CINEPHILE vol. 3 no. 1 Spring/Summer, April 2007 Table of Contents Editor’s Introduction 2 Contributors 3 Containing Their Rage Jennie Carlsten 4 The Global Social Problem Film Andrew DeWaard 12 Representations of Western Tourism in Cinema Tara Kolton 19 Interview With Filmmaker James Longley 28 War Films Without War Brenda Cromb 33 The Family Myth in Hollywood Slavoj Zizek 42 Medea’s Family Reunion Christine Evans 47 (Zombie) Revolution at the Gates R. Colin Tait 61 Book Reviews 71 CINEPHILE Vol. 3 No. 1, Spring/Summer Issue, June 2007. ISSN: 1712-9265 CINEPHILE (formerly UBCinephile): The Film Studies Journal of The University of British Columbia Copyright: The University of British Columbia Film Program Publisher: The University of British Columbia Film Program Editor: R. Colin Tait Faculty Advisor: Dr. Ernest Mathijs Program Administrator: Kate Castelo, Gerald Vanderwoude Original Art by: Alissa Staples Editorial Board: Jennie Carlsten, Brenda Cromb, Andrew deWaard, Christine Evans, Tara Kolton, Renée Penney, Lindsay Steenberg. Special Thanks to: Lisa Coulthard, Zanna Downes, Christine Evans, Brian McIlroy, Ian Patton, Richard Payment, Dave Cooper, Bern Staples, Sarah Gay. UBC Film Program Suite 235A Brock Hall Annex 1874 East Mall Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z1 Canada tel: (604) 822-6037 fax: (604) 822-0508 www.film.ubc.ca/ubcinephile Hollywood and Liberalism 1 Editor’s Note: Hollywood and Liberalism R. Colin Tait “We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in ‘reality,’ and reality has a well-known liberal bias.” – Steven Colbert at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner, 2006 elcome to the third issue of Cinephile: The by recontextualizing it within industrial, theoretical and University of British Columbia’s Film Journal. historical terms. This endeavor entails repatriating and WOur mandate involves considering this cinematic dislodging the political connotations of the word within the zeitgeist, while challenging the basic assumptions which media as most often expressed in the historical conflation permeate our field. We consider film studies an important of “Commie” and “Pinko” respectively. It is imperative emerging discourse, particularly when we consider the that we clarify that this enterprise aims not at reviving the absolute dominance of visual culture in our society. Our now-defunct project of “political correctness” but rather current theme, “Hollywood and Liberalism,” follows our for precision about the words we speak (and images that we tradition of addressing topics which engage the pressing trade in), in addition to dealing with the meaning-effects of issues of film, while at the same time proving its ongoing these words and images. We propose that there needs to be relevance to society at large. space to let ideas breathe, and that this involves a nuanced In our shorthand culture, most often communicated discussion which exceeds either/or partisanship. As an through talking points, it seems natural to assume that exemplar of this mentality, the statement that anyone is either Hollywood and Liberalism are synonymous concepts. “with America or with the terrorists” only impoverishes the However, even a brief look at the history of Hollywood public sphere as it leaves room for only the one-dimensional demonstrates that the opposite is true. The institutional left and right positions, ignoring ahead, behind, up, and and systemic logic of “Hollywood” exists as a miniature down. The questioning of anything outside of the party lines version of U.S. Capital, embedded in the larger logic of Left and Right, replete with accusations which begin with of the increasing corporatization of society. Historical the empty signifier “anti” (American/Israeli/nationalist, etc.) events – ranging from the institutions self-censorship via only serves to greater undermine the idea of “freedom,” the repressive and draconian policies of the Hays Code, by limiting and censoring everything we do and say in a McCarthyism, and the increasing spread of Hollywood as the democratic society. dominant mode of world cinema – all speak to the essential We will illustrate this contemporary deadlock by fact of Hollywood’s hegemony, not to mention its inherently investigating film’s tangible industrial, ideological and conservative formal qualities. metaphorical contributions to perpetuating and dispelling It is the residents of Hollywood who perpetuate the these myths. Until these positions are clarified and redefined, myth of liberal Hollywood. The recent fundraising effort the current perception of both these discourses (conservative in Hollywood, where prominent Democratic presidential and liberal alike) are akin to the recent farcical (and scary) hopefuls kowtow to the “cultural elite,” does