SCREEN-L Archives

June 1998, Week 2

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:
"Edward R. O'Neill" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Sat, 13 Jun 1998 15:23:46 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (118 lines)
I think Patricia Lewis's point is extremely well-taken.
 
It seems that we think of some cinematic elements as being
more intrinsic to genre than others, based as she suggests,
on a classical rather than post-classical model.
 
One implication would seem to be that post-classical cinema
can in part be defined by elements extrinsic to character
and story, such as the cost of the film, the conditions of
its production, and its target demographic. What a
post-classical film is "about" is thus no longer who acts
how to achieve what kind of result in what kind of social
world (typical generic concerns) but rather how much money
was spent.
 
This would confirm my suspicion, argued a few years ago in a
conference paper, that if _Cliffhanger_ is about anything at
all all, it is the sight of $100 million being *wasted*.
 
Another interesting aspect of the asendancy of the "action"
film is its proximity to Deleuze's concept of the action
image. Are these films defined and (self-)defining in the
same way that Deleuze seeks to differentiate a cinema of
action from one of time and memory?
 
Very interesting....
 
Edward R. O'Neill
UCLA
 
 
Patricia Scheiern Lewis wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I agree. If one considers only the classical Hollywood cinema,
> then the argument is probably valid. However, genre definitions become
> particularly sticky in the post-classical cinema, especially post-"Star
> Wars." Consider, for example, "True Lies" (or any of several other
> Schwarzenegger pics: "Predator," "Last Action Hero," "Commando," "Eraser"
> and "The Running Man" leap to mind). While the plot of "True Lies"
> ostensibly places the film in the "espionage" or perhaps "thriller" genre,
> the film's emphasis on stunts, spectacle, special effects, and the
> celebrity/brand name of Schwarzenegger as action hero completely overshadow
> the "espionage" elements of the film. Films in which the primary element or
> attraction is "action" constitute a de facto action genre. Reviewers label
> these types of films "action" films; they're marketed as action films;
> they're aimed at a well-defined demographic of action film fans. Most
> importantly, filmgoers generally know what to expect when they are told a
> film is an "action" film, and I think most of us on the list have some idea
> what an "action" film is. Aren't audience expectation and recognition the
> primary factors in defining a genre?
>
> I see that the Library of Congress does not list "action" as a genre in its
> Moving Image Genre Guide; it labels "Speed"--which I would argue is an
> "action" film--a "thriller," probably because of the terrorism and
> "countdown" element. I think the difference between a "thriller" and an
> "action" film is subtle but worthy of narrowing down. I mean, if there's a
> "Fallen woman" genre--I probably would've lumped that one in with
> "(melo)drama" or "women's pictures"--why not a separate genre for the "Die
> Hard" plot? When I tell an action fan that "Passenger 57" is "Die Hard on a
> Plane" and "Under Siege" is "Die Hard on a Boat," they know what to expect.
>
> At 06:43 PM 6/9/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >> Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 18:18:49 +0100
> >> From: Ingvald Bergsagel <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Subject: Action as genre
> >>
> >> Does anyone know of genre-studies done on action-films? I've found plenty
> >> on western, noir, gangster, sci-fi, adventure and other related genres, in
> >> addition to (naturaly) writings on screen-violence mentioning classic
> >> action-flicks, but nobody seems to have analysed action as a genre.
> >
> >I think the reason is, as I suggest in my book on the historical adventure
> >genre, because "action" itself is not a genre. The types you've mentioned
> >above are genres, whereas action is a style uniting them. The word action
> >itself does not imply a specific type of story or formula, but rather a
> >way of treating a story and an emphasis on certain types of elements.
> >Action is a male-oriented approach dependent on physical movement,
> >violence, and suspense, with often perfunctory motivation and romance.
> >Action tends to shift sentiment, character, dialogue, and family to the
> >background. In action films a hero succeeds by facing death, courageously
> >overcoming dangers and adversaries. Sherlock Holmes, James Bond, Shane,
> >the Thief of Bagdad, Luke Skywalker, and Robin Hood are, I would argue,
> >all action heroes--but each belongs to a separate genre (mystery,
> >espionage, western, fantasy, science fiction, historical adventure,
> >respectively).
> >
> >
> >Brian Taves
> >Motion Picture/Broadcasting/Recorded Sound Division
> >Library of Congress
> >101 Independence Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20540-4692
> >Telephone: 202-707-9930; 202-707-2371 (fax)
> >Email: [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >Disclaimer--All opinions expressed are my own.
> >
> >----
> >Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
> >http://www.tcf.ua.edu/screensite
> >
> >
> Patricia Scheiern Lewis
> Dept. of English
> University of Chicago
> [log in to unmask]
> http://student-www.uchicago.edu/users/pslewis/
>
> Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" until you can find a rock.
>
> ----
> Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
> http://www.tcf.ua.edu/screensite
 
----
Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2