批判性精神病:普林克特先生的《星球大战评论》中的类型、人格障碍和批评

Benjamin Kirbach
{"title":"批判性精神病:普林克特先生的《星球大战评论》中的类型、人格障碍和批评","authors":"Benjamin Kirbach","doi":"10.17077/2168-569X.1430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?-Obi-Wan KenobiWhen Harry S. Plinkett uploaded a review of Star Wars: Episode I-The Phantom Menace to YouTube in 2009, he became a brand of Internet celebrity. It is difficult, however, to detach \"review\" from rather large scare quotes. Posted in seven parts, Plinkett's rant is as smart as it is genre-bending. Yoking audio commentary to film theory, the review ostensibly takes the shape of a nonfiction video essay: a detailed, scene-by-scene analysis of the CGI-saturated Star Wars prequel. But simultaneously, as if unable to sustain the necessary level of repression, the review fractures into the narrative of Plinkett himself-a wheelchair-bound centenarian who murders his wives, actively abducts people, and offers to mail Totino's Pizza Rolls to viewers who comment on his \"webzone.\" Plinkett is a fictional character, voiced by independent filmmaker Mike Stoklasa and produced by Stoklasa's Milwaukee-based RedLetterMedia. RLM's website boasts many short films and webseries, but the Plinkett reviews are among the most highly anticipated.1 Plinkett's takedown of The Phantom Menace alone has received more than five million views on YouTube, and was even screened at the CPH PIX film festival in Denmark (\"Mike's Coming\"). Through Plinkett, Stoklasa stitches his reviews together using schizophrenic metalepsis and intentionally awkward editing. Overlaying tropes from video essay, mockumentary, mash-up, and even horror, Plinkett blurs the line between art and armchair criticism. And at seventy minutes, The Phantom Menace review is, by most accounts, a feature-length film unto itself. By recontextualizing supplemental footage and other Star Wars marketing material, Plinkett is a subversive response to a garishly overcommoditized film industry. His reviews are evidence that cultural producers do not possess ultimate control over the identities of their products. Stoklasa moreover uses a \"deranged\" mind as the template for defamiliarizing the hegemonic logic of consumerism. Psychosis is figured as a form of catharsis in response to the colossal disappointment of the Star Wars prequels, but it is simultaneously a form of critique. By fictionalizing his critic, Stoklasa reveals the lengths to which criticism is not merely derivative, but generative-a \"productive mutation,\" as media critics Anne Burdick et al. might call it (11), detourned from extant cultural forms and morphed into an eclectic performance of argument.\"Star Wars: The Phantom Menace was the most disappointing thing since my son,\" Plinkett begins. \"And while my son eventually hanged himself in the bathroom of the gas station, the unfortunate reality of the Star Wars prequels is that they'll be around. Forever\" (Stoklasa, Episode I). These opening lines of The Phantom Menace review attest to the indelible inscription of Star Wars upon our cultural imaginary, just as the figure of paternal authority might enroll us into a drama of imminent castration. But how could a Star Wars film be so disappointing? Speaking only from personal experience, I do not remember watching the original trilogy for the first time. My identity is premised on having always already seen it. I suspect this is true for many people born after the 1970s. And yet, even if you have never seen Star Wars, you probably know that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father, just as you probably recognize the quip, \"May the Force be with you.\" Over the last halfcentury, Star Wars has been exalted amongst American mythoi, its narratemes quilted into the backdrop of shared cultural experience. One could therefore argue that when George Lucas set out to create a prequel trilogy in the 1990s, there was simply no way it could live up to fans' expectations.Indeed, there has been no shortage of ire slung at the newer films. The fully CGI character Jar Jar Binks, for example, has been the focus of much derision, as has the postulation of midi-chlorians as the material basis for Force-sensitivity. …","PeriodicalId":448595,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Psychosis: Genre, Détournement, and Critique in Mr. Plinkett's Star Wars Reviews\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Kirbach\",\"doi\":\"10.17077/2168-569X.1430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?