Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Spoiler alert--this review gives away plot twists for What Richard Did, Herman Koch's novel Dinner (2012) and Christos Tsiolkas' novel Slap (2008). Lenny Abrahamson's third feature is something of a departure from dark, low-key comedy of Adam and Paul and mournful, quasi-spiritual tone and tenor of Garage. Interestingly, director also shifts his focus from male characters more frequently understood as problem social categories than actual people (drug users, marginalised rural men) to a social milieu in which privileges of white, middleclass masculinity are entirely taken for granted. What Richard Did is based on Kevin Power's 2008 novel Bad Day in Blackrock which was, in turn, inspired by Brian Murphy case, in which an 18-year old boy was beaten and kicked to death by school friends outside a Dublin nightclub in August 2000. Reviews of What Richard Did were overwhelmingly positive in both Irish and British press, and it recently won five IFTA awards out of a total of 10 nominations, including Best Film, Best Director, Best Script (Malcolm Campbell) and Best Actor (Jack Reynor). Set in an affluent Dublin suburb, story begins with somewhat mundane adventures of 'super-rich' kid Richard Karlsen and his friends in summer between finishing school and starting university. When a fight with Conor, Richard's rival for Lara's affections, ends with former beaten and left to die alone on street, however, Richard's moral universe begins to implode as it gradually dawns on him that there will be no punishment or repercussions for what he did. On contrary, his father and friends immediately move to cover up for him, and he is packed off to family beach house until whole incident blows over. There Richard is left confused and rudderless to contemplate future which his parents are so desperate to protect. film has been read as both indexing and allegorising moral nirvana of post-Celtic Tiger era. Sight and Sound reviewer Hannah McGill points out that, The sole offer of help comes to Richard from his Danish father (Denmark helped to bail Ireland out with a 400 [euro] million bilateral loan in 2010), also commenting that, the film frames this approach not as a reliable lifeline but as temptation to retreat further from hope; Richard's father doesn't help him to do right thing but encourages him to sidestep justice. (1) Indeed, it may well be Abrahamson's adroit allegorical framing of financial crisis not just as economic or local but also as moral and universal that explains film's resonance with audiences both within and beyond Ireland. In this sense, What Richard Did displays significant continuities with a particular sub-genre within both cinema and literature that is concerned with emotional aftermath of and middle-class response to ostensibly random acts of male violence, including Dutch author Herman Koch's best-selling novel Dinner (2012), Lionel Shriver's We Need to Talk About Kevin (2003), Christos Tsiolkas Slap (2008) and Christopher Wakling's What I Did (2011). Much of reviewer commentary around these novels and their filmic/TV adaptations has tended to focus on dynamics of middle class (post)modern family and questions of liberal parenting and political correctness. Like Slap (2008) and Dinner (2012), What Richard Did is preoccupied with moral crises experienced by characters after event rather than with their motivations. And, like Slap and Dinner, it is also a scathing critique of middle-class morality, which shows a level of self-interest and individualism among bourgeoisie that is practically indistinguishable from pre-democratic feudalism. In this neoliberal scenario, intersectional politics and group solidarity effectively disintegrate when interests of nuclear family--and by extension neoliberal capitalism--are threatened. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».