Proceedings of National Seminar on Postmodern ... - Igcollege.org
Proceedings of National Seminar on Postmodern ... - Igcollege.org
Proceedings of National Seminar on Postmodern ... - Igcollege.org
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
<strong>Postmodern</strong>ism and Film<br />
-- Rajendra G<strong>on</strong>arkar<br />
School <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Media Studies, SRTM Uni.<br />
Nanded.<br />
“Last night I was in the kingdom <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> shadows.”<br />
Maxim Gorky, <strong>on</strong> attending his first film<br />
screening.<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong>:<br />
Watching a movie takes almost all<br />
viewers out <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their everyday lives and lands<br />
them into a complete different world. To this a<br />
Russian writer Maxim Gorky called “the<br />
kingdom <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> shadows”. Whether people watch<br />
a film in a theatre or the digitalized versi<strong>on</strong> at<br />
home <strong>on</strong> a DVD, they c<strong>on</strong>tinue to visit<br />
Gorky’s kingdom (Tom Wallis, 2008). They<br />
immerse themselves in the lives <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
ficti<strong>on</strong>al characters, develop opini<strong>on</strong>s about<br />
historical events, and get captivated by the<br />
artistic combinati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> colour, light and<br />
sound. Film engages viewers <strong>on</strong> an emoti<strong>on</strong>al<br />
level, but some criticize the cinema as an<br />
escapist entertainment. It is also praised as an<br />
imaginative art form that allows people to<br />
realize their dreams and fantasies. The reality<br />
is that films do both <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> these things and much<br />
more.<br />
The Theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film:<br />
The theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film is almost as old as<br />
the medium itself whereas the cinema<br />
developed at the close <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the nineteenth<br />
century. It evolved through the stages such as<br />
the advances in photography, mechanics,<br />
optics and the scientific producti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
serialized images (chr<strong>on</strong>o photography). It also<br />
has its roots in the ancient form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> popular<br />
entertainment, ranging from magic lantern<br />
shows and phantasmagorias, large-scale<br />
panoramas, dioramas and optical toys.<br />
From the very beginning, inventors,<br />
manufacturers, artists, intellectuals, educators<br />
and scientists asked themselves questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
about the essence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema: was it a<br />
movement or otherwise, was it an image or<br />
writing, was it capturing place or storing time<br />
Besides its relati<strong>on</strong>ship to other forms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Dr. Ramesh Dhage<br />
School <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Language, Literature & Culture<br />
Studies, SRTM University, Nanded<br />
visualizati<strong>on</strong> and representati<strong>on</strong>, the questi<strong>on</strong><br />
was; was it science or an art Did it elevate<br />
and educate, or distract and corrupt<br />
Discussi<strong>on</strong>s cantered not just <strong>on</strong> the specificity<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema, but also <strong>on</strong> its <strong>on</strong>tological,<br />
epistemological and anthropological relevance.<br />
All the discussi<strong>on</strong>s ended up in the answers<br />
ranging from derogatory to scepticism. The<br />
first attempt to make film as a new medium<br />
took place in the early twentieth century and<br />
two representatives whose work can lay claim<br />
to the title ‘The first film theory’ are Vachel<br />
Lindsay and Hugo Munstgerberg (Richard<br />
Rusht<strong>on</strong> and Gary,2010).<br />
Roots <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film Study :<br />
The acdemicizati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film studies<br />
took root in the late 1960s, as humanities<br />
scholars imported film analysis into traditi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
humanistic programmes simulated by a more<br />
widespread renaissance <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinephilia within<br />
American culture, young pr<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>essors, and<br />
students took seriously to the study a <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
cinema as an intellectual pursuit. Students in<br />
literature classes attacked the Searchers (1956)<br />
and Psycho (1960) with hermeneutic fervour.<br />
Budding philosophers debated the existential<br />
worldviews <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Bergman and Ant<strong>on</strong>i<strong>on</strong>i,<br />
Admitting film programmes into the academy,<br />
thus, established the legitimacy <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film as an<br />
intellectual field <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> study.<br />
<strong>Postmodern</strong>ism and film:<br />
Karl Marx is probably the most<br />
influential thinker <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the last two centuries,<br />
both for those who accepted his ideas and,<br />
oddly by those who rejected him. Marx had<br />
argued that the ec<strong>on</strong>omic base determines the<br />
superstructure <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a society. The superstructure<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> society c<strong>on</strong>sisting <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> culture, ideology and<br />
politics follow the basic structure <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> society<br />
called capitalism. Ernest Mandel (1923-1995),<br />
for example, divided capitalism into three<br />
periods;<br />
519 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
a) Market<br />
b) M<strong>on</strong>opoly &<br />
c) Post-industrial phase<br />
The post industrial period began<br />
somewhere in between the end <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Sec<strong>on</strong>d<br />
World War. The 1960s saw the increasing use<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> nuclear power and electr<strong>on</strong>ic machines. It<br />
also marks the beginning <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the fall <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the old<br />
empires and the multinati<strong>on</strong>al corporati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
eclipsed the nati<strong>on</strong>-state c<strong>on</strong>cept (Andrew M.<br />
Butler, 2009). The American academic,<br />
Fredric James<strong>on</strong>, was <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the major<br />
scholars who labelled the era <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the postindustrial<br />
as postmodern age.<br />
The names <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the postmodern<br />
vanguards are Michel Foucault, Jacques<br />
Derrida, Jean-Francois Lyotrd and Richard<br />
Rorty who are its leading strategists. They set<br />
the directi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the movement. They also<br />
provided potent tools for its assessment. There<br />
are other c<strong>on</strong>tributors to this ideology who<br />
have earned infamous names for themselves,<br />
they are Stanley Fish and Franck Lentricchia<br />
in literary and legal criticism, Catharine<br />
Mackinn<strong>on</strong> and Andrea Dworkin in feminist<br />
legal criticism, Jacques Lacan in psychology,<br />
Robert Venturi and Andreas Huyseen in<br />
architectural criticism and Luce Irigaray in the<br />
criticism <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> science.<br />
Michel Foucault has identified the<br />
major targets, thus, “All my analyses are<br />
against the idea <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> universal necessities in<br />
human existence” (Stephen R. Hicks,<br />
2004).Such necessities must be swept aside,<br />
argues Foucault.<br />
<strong>Postmodern</strong>ism, as a discursive<br />
stylistic grid has enriched film theory and its<br />
analysis by calling attenti<strong>on</strong> to a stylistic shift<br />
toward a media c<strong>on</strong>scious cinema. Much <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the work <strong>on</strong> postmodernism in film has<br />
