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
Holly Chermack <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 19 Jul 1994 08:43:01 CDT
text/plain (31 lines)
Denise Bryson <[log in to unmask]> said:
>Why is it that it seems to be MANDATORY for those of us who study lit
>and films to disdain the films that are destined to make millions?
>I mean, the days that films were required to carry the Truth and
>the One True Politik to the People are over, right?
>It's not high art.  It's not the best film ever made.  But darnit,
>it's a well-spent entertainment buck, and not every filmgoer out
>there wait in line and spends his/her money to be politicized.  Some
>of us, every once in a while, just really want to settle back with
>some coke and popcorn, suspend disbelief, and laugh at comic-book
          I agree with you and usually enjoy these movies
          one at a time.  But when you stand back and look a
          the large number of violent action films that
          portray violence as heroic and women as inanimate
          objects, you realize these images must have some
          impact on the population, teenagers in particular,
          who want to be like these heroes.  I was not
          allowed to see any violent or horror films growing
          up and have to wonder what effect they would have
          had on me at a younger age.   You say we disdain
          the films that are destined to make millions.
          That is exactly what concerns me.  The violent
          action pictures ARE making a lot of money so I
          assume they affect a greater number of people.
          Holly Chermack
          [log in to unmask]