> I think that we should discuss and clarify what we mean by
> the term 'realism'.
> Just for once.
> Gloves off, no holds barred.
> Get it all out in the open, because many seem to be
> crossing boundaries, and confusing 'realism' with
> 'verisimilitude', 'neo-realism', 'cinema verite' etc.
> (I find it very confusing when this happens, and I'm sure
> the confusion is not intended.)
> Which films employ 'realism' or are 'realist'?
> Can we question the validity of each desciption?
> Etc., etc.
> That way, every time a film comes along which brings up the
> subject, we all have a common frame of reference.
Since there was no emoticon attached, I wonder if this suggestion is
tongue-in-cheek? Surely there are few more loaded terms than
"realism." Just to start with, there are:
visual realism (i.e., iconic similarity to an object or scene in nature;
with varying degrees of resemblence up to and including the full
range of color, dimension, movement, etc.)
psychological realism (i.e., actions that correspond to the ways
individuals would "normally" act under similar circumstances)
sociological realism (i.e., the circumstances of the individuals reflect
actualities of race, class, gender, etc.)
historical realism (i.e., the film and/or scenes approximate an accurate
reconstruction of the dress, customs, mores, etc. of a
particular time or event, etc.)
perceptual realism (i.e., the image accurately reproduces what the naked
eye would see or have seen)
and so on. I need hardly add that most of these terms are also
ideologically loaded as well!
Perhaps this is Damian's point, since much of the previous discussion
of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN has talked about some or all of these different
types of "realism," often within a single post!
Minnesota State U, Mankato
[log in to unmask]
To sign off SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]