SEE! HEAR! CUT! KILL! EXPERIENCING FRIDAY THE 13TH By Wickham Clayton. Jackson: U Mississippi P, 2020. 238 pp. $30.00 paper.

IF 0.5 3区 艺术学 0 FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION
Alissa Burger
{"title":"SEE! HEAR! CUT! KILL! EXPERIENCING FRIDAY THE 13TH By Wickham Clayton. Jackson: U Mississippi P, 2020. 238 pp. $30.00 paper.","authors":"Alissa Burger","doi":"10.1080/01956051.2021.1987834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of this project, essays within Women Make Horror: Filmmaking, Feminism, Genre explore a range of texts including narrative and experimental cinema, as well as short, anthology, and feature filmmaking. The essays included present case studies of North American as well as international filmmakers, films, and festivals. While the collection’s eighteen (in total) chapters include a range of topics—and veer into quite different scholarly directions—a recurring concern seen in a number of the essays has to do with the relationship between gender and genre. This focus can be clearly observed in several of the chapters that address American films. For example, in “Stephanie Rothman and Vampiric Film Histories,” Alicia Kozma addresses the intersection of gender and labor in the entertainment industries through an insightful case study of director Stephanie Rothman. Similarly, in “Self-Reflexivity and Feminist Camp in Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare,” Tosha R. Taylor examines the relationship between gender and genre while uncovering how film director Rachel Talalay hones a style and creates strong female characters that defy expectations as well as break barriers. This concern is addressed as well by Laura Mee in “Murders and Adaptations: Gender in American Psycho.” There, Mee discusses Bret Easton Ellis’s controversial 1991 novel and its (equally) controversial film adaptation by exploring the involvement by female filmmakers in bringing the work to the big screen. While it is true that many of the chapters that concern international films and filmmakers tackle a range of disparate topics, noteworthy essays in this collection effectively address the crucial relationship between gender and genre in non-US based films, as well (while also covering other important issues related to international cinema, such as those related to industry norms and reception history). For instance, in her worthwhile and nuanced essay, “The Secret Beyond the Door: Daria Nicolodi and Suspiria’s Multiple Authorship,” Martha Shearer considers the relationship between authorship, gender, and genre in the 1977 Italian supernatural horror film. Molly Kim’s thought-provoking essay, “Women-Made Horror in Korean Cinema,” also shines a light on the relationship between gender and genre, while she reexamines the history of Korean horror cinema. In both cases, the authors raise interesting questions about the assumptions traditionally associated with women filmmakers working in the field of horror cinema—and they thus both also participate in an important and ongoing discussion about these stillrelevant issues. As essays such as these demonstrate, Women Make Horror succeeds in highlighting the underexplored role women have played in creating horror films. Thus, by bringing these essays together, Peirse creates an important dialogue about horror films and their cultural relevance. In this sense, the collection fulfills its objective, which is to transform traditional views about women filmmakers and the horror film genre. By uncovering the complicated history of women’s engagement with horror films, and crossing national and scholarly boundaries to explore horror’s feminist themes, Peirse’s edited collection, Women Make Horror: Filmmaking, Feminism, Genre, pushes us to reassess the roles women have played in creating horror films. In this sense, this collection proves to be a worthwhile addition to the fields of both film studies and gender studies—and it therefore should be of interest to anyone working in those disciplines.","PeriodicalId":44169,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF POPULAR FILM AND TELEVISION","volume":"1 1","pages":"236 - 237"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF POPULAR FILM AND TELEVISION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01956051.2021.1987834","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As part of this project, essays within Women Make Horror: Filmmaking, Feminism, Genre explore a range of texts including narrative and experimental cinema, as well as short, anthology, and feature filmmaking. The essays included present case studies of North American as well as international filmmakers, films, and festivals. While the collection’s eighteen (in total) chapters include a range of topics—and veer into quite different scholarly directions—a recurring concern seen in a number of the essays has to do with the relationship between gender and genre. This focus can be clearly observed in several of the chapters that address American films. For example, in “Stephanie Rothman and Vampiric Film Histories,” Alicia Kozma addresses the intersection of gender and labor in the entertainment industries through an insightful case study of director Stephanie Rothman. Similarly, in “Self-Reflexivity and Feminist Camp in Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare,” Tosha R. Taylor examines the relationship between gender and genre while uncovering how film director Rachel Talalay hones a style and creates strong female characters that defy expectations as well as break barriers. This concern is addressed as well by Laura Mee in “Murders and Adaptations: Gender in American Psycho.” There, Mee discusses Bret Easton Ellis’s controversial 1991 novel and its (equally) controversial film adaptation by exploring the involvement by female filmmakers in bringing the work to the big screen. While it is true that many of the chapters that concern international films and filmmakers tackle a range of disparate topics, noteworthy essays in this collection effectively address the crucial relationship between gender and genre in non-US based films, as well (while also covering other important issues related to international cinema, such as those related to industry norms and reception history). For instance, in her worthwhile and nuanced essay, “The Secret Beyond the Door: Daria Nicolodi and Suspiria’s Multiple Authorship,” Martha Shearer considers the relationship between authorship, gender, and genre in the 1977 Italian supernatural horror film. Molly Kim’s thought-provoking essay, “Women-Made Horror in Korean Cinema,” also shines a light on the relationship between gender and genre, while she reexamines the history of Korean horror cinema. In both cases, the authors raise interesting questions about the assumptions traditionally associated with women filmmakers working in the field of horror cinema—and they thus both also participate in an important and ongoing discussion about these stillrelevant issues. As essays such as these demonstrate, Women Make Horror succeeds in highlighting the underexplored role women have played in creating horror films. Thus, by bringing these essays together, Peirse creates an important dialogue about horror films and their cultural relevance. In this sense, the collection fulfills its objective, which is to transform traditional views about women filmmakers and the horror film genre. By uncovering the complicated history of women’s engagement with horror films, and crossing national and scholarly boundaries to explore horror’s feminist themes, Peirse’s edited collection, Women Make Horror: Filmmaking, Feminism, Genre, pushes us to reassess the roles women have played in creating horror films. In this sense, this collection proves to be a worthwhile addition to the fields of both film studies and gender studies—and it therefore should be of interest to anyone working in those disciplines.
