many thanks to adrian for pointing this out , and for directing us, yet once more, to the deep well that is the bordwell website

and this  leads me to want to offer one other expression of thanks, and that is to david bordwell himself   for his indispensible role in the contemporary conversation about film . . . we may not always agree with him [this happens occasionally] , and when we do agree with him we may find that the questions he's ans wering so successfully are not the ones that matter most to us [this may happen more often]

still, without him all of our thinking about film would be much the poorer . . . there's no one else who can provide so careful and comprehensive an overview of almost all corners of the world of the moving image . . . one might be tempted to use the word magisterial about his work, were it not always so straightforward in tone and l ucid in exposition , and were his ethos not always so down to earth and sensible -- sensible even when we may think him wrong  

bravo, kudos and -- from at least one cinema studies guy -- an enormous debt of gratitude!!

mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Film-Philosophy Salon [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adrian Martin

Uncanny! (The Freudian uncanny??) There happens to be a comment on

mirror neurons in relation to viewer identification that I just

stumbled upon at David Bordwell's fascinating blog site (in the entry

on UNITED 93):

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/

But all this cognitivism is depressing me (quick, give me a pill).

Bring back Freud! All hail the unconscious!!

Adrian

**

* * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to. To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]. For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon. **