Film Studies Panel: Interrogating (Through) Reception
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
‘Perverse Interest': A Reception History of The Boys in the Band Dr. Matt Bell In an otherwise negative review of William Friedkin’s The Boys in the Band (1970), a writer for Variety praised what he described as the film’s inherent “perverse interest.” My paper begins with an examination of the thought so suggestively encrypted in this phrase, a textbook example of projection, through which the reviewer attributed to the film what must in fact have been his own (homo)sexual curiosity. Using this review as the point of entry to a more thorough reception history, my paper discusses three key forums in which the film has been assessed: the mainstream press of 1970, which tended to review The Boys in the Band in the erotically repressed mode of Variety; the emergent gay liberationist discourse of the 1970s and 1980s, typified by the writings of Dennis Altman, Arthur Bell, and Vito Russo, which tended to reject the “negative images” inscribed in it; and popular gay history, including Charles Kaiser’s 2007 book The Gay Metropolis, which has tended to view it as a period piece. Based on these simplifying appraisals of the film, and in response to its rather stunning neglect by scholars, my paper ultimately calls for bold reassessment of the film in light of developments over the past three decades in academic fields including LGBTQ studies, critical race studies, and queer theory. Perception and Reception Talk: Localisms and Working Class Heroisms in the Cultural Work of the Hui Brothers Dr. Sean Allan My presentation looks at the film work of Hong Kong celebrities Michael, Samuel and Ricky Hui. I will focus primarily on the films they made together, but I will also look at each brother separately, with attention to Michael’s directing, Samuel’s singing and acting, and Ricky’s acting. I will situate both their popularity during their active period within the contexts of Hong Kong popular cultural and political history as well as their continuing popularity. I will consider as well the aesthetic components of their abilities to affect an audience. The project looks at reception from a variety of angles. First, it interrogates the limits of how Hong Kong cinema history is conceptualized. Second, it interrogates the way local Hong Kong audiences are conceived by outsiders. Thirdly, it considers the limits of corrective, a consideration of a proper way that an interested figure can recognize both the complexities of localisms and popular cultural rhetorics and the lacunae that result from any sort of critical inquiry. Canadian Popcorn: Representations of Culture in Popular Canadian Film Dr. Eric Weeks My presentation examines the ways in which Canadian films represent Canadian identity and culture. When looking at a snapshot of Canadian films released in more recent years, an increasing number have been made that deal with various aspects of Canadian culture, and achieve as much in popular, accessible ways. What is most appealing about these movies is how they approach their subject matter. Some specific examples of films that evoke this sense of “Canadianness” include a comedy about curling (Men with Brooms, 2002), a hockey-themed musical (Score, 2010), and a buddy-cop action movie that also explores the strained relationship between Quebec and the rest of Canada (Bon Cop/Bad Cop, 2006). Far from being a dusty documentary or staid historical drama, many Canadian films that reflect that country’s history and identity could be considered “popcorn” movies, those films that appeal to a broader audience, enjoy a wider theatrical release, and may often be seen as simply entertainment and lacking a deeper message. Instead, however, I contend that films such as these are better able to express elements of Canada’s national identity, particularly when positioned against an overshadowing American film industry.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,014 | 0,010 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,002 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».