Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 22 Mar 1999 22:04:59 -0500 |
Content-Type: | TEXT/PLAIN |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Kubrick dated? You are not hearing laments because we freakin' can't
believe he's gone!
On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Sean Desilets wrote:
> I've never read any intereviews in which Kubrick speaks at any length
> about pulling Clockwork Orange, but I think there's a brief exchange about
> it in one of the interviews in _Perspectives on Stanley Kubrick_, which
> was edited by Mario Falsetto (I think). He says essentially what people
> have already said, that he pulled the film because of the copycat stuff
> but still stands behind it.
>
> I sometimes don't pay close enough attention to the list, so maybe I
> missed something, but I'm a little surprised by the silence with which
> Kubrick's death has been met here. Is that because everybody's tear ducts
> were worn out by Kurusowa's death, because we've all finally realized the
> "death of the author" so that individual authors' deaths aren't such a
> big deal, or because Kubrick is "dated" (or at least out of critical
> favor)?
>
>
> *******************************************************************************
> Sean Desilets * "The only people who
> * * believe that there is
> Department of English * a language that is
> East Hall * * not theoretical are
> Tufts University * professors of
> Medford, MA 02155 * * literature."
> [log in to unmask] * Paul de Man
>
> *******************************************************************************
>
> ----
> Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
> http://www.tcf.ua.edu/ScreenSite
>
Irene C. Upshur, Director
Instructional Media Center
Marymount University
2807 N. Glebe Rd.
Arlington, Virginia 22207
----
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html
|
|
|