involved the positing <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a postmodern<br />
aesthetic, exemplified in such influential films<br />
as Blue velvet, Blade Runner and pulp ficti<strong>on</strong><br />
(James M<strong>on</strong>aco,2000). For James<strong>on</strong>, the<br />
postmodernism was to be viewed with a<br />
certain amount <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> suspici<strong>on</strong>. This approach is<br />
supported by other theorists. These aesthetics<br />
celebrated the copy or simulacrum over the<br />
original, style over substance, dem<strong>on</strong>strated a<br />
failure <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> emoti<strong>on</strong> and individualism and<br />
frequently would be characterised by pastiche<br />
or nostalgia for an imagined golden age<br />
(Robert Stam, 2000). James<strong>on</strong> wrote about the<br />
nostalgic film in relati<strong>on</strong> to Star Wars (1977),<br />
American Graffiti (1973), Something Wild<br />
(1986) and Blue Velvet (1984). Film, as<br />
supposedly a democratic, lowbrow, art form,<br />
was written about heavily by postmodern<br />
analysts, with Blade Runner (1932) being the<br />
i<strong>on</strong>ic text for the new ic<strong>on</strong>oclasts.<br />
James<strong>on</strong> discerns the neo-noir film<br />
‘Body Heat’ as’ nostalgia for the present.’<br />
Films like American Graffiti for |Americans,<br />
Indo chine for the French and the ‘raj<br />
nostalgia’ films (Heat and Dust, A passage to<br />
India) for the British c<strong>on</strong>vey a wistful sense <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
loss for what is imagined as a simpler and<br />
grander time. For this stylistically hybrid<br />
postmodern cinema, both the modernist avantgarde<br />
modes <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> analysis with the cinema as the<br />
instigator <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> epistemological breakthroughs –<br />
and the modes <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> analysis developed for<br />
classical cinema, no l<strong>on</strong>ger quite ‘work’.<br />
Instead, libidinal intensities compensate for the<br />
weakening <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> narrative time, as the older plots<br />
are replaced by an ‘endless string <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> narrative<br />
pretexts in which <strong>on</strong>ly the experiences<br />
available in the sheer viewing present can be<br />
entertained’.<br />
The movie Clueless by Joe<br />
Dante could be seen as a reflecti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
postmodernism. The rewriting <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Austen’s<br />
story no l<strong>on</strong>ger just bel<strong>on</strong>gs to her. The<br />
characters <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Emma and Mr Knightly, depicted<br />
by the novelist have been pushed into oblivi<strong>on</strong><br />
by the versi<strong>on</strong>s in the movie. The joy is in<br />
seeing how the characters in the movie enjoy<br />
sexual liberty, which is absent with the<br />
characters in the novel. (Tom Wallis & Maria<br />
Pramaggiore, 2008) The liberty exercised by<br />
the film maker made the characters in the<br />
visual form more appealing than the <strong>on</strong>es in<br />
the written versi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>:<br />
In the present times when the world is<br />
dominated by informati<strong>on</strong> technology, film<br />
c<strong>on</strong>tinues to remain as an inevitable tool <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
public educati<strong>on</strong> and entertainment. The timetemper<br />
has dried human relati<strong>on</strong>s. Man has<br />
become isolated and lost communicati<strong>on</strong> with<br />
the outer world. This hollow space in human<br />
life c<strong>on</strong>stitutes the c<strong>on</strong>tent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> postmodernism<br />
which has been forcefully brought to the<br />
notice <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the world by cinema. It is, therefore,<br />
520 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
the assessment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema in the c<strong>on</strong>text <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
post-modern film theory is an inevitable need.<br />
References:<br />
1. Tom Wallis and Maria<br />
Pramaggiore, Film A Critical<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong>, Laurence King<br />
Publishing Ltd. L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>, 2008.<br />
2. Richard Rusht<strong>on</strong> and Gary<br />
Bettins<strong>on</strong>, What is Film Theory,<br />
An Introducti<strong>on</strong> to C<strong>on</strong>temporary<br />
Debates, open University Press,<br />
England, 2010<br />
3. Andrew M. Butler, The pocket<br />
Essential Film Studies, 2009<br />
4. Stephen R. Hicks, <strong>Postmodern</strong>ism<br />
scepticism and socialism from<br />
Rousseau to Foucault, Scholargy<br />
Publishing , New Berlin,2004<br />
5. Robert Stam, Film Theory- An<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong>, Blackwell<br />
Publishing, Malden,2000<br />
6. James M<strong>on</strong>aco, How to read A<br />
film, Oxford University Press ,<br />
New York,3 rd editi<strong>on</strong>, 2000<br />
521 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Applicati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film Theory <strong>on</strong> Hollywood Animated Movie Antz<br />
Kale Sandip Sahebrao<br />
Indira Gandhi Sr. College, Nanded.<br />
Abstract:-<br />
1.Film theory in general<br />
2.Henri Bergs<strong>on</strong>’s opini<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> film theory<br />
3.Instroducti<strong>on</strong> to Antz<br />
4.Producti<strong>on</strong> and recepti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Antz<br />
5.Comparisi<strong>on</strong> between Antz and a Bugs Life<br />
6.Applicati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film theory to Antz<br />
7.Anew tide in animated 3D movies with didactic purpose<br />
8.Individual vs Society<br />
9.Critical c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong><br />
Keywords:-<br />
1.Cenemetagraphy terminology<br />
2.Film theory in general<br />
3C<strong>on</strong>formist society<br />
4.hard socialism<br />
5.hard individual<br />
6.facist methodology<br />
7.critical recepti<strong>on</strong><br />
8.critical c<strong>on</strong>sesus<br />
9.tremendous humanism<br />
Film theory is as intrinsic as the film<br />
itself. As we know it’s an academic disciple that<br />
aims to explore the essence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinematography.<br />
Film theory also provides c<strong>on</strong>ceptual<br />
frameworks for fancy and imaginati<strong>on</strong> and other<br />
complementary arts. Henri Bergs<strong>on</strong> truly hailed<br />
film theory as an amalgamati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
movement image and the time image film theory<br />
took up residence in academia importing<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cepts from established disciplines like gender<br />
studies, psychoanalysis, anthropology, literary<br />
theory semiotics and finally linguistics. This<br />
paper will apply film theory <strong>on</strong> a 3D Hollywood<br />
child-movie Antz. The paper will deal with the<br />
thematic dimensi<strong>on</strong>s, producti<strong>on</strong> values and<br />
recepti<strong>on</strong> by audience all over the world.(Stam,<br />
Robert:1).<br />
Antz is a current computer animated<br />
acti<strong>on</strong> adventure film produced by<br />
DreamWorks. Ant was directed by Eric Darnell<br />
produced by Brad Lewis, written by Paul Weitz<br />
and cinema to graphied by S. J. Smith Antz<br />
features the voices <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> well-known celebrities<br />
like woody Allen, Sylvester st<strong>on</strong>e and Jennifer<br />
Lopez. [2] Al<strong>on</strong>g with Finding Nemo and Shark<br />
Tales, Antz is notable for being part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Disney-<br />
Dream works. This movie was released little<br />
more than a m<strong>on</strong>th before Pixar’s A Bug’s Life,<br />
which was coming out opposite Dream work the<br />
prince <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Egypt. Even though a bug’s life was<br />
the first to be pitched, Antz was finished and<br />
leased first. Though the general public tends to<br />
say they are similar in many ways, <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten<br />
