MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3004209738 · doi:10.4324/9780429058332-9a

United Artists, fourth quarter 1980

2020· book-chapter· en· W3004209738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Justin Wyatt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)ArtVisual artsHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the exodus of key executives to form Orion Pictures in 1978, United Artists was left with very little in the production pipeline. Although the company was bolstered by continuing franchises and film series, the volume of original productions diminished during this period. By the fourth quarter of 1980, UA was reduced to five releases: the horror comedy Motel Hell and the backstage drama The Idolmaker , along with three auteur projects, Woody Allen’s Stardust Memories , Martin Scorsese’s Raging Bull , and Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate . With negligible marketing efforts and grosses for the first two films, UA executives Bach and Field focused their energy on the auteur driven films. By the fourth quarter of 1980, the press was ready to engage with the UA auteur films as much for their budgets and production histories as for their aesthetics. The era of the ‘risky megabuck trend,’ to cite a Variety term from the era, was evidenced in a direct way by UA. This chapter examines this point in UA history with an eye to understanding how two factors – the construction of a cautionary tale within Hollywood on big budget auteur projects and the rise of enfotainment (entertainment industry news) – helped to shape the discourse surrounding Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.013

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCultural Industries and Urban Development→French-language works237,207→