DOCSLIB.ORG

Leroy Neiman, Sports World Artist

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leroy Neiman, Sports World Artist A48 OBITUARIES NEW YORK LeRoyNeiman, sportsworld artist BY TOM McELROY told the AP. “You can call me an The Associated Press American first. ...[but] I’ve been labeled doing neimanism, LeRoy Neiman, the painter so that’s what it is, Iguess.” and sketch artist best known for He worked in many medi- PHOTO MES evoking the kinetic energy of the um,producing thousands of TI world’s biggest sporting and lei- etchings, lithographs and silk- sure events with bright, quick screen prints known as serig- ORK WY strokes, died yesterday at age 91. raphy. NE Neiman also was acontribut- His works are in the perma- Sarris helped pioneer a ingartist at Playboy magazine nent collections of many pri- focus on film directors. for many years and official vate andpublic museums. But painter of five Olympiads. His his criticssaid Neiman’s forays NEW YORK longtime publicist Gail Paren- into thecommercial world mini- teau confirmed his death but mized him as aserious artist. Ne- didn’t disclose the cause. iman shrugged off such criti- Andrew Neiman was amedia-savvy cism. artist who knew how to enthrall He was aself-described wor- audiences with his instant rendi- kaholic who seldom took vaca- Sarris, tions of what he observed. In tions and had no hobbies. He 1972, he sketched the world PHOTO worked daily in his Manhattan chesstournament between FILE home studio at the Hotel des movie Boris Spassky and Bobby Fis- AGE Artistes near Central Park that cher in Reykjavik, Iceland, for a IM he shared with his wife of more live television audience. WIRE than 50 years, Janet. critic He also produced live draw- Muhammad Ali with Neiman in Las Vegas in 2002. Behind them And, over the years, he en- ings of theOlympics for TV and is atypical Neiman work: an explosion of energy in bright colors. dowed anumber of institutions, BY HILLEL ITALIE wasthe official computer artist donating $6 million in 1995 for The Associated Press of theSuper Bowl for CBS. interview. “I’ve zeroed in on fast-moving strokes, are an ex- thecreation of the LeRoy Ne- Neiman’s “reportageofhisto- what you would call action and plosioninbright colors of pure iman Center for Print Studies at Andrew Sarris, aleading ry and the passing scene. ..re- excellence. ...Everybody who kineticenergy. Columbia University, and $3 mil- movie critic during agold- vived an almost lost and time- doesanything to try to succeed He has been described as an lion to his alma mater, the Art In- en age for reviewers who honored art form,” according to has to give the best of them- American impressionist, but stitute of Chicago, where he popularized the French rev- a1972 exhibit catalog of the art- selves, and art has made me pull the St. Paul, Minn., native pre- taught for adecade. erence for directors and in- ist’sOlympics sketches at the In- the best out of myself.” ferred to think of himself sim- He also donated $1 million to spired debate about count- dianapolis Museum of Art. Neiman’s paintings, many exe- ply as an American artist. create apermanent home for less filmsand filmmakers, “It’s been fun. I’ve had alucky cuted in household enamel “Idon’t know if I’m an impres- Arts Horizons,acommunity died yesterday. He was 83. life,” Neiman said in aJune 2008 paints that allowed the artist his sionist or an expressionist,” he art center in Harlem. Sarris died at St. Luke’s- Roosevelt Hospital in Man- hattan after complications LONG ISLAND developed from astomach virus, accordingtohis wife, film critic Molly Haskell. Herbert J. Pluschau, 82, longtime educator Sarris was best known for his work with the Vil- BY MARINA VILLENEUVE Queens. He played basketball at education teachers and later, as lage Voice, which he [email protected] Grover ClevelandHigh School, avarsity basketball coach. “He’s joined in 1960. from which he graduated in still in contact with alot of the His opinions were espe- Herbert J. Pluschau believed 1948. He earned his bachelor’s de- players, especially from the 1956 cially vitalduring the 1960s so much in thepower of educa- gree in education in 1952 from team,” Cone said. and 1970s, whenmovies be- tion to change societythat he be- the State University of New For the classes of 1958-1962, came films, or even cinema, came ateacher, serving in al- York at Brockport. In 1963, he Pluschau served as guidance andcritics and fans argued most every position in the Mass- earned his master’s degree in ed- counselor; and he was vice prin- about them the way they apequa school district. ucation from Hofstra University. cipal from1962 to 1967. He later once might have contended Pluschau,who rose from sub- “He wanted to be ateacher be- served as adistrict administra- over paintings or novels. stitute teacher to superintendent causehis mother wanted him to tive assistant, assistantsuperin- Audiences