claiming <strong>on</strong>e ripped-<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>f the other, the <strong>on</strong>ly true<br />
comm<strong>on</strong>ality they have is that they both include<br />
a work and falling in love with a princess<br />
out.(Stam, Robert:3)<br />
Loosely based <strong>on</strong> the novel Brave New<br />
World by Aldous Huxley, the setting for the<br />
story is an ant col<strong>on</strong>y in Central Park in New<br />
York City, under the chr<strong>on</strong>ological time span <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
4 days. The protag<strong>on</strong>ist (Woody Allen) is Z-<br />
4195, or "Z" for short, a neurotic and<br />
individualistic worker ant living in a wholly<br />
c<strong>on</strong>formist society who l<strong>on</strong>gs for the opportunity<br />
to truly express himself. His friends include<br />
fellow worker Azteca (Jennifer Lopez) and a<br />
soldier ant, Weaver (Sylvester Stall<strong>on</strong>e). Z<br />
meets Princess Bala (Shar<strong>on</strong> St<strong>on</strong>e) at a bar<br />
where she goes to escape from her suffocating<br />
royal life and falls in love with her. In order to<br />
see Bala again, Z exchanges places with Weaver<br />
and joins the army. He marches with the ranks,<br />
befriending Barbatus (Danny Glover), another<br />
522 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
soldier, in the process. He doesn't realize that the<br />
army's leader and Bala's fiancé, the corrupt<br />
General Mandible (Gene Hackman), is secretly<br />
sending all the soldiers loyal to the Queen to die<br />
so he can begin to build a col<strong>on</strong>y filled with<br />
powerful ants. At the base <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a tree near<br />
nightfall, Z realizes he's actually marching into<br />
battle, and all <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the soldiers except for Z are<br />
killed by the acid-shooting termites. Following<br />
the battle, all Z can find <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Barbatus is his head.<br />
Before he dies, Barbatus tells Z to think for<br />
himself rather than follow orders all his life. Z<br />
returns home and is hailed as a war hero,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>gratulated pers<strong>on</strong>ally by the secretly irate<br />
General Mandible, and is brought before the<br />
Queen. There he meets Princess Bala, who<br />
eventually recognizes him as a worker. When Z<br />
finds that he has been cornered in a lie, he panics<br />
and takes Princess Bala hostage. They escape<br />
the col<strong>on</strong>y and hide, and Z decides to search for<br />
the legendary Insectopia. Bala reluctantly<br />
decides to go with him after she narrowly<br />
escapes from a hungry praying mantis. Word <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the incident quickly spreads through the col<strong>on</strong>y,<br />
whereup<strong>on</strong> Z's act <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> individuality sparks a<br />
revoluti<strong>on</strong> in the workers. As a result,<br />
productivity grinds to a halt. Seeing an<br />
opportunity to gain c<strong>on</strong>trol, General Mandible<br />
begins to publicly portray Z as a villain who<br />
cares <strong>on</strong>ly about himself. Mandible then<br />
promotes the glory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>formity and promises<br />
them a better life, which he claims to be the<br />
reward <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> completing a "Mega Tunnel" planned<br />
by himself. Mandible learns Z is looking for<br />
Insectopia after interrogating Weaver. Knowing<br />
full well <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the place's existence, Mandible sends<br />
his aide, Col<strong>on</strong>el Cutter (Christopher Walken),<br />
to its locati<strong>on</strong> to retrieve the Princess and kill Z.<br />
Cutter, however, slowly begins to have sec<strong>on</strong>d<br />
thoughts about Mandible's plans and agenda and<br />
develops sympathy for the worker ants.<br />
The film topped the box <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fice in its<br />
opening weekend, earning $17,195,160 for a<br />
$7,021 average from 2,449 theaters. In its<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d weekend, the film held the top spot<br />
again, with a slippage <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong>ly 14% to $14.7<br />
milli<strong>on</strong> for a $5,230 average and expanding to<br />
2,813 sites. It held well also in its third weekend,<br />
slipping <strong>on</strong>ly 24% to $11.2 milli<strong>on</strong> and finishing<br />
in third place, for a $3,863 average from 2,903<br />
theaters. The film's widest release was 2,929<br />
theaters, and closed <strong>on</strong> February 18, 1999. The<br />
film altogether picked up $90,757,863<br />
domestically, recouping its $60 milli<strong>on</strong> budget,<br />
but failing to outgross its competiti<strong>on</strong> with A<br />
Bug's Life. The film picked up an additi<strong>on</strong>al $81<br />
milli<strong>on</strong> overseas for a worldwide total <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> $171.8<br />
milli<strong>on</strong>, making it a box <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fice success. Antz is<br />
the first animated film, as well as the first CGIanimated<br />
film, by DreamWorks and the<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d computer-animated film released in the<br />
United States after Toy Story. The film was<br />
originally released to theaters <strong>on</strong> October 2,<br />
1998.<br />
Z and Bala, after misdirecti<strong>on</strong> and a<br />
brief separati<strong>on</strong>, finally find Insectopia, which<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sists <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a human waste-bin overfilled with<br />
decaying food (a treat for insects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> all kinds).<br />
Here, Bala begins to reciprocate Z's feelings.<br />
However, during a break, Cutter arrives and<br />
takes Bala back to the col<strong>on</strong>y. Z finds them g<strong>on</strong>e<br />
and makes his way back to the col<strong>on</strong>y to rescue<br />
Bala, aided by a wasp named Chip (Dan<br />
Aykroyd), whom he met earlier and has made<br />
himself drunk grieving over the loss <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> his<br />
swatted wife, Muffy (Jane Curtin). Z arrives at<br />
the col<strong>on</strong>y, where he finds that Bala has been<br />
held captive in General Mandible's <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fice. After<br />
rescuing her, he learns that General Mandible's<br />
"Mega Tunnel" leads straight to a body <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water<br />
(the puddle next to Insectopia), which Mandible<br />
will use to drown the queen and the workers<br />
who have gathered at the opening cerem<strong>on</strong>y.<br />
Bala goes to warn the workers and her mother at<br />
the cerem<strong>on</strong>y, while Z goes to the tunnel exit to<br />
stop the workers from digging any further. He<br />
fails, however, and the water leaks in. Z and<br />
Bala unify the workers into a single working<br />
unit and build a towering ladder <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ants towards<br />
the surface as the water c<strong>on</strong>tinues to rise.<br />
Meanwhile, General Mandible and his<br />
soldiers are gathered at the surface, where he<br />
explains to them his visi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a new col<strong>on</strong>y with<br />
n<strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the "worker filth". He is interrupted,<br />
however, when the workers successfully claw<br />
their way to the surface and break through.<br />
Mandible tries to kill Z but is stopped by Cutter,<br />
who finally rebels against Mandible and instead<br />
tries to help Z and the worker ants out <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
hole "for the good <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the col<strong>on</strong>y." Mandible then<br />
snaps, yelling that he is the col<strong>on</strong>y, and charges<br />
523 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
toward Cutter, who is, however, pushed away by<br />
Z at the last moment. Mandible inadvertently<br />
takes Z with him back down into the flooded<br />
col<strong>on</strong>y, and gets killed when he lands up<strong>on</strong> a<br />
root while Z falls into the water. Cutter, taking<br />
charge, orders the other soldier ants to help the<br />
workers and the queen <strong>on</strong>to the surface while he<br />
himself rescue Z. Although it seems that Z has<br />
drowned, Bala successfully resuscitates him. Z<br />
