DOCSLIB.ORG

SHORT ARTICLE Film Criticism, Film Theory, and the Middle Range

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SHORT ARTICLE Film Criticism, Film Theory, and the Middle Range International Journal of Jungian Studies, 2013 Vol. 5, No. 2, 177Á180, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19409052.2013.773631 SHORT ARTICLE Film criticism, film theory, and the middle range Andrew McWhirter* University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK What do we mean by film criticism, and what of its relevance here? As academics and individuals, we constantly think about other fields and a variety of spheres. These include, but are not exclusive to, the often encouraged cross-disciplinary approach, as well as the interactive dynamics between corporate, state, public and private interests that dominate our professional as well as domestic lives. In other words, we are not and should not be limited by one approach. Bringing film to the pages of the International Journal of Jungian Studies not only shows the relevance in juxtaposing cinema studies with the work of Carl Jung: the merging of these arenas also transpires in greater depth of analytical detail Á such as in the exposition work of Luke Hockley over the years. No, the most important sphere or discipline that it is hoped will become illuminated for the Jungian readership by this exercise is that of arts criticism Á both as a mode of address and specifically in relation to film. Is it possible to write film criticism and use film theory at the same time? Or, perhaps more importantly, is it possible to do this in an engaging, accessible and jargon-free way? Former film critic turned academic, Adrian Martin (2008) (he quit his newspaper job in 2006 when his articles were being slashed to make room for advertisements), argues that there are three levels of film criticism. Firstly, ‘mass media journalism’, which ‘takes place in newspapers and general non-film magazines, as well as on radio and on television’. In Britain, this would include even a quality broadsheet such as The Guardian.1 Secondly, the ‘middle range’, usually existing ‘in regular film magazines that can offer quite intellectual commentary, but in an accessible, fairly easily readable way’. For example, Sight and Sound in the UK, Film Comment in the USA, and El Amante in Argentina. Martin lists the third level of film criticism as ‘academic’, and defines it as ‘where film criticism becomes film history and film theory. Its home is the academic journal, and its readership is usually very small and specialised’. Another UK example here would be Screen, with a more than respectable circulation topping over 1200. Stressing no inherent hierarchies in these areas, because the lines between them are often blurred, Martin (2008) argues that concentration must reside with the middle range, proposing that ‘we must expand this middle range, and pull more into it from all directions’. But, if we concentrate on the middle range, aren’t we losing some colour from the mainstream or rigour from the academy? Email: [email protected] # 2013 Taylor & Francis 178 A. McWhirter Some question whether academic film criticism exists at all. In The Language and Style of Film Criticism (2011), editors Alex Clayton and Andrew Klevan argue that any actual film criticism is relatively marginalised in this area, and that what does exist is often too formalised, or embedded in theory and insular language. For a universal medium, this is an immediate and detrimental problem. The writers they bring together in their collection, Martin among them, intend to show that film criticism can exist in the academy, with most contributors being or having been academics and film critics in some capacity.2 In his 2007 work, The Death of the Critic,Ro´na´n McDonald attests to two factors that gave birth to his book’s ominous title: the internet, and the rise of cultural studies. On the former point, one can assert that the proliferation of noise and marketing that drove Martin out has increased considerably online. And, on the latter, that a general suspicion of, or reluctance to evaluate, artwork exists due to the fear of being judged as having an ideological bias. Indeed, some academics argue that evaluation is lacking from all contemporary criticism, not just in the academy (Carroll, 2009). So, if this middle range is an area that is clear and accessible, intelligent and (quasi) independent of markets, and not afraid to evaluate, then perhaps Martin is correct. After all, this is how criticism has worked best in the past. Although coming from politically diametric spheres, literary critic Terry Eagleton (1984) and philosopher Noel Carroll (2009) Á when articulating the task of the critic and function of criticism Á at least agree that criticism is acknowledge at its most productive and vibrant when it closes the gap between Grub Street and Ivory Tower.3 However, though evaluation is a key concern, theory need not be abandoned. For example, on just one level, it would be revealing on its own terms to have someone with a Jungian background to evaluate a work. At the same time, it is important to realise that just because the writer is a Jungian does not mean that their judgement constitutes a Jungian analysis. On another level, it would be interesting to see if more than one Jungian reading is possible of the same film. This is what film criticism is for Á in the words of one of the greatest living film critics writing today (who perfectly straddles the boundaries of academic and journalistic writing), Jonathan Rosenbaum, ‘to facilitate a discussion’ (personal interview conducted by author at University of Glasgow, 2009). If there’s one thing Jungian analysis lends itself to, alongside an idealised critical sphere, it is