SCREEN-L Archives

July 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]>
Wed, 20 Jul 1994 16:39:10 EDT
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (27 lines)
Re. Scott Key and Denise Bryson on alternative films--Who says there aren't
people on this list who are DYING to talk about alternative films?
Let's talk about GO FISH.  What do you think?  Good filmmaking?  I thought
so ("alternative" isn't my forte, but I watch whenever I get the chance),
though the schizoid camera work seemed only "for-the-sake-of-camera-work"
after a while.  I liked the talking heads, the dreamy camera-work in
such scenes as Max and Ely's sex scene--or maybe I just liked the sensual
way of filming sex and women's bodies.
I'm curious what people think about the film's treatment of the political
nature of lesbianism, both between lesbian's with different ideas of
what that identity means (the "jury" scene), and between lesbians and
straights  (I don't even know if straightness comes up any other time
than in the jury scene).  The jury scene was fascinating to me in how it
represented so many different points of view, placing the one I *think* the
filmmakers were most sympathetic with "on trial."  I found the scene
sarcastic towards the jurors, at any rate, but still I felt definitions
. . . .  Thinking off the top of my head: the issues of the jury scene
get LOST utterly.
What do others think?  What's the alternative film scholars' take on the
Susan Crutchfield
[log in to unmask]