is lauded for his heroism and marries Bala.<br />
Together they rebuild the col<strong>on</strong>y with Cutter as<br />
their General, transforming the col<strong>on</strong>y from a<br />
c<strong>on</strong>formist military state into a community that<br />
values each and every <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its members. The<br />
film is loosely based <strong>on</strong> the novel Brave New<br />
World by Aldus Huxley; the setting for the<br />
str<strong>on</strong>g is an ant col<strong>on</strong>y in central park in New<br />
York City, under the chr<strong>on</strong>ological time span <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
4 days. The protag<strong>on</strong>ist z is symbolically a<br />
neurotic and individualistic worker and living in<br />
a wholly c<strong>on</strong>formist society who l<strong>on</strong>gs for the<br />
opportunity to truly express him. The film also<br />
paradise the suffocating royal life as well as the<br />
war lord general. Here the motifs like insectopia,<br />
mega-tunnel, praying mantis and towering<br />
ladders are very symbolic. The antag<strong>on</strong>ist<br />
mandible is truly a fascist Hitler like hypocrite is<br />
really a momentum <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the movie The Antz is<br />
truly didactic, z is lauded for his heroism and<br />
married princess Bala. Together they rebuild the<br />
col<strong>on</strong>y with cutter as their general, transforming<br />
the col<strong>on</strong>y from a c<strong>on</strong>formist military state in to<br />
a community that values each an d every <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
its members. [4]<br />
This movie received positive reviews.<br />
Review aggregate rotten tomatoes reports that<br />
95% <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> critics have given the film a positive<br />
review based <strong>on</strong> 85 review with an average<br />
score <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 7.7/10. The critical c<strong>on</strong>sensus is<br />
References:-<br />
1. Stam, Robert. Film Theory : An Anthology,<br />
New York, Wiley-Blackwell.2010 (P.1)<br />
w<strong>on</strong>derful animati<strong>on</strong> backed by humor and the<br />
vocal talents <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its cast make for an entertaing<br />
movie, Antz<br />
was the first animated dream works film<br />
to receive over 90% <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its reviews as very<br />
positive and the <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e until How to Train<br />
Your Drag<strong>on</strong>. Even Roger Berts praised the film<br />
saying that it’s sharp and funny”. The variety <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
themes, interesting visuals and voice acting were<br />
each aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film that were praised.<br />
According to time magazine the protag<strong>on</strong>ist is a<br />
limit neurotically oppressed sexually obsessed<br />
flumly fanny urban male who somehow<br />
stumbles his way to c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>al happiness time<br />
further asserts. In the dark-t<strong>on</strong>ed computer<br />
animati<strong>on</strong> kids may be puzzled by rebellious<br />
worker ants chanting Marxist slogans. (Stam,<br />
Robert:9)<br />
According to a positive resp<strong>on</strong>se is a<br />
milest<strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> animati<strong>on</strong> complexity despite some<br />
visual sameness, it clearly c<strong>on</strong>trasts a vast<br />
underground world with the larger <strong>on</strong>e under the<br />
sun, and deftly keeps a love str<strong>on</strong>g alive amid<br />
crucial political crisis. .(Stam, Robert:14).<br />
Hence we can assert that the film strikes<br />
creative gold with a sequence in which<br />
protag<strong>on</strong>ist Z breaks out <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> his stifling situati<strong>on</strong><br />
by trading places with weaver buddy and a<br />
hunky warrior who’d rather be a worker ordered<br />
into battle, emerges as a hero and this gets big<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong> from his love with whom ultimately<br />
flees the col<strong>on</strong>y. Thus we can say that Z and<br />
Bala encounter the giant world <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> humans. They<br />
both get stepped <strong>on</strong> by a kid but cling to a piece<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> gum and the bottom <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> his shoe as he runs<br />
through a park. The acti<strong>on</strong> is shown from their<br />
point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view and it’s a gem.<br />
5. Ibid. Stam, Robert. Film Theory : An<br />
Anthology, New York, Wiley-Blackwell.2010<br />
2. en.wikipedia.<strong>org</strong>/wiki/Antz<br />
3. Stam, Robert. Film Theory : An Anthology,<br />
New York, Wiley-Blackwell.2010.<br />
4. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/antz/<br />
524 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Adumbrati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Major C<strong>on</strong>cepts in Film Theory<br />
--Sushil A. Deshmukh,<br />
Tuljaram Chaturchand College,<br />
Baramati Dist- Pune, 413102.<br />
Cinema has arguably been the most<br />
powerful cultural phenomen<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the twentieth<br />
century. As a mode <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> mass public culture, art<br />
practice, vehicle <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> propaganda and<br />
documentary reflecti<strong>on</strong>, it has been integral to<br />
the development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> modern societies. Film<br />
theory is an academic discipline which intends<br />
to explore the essence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Cinema and<br />
provides ideas and principles based frame works<br />
to understand film’s relati<strong>on</strong>ship to reality, the<br />
other arts, individual viewers and society at<br />
large. Living in a multi-centered media world,<br />
academia has begun to draw up<strong>on</strong> from an<br />
elective range <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> disciplinary approaches- media<br />
and cultural studies, anthropology, sociology,<br />
film and performance studies and more, to<br />
accommodate perspectives and research<br />
methods from both the humanities and social<br />
sciences.<br />
Literature, media and films are means <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
communicati<strong>on</strong> and these have had an enormous<br />
influence <strong>on</strong> every single <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> us. Film theory<br />
is a verbal representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film complex.<br />
However, Film Theory is not to be c<strong>on</strong>fused<br />
with general film criticism, though there can be<br />
some crossover between the two disciplines.<br />
One <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the notable predecessors <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ‘Film Theory’ is the French<br />
philosopher Henri Bergs<strong>on</strong>. His work “Matter<br />
and Memory” (1896) had wide influence ‘during<br />
the birth <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema. Bergs<strong>on</strong> coined the terms<br />
“the movement image” and “the time image.”<br />
Early Film-Theory arose in the silent<br />
era and was mostly c<strong>on</strong>cerned with defining the<br />
crucial elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema as a medium. It<br />
largely evolved from the works <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> directors like<br />
Germaine Dulac, Louis Dellue, Jean Epstein,<br />
Sergei Eisenstain, Lev Kuleshov, and Dziga<br />
Vertov and film theorists like Rudolf Arnheim<br />
and Bela Balazs. These individuals emphasized<br />
how film differed from reality and how it might<br />
be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a valid art form. However, the<br />
French critic Andre Bazin voiced against this<br />
approach. He argued that film’s essence lay in<br />
its ability to mechanically reproduce reality, not<br />
in its difference from reality. American scholar<br />
David Bordwell has used the humorously<br />
derogatory term “SLAB theory” to refer to film<br />
studies based <strong>on</strong> the ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Saussure, Lacan,<br />
Althusser and Barthes. Film always exceeds<br />
attempts to institute such New- Critical readings,<br />