that it rarely seeks to close down meaning. The elements that are inherent composites of criticism Á dialogues, oppositions, contrary readings, reactionary critiques Á are all easy to embrace with a Jungian inflection, but only if the work suggests so. And certainly not at the expense of the normal processes of reviewing a film: context, film history, evaluation. But analytical psychology can be particularly useful to film criticism. The constant tension between the processes and themes of cinema as an art form lend themselves to similar tensions that exist in Jungian studies between the self or the interior world and the exterior world or society, and in turn these lend themselves to a discussion of criticism itself. For instance, how should we talk about David Cronenberg’sADangerous Method (2011)? In the context of the director as an auteur and his styling (markedly different with this picture)? Or as a collaborative procedure (distilled from various source materials performed by Hollywood stars)? Film criticism, or at least coverage, now takes place in many academic journals that are not necessarily focused on film or even theory. Whether this extends the.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Viewing Film from a Communication Perspective
    Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal Volume 36 Article 6 January 2009 Viewing Film from a Communication Perspective: Film as Public Relations, Product Placement, and Rhetorical Advocacy in the College Classroom Robin Patric Clair Purdue University, [email protected] Rebekah L. Fox Purdue University Jennifer L. Bezek Purdue University Follow this and additional works at: https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/ctamj Part of the Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, Film and Media Studies Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Clair, R., Fox, R., & Bezek, J. (2009). Viewing Film from a Communication Perspective: Film as Public Relations, Product Placement, and Rhetorical Advocacy in the College Classroom. Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal, 36, 70-87. This Teacher's Workbook is brought to you for free and open access by Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal by an authorized editor of Cornerstone: A Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato. Clair et al.: Viewing Film from a Communication Perspective: Film as Public Rel 70 CTAMJ Summer 2009 Viewing Film from a Communication Perspective: Film as Public Relations, Product Placement, and Rhetorical Advocacy in the College Classroom Robin Patric Clair Professor [email protected] Rebekah L. Fox, Ph.D. Jennifer L. Bezek, M.A. Department of Communication Purdue University West Lafayette, IN ABSTRACT Academics approach film from multiple perspectives, including critical, literary, rhetorical, and managerial approaches. Furthermore, and outside of film studies courses, films are frequently used as a pedagogical tool.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcasting Taste: a History of Film Talk, International Criticism, and English-Canadian Media a Thesis in the Department of Co
    Broadcasting Taste: A History of Film Talk, International Criticism, and English-Canadian Media A Thesis In the Department of Communication Studies Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Communication Studies) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada December 2016 © Zoë Constantinides, 2016 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Zoë Constantinides Entitled: Broadcasting Taste: A History of Film Talk, International Criticism, and English- Canadian Media and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in Communication Studies complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: __________________________________________ Beverly Best Chair __________________________________________ Peter Urquhart External Examiner __________________________________________ Haidee Wasson External to Program __________________________________________ Monika Kin Gagnon Examiner __________________________________________ William Buxton Examiner __________________________________________ Charles R. Acland Thesis Supervisor Approved by __________________________________________ Yasmin Jiwani Graduate Program Director __________________________________________ André Roy Dean of Faculty Abstract Broadcasting Taste: A History of Film Talk, International Criticism, and English- Canadian Media Zoë Constantinides,
    [Show full text]
  • Roger Ebert's
    The College of Media at Illinois presents Roger19thAnnual Ebert’s Film Festival2017 April 19-23, 2017 The Virginia Theatre Chaz Ebert: Co-Founder and Producer 203 W. Park, Champaign, IL Nate Kohn: Festival Director 2017 Roger Ebert’s Film Festival The University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign The College of Media at Illinois Presents... Roger Ebert’s Film Festival 2017 April 19–23, 2017 Chaz Ebert, Co-Founder, Producer, and Host Nate Kohn, Festival Director Casey Ludwig, Assistant Director More information about the festival can be found at www.ebertfest.com Mission Founded by the late Roger Ebert, University of Illinois Journalism graduate and a Pulitzer Prize- winning film critic, Roger Ebert’s Film Festival takes place in Urbana-Champaign each April for a week, hosted by Chaz Ebert. The festival presents 12 films representing a cross-section of important cinematic works overlooked by audiences, critics and distributors. The films are screened in the 1,500-seat Virginia Theatre, a restored movie palace built in the 1920s. A portion of the festival’s income goes toward on-going renovations at the theatre. The festival brings together the films’ producers, writers, actors and directors to help showcase their work. A film- maker or scholar introduces each film, and each screening is followed by a substantive on-stage Q&A discussion among filmmakers, critics and the audience. In addition to the screenings, the festival hosts a number of academic panel discussions featuring filmmaker guests, scholars and students. The mission of Roger Ebert’s Film Festival is to praise films, genres and formats that have been overlooked.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction in FOCUS: Cinephilia
