MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198739615 · doi:10.7202/1079802ar

Giallo Nostalgia: Appropriations of Giallo Aesthetics in Contemporary Cinema

2021· article· en· W3198739615 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNostalgia and Consumer Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterFilmmakingHighbrowAestheticsContext (archaeology)IndexicalityArtVisual artsStudioSociologyLiteratureHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article aims to engage with the ways in which contemporary global cinema looks back at the Italian giallo production of the 1970s through a series of remakes, homages and pastiches. What we define as retrogiallo differs from other examples of “retroexploitation,” where films such as Grindhouse (Rodriguez and Tarantino, 2007) and Hobo with a Shotgun (Eisener, 2011) address nostalgia for a specific kind of spectatorship, the grindhouse circuit, through conscious visual archaisms. Retrogialli present a more complex approach: instead of mimicking the imperfections of analogue indexicality, they fetishize the artisanal quality of filmmaking, displacing the stylistic features of the giallo in a highbrow context. Films such as Amer (Cattet and Forzani, 2009), The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears (Cattet and Forzani, 2013) and Berberian Sound Studio (Strickland, 2012) ultimately present a new opportunity to address the critical understanding of the giallo.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.256 · 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