because <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its history. Film’s promiscuity points<br />
every day and in every way toward the social. It<br />
is three things, all at <strong>on</strong>ce: a recorder <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> reality; a<br />
manufacturer <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> reality and part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> reality.Film<br />
is a marker <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> culture:<br />
………………….not even the final<br />
target <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> enquiry, but part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a wider<br />
argument about representati<strong>on</strong>s-- the<br />
social process <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> making images,<br />
sounds, signs stand for<br />
something………….In effect, Film<br />
Theory becomes part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the wider field<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> disciplines and approaches called<br />
cultural studies (Turner 1988:38).<br />
This suggests that the study <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema is about<br />
how c<strong>on</strong>sciousness and systems <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> value are<br />
created and either bind society together or<br />
illuminate its fissures. Film attained its majority<br />
as <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the principal new forms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> inter-war<br />
communicati<strong>on</strong>. Al<strong>on</strong>g with the popular press<br />
and radio, it was designated as ideal for<br />
propaganda and social uplift.<br />
Specific Theories <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film:<br />
Apparatus theory – Apparatus theory came into<br />
prominence in 1970s. The term 'cinematic<br />
apparatus' refers to both an industrial machine as<br />
well as a mental or psychic apparatus. Jean<br />
Louis Baudry and Metz and Mulvey analyze the<br />
cinema as an institutui<strong>on</strong>. Baudry explored his<br />
ideas about the cinematic apparatus in his essay<br />
‘ Ideological Effects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Basic<br />
Cinematographic Apparatus’. He maintains that<br />
cinema is by nature ideological because its<br />
mechanics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> representati<strong>on</strong> are ideological. Its<br />
mechanics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> representati<strong>on</strong> include the camera<br />
and editing. The central positi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the spectator<br />
within the perspective <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the compositi<strong>on</strong> is also<br />
ideological. Apparatus theory argues that cinema<br />
525 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
maintains the dominant ideology <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the culture<br />
within the viewer. Ideology is not imposed <strong>on</strong><br />
cinema but is its integral part.<br />
Auteur theory – Auteur theory draws <strong>on</strong><br />
the work <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> group <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema enthusiasts who<br />
argued that films should reflect a director’s<br />
pers<strong>on</strong>al visi<strong>on</strong>. The word ‘auteur’ is the French<br />
word for author. In 1954, Francois Truffaut<br />
wrote an essay entitled A Certain Tendency in<br />
French Cinema. In this work he claimed that<br />
film is a great medium for expressing the<br />
pers<strong>on</strong>al ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the director. He suggested that<br />
this meant that the director should therefore be<br />
regarded as an auteur. In fact, Truffaut <strong>on</strong>ce<br />
provocatively said that “There are no good and<br />
bad movies, <strong>on</strong>ly good and bad directors”.<br />
Auteur Theory suggests that a director can use<br />
the commercial apparatus <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film-making in the<br />
same way that a writer uses a pen or a painter<br />
uses paint and a paintbrush. Sometimes this<br />
theory is useful when analyzing the works <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
actors who are working within the ‘star system’<br />
For example, it is possible to interpret Golmal 3<br />
in relati<strong>on</strong> to the can<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> films created with<br />
Ajay Devgan in them. Auteur theory holds that<br />
a director’s film reflects the director’s pers<strong>on</strong>al<br />
creative visi<strong>on</strong>. The best films will bear their<br />
maker’s ‘signature’ Alfred Hitchcock is <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the first names who comes to mind when talking<br />
about auteur theory. His most famous films are<br />
Vertigo, Psycho, The Birds and Rear Window. In<br />
law, the film is treated as a work <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> art, and the<br />
auteur as the creator <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film is the original<br />
copyright holder. Under European Uni<strong>on</strong> Law,<br />
the film director is c<strong>on</strong>sidered the author or <strong>on</strong>e<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the authors <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a film, largely as a result <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
influence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> auteur theory.<br />
Feminist Film Theory–Feminist film<br />
theory was influenced by sec<strong>on</strong>d wave feminism<br />
and the development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women’s studies within<br />
the academy. Feminist film theory inspired from<br />
sociological theory and focused <strong>on</strong> the functi<strong>on</strong><br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women characters in particular film narratives<br />
or genres and <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> stereotypes as a reflecti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a<br />
society’s view <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women. Claire Johnst<strong>on</strong> was<br />
am<strong>on</strong>g the first feminist critics to <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fer a<br />
sustained critique <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> stereotypes from a semiotic<br />
point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view. She put forward how classical<br />
cinema c<strong>on</strong>structs the ideological image <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
woman. Drawing <strong>on</strong> Roland Barth’s ‘noti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
myth’ Johnst<strong>on</strong> investigated the myth <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
‘Woman’ in classical cinema. The sign ‘woman’<br />
can be analyzed as a structure, a code <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>. It represents the ideological<br />
meaning that ‘woman’ has for men. In relati<strong>on</strong><br />
to herself she means nothing (1919:25): women<br />
are negatively represented as ‘not man’. The<br />
‘woman as woman’ is absent from the text <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
film. Molly Haskell’s “From Reverence to Rape:<br />
The Treatment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Women in Movies (1974)<br />
analyze how the women portrayed in film<br />
related to the broader historical c<strong>on</strong>text, the<br />
stereotypes depicted the extent to which the<br />
women were shown as active or passive, and the<br />
amount <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> screen time given to women. For e.g.<br />
women have mainly played decorative objects in<br />
Hindi cinema for a l<strong>on</strong>g time. Or, even in films<br />
where they had important roles, they are more<br />
victims and martyrs or victimizers <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> other<br />
women. Rarely have films like Kunku presented<br />
women as str<strong>on</strong>g women who can raise their<br />
voice against injustice, who can rebel in their<br />
own way and make their own political<br />
statement.<br />
Formalist Film Theory–Formalism is<br />
primarily c<strong>on</strong>cerned with style and how it<br />
communicates ideas, emoti<strong>on</strong>s and themes. Two<br />
examples <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ideological interpretati<strong>on</strong>s that are<br />
related to formalism: the classical Hollywood<br />