-Obi-Wan KenobiWhen Harry S. Plinkett uploaded a review of Star Wars: Episode I-The Phantom Menace to YouTube in 2009, he became a brand of Internet celebrity. It is difficult, however, to detach \\\"review\\\" from rather large scare quotes. Posted in seven parts, Plinkett's rant is as smart as it is genre-bending. Yoking audio commentary to film theory, the review ostensibly takes the shape of a nonfiction video essay: a detailed, scene-by-scene analysis of the CGI-saturated Star Wars prequel. But simultaneously, as if unable to sustain the necessary level of repression, the review fractures into the narrative of Plinkett himself-a wheelchair-bound centenarian who murders his wives, actively abducts people, and offers to mail Totino's Pizza Rolls to viewers who comment on his \\\"webzone.\\\" Plinkett is a fictional character, voiced by independent filmmaker Mike Stoklasa and produced by Stoklasa's Milwaukee-based RedLetterMedia. RLM's website boasts many short films and webseries, but the Plinkett reviews are among the most highly anticipated.1 Plinkett's takedown of The Phantom Menace alone has received more than five million views on YouTube, and was even screened at the CPH PIX film festival in Denmark (\\\"Mike's Coming\\\"). Through Plinkett, Stoklasa stitches his reviews together using schizophrenic metalepsis and intentionally awkward editing. Overlaying tropes from video essay, mockumentary, mash-up, and even horror, Plinkett blurs the line between art and armchair criticism. And at seventy minutes, The Phantom Menace review is, by most accounts, a feature-length film unto itself. By recontextualizing supplemental footage and other Star Wars marketing material, Plinkett is a subversive response to a garishly overcommoditized film industry. His reviews are evidence that cultural producers do not possess ultimate control over the identities of their products. Stoklasa moreover uses a \\\"deranged\\\" mind as the template for defamiliarizing the hegemonic logic of consumerism. Psychosis is figured as a form of catharsis in response to the colossal disappointment of the Star Wars prequels, but it is simultaneously a form of critique. By fictionalizing his critic, Stoklasa reveals the lengths to which criticism is not merely derivative, but generative-a \\\"productive mutation,\\\" as media critics Anne Burdick et al. might call it (11), detourned from extant cultural forms and morphed into an eclectic performance of argument.\\\"Star Wars: The Phantom Menace was the most disappointing thing since my son,\\\" Plinkett begins. \\\"And while my son eventually hanged himself in the bathroom of the gas station, the unfortunate reality of the Star Wars prequels is that they'll be around. Forever\\\" (Stoklasa, Episode I). These opening lines of The Phantom Menace review attest to the indelible inscription of Star Wars upon our cultural imaginary, just as the figure of paternal authority might enroll us into a drama of imminent castration. But how could a Star Wars film be so disappointing? Speaking only from personal experience, I do not remember watching the original trilogy for the first time. My identity is premised on having always already seen it. I suspect this is true for many people born after the 1970s. And yet, even if you have never seen Star Wars, you probably know that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father, just as you probably recognize the quip, \\\"May the Force be with you.\\\" Over the last halfcentury, Star Wars has been exalted amongst American mythoi, its narratemes quilted into the backdrop of shared cultural experience. One could therefore argue that when George Lucas set out to create a prequel trilogy in the 1990s, there was simply no way it could live up to fans' expectations.Indeed, there has been no shortage of ire slung at the newer films. The fully CGI character Jar Jar Binks, for example, has been the focus of much derision, as has the postulation of midi-chlorians as the material basis for Force-sensitivity. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":448595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17077/2168-569X.1430\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17077/2168-569X.1430","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

谁更愚蠢,傻瓜还是跟着他的傻瓜?2009年,哈利·s·普林克特(Harry S. Plinkett)在YouTube上上传了一篇《星球大战前传1:幽灵的威胁》的影评后,他成为了网红。然而,很难将“评论”与相当大的惊吓引号分开。这篇文章分七个部分发表,普林克特的咆哮既聪明又不失体裁。这篇评论将音频评论与电影理论结合在一起,表面上看起来像是一篇非虚构的视频文章:对这部充斥着cgi图像的《星球大战》前传进行了详细的、逐场景的分析。但与此同时,似乎无法维持必要的压制水平,评论分裂成对普林克特本人的叙述——一个坐在轮椅上的百岁老人,谋杀他的妻子,积极绑架人,并主动将托蒂诺的披萨卷邮寄给评论他的“网络区域”的观众。Plinkett是一个虚构的角色,由独立电影制作人Mike Stoklasa配音,由Stoklasa位于密尔沃基的RedLetterMedia制作。RLM的网站上有很多短片和网络连续剧,但普林克特的评论是最受期待的光是普林克特的《幽灵的威胁》就在YouTube上获得了超过500万的浏览量,甚至还在丹麦的CPH PIX电影节上放映了(“迈克的到来”)。通过普林克特,斯托克拉萨将他的评论用精神分裂症式的幻觉和故意的尴尬剪辑拼接在一起。从视频散文,伪纪录片,混搭,甚至恐怖的比喻,普林克特模糊了艺术和纸上谈的批评之间的界限。《幽灵的威胁》的影评时长为70分钟,从大多数人的角度来看,它本身就是一部长片。通过将补充镜头和其他《星球大战》营销材料重新置于背景中,普林克特对过度商品化的电影工业做出了颠覆性的回应。他的评论证明,文化生产者对其产品的身份并没有最终的控制权。此外,斯托克拉萨还以“精神错乱”为模板,对消费主义的霸权逻辑进行了陌生化。精神错乱被认为是对《星球大战》前传的巨大失望的一种宣泄,但同时也是一种批评。通过虚构他的批评家,斯托克拉萨揭示了批评不仅是衍生的,而且是产生的——正如媒体评论家安妮·伯迪克等人所说的那样(11),一种“生产性突变”,偏离了现存的文化形式,演变成一种折衷的争论表现。“《星球大战:幽灵的威胁》是我儿子之后最令人失望的电影,”普林克特开始说。“虽然我儿子最终在加油站的浴室里上吊自杀了,但《星球大战》前传的不幸现实是,它们将一直存在。《幽灵的威胁》的开篇几句话证明了星球大战在我们的文化想象中不可磨灭的烙印,就像父亲权威的形象可能会把我们卷入一场即将被阉割的戏剧一样。但是《星球大战》电影怎么会如此令人失望呢?就个人经验而言,我不记得第一次看原版三部曲是什么时候。我的身份是建立在已经看到它的基础上的。我怀疑对于许多70后来说都是如此。然而,即使你从未看过《星球大战》,你也可能知道达斯·维德是卢克·天行者的父亲,就像你可能知道那句俏皮话一样:“愿原力与你同在。”在过去的半个世纪里,《星球大战》在美国神话中备受推崇,它的叙事融入了共同的文化经历。因此,有人可能会说,当乔治·卢卡斯在20世纪90年代开始创作前传三部曲时,它根本不可能达到粉丝的期望。事实上,人们对新电影的抨击并不少。例如,全CGI角色加·加·宾克斯(Jar Jar Binks)一直是许多人嘲笑的焦点,就像假设中氯仿体是力敏的物质基础一样。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critical Psychosis: Genre, Détournement, and Critique in Mr. Plinkett's Star Wars Reviews
