Audience to Allies: : Shared Terror and Cinematic Dread in Peele's Get Out (2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For his first feature film, Jordan Peele wanted to create a horror film for black audiences, who have long been isolated by the tradition of objectification and othering of black bodies within the horror genre. Get Out (2017) highlights the paranoia that defines being black in America, but despite the film’s focus on the black American experience, Peele intended for the film to be an inclusive experience. And judging by the film’s financial and critical success, Get Out certainly resonated with a wide variety of audiences. This paper aims to explore how Peele manages to create a space of terror regarding something white viewers have never experienced firsthand, while simultaneously uncovering the purpose of involving an audience who oftentimes are the perpetrators of the microaggressions Get Out condemns. Using Julian Hanich’s theory of cinematic dread, I will argue that Peele creates a sense of shared terror that transcends racial boundaries, ultimately forcing audience members who have never experienced discrimination based on the colour of their skin into allies. Department: English Faculty Mentor: Dr. Mike Perschon
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".