SCREEN-L Archives

July 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
James Prather <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 19 Jul 1994 21:17:14 -0400
text/plain (39 lines)
There's emotional enjoyment but also important is aesthetic enjoyment.
Some films can have irony or witty dialogue or pleasing cinematography or
any number of other aesthetic values but lack a "meanful" political/social
Of course, some "bad" values in films overcome all aesthetic values--nazi
films, hate films, etc.
On Tue, 19 Jul 1994, Kurt R Gegenhuber wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 1994, Guy Rosefelt wrote:
> > Denise,>
> > I heartily agree with you.  Movies are foremost entertainment.  Any effort
> > educate or extract a response beyond enjoyment is secondary.  I posted a
> > similar opinion on CINEMA-L and got shot down for it too.
> >
> > Guy
> Look, this is ridiculous. Does our analysis of what's going on have to
> come to a grinding halt if we see that somebody is being entertained or is
> receiving pleasure? That ought to be the starting point.
> We ought to be able to ask "Where does this pleasure come from?" The
> answer, as I see it, is that people are entertained by representation that
> confirms their worldview, that tells them that their sense of what's true
> and just and sensible is JUST FINE. People watch to have their values
> stroked. When America saw Fatal Attraction in the 80's, it said, "Yep, I
> told you so." That's entertainment.
> To say that entertainment ought to be exempt from analysis, or necessarily
> excludes politics, is to utterly miss what entertainment is. Isn't that a
> bit of a problem if you're studying TV and film?
> Kurt Gegenhuber
> [log in to unmask]