cinema has a very distinct style, sometimes<br />
called the Instituti<strong>on</strong>al Mode <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Representati<strong>on</strong>,<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>dly, c<strong>on</strong>tinuity in editing, massive<br />
coverage, three point lighting, “mood” music,<br />
dissolves, all designed to make the experience as<br />
pleasant as possible.<br />
Film noir which was given its name by<br />
Nino Frank is marked by lower producti<strong>on</strong><br />
values, darker images, under lighting, locati<strong>on</strong><br />
shooting and general nihilism: this is because,<br />
we are told during the war and post-war years<br />
filmmakers were generally more pessimistic.<br />
Italian film The Bicycle Thief is a great example<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film noir. It can be argued that, by this<br />
approach, the style or language <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> these films is<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>sible, but by social, ec<strong>on</strong>omic and<br />
political pressures <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> which the film makers<br />
themselves may be aware or not. It is this branch<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> criticism that gives us such categories as the<br />
independent movement, the New American<br />
526 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
independent movement, the new queer cinema<br />
and the French, German and Czech new waves.<br />
Genre Studies–Genre studies are a structuralist<br />
approach to literary theory, film theory and other<br />
cultural theories. The study <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a genre in this<br />
way examines the structural elements that<br />
combine in the telling <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a story and find<br />
patterns in collecti<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> stories Genre studies<br />
have gained the most recogniti<strong>on</strong> in film theory<br />
where the study <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> genre directly c<strong>on</strong>trasts with<br />
auteur theory which privileges the directors’ role<br />
in crafting a movie.<br />
Psychoanalysis Film Theory–<br />
Psychoanalysis and the cinema were born at the<br />
end <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the nineteenth century. They share a<br />
comm<strong>on</strong> historical, social and cultural<br />
background shaped by the forces <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> modernity.<br />
Theorists comm<strong>on</strong>ly explore how<br />
psychoanalysis, with its emphasis <strong>on</strong> the<br />
importance <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> desire in the life <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the individual,<br />
has influenced the cinema. A great many films<br />
from the first half <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the 20 th century drew up<strong>on</strong><br />
psychoanalytic c<strong>on</strong>cepts such as: the<br />
unc<strong>on</strong>scious as in Keat<strong>on</strong>’s Sherlock Jr.; dream<br />
work in Cavalcanti’s Dead <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Night; the Oedipus<br />
complex in Olivier’s Hamlet and psychoanalysis<br />
itself as in Hitchcock’s Spellbound. Historically<br />
speaking film and psychoanalysis have always<br />
been close siblings. The unc<strong>on</strong>scious studied by<br />
psychoanalytic film theory has been attributed to<br />
four different agencies: the filmmaker, the<br />
characters <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a film, the film’s audience, and the<br />
discourse <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a given film.<br />
1) The filmmakers unc<strong>on</strong>scious: - In its<br />
earliest stages, psychoanalytic film theory<br />
compared films to such manifestati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
unc<strong>on</strong>scious as dreams, slips <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the t<strong>on</strong>gue, and<br />
neurotic symptoms. Just as these are c<strong>on</strong>sidered<br />
to be manifestati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a patients unc<strong>on</strong>scious,<br />
films were c<strong>on</strong>sidered to be manifestati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a<br />
filmmaker’s unc<strong>on</strong>scious.<br />
2) The Character’s Unc<strong>on</strong>scious: - Here<br />
the focus is <strong>on</strong> the character <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a given film and<br />
their behavior and dialogue is being analyzed in<br />
an attempt to interpret traces <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their<br />
unc<strong>on</strong>scious.<br />
3) The Audience’s Unc<strong>on</strong>scious: - The<br />
audience focused approach will <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten focus <strong>on</strong><br />
the way in which the behavior and dialogue <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
certain characters can be interpreted as<br />
manifestati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> our unc<strong>on</strong>scious. Thus, as we<br />
sit quietly in the dark and f<strong>org</strong>e are psychic<br />
b<strong>on</strong>ds with this or that character, we<br />
unc<strong>on</strong>sciously project our own fantasies,<br />
phobias and fixati<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
4) The Unc<strong>on</strong>scious <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Cinematic<br />
Discourse: - This versi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> psychoanalytic film<br />
theory aband<strong>on</strong>s the character central approach<br />
and focused instead <strong>on</strong> how the form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> films<br />
replicates or mimics the formal model <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>scious/unc<strong>on</strong>scious mind posited by<br />
psychoanalysis.<br />
Marxist Film Theory–Marxist film<br />
theory is <strong>on</strong>e<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the oldest forms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film theory.<br />
Sergei Eisenstein and many other soviet<br />
filmmakers in the 1920s expressed ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Marxism through film. In fact, Hegelian<br />
dialectic was c<strong>on</strong>sidered best displayed in film<br />
editing through the Kuleshov Experiment and<br />
the development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> m<strong>on</strong>tage.<br />
Sergei Eisenstein <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten c<strong>on</strong>sidered to be<br />
the “father <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> M<strong>on</strong>tage”. He is well known<br />
particular for his silent films ‘Strike’, ‘Battleship<br />
Potemkin’ and ‘October’. His articles “Film<br />
Form and The Film Sense” explain the<br />
significance <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> m<strong>on</strong>tage in detail. Eisenstein<br />
believed that “collisi<strong>on</strong>” <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> shots could be used<br />
to manipulate the emoti<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the audience and<br />
create film metaphors. According to him an idea<br />
should be derived from the juxtapositi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> two<br />
independent shots, bringing an element <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
collage into films. This he called ‘methods <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
m<strong>on</strong>tage’. In his film ‘Strike’ a shot <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> striking<br />
workers being attacked cut with a shot <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a bull<br />
being slaughtered creates a film metaphor<br />
suggesting that the workers are being treated like<br />
cattle. This meaning does not exist in the<br />
individual shots; it <strong>on</strong>ly arises when they are<br />
juxtaposed. At the end <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ‘Apocalypse Now’ the<br />
executi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> col<strong>on</strong>el Kurtz is juxtaposed with<br />
the villagers’ ritual slaughter <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a water buffalo.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>cepts similar to m<strong>on</strong>tage<br />
would arise during the first half <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the 20 th<br />
century, such as Imagism in poetry specifically<br />
