{"title":"Cecilia Mangini and Lino Del Fra Collection, Cineteca di Bologna","authors":"Michela Zegna","doi":"10.1386/jicms_00117_7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jicms_00117_7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78982730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Neorealist Film Culture, 1945‐1954: Rome, Open Cinema, Francesco Pitassio (2019)","authors":"G. Bertellini","doi":"10.1386/jicms_00108_5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jicms_00108_5","url":null,"abstract":"Review of: Neorealist Film Culture, 1945‐1954: Rome, Open Cinema, Francesco Pitassio (2019)Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 384 pp.,ISBN 978-9-08964-800-6, h/bk, £99.00","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81615477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Hacked Transmissions: Technology and Connective Activism in Italy, Alessandra Renzi (2020)","authors":"J. Mullins","doi":"10.1386/jicms_00113_5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jicms_00113_5","url":null,"abstract":"Review of: Hacked Transmissions: Technology and Connective Activism in Italy, Alessandra Renzi (2020)Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 256 pp.,ISBN 978-1-51790-326-8, p/bk, $27.00","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78146373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Photoromance, she read: Fandom and the politics of Italian media","authors":"Paola Bonifazio","doi":"10.1386/jicms_00099_1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jicms_00099_1","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines Italian non-fiction media productions of the late 1950s and 1960s that represent the photoromance industry and its female fans. I argue that state-controlled and/or privately owned media outlets and their contributors (among them, Cesare Zavattini and Mario Soldati)\u0000 scapegoated photoromances in defence of moral, social and cultural respectability, but also on the basis of anxieties towards the increasing role played by female audiences in the making of culture. Furthermore, I show that politically engaged documentaries similarly chastised the photoromance\u0000 industry without necessarily serving the cause of women’s emancipation. Blaming photoromances for the degeneration of Catholic values, for the debasement of working-class culture and for the degradation of consumerist society, all films serve the same purpose of maintaining a patriarchal\u0000 society’s status quo, of diverging attention from ‘higher’ cultural products and their exploitation of women’s bodies and of minimizing the important role that female fans played in the success of a global market.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75067353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Dreams and desire. The cinema of Pier Paolo Pasolini and Federico Fellini: A conversation with Roberto Chiesi","authors":"Angela Porcarelli","doi":"10.1386/jicms_00104_7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jicms_00104_7","url":null,"abstract":"In this interview, Roberto Chiesi talks about the personal and professional relationship between Pier Paolo Pasolini and Federico Fellini. He describes their experience with neorealism and how each of them moved past it to develop an original and unique cinematographic style. He focuses\u0000 on specific elements of their cinema, such as the importance of the oneiric dimension and their conception of the sacred. Chiesi explains the central role civic involvement had in the work of Pasolini; his last movie Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma (Salò, or the 120\u0000 Days of Sodom) (Pasolini 1975) is centred on the dramatic process of degradation caused by the new consumeristic ideology. Fellini, instead, was primarily concerned with the corruptive vulgarity of the new commercial television. Highlighting the importance of Pasolini and Fellini’s\u0000 legacy, Chiesi concludes the interview by saying that the two artists had the foresight to imagine the dreadful long-term consequences the events of their time would produce, consequences we are experiencing in today’s society.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89428211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Seinfeld","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0346","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0346","url":null,"abstract":"Co-created by comedian Jerry Seinfeld, and his friend, also a stand-up comic, Larry David, Seinfeld (1989–1998) ran for nine seasons on NBC. The show was initially designed around Jerry (Seinfeld, playing a version of himself), but his three friends, George (played by Jason Alexander and based loosely on Larry David), Elaine (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), and Kramer (Michael Richards) would feature just as prominently. The four unmarried characters would gather at Jerry’s Upper West Side apartment or the neighborhood diner to commiserate on the challenges of their social and professional lives, talking and scheming their way through failed relationships, crazy parents, annoying acquaintances, and eccentric bosses. Television critics picked up on the show’s quality almost immediately, but a larger audience was slow to find Seinfeld. After the pilot scored infamously low with a test audience, NBC was about to pass on the show before its late-night division stepped in to fund it for primetime programming, providing a budget for a meagre four-episode first season. The next year, NBC remained cautiously supportive with a twelve-episode order, and by season three, the first full season, the show was catching on. Season four, which included a serialized, self-referential plot about Jerry and George creating a sitcom for NBC, won the show its only Emmy Award for Outstanding Comedy Series. By season five, it reached third in the Nielsen ratings, finishing either first or second in every season thereafter. The language of the show entered the cultural zeitgeist, and terms like “soup Nazi” and “sponge-worthy” remain part of the American lexicon. The much-hyped final episode ultimately scored the fourth largest audience for a series finale in history—over 75 million viewers. The episode eschewed a happy ending in favor of a more deserved fate for the four characters, who are punished for their nine seasons of selfish behavior. The finale received mixed reviews from critics and fans, and is remembered as a letdown. Overall, Seinfeld is considered one of the greatest sitcoms in television history, lauded for its writing, which was groundbreaking for its complex and interwoven plots, and for its comedic style, finding humor in the minutiae of daily life—it was known affectionately as a “show about nothing.” However, as the multifaceted scholarship on Seinfeld reveals, that nickname is misleading.