看!听!减少!杀!维克汉姆·克莱顿《体验13号星期五》杰克逊:密西西比大学,2020年。238页,30美元纸。
作为这个项目的一部分,《女性制造恐怖:电影制作、女权主义、类型》中的文章探讨了一系列的文本,包括叙事和实验电影,以及短片、选集和故事片。这些文章包括北美和国际电影人、电影和电影节的当前案例研究。虽然这本合集的十八章(总共)包含了一系列的主题,并转向了完全不同的学术方向,但在许多文章中反复出现的一个问题与性别和体裁之间的关系有关。这种关注可以在论述美国电影的几个章节中清楚地观察到。例如,在《斯蒂芬妮·罗斯曼和吸血鬼电影史》一书中,艾丽西亚·科兹玛通过对斯蒂芬妮·罗斯曼导演的深刻案例研究,探讨了娱乐行业中性别和劳动的交集。同样,在《弗雷迪之死:最后的噩梦》中,托莎·r·泰勒(Tosha R. Taylor)检视了性别和类型之间的关系,同时揭示了电影导演雷切尔·塔拉雷(Rachel Talalay)如何锤砺一种风格,创造出超越预期、打破障碍的坚强女性角色。劳拉·梅在《谋杀与改编:美国精神病人中的性别》一书中也提到了这个问题。在书中,梅探讨了布雷特·伊斯顿·埃利斯1991年备受争议的小说及其(同样)备受争议的改编电影,探讨了女性电影人在将作品搬上大银幕时的参与。虽然这本书的许多章节确实涉及国际电影和电影人,涉及了一系列不同的主题,但这本书中值得注意的文章也有效地解决了非美国电影中性别和类型之间的关键关系(同时也涵盖了与国际电影相关的其他重要问题,例如与行业规范和接受历史相关的问题)。例如,玛莎·希勒在她那篇颇有价值且细致入时的文章《门后的秘密:达里娅·尼科罗迪和苏斯皮里亚的多重作者》中,探讨了1977年意大利超自然恐怖电影中作者、性别和类型之间的关系。莫利•金的文章《韩国电影中的女性制造的恐怖》引人深思,在重新审视韩国恐怖电影史的同时,也揭示了性别与类型之间的关系。在这两个案例中,作者都提出了一些有趣的问题,这些问题是关于传统上与在恐怖电影领域工作的女性电影人有关的假设——因此,他们也都参与了关于这些仍然相关的问题的重要和持续的讨论。正如这些文章所展示的那样,《女人制造恐怖》成功地突出了女性在创作恐怖电影中所扮演的未被充分发掘的角色。因此,通过将这些文章汇集在一起,皮尔斯创造了一个关于恐怖电影及其文化相关性的重要对话。从这个意义上说,这个系列实现了它的目标,即改变对女性电影人和恐怖电影类型的传统看法。通过揭示女性参与恐怖电影的复杂历史,并跨越国家和学术界限探索恐怖的女权主义主题,皮尔斯的编辑集《女性制造恐怖:电影制作,女权主义,类型》促使我们重新评估女性在恐怖电影创作中所扮演的角色。从这个意义上说,这个合集被证明是对电影研究和性别研究领域的一个有价值的补充,因此,在这些学科工作的任何人都应该感兴趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JOURNAL OF POPULAR FILM AND TELEVISION
JOURNAL OF POPULAR FILM AND TELEVISION FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: How did Casablanca affect the home front during World War II? What is the postfeminist significance of Buffy the Vampire Slayer? The Journal of Popular Film and Television answers such far-ranging questions by using the methods of popular culture studies to examine commercial film and television, historical and contemporary. Articles discuss networks, genres, series, and audiences, as well as celebrity stars, directors, and studios. Regular features include essays on the social and cultural background of films and television programs, filmographies, bibliographies, and commissioned book and video reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信