Ezra Pounds’ Ideogrammic Method or Cubism’s<br />
attempt at synthesizing multiple perspectives<br />
into <strong>on</strong>e painting.<br />
527 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong><br />
To c<strong>on</strong>clude, Humanities divisi<strong>on</strong>s are hiding<br />
places for radical cultural critics for whom film<br />
study provide an opportunity to help shift the<br />
ground <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> whole realm <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> humanities. Film<br />
theory born in the world <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> humanities has been<br />
based <strong>on</strong> the efficacy and import <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> metaphors<br />
about the film phenomen<strong>on</strong>. Since metaphors are<br />
more readily generated than are computerized<br />
analyses <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> audience questi<strong>on</strong>naires or minute<br />
descripti<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> hundreds <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> obscure films, the<br />
discourse <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film theory is destined to remain in<br />
this literary world.<br />
References:-<br />
•Eisenstein Sergei M. Film Form: Essays in Film<br />
Theory & The Film sense. (1949) Harcourt<br />
Brace & Co.<br />
•J. Dudley Andrew (1975) The Major Film<br />
Theories. Oxford University Press<br />
•Thomas Elsaesser, Mallte Hagener (2009) Film<br />
Theory: An Introducti<strong>on</strong> through the Senses.<br />
Rout ledge<br />
•Toby Miller, Robert Stam (2004) A<br />
Compani<strong>on</strong> to Film Theory. Blackwell<br />
Publishing.<br />
528 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Title: HUMAN BONDING IN VIOLENCE IN THE FILM: PINJAR<br />
India’s partiti<strong>on</strong> in 1947 and the holocaust that allowed it made every<br />
sensible feels that it was grave blender to divide this ancient country <strong>on</strong> the<br />
grounds <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> religi<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Post- independent and translati<strong>on</strong> textual and cinematic works have<br />
revisited the violence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> India-Pakistan partiti<strong>on</strong> and cross border migrati<strong>on</strong><br />
with specific attenti<strong>on</strong> to the abducti<strong>on</strong>, raping and mutilati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women’s<br />
bodies through literary texts and films like: Megh Dhake Tara, Tamas, Gadar,<br />
Earth , Pinjar etc. Communal violence am<strong>on</strong>g Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims was<br />
not <strong>on</strong>ly due to mutual hatred am<strong>on</strong>g the communities for historical and<br />
religious reas<strong>on</strong>s. There were other factors resp<strong>on</strong>sible for the bloodshed. The<br />
psychoanalyst Sudhir Kakar, holds sociological reas<strong>on</strong>s for the violence:<br />
“On a more sociological level, the chief reas<strong>on</strong> for the prep<strong>on</strong>derance <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> specifically sexual<br />
violence in the partiti<strong>on</strong> riots in the north is that, as compared to the many other parts <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
country, the undivided Punjab (and c<strong>on</strong>tinue to be) a rather violent society. It’s high murder<br />
rate is <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e indicati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong>e’s land or <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> pers<strong>on</strong>al and family h<strong>on</strong>our”.<br />
The present paper focuses <strong>on</strong> the theme <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> human b<strong>on</strong>ding in violence<br />
during partiti<strong>on</strong> in the film: Pinjar. The film is based <strong>on</strong> the novel by Amrita<br />
Pritam by the same name in 1950.<br />
Pinjar is <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the most influential stories <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Pritam at least in south<br />
asian literature circles. Pinjar (skelet<strong>on</strong>), a dark narrative <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the cross religious<br />
abducti<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> woman that took place in the partiti<strong>on</strong>. The protag<strong>on</strong>ist Puro, is a<br />
Hindu woman who is abducted and forcibly married into a Muslim family. Puro<br />
isn’t a single victim, there are so many women who were abducted and forcibly<br />
change their religi<strong>on</strong>, during partiti<strong>on</strong> riots. Pritam’s story is somewhere<br />
between a realist (ethnographic and historical) account <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> particularly nasty<br />
aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women’s experience <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the partiti<strong>on</strong>, <strong>on</strong> the <strong>on</strong>e hand and a more<br />
internal psychological portrait where realism is <strong>on</strong>ly a sec<strong>on</strong>dary goal <strong>on</strong> the<br />
other hand.<br />
The novel is filmed in 2003 and directed by Dr.Chandraprakash Dwivedi.<br />
In an interview with Dr. Dwivedi, he answered the questi<strong>on</strong>, what prompted<br />
him to make a film <strong>on</strong> the novel:<br />
529 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
“ History always talk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the victories, literature talks <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> defeats. History speaks <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> what is<br />
while literature talks <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> what could have been but both talk <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> what should not have been.<br />
Partiti<strong>on</strong> is a wound, which doesn’t heal ever. There are lot <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> painful memories associated<br />
with it and those who have g<strong>on</strong>e through it are still haunted by memories”.<br />
The film starts with Puro’s (Urmila Mart<strong>on</strong>dkar) carefree life with her<br />
parents (Kulbhushan Kharbanda and Lillete Dubey) and brother Trilok<br />
(Priyanshu Chatterjee) and two sister, <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> them is Rajjo(Isha Koppikar). The<br />
film moved during 1946 and 1948, the time <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> freedom from British col<strong>on</strong>ies<br />
and the air <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> partiti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the land India and Pakistan.<br />
Puro’s marriage is fixed with a wealthy, decent and scholar young man,<br />
Ramchand (Sanjay Suri) and it is decided that Trilok will be marry with Lajjo,<br />
Ramchand’s sister (Sandali Sinha). But <strong>on</strong>e evening Puro is kidnapped by<br />
Rashid (Manoj Bajpai). Puro’s family is grief stricken but they neither bother to<br />
lodge police complaint nor look for her. When girl is kidnapped mysteriously<br />
from a house, she is as good as dead for her family. What is the reas<strong>on</strong>- Rashid<br />
explains it – the two families – his and hers – haven been rivals for some years<br />
now. Her grandfather had g<strong>on</strong>e <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> his aunts kidnapped and kept her at their<br />
house for three successive nights, while his grandfather, father and uncle<br />
pledged revenge. It was d<strong>on</strong>e thing so, now it was Puro’s turn to face the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sequences <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> her ancestors’ misdeeds. One night Puro succeeds to run away<br />
and reaches her parent’s house but they refuse to take her back because their<br />
community w<strong>on</strong>’t accept her and nobody will marry her. Puro decides to get<br />
suicide but Rashid waits for her near the well and takes her back with him. He<br />
loves her genuinely; he has repentance for his deeds. Puro also slowly adjusts<br />
with her new life and identity with the new name Hamida though she can’t<br />
f<strong>org</strong>et her root, her parents, her village and her love.<br />
Life goes <strong>on</strong> for everybody except Trilok and Ramchand, Trilok searches<br />
his sister Puro and Ramchand yet waits for his Janaki.<br />