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87911614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Musicals on Television","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0343","url":null,"abstract":"American musical theater and film have been crossing over into television since the mid-20th century. In the early days of American television, the proximity of Broadway and the headquarters of the television industry made a union between the popular musical form and the new living room medium a no-brainer. By 1944 the DuMont network had premiered the first musical made specifically for US television, The Boys from Boise, and within the next decade and a half, dozens of new and adapted musicals had made their way to the small screen and into homes across the country. In addition to musicals in their entirety, television embraced popular songs of the stage via variety series and specials. The works of Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, and Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II had already transcended the stage and screen, finding themselves on the Billboard charts and on people’s phonographs. Such ubiquity quickly translated to television, with Broadway singers and popular crooners alike performing across series. Over the next decades, full-length musical plays waned on television, but variety series and specials featuring the likes of Barbra Streisand, Frank Sinatra, Carol Channing, Liza Minnelli, and Bing Crosby flooded the airways. Shows like The Carol Burnett Show and The Muppet Show featured and parodied decades of musical theater and film, providing a musical education to unwitting viewers. By the eighties, the rise of cable television had opened up new spaces for high and low culture, with musical theater peppering the new (and quickly floundering) cultural cable channels and popular dance musicals selling themselves via music video on the phenomenally successful new youth-oriented channel MTV. Over the decades, US television would continue to dabble in the musical in the form of musical series, one-off musical episodes, a resurgence of live-musical broadcasts, and new Internet-based and streaming platforms that forced viewers to reconsider just what constituted television and breathed new life into the cross-platform musical television experience. Although almost wholly focusing on the musical’s foray into TV within a US context, this article also touches briefly on global settings, including musical theater reality TV in Canada, gender and musical television in Israel, and the musical dramas of the United Kingdom.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88722299","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Film Guilds and Unions","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0344","url":null,"abstract":"Film guilds and unions engage in collective bargaining on behalf of media workers in the United States and around the world. Historically, the word “guild” was associated with craft and professional training, but in the US film industry it is often interchangeable with “union.” The exception to this rule is the Producers Guild of America (PGA), which is a professional organization that maintains professional standards and provides its members with networking opportunities. In Hollywood, unions also exist alongside craft organizations such as the American Society of Cinematographers, which help to advance the art and establish professional norms, but do not negotiate wages or provide health and retirement benefits. Some film unions (such as those in the United States, Canada, and England) are historically more well established, in contrast to nations where production is not unionized or unionization has only recently begun. Film unions and guilds in the United States, which include the Directors Guild of America (DGA), the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), SAG-AFTRA (the union that represents screen performers), and the Writers Guild of America (WGA), have been the most well-studied. Since the first Studio Basic Agreement in 1926, unions have contributed to the professional development and well-being of Hollywood workers, but they have historically been marginal institutions within cinema and media scholarship. There has been abundant writing on union activities in journalistic sources and union magazines, all of which are essential reading for scholars of film guilds and unions. Those looking for scholarship on unions and guilds will need to read across disciplines, as the work on film guilds and unions is methodologically diverse and comes from labor historians and political economists of communication, in addition to cinema and media scholars.