MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567075579 · doi:10.52086/001c.27105

‘Conflict cinema’ and hostile space in Northern Ireland and Palestine

2016· article· en· W2567075579 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Harrington

Bibliographic record

VenueTEXT · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterMilitantAestheticsSociologyNegotiationGender studiesMedia studiesLawPolitical sciencePoliticsArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is concerned with narratives of ethno-religious conflict depicted in a genre I term ‘conflict cinema’. The two films under discussion, ’71 and Paradise Now , are largely set, respectively, in the cities of Belfast in Northern Ireland and Nablus in Palestine and represent the divisions and violent tension between enemy factions there. The intersection of the landscape of the conflicts and the bodies of the male protagonists who must negotiate them emphasizes the centrality of physically being ‘in place’ or ’out of place’ to ‘conflict cinema’. The soldier/colonizer Gary Hook in ’71 and the freedom fighters/terrorists Said and Khaled in Paradise Now travel through the enduring battlegrounds of their divided and politically unstable societies. Against the backdrop of ethno-religious conflict, both films focus on the ideal militant body that must be a machine or an automaton. I argue that through the screenwriters’ and filmmakers’ depiction of these bodies’ negotiations of conflict space, or in other words, the interface between the body and the unstable, urban conflict zone, ‘conflict cinema’ upsets overdetermined notions of the male militant body, thus manifesting the paradox of the dehumanised body that is also innately human.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.016
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTEXTSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207