SCREEN-L Archives

September 1995, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
William Orr <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 6 Sep 1995 16:20:23 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Good point Mark.  You remind me of Performance by Roeg.  Viewers have a
hard time with that film for the same reasons as in Don't Look Now, maybe
even more so. Performance is a very disconcerting piece of work.
 
        Bill Orr
 
On Wed, 6 Sep 1995, Panther Rules! wrote:
 
> Nicholas Roeg's "Don't Look Now" creates unreliability somewhere. But the
> question here is whether or not it is the narrator that is unreliable. In
> fact the narrator is remarkably reliable, but it is the protagonists and
> the viewer's misunderstanding of his visions that creates the
> unreliability. Is this then an unreliable narrator? Or simply an
> unreliable protagonist?
>
> -- Mark Kawakami
> Chapman University
>
> ----
> To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
> in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]
>
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2