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79668932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Media Ecology","authors":"Sue Robinson","doi":"10.4324/9780203114261-52","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203114261-52","url":null,"abstract":"Media ecology is a clearly defined branch of the field of media studies and, among scholars who define themselves as media ecologists, is often recognized as a discipline in its own right. It offers a coherent, specific, and highly generative framework for thinking about and understanding media. Media ecology is specific in that practitioners in the larger discipline of media studies tend to focus on one (or a combination) of four areas: media content, audiences, the industry and industrial practice, or media themselves. Media ecologists focus expressly on the latter: the nature of media themselves. To do so, they often call upon an approach that compares and contrasts media to one another, and which is based upon a certain view of the history of our media of human communication. This history, as it is largely agreed upon, is comprised of four “revolutionary” inventions in media: fully developed and conventionally shared systems of oral, or speech language; systems of writing, with their pinnacle achievement in alphabetic writing; the mechanical, movable-type printing press and its consequences; and the development of our electric/electronic means of communication beginning with the 19th-century invention of telegraphy. The jury remains out with respect to the idea of a revolution or revolutions after television arose as our most powerful medium of electronic mass communication. Disagreement on this matter has led to some of the most fruitful developments in media ecology scholarship, as scholars argue whether digitization, computer-mediated communication, the Internet, mobility and the mobile Internet, and social media, while themselves electric/electronic, represent not merely a fifth revolution in our contemporary age but possibly a series of revolutions in the making, or which have already taken place. In addition, media ecology can be said to be comprised of two “schools.” The first is the Toronto School of Communication Theory—the very term “media ecology” having arisen out of the probing wordplay of H. Marshall McLuhan, who is considered both the founding figure and patron saint of the discipline. The second school is the New York School, founded by the educationist Neil Postman. As an English-language educator at the moment television was having its initial impact on US culture, Postman was, along with McLuhan, presciently concerned about the impact of the medium’s visual/image-based emphasis for the traditions and gifts of the print-literate culture up to that time. Postman was greatly influenced by McLuhan’s work, became both a champion and a clarifier of McLuhan’s ideas, and established a PhD program in media ecology at New York University in 1970. This bibliography presents the Essential Readings in the field, followed by works about: Orality and Its Antecedents; Writing; Print; Electric/Electronic Media; “New” Media and Perspective on the New Revolution/s; and Fully Understanding Media and Media Ecology.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"313 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72391907","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Streaming Television","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0347","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0347","url":null,"abstract":"Television scholars have been exploring changes within the television industry for decades, with studies of “new” media like cable and satellite television acknowledging the innovative possibilities created by technological advancements while also reasserting the relevance of long-standing modes of practice and conceptual understanding. As such, the emergence of digital technologies as integral to television distribution has inspired work focused on similar themes of change and continuity. While digital technologies span a wide variety of media, this bibliography focuses on streaming television, and as such, related works about streaming video, which may include cinema, gaming, and mobile or social media, may not be included here. There are a variety of reasons for this focus on television, but perhaps most importantly, the content that has consistently animated streaming businesses like Netflix is best called “television,” because it tends to be viewed at home, on small screens, with programming that is serialized or episodic and produced by major media conglomerates. One other caveat is that “streaming television” is only one of a host of common terms to refer to television viewed through the Internet today. Other common terms include convergence, spreadable media, connected viewing, transmedia, web TV, Internet-distributed TV, binge viewing, and subscription video on demand (SVOD), among others. This breadth of keywords demonstrates not only that this is cutting-edge work, but also that scholars and the industry they study are constantly working to pin down an ever-changing research object. To define this evolving area of study, then, this article prioritizes work that builds upon historical and theoretical foundations for the exploration of streaming television. The section organization highlights history, industry, and audience, with additional sections reviewing book-length studies, both single-authored and anthologized. Positioning an entry in any single category is not meant to limit the scope or significance of the work; as such, authors may appear across sections, and some works could comfortably fit under more than one section because the work in this article is nuanced and may feature multiple methodologies. Nevertheless, the section categorizations seek to make sense of a developing subfield and a complex set of objects. The streaming landscape is only becoming more competitive, through the emergence of new streamers (like Hulu and Amazon) and of traditional media companies creating streaming portals (the BBC iPlayer, HBO Max, Paramount+, Disney+, etc.). As such, Netflix may not always be the dominant player in the United States, just as it is often not the dominant player abroad, and for this reason, Netflix is not separated out as an organizing category. This article argues that scholarly work exploring how we study streaming television provides essential tools to understand the industry and its content, now and for years to come.","PeriodicalId":41388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Italian Cinema and Media Studies","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78885219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}