discovered for- in the hamlet, died Monday at St. be alawyer, and he never did tendent, deputy superintendent eign directors such as Feder- newsday.com Joseph Hospital in Bethpage of what his mother wanted,” Cone and finally, superintendent of ico Fellini and Ingmar Berg- complications from astroke. He kidded. schools, beginning in 1982. man and welcomed new 2012 was 82. In February 1953, Pluschau Pluschau received commenda- Hollywood favorites such Herbert Pluschau served many 21, “He loved Massapequa,” his was hired as asubstitute at Mass- tions from the U.S. House of Rep- as Robert Altman and Mar- daughter Christine Pluschau roles in Massapequa schools. apequa, and in 1956 he bought the resentatives, New York State tin Scorsese. JUNE Cone of Marietta,Ga., said. “I house in the hamletinwhich his Senate, Town of Oyster Bay, Vil- “Andrew Sarris was a don’t understand loving atown. he retired in 1988. Developing a wife of 60 years,Carol, still lives. lage of Massapequa Park,Mass- vitalfigure in teaching But he loved Massapequa.” passion for searching for Mass- “He was hard working, he was apequa Board of Education, America to respond to for- Massapequa High School’s apequa High alumni,heserved dedicated,” said his daughter. Massapequa Parent-Teachers eign films as well as Ameri- hall of fame honored Pluschau in as president of the hall of fame “It’s just amazing how many Association and the Massape- can movies,” fellow critic THURSDAY, 1994 for his decades of service. and organized its annual golf out- lives he’s touched. He has more qua Federation of Teachers. David Thomson said. “As “Itwas really unusual for some- ing charity event, Cone said. Facebook friendsthan Ido. He’s Services are planned Satur- writer,teacher, friend and one to span theirwhole career in The son of German immi- aspecial man.” day at 10:30 a.m. at Grace Epis- husbandhewas an essen- one district,” Cone said. grants, Pluschau was born in Pluschau enjoyed his role as copal Church with interment at tial.History has gone.” NEWSDAY, Pluschau stayed active after Brooklyn and raised in Maspeth, one of the school’s first physical Grace Cemetery, Massapequa..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia Other Books by Jonathan Rosenbaum
    Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia Other Books by Jonathan Rosenbaum Rivette: Texts and Interviews (editor, 1977) Orson Welles: A Critical View, by André Bazin (editor and translator, 1978) Moving Places: A Life in the Movies (1980) Film: The Front Line 1983 (1983) Midnight Movies (with J. Hoberman, 1983) Greed (1991) This Is Orson Welles, by Orson Welles and Peter Bogdanovich (editor, 1992) Placing Movies: The Practice of Film Criticism (1995) Movies as Politics (1997) Another Kind of Independence: Joe Dante and the Roger Corman Class of 1970 (coedited with Bill Krohn, 1999) Dead Man (2000) Movie Wars: How Hollywood and the Media Limit What Films We Can See (2000) Abbas Kiarostami (with Mehrmax Saeed-Vafa, 2003) Movie Mutations: The Changing Face of World Cinephilia (coedited with Adrian Martin, 2003) Essential Cinema: On the Necessity of Film Canons (2004) Discovering Orson Welles (2007) The Unquiet American: Trangressive Comedies from the U.S. (2009) Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia Film Culture in Transition Jonathan Rosenbaum the university of chicago press | chicago and london Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote for many periodicals (including the Village Voice, Sight and Sound, Film Quarterly, and Film Comment) before becoming principal fi lm critic for the Chicago Reader in 1987. Since his retirement from that position in March 2008, he has maintained his own Web site and continued to write for both print and online publications. His many books include four major collections of essays: Placing Movies (California 1995), Movies as Politics (California 1997), Movie Wars (a cappella 2000), and Essential Cinema (Johns Hopkins 2004). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 2010 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Lonely Places, Dangerous Ground
    Introduction Nicholas Ray and the Potential of Cinema Culture STEVEN RYBIN AND WILL SCHEIBEL THE DIRECTOR OF CLASSIC FILMS SUCH AS They Live by Night, In a Lonely Place, Johnny Guitar, Rebel Without a Cause, and Bigger Than Life, among others, Nicholas Ray was the “cause célèbre of the auteur theory,” as critic Andrew Sarris once put it (107).1 But unlike his senior colleagues in Hollywood such as Alfred Hitchcock or Howard Hawks, he remained a director at the margins of the American studio system. So too has he remained at the margins of academic film scholarship. Many fine schol‑ arly works on Ray, of course, have been published, ranging from Geoff Andrew’s important auteur study The Films of Nicholas Ray: The Poet of Nightfall and Bernard Eisenschitz’s authoritative biography Nicholas Ray: An American Journey (both first published in English in 1991 and 1993, respectively) to books on individual films by Ray, such as Dana Polan’s 1993 monograph on In a Lonely Place and J. David Slocum’s 2005 col‑ lection of essays on Rebel Without a Cause. In 2011, the year of his centennial, the restoration of his final film,We Can’t Go Home Again, by his widow and collaborator Susan Ray, signaled renewed interest in the director, as did the publication of a new biography, Nicholas Ray: The Glorious Failure of an American Director, by Patrick McGilligan. Yet what Nicholas Ray’s films tell us about Classical Hollywood cinema, what it was and will continue to be, is far from certain. 