    IN FOCUS: Cinephilia Introduction edited by MARK BETZ s was the case for authorship around 1990, in the last decade the tide has turned for cinephilia. Raised from the critical doldrums in which it had drifted since the 1970s, it has in the new mil- A lenium gathered momentum in the form of an outpouring of published essays, special journal issues, and book-length collections (as well as a singly authored monograph) devoted to its numerous mani- festations and implications. As some of the contributions in this dossier indicate, it was Susan Sontag’s 1996 New York Times Magazine lament for the bygone days of cinephilia, “The Decay of Cinema,” which sparked the powder keg—buried, not forgotten, unearthed anew—for critical work on what might be termed the new cinephilia. Much of this work proceeds from and along the faultlines that have divided aca- demic fi lm studies proper from the more broadly based fi lm culture which partly gave rise to the discipline in the fi rst place. And it is along precisely these faultlines that cinephilia’s future must be envisioned. I consider this in-between-ness to be a good thing: cinephilia may be understood as something of an irritant to certain entrenched con- ceptions about what academic study proper is, what it might concern itself with, how it should carry out its procedures—and this is very much the spirit of George Toles’s piece which concludes this dossier. It also fl ies in the face of the “death of cinema” doom-mongering that came into vogue around the time of Sontag’s article and that fi xated on how new digital media are effecting a fundamental break in the history of the medium.
    [Show full text]
  • THE Permanent Crisis of FILM Criticism
    mattias FILM THEORY FILM THEORY the PermaNENT Crisis of IN MEDIA HISTORY IN MEDIA HISTORY film CritiCism frey the ANXiety of AUthority mattias frey Film criticism is in crisis. Dwelling on the Kingdom, and the United States to dem­ the many film journalists made redundant at onstrate that film criticism has, since its P newspapers, magazines, and other “old origins, always found itself in crisis. The erma media” in past years, commentators need to assert critical authority and have voiced existential questions about anxieties over challenges to that author­ N E the purpose and worth of the profession ity are longstanding concerns; indeed, N T in the age of WordPress blogospheres these issues have animated and choreo­ C and proclaimed the “death of the critic.” graphed the trajectory of international risis Bemoaning the current anarchy of inter­ film criticism since its origins. net amateurs and the lack of authorita­ of tive critics, many journalists and acade­ Mattias Frey is Senior Lecturer in Film at film mics claim that in the digital age, cultural the University of Kent, author of Postwall commentary has become dumbed down German Cinema: History, Film History, C and fragmented into niche markets. and Cinephilia, co­editor of Cine-Ethics: riti Arguing against these claims, this book Ethical Dimensions of Film Theory, Prac- C examines the history of film critical dis­ tice, and Spectatorship, and editor of the ism course in France, Germany, the United journal Film Studies. AUP.nl 9789089647177 9789089648167 The Permanent Crisis of Film Criticism Film Theory in Media History explores the epistemological and theoretical founda- tions of the study of film through texts by classical authors as well as anthologies and monographs on key issues and developments in film theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Realism and Formalism Even Before 1900, Movies Began to Develop in Two ­Major Directions: the Realistic and the For- Malistic
    Realism and Formalism Even before 1900, movies began to develop in two major directions: the realistic and the for- malistic. In the mid‑1890s in France, the Lumière brothers delighted audiences with their short movies dealing with everyday occurrences. Such films as The Arrival of a Train (4–4a) fascinated viewers precisely because they seemed to capture the flux and spontaneity of events as they were viewed in real life. At about the same time, Georges Méliès (pronounced mel‑yez) was creating a number of fantasy films that emphasized purely imagined events. Such movies as A Trip to the Moon (4–4b) were typical mixtures of whimsical narrative and trick photogra‑ phy. In many respects, the Lumières can be regarded as the founders of the realist tradition of cinema, and Méliès of the formalist tradition. Realism and formalism are general rather than absolute terms. When used to suggest a tendency toward either polarity, such labels can be helpful, but in the end they’re just labels. Few films are exclusively formalist in style, and fewer yet are completely realist. There is also an important difference between realism and reality, although this distinction is often forgot‑ ten. Realism is a particular style, whereas physical reality is the source of all the raw materials of film, both realistic and formalistic. Virtually all movie directors go to the photographable world for their subject matter, but what they do with this material—how they shape and ma‑ nipulate it—is what determines their stylistic emphasis. Generally speaking, realistic films attempt to reproduce the surface of reality with a mini‑ mum of distortion.
