblivion (DiCillo),
>Film Johnny (Chaplin),
>The last C Breillat?
>Richard
>
>--part1_134.269614f1.2cc41c3e_boundary
>Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>>=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">Nader,

>Day for Night (Truffaut),

>Living in Oblivion (DiCillo),

>Film Johnny (Chaplin),

>The last C Breillat?

>Richard

>
>--part1_134.269614f1.2cc41c3e_boundary--
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of FILM-PHILOSOPHY Digest - 19 Oct 2003 (#2003-326)
>*******************************************************
>

*
*
*
*
***

Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.

After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.

If you have any questions about salon membership then email: [log in to unmask]

***