1 © 2014 State University of New York Press, Albany 2 Steven Rybin and Will Scheibel After all, what most powerfully characterizes Ray’s films is not only what they are—products both of Hollywood’s studio and genre systems—but also what they might be.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Sarris Papers, 1955-1988 MS# 1451
    Andrew Sarris Papers, 1955-1988 MS# 1451 ©2007 Columbia University Library SUMMARY INFORMATION Creator Andrew Sarris, 1928- Title and dates Andrew Sarris Papers, 1955-1988. Abstract This collection contains documents related to the life and career of Andrew Sarris, an influential American film critic and Professor in the Film Division of Columbia University’s School of the Arts. Professional and personal correspondence, rough drafts of articles, clippings of newspaper columns written by Sarris and his peers, and back issues of film periodicals represent the bulk of this collection. The documents span several decades, from his start as a film critic and theorist in the mid-1950s to the last years of his long tenure at The Village Voice in the late 1980s. Size 1.67 linear feet (4 document boxes) Call number MS# 1451 Location Columbia University Butler Library, 6th Floor Rare Book and Manuscript Library 535 West 114th Street New York, NY 10027 Andrew Sarris Paper Language(s) of material English Biographical Note A prominent American film critic perhaps best known for his "Films in Focus" column, which ran in New York City’s alternative weekly newspaper, The Village Voice, for much of its history, Andrew Sarris upheld the Voice’s reputation as a piquant publication with his lively and frequently contentious writings on cinema. Born in Brooklyn on October 31, 1928, Sarris was the child of immigrant parents who fell on hard times with the onset of the Great Depression. In 1946, he enrolled at Columbia for his undergraduate studies, but around this time, he developed a love of cinema that interfered with his schoolwork, and consequently his grades were poor.
    [Show full text]
  • {PDF EPUB} the Films of Josef Von Sternberg by Andrew. Sarris —Andrew Sarris, from the Films of Josef Von Sternberg (1966)
    Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} The Films of Josef Von Sternberg by Andrew. Sarris —Andrew Sarris, from The Films of Josef von Sternberg (1966). [16] Time felt the film was realistic in some parts, but disliked the Hollywood cliché of turning an evil character's heart to gold at the end. Sarris, Andrew, The Films of Josef von Sternberg , New York, 1966. Walker, Alexander, The Celluloid Sacrifice , New York, 1967. Weinberg, Herman G., Josef von Sternberg: A Critical Study , … Andrew Sarris, The Films of Josef von Sternberg, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1966, p. 15. Tag Gallagher, “Josef von Sternberg”, Senses of Cinema no. 19, February 2002. Surrendering to the police upon realising that Feathers and Rolls Royce have remained faithful to him, Bull states: “That hour was worth more to me than my whole life.” Sarris has been the film citic for the Village Voice, editor-in-chief of Cahiers du Cinema in English, and an associate editor of Film Culture. He is the author of The Films of Josef von Sternberg, Interviews with Film Directors, The Film, Confessions of a Cultist, The Primal Screen, The John Ford Movie Mystery, and Politics and Cinema. The gangster movies exploded in the sound era with Little Caesar (1931) and The Public Enemy (1931) but it was Josef von Sternberg who gave birth to the modern gangster movie with two crime dramas that took a more romantic approach to the genre. Von Sternberg by John Baxter ( ); Fun in a Chinese laundry by Josef Von Sternberg ( Book ); The films of Josef von Sternberg by Andrew Sarris ( Book ); In the realm of pleasure : Von Sternberg, Dietrich, and the masochistic aesthetic by Gaylyn Studlar ( Book ) Shanghai Express was the fourth, and one of the best, of the seven outstanding films that Josef von Sternberg made with Marlene Dietrich in the 1930s.Unlike their preceding film, Dishonored (1931), which had more of a historical/adventure spin to it, Shanghai Express was a return to the moody and deeply romantic style that characterized Morocco (1930).
