SCREEN-L Archives

December 1994, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced 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
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Arthur Lizie Jr <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 7 Dec 1994 21:09:04 -0500
In-Reply-To:
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
Thanks, but maybe I should have been more specific.  I've checked out
Schatz, Solomon, Kaminsky, but I find them all tautological.  And Grant
and Altman and Neale, but they all tend to fall into the same traps.
Maybe I'm just getting last minute jitters abou this paper on film genre
theory (and have been readin too much Bordwell).
 
arthur
\
 
On Wed, 7 Dec 1994, liz weis wrote:
 
> For essays on film genre per se check out Pam Cook's "The Cinema Book" and
 Thom
> as Schatz's "Hollywood Genres."  You'll also find good generalities
> genre-alities?--in most Film 1 books.  Sobchack and Sobchack does well.
> Barry Grant has probably got some good things to say as well.
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2