FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W329186963> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W329186963 startingPage "68" @default.
• W329186963 abstract "It appears that the discipline of cinema studies is entering an unprecedented stage, following brief, misguided excursion into the realm of what has been dubbed the 'post-theory' era in cinema studies. A fairly recent survey of this precarious field--doubly unsettling in terms of both the state of film criticism and the state of the medium itself--entitled Reinventing Film Studies provides case in point. In it, the editors have assembled range of texts that explore issues pertaining to number of aesthetic, historical, and more generally, theoretical issues surrounding the past, present, and future (i.e. multimedia and digital formats) of film theory and criticism. Bill Nichols' key text, an articulation of this less-than-desirable state, accordingly titled Film Theory and the revolt against the master narratives, constructs compelling argument calling for return to climate wherein the art of theorizing projects as a representation of how we wish to engage with the world. (1) This change in attitude reflects the underlying assumptions about the status and role of intellectuals and points to an earlier incarnation of similar debate in the late sixties writings of Noam Chomsky. (2) Chomsky's appeal was aimed at addressing and confronting American imperialism and more specifically the stale intellectual and critical climate during America's widely contested interventions in Southeast Asia. In American Power, he argued for the need to question the numerous levels of consent--at the level of both government and media--powers that conspired to control the flow and order of information. Equally collaborative in this war of words and images were apologists, essentially intellectuals who were unwilling to commit to their intellectual duties, duties that could potentially place their academic titles in jeopardy. (3) Echoes of Nichols' timely appeal can be observed in recent issue of CineAction wherein Richard Rushton provides suitable critique of the relatively new yet essentially limited paradigm that is audience research. Rushton vies to return (at least portion of) film studies to proper film interpretation with the ultimate goal of offering ways in which the world might be changed; we should not strain to identify trend here, one that projects an awareness and perception of film studies as primarily humanity, where scientifically inspired methodologies hold less ground. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] This motion towards even the realm of possibility was enough to inspire an act of critical resuscitation on my part, and in the following pages I will state my case for renewed interest in most underrated and neglected work of art, Alejandro Jodorowsky's Holy Mountain (1973). Furthermore, this is but one specimen culled from much larger group of films such as Benoit Delepine and Gustave de Kervern's Avida (2006) that underscore our need to revise the current state of film criticism, or risk banishing potentially great artworks to the dustbins of film history. The history surrounding the release of Jodorowsky's third feature is curious one, and even meagre knowledge of it strikes one as being strangely conspiratorial. A most ambitious production, it was funded graciously by none other than John Lennon and Yoko Ono via their producer Allen Klein, to the tune of one and half million dollars, and was the most expensive Mexican film produced to date. Following Jodorowsky's abandonment of Pauline Reage's 1954 sadoerotic bestseller The Story of 0, Klein chose to shelve the former's films until very recently. Nevertheless, Holy Mountain has often been credited as the film that ushered in the midnight (cult) screenings that evolved in cine-clubs across the globe, thanks in part to the success of Jodorowsky's earlier metaphysical western, El Topo (1969). A few years ago, during stint at local repertory cinema, I could fondly recall having to turn film enthusiasts away from the box office because our Friday and Saturday evening screenings were sold out. …" @default.
• W329186963 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W329186963 creator A5067531120 @default.
• W329186963 date "2009-03-22" @default.
• W329186963 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W329186963 title "The Art of Persuasion: Or: Have You Seen This Man's Films Lately?" @default.
• W329186963 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W329186963 type Work @default.
• W329186963 sameAs 329186963 @default.
• W329186963 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W329186963 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W329186963 hasAuthorship W329186963A5067531120 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C142437206 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C163258240 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C170494952 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C2778757428 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C29595303 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C519580073 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C7991579 @default.
• W329186963 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C107038049 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C11413529 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C121332964 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C124952713 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C142362112 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C142437206 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C144024400 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C163258240 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C170494952 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C17744445 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C199539241 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C2778757428 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C29595303 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C41008148 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C48103436 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C519580073 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C62520636 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C7991579 @default.
• W329186963 hasConceptScore W329186963C95457728 @default.
• W329186963 hasIssue "76" @default.
• W329186963 hasLocation W3291869631 @default.
• W329186963 hasOpenAccess W329186963 @default.
• W329186963 hasPrimaryLocation W3291869631 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W1170811059 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W117736236 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W1499457885 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W1563221678 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W1601490498 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2018817381 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2028355903 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2073456162 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2087059546 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2095535030 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2132860909 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2134412334 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W232742485 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2508930103 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2993200009 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W304042661 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W312747984 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W427675852 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2601258200 @default.
• W329186963 hasRelatedWork W2760458877 @default.
• W329186963 isParatext "false" @default.
• W329186963 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W329186963 magId "329186963" @default.
• W329186963 workType "article" @default.