MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036065258 · doi:10.1353/esp.2020.0019

Screening Youth, Contemporary French and Francophone Cinema ed. by Romain Chareyron and Gilles Viennot

2020· article· en· W3036065258 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peadar Kearney

Bibliographic record

Venue˜L'œesprit créateur/˜L'œEsprit créateur · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchMovie theaterTheme (computing)Film directorQueerArt historyMetisSociologyHumanitiesArtHistoryGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Screening Youth, Contemporary French and Francophone Cinema ed. by Romain Chareyron and Gilles Viennot Peadar Kearney Romain Chareyron and Gilles Viennot, eds. Screening Youth, Contemporary French and Francophone Cinema. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2019. Pp. 250. Screening Youth, Contemporary French and Francophone Cinema is an innovative text that gathers together diverse approaches to the notion of youth in French-language cinema. Editors Romain Chareyron and Gilles Viennot inform us that the desire to produce the collection stemmed from the realization that while youth has been a central interest of Francophone film, this focus has not yet been matched by academic studies. Most debates concerning the 'teen movie' as genre find their roots in studies of Rebel Without a Cause (Nicolas Ray, 1956). Although the 'teen movie' may be less established in the Francophone world than it is in the Anglosphere, one can think of many French-language screen productions where young people are at the fore. The collection is therefore very much at the intersection of French studies and film studies. There are three different types of chapters in Screening Youth: theory-based, filmmaker-centered, and thematic comparison. The theory-based chapters are understandably placed near the beginning of the book in order to sketch out a framework for what is to follow. The majority of chapters address the notion of youth across the work of one filmmaker. However, a number of theme-based chapters examine the notion of youth across the work of multiple directors, for example, comparing the notion of queer bodies in the Maghreb and France or representations of gender and the banlieue. The collection retains its cohesion by being grouped through its common over-arching thematic and notional concerns. Gemma Edney's theorization of what may interest us in terms of the 'youth movie' in the French-speaking context is of particular interest here, as she asks if there is a French equivalent of the 'teen movie,' an established genre of the American mainstream. Fiona Handyside's analysis adds depth and fresh perspective to Mia Hansen-Løve's films, while Elizabeth Geary Keoghan's study of Bruno Dumont's P'tit Quinquin (2014) allows us to reconsider many of the unanswered questions of the memorable mini-series. Walter S. Temple's chapter mixes the study of film with spectator reaction interviews in order to articulate the extent to which the films being studied may be considered authentic. With these examples alone, we can see that the collection successfully covers a broad range of genres and styles, even going slightly beyond the limits of cinema itself. Spanning 15 chapters, 13 of these being case studies, the collection's scope is suitably broad in covering an array of styles and artistic registers. Remaining predominantly with the extreme contemporary enhances the collection's cohesion, as few of the films studied date before 2000. There is potential for more work to develop the initial ideas and apply them elsewhere; for example, one could easily imagine another collection that concentrates on Quebec or Belgium, with an abundance to say about the notion of youth in films of Xavier Dolan or the Dardenne brothers. Comparative studies of different film cultures would surely provide further insight. Such inspiration is a testament to the collection's success. [End Page 152] Peadar Kearney Maynooth University Copyright © 2020 L'Esprit Créateur

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)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
GenreReview

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 venue˜L'œesprit créateur/˜L'œEsprit créateurSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207