MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244243622 · doi:10.5117/9789053567852

Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise

2006· book· en· W4244243622 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anat Zanger

Bibliographic record

VenueAmsterdam University Press eBooks · 2006
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTel Aviv UniversityUniversity of CambridgeMinistry of Minority AffairsYork UniversityGilead SciencesPrinceton UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of OxfordHarvard University
KeywordsArtHistoryVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psycho: Inside and Outside the FrameThe cinematic medium, by virtue of its technology, encapsulates  versions of potential movement per second.Within the same shot, each frame is an earlier version of the frame about to be seen.Seriality is constitutive in the very material of the cinema, i.e., its film strip.The cinema's "self-differing" elements might be identified as its specificity (Krauss, : ) but its differences are countered in favor of continuity during the screening process (Bellour, ; Baudry,  []; Usai, ). A parallel process of difference, repetition and denial also exists in the cinema's imaginary archive.This imaginary archive exists in the spectator's mind and is comprised of all the texts that have been absorbed, thus enabling the production of a network of comparisons among them. One of the significant undercurrents of cinematic history is that of serial repetitions and their variations, so often overlooked.It is my intention to slow down the flow of new films and new data and trace one of the most persistent serial repetitions in the history of cinema.When we talk of series of repetitions in any medium, however, we have to distinguish between auto-repetition, which is controlled and highly conscious, and cultural repetition which is not always conscious, certainly not controlled, and occurs in the public domain outside of "lab-controlled" conditions.Autorepetition can be exemplified by Andy Warhol's series of paintings of Marilyn Monroe (, , -) or the Campbell's soup tins (, , ), by Hitchcock's own remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much (the first in  with Edna Best and Leslie Banks and the second in  with Doris Day and James Stewart) or by Tom Tykwer's Lola rennt (Run Lola Run) in . Cultural repetition, on the other hand, the rewriting of the same text that may or may not be conscious but is not entirely controlled, can be illustrated by the many repetitions and variations of the Cinderella story (e.g., Moonstruck, Pretty Woman), the Romeo and Juliet story (West Side Story), or Manet's Olympia. This latter, "wild" type of repetition in cinema and art involves not only issues of repetition and variation but also the issue of the collective subconscious of a particular society or culture, which results in the continued repetition of certain texts.It is my contention that all of these stories are encoded expressions that society keeps transforming in order to tell itself about itself.The constant repetition of the same stories, like the retelling of myths in the

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmsterdam University Press eBooksSame topicShakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary CriticismFrench-language works237,207