SCREEN-L Archives

November 1997, Week 4

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

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
Subject:
From:
erik weems <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 24 Nov 1997 20:50:08 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
>Leo Bankersen wrote:
It seems that sentiments around
>Bill Clinton, if involved at all, can work out in very different ways.
>Could it be that there is a common factor behind all this? Like: the
>president has become acceptable as a screen character?
>
 
 
Perhaps because of the always increasing necessity of media manipulation by
politicians, the translation of the President of reality into the President
of screen-fiction is becoming more and more seamless (i.e., the image in
reality and on-screen image are merging).
 
From what I have seen, older films shied away from on-screen contemporary
depictions of the President... an example being Capra's MR SMITH GOES TO
WASHINGTON. (But Historical screen depictions -Lincoln especially- have
always been okay.)
 
Perhaps from the combination of respectful distance and the hurdle of the
controversy itself the president has been left off-screen... but minor
political positions have always been open target, both as frauds and as
heroes (MR SMITH again) or even more blatently criminal (Preston Sturges'
THE GREAT MCGINTY).
 
erik weems
 
----
Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2