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?-Obi-Wan KenobiWhen Harry S. Plinkett uploaded a review of Star Wars: Episode I-The Phantom Menace to YouTube in 2009, he became a brand of Internet celebrity. It is difficult, however, to detach "review" from rather large scare quotes. Posted in seven parts, Plinkett's rant is as smart as it is genre-bending. Yoking audio commentary to film theory, the review ostensibly takes the shape of a nonfiction video essay: a detailed, scene-by-scene analysis of the CGI-saturated Star Wars prequel. But simultaneously, as if unable to sustain the necessary level of repression, the review fractures into the narrative of Plinkett himself-a wheelchair-bound centenarian who murders his wives, actively abducts people, and offers to mail Totino's Pizza Rolls to viewers who comment on his "webzone." Plinkett is a fictional character, voiced by independent filmmaker Mike Stoklasa and produced by Stoklasa's Milwaukee-based RedLetterMedia. RLM's website boasts many short films and webseries, but the Plinkett reviews are among the most highly anticipated.1 Plinkett's takedown of The Phantom Menace alone has received more than five million views on YouTube, and was even screened at the CPH PIX film festival in Denmark ("Mike's Coming"). Through Plinkett, Stoklasa stitches his reviews together using schizophrenic metalepsis and intentionally awkward editing. Overlaying tropes from video essay, mockumentary, mash-up, and even horror, Plinkett blurs the line between art and armchair criticism. And at seventy minutes, The Phantom Menace review is, by most accounts, a feature-length film unto itself. By recontextualizing supplemental footage and other Star Wars marketing material, Plinkett is a subversive response to a garishly overcommoditized film industry. His reviews are evidence that cultural producers do not possess ultimate control over the identities of their products. Stoklasa moreover uses a "deranged" mind as the template for defamiliarizing the hegemonic logic of consumerism. Psychosis is figured as a form of catharsis in response to the colossal disappointment of the Star Wars prequels, but it is simultaneously a form of critique. By fictionalizing his critic, Stoklasa reveals the lengths to which criticism is not merely derivative, but generative-a "productive mutation," as media critics Anne Burdick et al. might call it (11), detourned from extant cultural forms and morphed into an eclectic performance of argument."Star Wars: The Phantom Menace was the most disappointing thing since my son," Plinkett begins. "And while my son eventually hanged himself in the bathroom of the gas station, the unfortunate reality of the Star Wars prequels is that they'll be around. Forever" (Stoklasa, Episode I). These opening lines of The Phantom Menace review attest to the indelible inscription of Star Wars upon our cultural imaginary, just as the figure of paternal authority might enroll us into a drama of imminent castration. But how could a Star Wars film be so disappointing? Speaking only from personal experience, I do not remember watching the original trilogy for the first time. My identity is premised on having always already seen it. I suspect this is true for many people born after the 1970s. And yet, even if you have never seen Star Wars, you probably know that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father, just as you probably recognize the quip, "May the Force be with you." Over the last halfcentury, Star Wars has been exalted amongst American mythoi, its narratemes quilted into the backdrop of shared cultural experience. One could therefore argue that when George Lucas set out to create a prequel trilogy in the 1990s, there was simply no way it could live up to fans' expectations.Indeed, there has been no shortage of ire slung at the newer films. The fully CGI character Jar Jar Binks, for example, has been the focus of much derision, as has the postulation of midi-chlorians as the material basis for Force-sensitivity. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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