SCREEN-L Archives

June 1994


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
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 14 Jun 1994 12:32:40 EDT
Message of Tue, 14 Jun 1994 12:10:07 MESZ from <[log in to unmask]>
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (31 lines)
On Tue, 14 Jun 1994 12:10:07 MESZ Daniel Pisano said:
>I don't get it.
>And I thoguht that the US were the freest country in the world, but now
>with all the cutting, dubbing, editing and opportunism I don't know any more.
Part of the freedom is the freedom for entrepreneurs to do whatever they
wish -- within broad legal limits -- to make a buck.
For mechanical entertainments, e.g., film, tv, etc., this freedom means that
various versions can be created of a particular work to suit particular
markets.  Thus, it is not unusual to shoot a "hot" and "cold" version of
a film for different markets.  More skin is acceptable and expected overseas
than in the states.  The hot versions are typically sold in those markets.
On the other hand, some Asian markets will not accept even the chaste
versions released in the states.  Guess what:  Less exposed versions
are shipped to those markets.
The whole point is that filmmaking is not like poetry where there is a
single "definitive text."  Even in the normal course of commerce there
are multiple versions.  The existence of these versions poses the same
theoretical/critical problem posed by the lack of definitive early
films due to these market considerations in addition to the archival
problems created by multiple generations of prints and deterioration
of prints due to normal wear and tear.
Cal Pryluck, Radio-Television-Film, Temple University, Philadelphia
<[log in to unmask]>  <[log in to unmask]>