SCREEN-L Archives

March 1995, Week 2

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

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

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Mon, 13 Mar 1995 13:48:24 CST
In-Reply-To:
Your message of Fri, 10 Mar 1995 12:21:10 CST. <[log in to unmask]>
X-cc:
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
In article <[log in to unmask]>
[log in to unmask] writes:
 
>> A variation on Tarantino's violence might be Peter Jackson's _Braindead_ and
>> _Bad Taste_..., yes, he directed _Heavenly Creatures_, just down the road
>> from here.
>>
>> So let's use the net for global discussion, ok?
>>
I would say that TArantinian and Jacksonian violence is considerably
different. Both might be said to compose parodies to a certain genre,
although I think it doesn't do Jackson much justice to describe his
films as mere parodies (I haven't seen _Heavenly Creatures_, but
am especially referring to his extremely delightful _Meet the Feebles_).
However, every single image of Jackson's films (the ones I've seen)
carries the message "fun!", and I don't think the same could be said
with reference to Tarantino. To put it bluntly: Jackson makes fun
all over the place, and this stretches out through the violent
scenes, as well, whereas Tarantino does make a lot of fun, but not
in the violent shots.
 
Birgit Kellner
Institute for Indian Philosophy
University of Hiroshima

ATOM RSS1 RSS2