SCREEN-L Archives

November 1994, Week 5


Options: Use Proportional Font
Show HTML 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]>
Tony Williams <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 30 Nov 1994 12:54:02 CST
note of 11/30/94 10:23
Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (23 lines)
From: Tony Williams
 I suppose we should allow Branagh some creative licence in Henry V. But its
good to hear more critical opinion voiced about another shallow icon of the
80s. While Branagh's Henry V is an interesting adaptation, our Ken spouted
off about how great his version was in comparison to Olivier's. Derek Jarman
immediately put the upstart down by stating how cinematic Olivier's version
was. This is really accurate. At least, Olivier had the grace to co-credit
editor Reginald Marsh as collaborator.
  I hesitated renting DEAD AGAIN until a couple of weeks ago. I'll refrain
from using too vulgar language but found it over-rated, trite, badly directed,
with Ken and Emma as unbelievable Americans full of Brit. theatrical mannerisms
Marcia Landy and Lucy Fischer recently wrote an excellent critique of DEAD
AGAIN in Cinema Journal.
 I think it is extremely ironical in a supposedly postmodernist, post-struct-
ural era that the director as cult hero (or a 20 year old book titled, The
Director as Superstar) is a predominant discourse in popular culture and the
film community.
  Since I recently joined SCREEN-L (September) I missed out on any commentary
about DEAD AGAIN, but am certainly interested in the developing critical
mail about Branagh. Let battle commence! Tony Williams.