    [Show full text]
  • Cinephilia and Online Communities Copyright 2013
    CINEPHILIA AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty by Stuart Collier In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Science, Technology and Culture in the School of Literature, Media, and Communication Georgia Institute of Technology August 2013 COPYRIGHT 2013 BY STUART COLLIER Collier 2 CINEPHILIA AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES Approved by: Dr. JC Reilly, Advisor School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Vinicius Navarro School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Angela Dalle Vacche School of Literature, Media, and Communications Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: May 5, 2013 Collier 3 INTRODUCTION Cinephilia, broadly defined, means ‘love for cinema.’ Many people love movies, and for a variety of reasons, but for cinephiles that love runs far deeper than the desire to be entertained. Cinephiles are marked by a passion for cinema, one often defined in terms of aesthetic appreciation, consumption of film criticism, and a tendency to seek out what is marginalized or undervalued in filmmaking. On the surface, cinephilia seems to refer to a specialized fan enterprise with no larger significance. However, cinephilia has been integral to the historical evolution of cinema, spurring on new artistic traditions and modes of critical thought, and keying in on larger paradigmatic issues of information circulation and media consumption. The 1960s surge in cinematic modernism and auteur theory, the proliferation of underground video trading and cult film enthusiasm in the 70s and 80s, and the globalism of contemporary film culture are all directly tied to cinephilic activism. While cinephilia has led to well-documented reverberations within film culture since the beginning of the twentieth century, the steady rise of digital media over the past two decades has radically transformed the nature of its productivity into something with readily observable implications for all forms of media consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Www .Thevirginia.Org
    2014 - 2015 INAUGURAL PERFORMING ARTS SEASON ENJOY Dear Friends, Your beautiful Virginia Theatre has been through quite a transformation, and we are thrilled to present her now as she was when she was first built: full of beauty, hope, and promise. We couldn’t be more excited for the future of our historic theatre as we move into our first-ever planned season with a hand-picked line-up of crowd favorites, compelling new acts, and wonderful local flavor. As we enter this new phase of the Virginia’s journey, we would like to thank you, our sup- porters, for your excitement and dedication over the past fourteen years. We invite you to join us for music, movies, comedy, theatre, sing-alongs, holiday fun, and more. Your Virginia Theatre is a wonderful place to explore, enjoy, and be delighted all year long. You’ll be treated to Grammy-Award winning singers like Lyle Lovett and His Large Band alongside hometown favorites like the Tons O’ Fun Band; national comedians like Bill Cosby, Mike Birbiglia and Second City; and, of course, local artistry courtesy of The Chorale, The Champaign-Urbana Ballet and Champaign Park District Dance Arts and Youth Theatre, Art in Motion, and so many others. Along with live acts, the Virginia is also proud to present movies on our new digital projector while continuing the use of our historic 35mm projectors. Film series such as our Best of Summer Blockbusters, the News-Gazette Film Series, and the 17th Annual Roger Ebert’s Film Festival are an essential part of our upcoming season.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying Film with André Bazin
    BLANDINE JORET FILM THEORY IN MEDIA HISTORY STUDYING FILM WITH ANDRÉ BAZIN BLANDINE JORET STUDYING FILM WITH ANDRÉ BAZIN ANDRÉ WITH FILM STUDYING Studying Film with André Bazin Film Theory in Media History Film Theory in Media History explores the epistemological and theoretical foundations of the study of film through texts by classical authors as well as anthologies and monographs on key issues and developments in film theory. Adopting a historical perspective, but with a firm eye to the further development of the field, the series provides a platform for ground-breaking new research into film theory and media history and features high-profile editorial projects that offer resources for teaching and scholarship. Combining the book form with open access online publishing the series reaches the broadest possible audience of scholars, students, and other readers with a passion for film and theory. Series editors: Prof. Dr. Vinzenz Hediger (Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany), Weihong Bao (University of California, Berkeley, United States), Dr. Trond Lundemo (Stockholm University, Sweden). Editorial Board Members: Dudley Andrew, Yale University, United States Raymond Bellour, CNRS Paris, France Chris Berry, Goldsmiths, University of London, United Kingdom Francesco Casetti, Yale University, United States Thomas Elsaesser, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Jane Gaines, Columbia University, United States Andre Gaudreault, University of Montreal, Canada Gertrud Koch, Free University of Berlin, Germany John MacKay, Yale University, United States Markus Nornes, University of Michigan, United States Patricia Pisters, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Leonardo Quaresima, University of Udine, Italy David Rodowick, University of Chicago, United States Philip Rosen, Brown University, United States Petr Szczepanik, Masaryk University Brno, Czech Republic Brian Winston, Lincoln University, United Kingdom Film Theory in Media History is published in cooperation with the Permanent Seminar for the History of Film Theories.
    [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]
  • Ebertfest 2013 Roger Ebert's Film Festival
    The College of Media at Illinois Presents... 15th Annual ebertfestApril 17–21 2013The University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Roger Ebert’s Film Festival The College of Media at Illinois Presents... Roger Ebert’s Film Festival 2013 April 17–21, 2013 Roger Ebert, Programmer and Host Chaz Ebert, Executive Producer Nate Kohn, Festival Director Mary Susan Britt, Associate Director More information about the festival can be found at www.ebertfest.com Mission Roger Ebert, 1964 University of Illinois Journalism graduate and Pulitzer Prize-winning film critic, comes to Urbana-Champaign each spring to host Ebertfest. The mission of Roger Ebert’s Film Festival is to praise films, genres and formats that have been overlooked by audiences, critics and distributors. Each year, Mr. Ebert selects 12 films representing a cross-section of important cinematic works. They include films without distributors, independent and studio films that did not win wide audiences, formats such as 70mm, silent films, and overlooked genres like the documentary. The films are screened in the 1,500-seat Virginia Theatre, a restored movie palace built in the 1920s. Festival guests who help showcase the features include producers, writers, actors and directors. Following each screening, Mr. Ebert leads discussions with the filmmakers for general audi- ences, distributors and critics from around the world. There are also a number of campus wide panel discussions featuring Mr. Ebert, festival guests and academic scholars. We work to keep the festival small enough so that a sense of community can develop among the audience, filmmakers, guests, students and scholars. The festival is a non-profit event of the College of Media at Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • La Caméra-Stylo
    10 LA CAMÉRA-STYLO Notes on video criticism and cinephilia Christian Keathley In his 1975 essay ‘The Unattainable Text’–written immediately in advance of the video revolution that enabled cinephiles everywhere to possess film libraries of their own – Raymond Bellour speculated about that day in the future when people could own movies in the same way that they own books and records. Considering the implications of such ownership of movies for cinema scholarship, Bellour wrote, ‘If film studies are still done then, they will undoubtedly be more numerous, more imaginative, more accurate, and above all more enjoyable than the ones we carry out in fear and trembling, threatened continually with the dispossession of the object’ (Bellour 2000: 21). That future Bellour imagined has been with us for more than three decades, and while much attention has been given to the changes that the existence of home video has had on film style,1 there has only recently been a consideration of the ways that ownership and re-viewability of movies is changing – or has the potential to change – film criticism. In Death 24x a Second, Laura Mulvey describes how movies on DVD – which offer features like freeze frame, scan, slow motion, as well as random access of scenes and infinite replayability –‘have opened up new ways of seeing old movies’ (Mulvey 2006: 8), ways that Bellour in 1975 could not have imagined. A key issue for Mulvey in this development is the concept of ‘delay’, which for her refers both to ‘slowing down the flow of the film’ and to ‘the delay in time during which some detail has lain dormant, as it were, waiting to be noticed’ (Mulvey 2006: 8).
    [Show full text]