    [Show full text]
  • Download Flyer
    ANTHEM PRESS INFORMATION SHEET Screen Writings Volume 2 Genres, Classics, and Aesthetics Bert Cardullo Pub Date: March 2010 Category: PERFORMING ARTS / Film Binding: Hardback & Video / Direction & Production Price: £60 / $99 BISAC code: PER004010 ISBN: 9781843318378 BIC code: APF Extent: 210 pages Rights Held: World Size: 229 x 152mm / 9 x 6 Illustrations: 12+ images Description Volume 2 of Screen Writings offers close readings of genre films and acknowledged film classics in an attempt to explore both the aesthetics of genre and the definition of ‘classic’. ‘The film writings of Bert Cardullo are fresh and lucid, in addition to being revelatory of his belief that the study of cinema is a sacred calling. I marvel at Cardullo’s profound perceptiveness – particularly on display in Screen Writings – about the exemplary meaning as well as the ultimate magic of the movies.’ —Andrew Sarris, Columbia University ‘Among my contemporaries, the best film critic writing in English in America is Bert Cardullo, and Screen Writings proves why. ‘ —Dan Harper, American film scholar Screen Writings: Genres, Classics, and Aesthetics explores both the aesthetics of genre and the definition of ‘classic’, as well as the changing perception of so-called classic movies over time. Implicitly theoretical as much as it is unashamedly practical, this book is a model not only of film analysis, but also of the enlightened deployment of cultural studies in the service of cinema study. The book includes re-considerations of such classic films as I vitelloni, Grand Illusion, Winter Light, and Tokyo Story; it features genre examinations of the war film (Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima), farce (Some Like It Hot), the road film (The Rain People), the New York- centered movie (Manhattan), and avant-garde pictures that privilege narrative (3-Iron and Eternal Sunshine of the Classic Mind).
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Sarris and Pauline Kael: the Duel for the Soul of American Film Criticism
    1 Andrew Sarris and Pauline Kael: The Duel For the Soul of American Film Criticism By Inge Fossen Høgskolen i Lillehammer / Lillehammer University College Avdeling for TV-utdanning og Filmvitenskap / Department of Television and Film Studies (TVF) Spring 2009 1 2 For My Parents 2 3 ”When we think about art and how it is thought about […] we refer both to the practice of art and the deliberations of criticism.” ―Charles Harrison & Paul Wood “[H]abits of liking and disliking are lodged in the mind.” ―Bernard Berenson “The motion picture is unique […] it is the one medium of expression where America has influenced the rest of the world” ―Iris Barry “[I]f you want to practice something that isn’t a mass art, heaven knows there are plenty of other ways of expressing yourself.” ―Jean Renoir “If it's all in the script, why shoot the film?” ―Nicholas Ray “Author + Subject = Work” ―Andrè Bazin 3 4 Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgements p. 6. Introduction p. 8. Defining Art in Relation to Criticism p. 14. The Popular As a Common Ground– And an Outline of Study p. 19. Career Overview – Andrew Sarris p. 29. Career Overview – Pauline Kael p. 32. American Film Criticism From its Beginnings to the 1950s – And a Note on Present Challenges p. 35. Notes on Axiological Criticism, With Sarris and Kael as Examples p. 41. Movies: The Desperate Art p. 72. Auteurism – French and American p. 82. Notes on the Auteur Theory 1962 p. 87. "Circles and Squares: Joys and Sarris" – Kael's Rebuttal p. 93.
    [Show full text]
  • American Auteur Cinema: the Last – Or First – Great Picture Show 37 Thomas Elsaesser
    For many lovers of film, American cinema of the late 1960s and early 1970s – dubbed the New Hollywood – has remained a Golden Age. AND KING HORWATH PICTURE SHOW ELSAESSER, AMERICAN GREAT THE LAST As the old studio system gave way to a new gen- FILMFILM FFILMILM eration of American auteurs, directors such as Monte Hellman, Peter Bogdanovich, Bob Rafel- CULTURE CULTURE son, Martin Scorsese, but also Robert Altman, IN TRANSITION IN TRANSITION James Toback, Terrence Malick and Barbara Loden helped create an independent cinema that gave America a different voice in the world and a dif- ferent vision to itself. The protests against the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights movement and feminism saw the emergence of an entirely dif- ferent political culture, reflected in movies that may not always have been successful with the mass public, but were soon recognized as audacious, creative and off-beat by the critics. Many of the films TheThe have subsequently become classics. The Last Great Picture Show brings together essays by scholars and writers who chart the changing evaluations of this American cinema of the 1970s, some- LaLastst Great Great times referred to as the decade of the lost generation, but now more and more also recognised as the first of several ‘New Hollywoods’, without which the cin- American ema of Francis Coppola, Steven Spiel- American berg, Robert Zemeckis, Tim Burton or Quentin Tarantino could not have come into being. PPictureicture NEWNEW HOLLYWOODHOLLYWOOD ISBN 90-5356-631-7 CINEMACINEMA ININ ShowShow EDITEDEDITED BY BY THETHE
    [Show full text]
  • A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell Andrew Sarris
    Sacred Heart University Review Volume 21 Issue 1 Sacred Heart University Review, Volume XXI, Article 4 Numbers 1 & 2, Fall 2000/ Spring 2001 March 2010 Taking Film Seriously: A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell Andrew Sarris Molly Haskell Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview Recommended Citation Sarris, Andrew and Haskell, Molly (2010) "Taking Film Seriously: A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell," Sacred Heart University Review: Vol. 21 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol21/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the SHU Press Publications at DigitalCommons@SHU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sacred Heart University Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@SHU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Taking Film Seriously: A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell Cover Page Footnote Andrew Sarris writes on film for the New York Observer, and is Professor in the School of the Arts at Columbia University. Molly Haskell covers film for the feminist quarterly On the Issues, and writes a regular column for the Observer. This is a lightly-edited transcription of their talk at the Eighth Annual Media Studies Symposium at Sacred Heart University on April 14, 2002. This article is available in Sacred Heart University Review: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/shureview/vol21/iss1/4 Sarris and Haskell: Taking Film Seriously: A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Moll ANDREW SARRIS AND MOLLY HASKELL Taking Film Seriously: A Conversation with Andrew Sarris and Molly Haskell Molly: We want all of you to get involved in this, and interrupt at any point.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study on Film Authorship: Exploring the Theoretical and Practical Sides in Film Production
    A Case Study on Film Authorship by David Tregde — 5 A Case Study on Film Authorship: Exploring the Theoretical and Practical Sides in Film Production David Tregde* Media Arts and Entertainment Elon University Abstract Film authorship has been a topic of debate in film theory since the Cahiers du Cinema critics first birthed auteur theory. Andrew Sarris used this theory to categorize directors based on their level of artistic au- thorship, solidifying the idea that a director is the sole author of a film. In The Schreiber Theory, David Kipen argues that a writer is responsible for creating the world of the movie and should be considered the author of a film. However, collaborative theories, such as those proposed by Paul Sellors, provide a more practical framework for studying film authorship. Rarely are any film authorship theories compared with specific exam- ples. To compare theory to practice, this research took a two-fold approach. First, theory is explored through primary and secondary sources to give a background and understanding of the main arguments in authorship. Second, this research documents the production of two feature films (Blade Runner & The Man Who Killed Don Quixote) as case studies through analysis of in-depth documentaries. By examining these productions, this study observes theory in practice rather than studying the finished products. I. The Problem of Authorship “Authorship does matter,” says Janet Staiger, because it addresses the issue of acknowledging credit behind a motion picture (Gerstner and Staiger 27). When addressing the responsible parties for a film, it is important to know why such analysis is needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Author Functions, Auteur Fictions Understanding Authorship in Conglomerate Hollywood Commerce, Culture, and Narrative