This situati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> these three pers<strong>on</strong>s are narrated through a beautiful s<strong>on</strong>g<br />
sung by Jagjeet Singh:<br />
“Haath Choote bhi to Rishte Nahi Choota Karate<br />
Waqt ki Shakh se Lamhe Nahi Toota Karate.”<br />
530 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
M<strong>on</strong>ths pass and the Hindu-Muslim unrest grow with each passing day.<br />
The partiti<strong>on</strong> takes place and thousands <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Hindu and Muslim families are<br />
displaced overnight, riots breakout, girls are kidnapped and raped while men are<br />
brutally killed. Ramchand’s family is also forced to leave the place,<br />
unfortunately Lajjo is kidnapped by a Muslim man. Puro gets to know this<br />
through Ramchand who has been forced to seek refuge in the nearby village.<br />
She decides to search her sister in law with Rashid’s help .After some attempts,<br />
she manages to not <strong>on</strong>ly rescue Lajjo but also hand over to her brother<br />
,Ramchand.<br />
The last seen <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film is important when Puro <strong>on</strong>ce again departs from<br />
her people. Trilok tells her that Ramchand is ready to marry her and take her<br />
back but she explains that now she adjusted herself with her new identity, a wife<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Rashid,<br />
“d<strong>on</strong>’t make me homeless again.”<br />
Pinjar is the saga <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> human strength during trying times. A saga that is far from<br />
being the story <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> victims The film interrogates not <strong>on</strong>ly but how we know it.<br />
Pinjar is the strength and hope that epitomizes the way many people resp<strong>on</strong>ded<br />
to the brutal past. The film is the representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the partiti<strong>on</strong>, the story <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
divisi<strong>on</strong> lives seen and experienced by a young woman, Puro. Where we know<br />
the recorded facts in the history, Pinjar revisits the sprit <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> that time. The desire<br />
to live combat circumstances, the will to change the world and the suffering for<br />
any<strong>on</strong>e untouched by the mayhem. Puro is the symbol <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> undaunted strength<br />
and determinati<strong>on</strong>. Like Puro, the women’s struggle during this time was<br />
through silence which eventually transformed into the silent movement where<br />
Puro’s refused to become helpless victims to the crossfire <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> polity. Puro’s<br />
missi<strong>on</strong> and inner strength are very poignant nuances the film highlights. It’s<br />
about Puro, her selflessness and her ability to keep aside her pers<strong>on</strong>al grief and<br />
strive for the happiness <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the others. On those counts Pinjar is heart wrenching.<br />
References:<br />
1.Cinema in India,A quarterly magazine.<br />
2.Interview with Dr. Dwivedi:Hindu Times.<br />
3.M.P.Sinha:Indian Ficti<strong>on</strong> in Translati<strong>on</strong>:Atlantic Publishers,2005.<br />
531 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Webliography:<br />
Lotusread.com<br />
BHORE ASHWINI R.<br />
Nagari,<br />
Road<br />
‘Usha’,13,Ayodhya<br />
Taroda(kh),Malega<strong>on</strong><br />
Nanded.<br />
Mob:9423137302.<br />
532 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Film Theory<br />
Film theory is an academic discipline that aims to explore the essence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the Cinema and provides c<strong>on</strong>ceptual frame works for understanding film’s<br />
relati<strong>on</strong>ship to reality, the other Arts, individual viewers, and society at large.<br />
Film theory is not to be c<strong>on</strong>fused with general film criticism, though there can<br />
be some crossover between the two disciplines.<br />
French Philosopher Henri Bergs<strong>on</strong>’s “Matter and Memory” (1896) has<br />
been cited as anticipating the developments <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film theory during the birth <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
cinema. Bergs<strong>on</strong> coined the terms “The Movement Image” and “The Time<br />
Image”. Early film theory arose in the silent era and was mostly c<strong>on</strong>cerned with<br />
defining the crucial elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the medium. This work is largely evolves from<br />
the works <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> directors, like Germaine Dulac, Louis Delluc, Jean Epstein, Sergei<br />
Eisenstein, Lev kweshov, and Dziga Vertoy and film theorists like Rudolf<br />
Arnmeim, Bela Balazs and Siegfried Kracher. These individuals emphasized<br />
how film differed from reality and how it might be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a valid art form.<br />
French film critic Andre Bazin Says.:<br />
“Film’s essence lay in its ability ,<br />
to mechanically reproduce reality;<br />
not in its difference from reality.”<br />
In 1960 and 1907s, film theory took up residence in academic importing<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cepts from established disciplines like Psychoanalysis, gender studies,<br />
anthropology, literary theory semiotics and linguistics.<br />
The late 1980s, or early 1990s, did film theory achieve much<br />
prominence in American universities by displacing the prevailing humanistic,<br />
auteur theory that had dominated cinema studies and which had been focused<br />
<strong>on</strong> the practical elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film writing, producti<strong>on</strong>, editing and criticism.<br />
American scholar David Bordwell has spoken against many prominent<br />
developments film theory since the 1970s, i.e. he uses the humorously<br />
derogatory term “SLAB Theory” to refer to film studies based <strong>on</strong> the ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Saussure, Lacan, Althusser, Barthes. Bordwell Promotes what he describers as<br />
“Ne<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ormalism”. During 1990s, the digital revoluti<strong>on</strong> in image technologies<br />
had an impact <strong>on</strong> film theory in various ways. Film ability to capture an<br />
“indexicl” image <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a moment in time by theorists like Mary Ann Doane, Philip<br />
Rosen, and Laura Mulvey who was informed by Psychoanalysis. A<br />
psychoanalytical perspective, Lacanian “ The Real”, Slavoj Zizek “The gaze”,<br />
extensively used in c<strong>on</strong>temporary film analysis.<br />
533 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Televisi<strong>on</strong> writer David Weddle says –<br />
“Film theory as practiced in the early 2000s, is a form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> bait<br />
and switch, taking advantage <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> young, would be film-makers, any<strong>on</strong>e in<br />
Hollywood film making who used film theory terms like “fibula” and<br />
“Syuzhet” would be laughed <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>f the lot.”<br />
Roger Ebert sys, -<br />
“Film theory has nothing to do with film.”<br />
Film historian Kevin Brownlows says, “Academic film theorists are typically<br />
quite aggressively Marxist”.<br />
In 2008, German film maker Werner Herzog sys –<br />
“Theoretical film studies has become really awful, that’s not how<br />
you should study film, abolish these courses and do something<br />
else which makes much more sense.”<br />
Some theories <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film as follows<br />
1) Apparatus Theory :-<br />
It derived in part form Marxist film theory, semiotics and<br />
psychoanalysis, was a dominant theory within cinema studies during<br />
1907s. It maintains that cinema is by nature ideological because its<br />
mechanics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> representati<strong>on</strong> are ideological. Its mechanics or<br />
representati<strong>on</strong> include camera and editing. This theory argues that<br />
cinema maintains the dominant ideology <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the culture within the<br />
viewer. Ideology is not imposed <strong>on</strong> cinema, but is part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> its nature.<br />
Apparatus theorists like – Jacque Lacan, Louis Althusser, Jean-Louis<br />
Baudry, Jean- Louis Comolli, