SCREEN-L Archives

May 1994


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

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

Print Reply
Gene Stavis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sat, 28 May 1994 11:11:38 PDT
text/plain (16 lines)
To Gayle re "Pinky"-
Very good points. I agree with you totally and certainly did not mean to
imply that any film is obsolete. Even the most innocuous time-waster (which
it certainly is NOT) helps us to understand attitudes and ways of life better
than any other medium. That is why ALL films must be preserved, not just the
official masterpieces.
And to the denigrator of "Gentlemens' Agreement"-
On re-reading your post on this film, I am struck by how you are infected
with the "auteur" disease whereby you attribute the assets and liabilities of
the film exclusively to the director. The film was based on a best-seller by
Laura Z. Hobson and was produced by Darryl Zanuck as his most prestigious
film of the year. And Zanuck was not one to give a director, and particularly
a relative newcomer like Kazan, carte blanche in such an important film. And,
by the way, Zanuck was not Jewish either!