    Author Functions, Auteur Fictions Understanding Authorship in Conglomerate Hollywood Commerce, Culture, and Narrative VOLUME II: APPENDICES Thomas James Wardak A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Sheffield Faculty of Arts and Humanities School of English Literature March 2017 Bibliography ‘2009 WORLDWIDE GROSSES’, Box Office Mojo (n.d.) <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2009> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘2015 WORLDWIDE GROSSES’, Box Office Mojo (n.d.) <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2015> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘3D screens—2004 onwards’, UK Cinema association (n.d.) <http://www.cinemauk.org.uk/the- industry/facts-and-figures/uk-cinema-industry-infrastructure/3d-screens/> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘ABOUT REDDIT’, Reddit (13 April 2016) <https://web.archive.org/web/20160413011025/https://www.reddit.com/about/> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘Box office revenue in North America from 1980 to 2015 (in billion U.S. dollars)’, Statista: The Statistics Portal (2016) <http://www.statista.com/statistics/187069/north-american-box- office-gross-revenue-since-1980/> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘Comic Book Sales by Year’, Comichron (n.d.) <http://www.comichron.com/yearlycomicssales.html> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘Footfall Breakdown for each Station’, Network Rail (n.d.) <https://web.archive.org/web/20160910230139/https://www.networkrail.co.uk/Footfa llBreakdownForEachStation.pdf> [accessed 13 March 2017]. ‘John Ford’s Young Mr. Lincoln: A collective text by the Editors of Cahiers du Cinéma’, trans. Helen Lackner and Diana Matias, Screen, 13.3 (1972), 5-44. ‘Monthly reach of Empire magazine in the United Kingdom (UK) from October 2012 to September 2015 (in 1,000s)’, Statista: The Statistics Portal (n.d.) <http://www.statista.com/statistics/413664/empire-monthly-reach-uk/> [accessed 13 March 2017].
    [Show full text]
  • Family & Domesticity in the Films of Steven Spielberg
    Bard College Bard Digital Commons Senior Projects Spring 2017 Bard Undergraduate Senior Projects Spring 2017 Why Did I Marry A Sentimentalist?: Family & Domesticity in the Films of Steven Spielberg Emmet Dotan Bard College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2017 Part of the Other Film and Media Studies Commons, and the Theory and Criticism Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Dotan, Emmet, "Why Did I Marry A Sentimentalist?: Family & Domesticity in the Films of Steven Spielberg" (2017). Senior Projects Spring 2017. 232. https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2017/232 This Open Access work is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been provided to you by Bard College's Stevenson Library with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this work in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Why Did I Marry A Sentimentalist?: Family & Domesticity in the Films of Steven Spielberg Senior Project Submitted to The Division of Arts of Bard College by Emmet Dotan Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 2017 Acknowledgements I want to thank my advisor, Ed Halter, for pushing me to understand why I love the films that I love. I would also like to thank Natan Dotan for always reminding me why I do what I do.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Program Files\Qualcomm\Ebimail\Attach
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES FILMING IMAGES OR FILMING REALITY: THE LIFE CYCLES OF MOVIE DIRECTORS FROM D.W. GRIFFITH TO FEDERICO FELLINI David W. Galenson Joshua Kotin Working Paper 11486 http://www.nber.org/papers/w11486 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 June 2005 The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. ©2005 by David W. Galenson and Joshua Kotin. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Filming Images or Filming Reality: The Life Cycles of Movie Directors from D.W. Griffith to Federico Fellini David W. Galenson and Joshua Kotin NBER Working Paper No. 11486 July 2005 JEL No. ABSTRACT Why have some movie directors made classic early films, but subsequently failed to match their initial successes, whereas other directors have begun much more modestly, but have made great movies late in their lives? This study demonstrates that the answer lies in the directors’ motivations, and in the nature of their films. Conceptual directors, who use their films to express their ideas or emotions, mature early; thus such great conceptual innovators as D. W. Griffith, Sergei Eisenstein, and Orson Welles made their major contributions early in their careers, and declined thereafter. In contrast experimental directors, whose films present convincing characters in realistic circumstances, improve their techniques with experience, so that such great experimental innovators as John Ford, Alfred Hitchcock, and Akira Kurosawa made their greatest films late in their lives.
    [Show full text]