nothing to depiction of “The Jew” in Sacha Baron Cohen’s film Borat: separate the perception of this link, nor does the annual ritual Cultural Learnings for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of of the Academy Awards. If anything, the metalinguistic Kazakhstan, 2006. We propose that the rhetoric used to entity known as Hollywood more often represents its precise define both the liberal and the conservative is as absurdly opposite – a place where starlets get drunk and crash their propagandistic as Borat’s monstrous othering of “the Jew” as (electric) cars. We must further consider that the films which a mythical egg-laying beast with claws and horns. stand for Hollywood’s “liberal” efforts do not represent a We are incredibly fortunate to have one of the world’s significant fraction of the profits that Hollywood garners. prominent thinkers join us in our endeavor and are happy Rather, they accounted for a mere 5% of the total American to present a new article by Slavoj Žižek in this issue. I domestic gross. In short, we should recall that none of 2005’s cannot fully express my gratitude for this collegial gesture, Best Picture Academy Award nominees – which included the and thank Professor Žižek endlessly for his contribution to most unabashedly “liberal” films in recent history – none of our journal. It is only fitting that in an effort to clarify our these nominees even came close to cracking the top 20 box- positions within the field of public discourse that we follow office earners for that year. Professor Žižek’s recent imperatives to think before we Dealing specifically with the semantics of “liberalism,” speak, read before we write and learn before we do either. our goal is to disentangle the term’s popular meaning CINEPHILE vol. 3, Number 1, Spring/Summer ‘07 Contributors Jennie Carlsten received her M.A. in Film Studies from the University of British Columbia, and her B.A. in Communications (Media Studies and Film Concentration) and Political Science from the University of Iowa. Her research concerns include audience reception and spectatorship, ethnic representation, political identity, and memory construction. Jennie is particularly interested in Irish and Northern Irish cinema. Brenda Cromb completed her Honours B.A. in English and Cinema Studies at the Univeristy of Toronto. Currently, she is an M.A. Candidate at UBC. She recently presented a paper on Maggie Cheung and transnational stardom at the 2007 FSAC Graduate Colloquium. Other recent work has included papers on Takashi Miike’s Audition and on melodrama in the films of Pedro Almódovar. Brenda plans to complete her degree in 2008. Andrew deWaard Andrew deWaard is an M.A. Candidate in Film Studies at the University of British Columbia. His broad research area is popular/consumer/celebrity culture and the television/music/film industries that (re)produce it, viewed from a political-economic lens. Intertextuality, Steven Soderbergh, Medium Theory, and Paul Virilio especially tickle his fancy. His latest work is “Joints and Jams: Spike Lee as Sellebrity Auteur,” in The Spike Lee Reader (forthcoming). Christine Evans received her Masters degree in Film Studies from the University of British Columbia and her Bachelor’s degree in Cinema Studies from the University of Toronto. She is currently undertaking her Ph. D. in Film Studies at the University of Kent, Canterbury, where her research focuses on Slavoj Žižek’s unique contributions to film theory. She has published articles on shame and the lamella, psychoanalytic structures of belief, aphanisis and narrational strategies in cinema, the work of Slavoj Žižek, and the ‘ethics’ of representation. Her research interests include psychoanalysis and cinema and the philosophical comprehensions and expressions of love and theology. She thinks that baby ducks are really cute! Tara Kolton graduated from Rutgers University, 2004, with a B.A. in English (with a concentration in Cinema Studies) and is currently a M.A. candidate in Film Studies at the University of British Columbia. Tara recently attended the 2007 FSAC Graduate Colloquium where she delivered her paper, “Traversing the Internal: Metaphysical Landscapes in Contemporary Cinema.” Her research interests include French cinema, film music and sound, and transcendental style in cinema. Alissa Staples is a painter, translator, and illustrator who received her B.F.A. in Studio Art at UBC. In her illustrations for this issue of “Cinephile,” she explored the various styles of sequential art and a merging of both traditional and digital painting media. She lives in North Vancouver. Lindsay Steenberg is a doctoral candidate at the University of East Anglia under the supervision of Professor Yvonne Tasker. Her dissertation is concerned with the representation of female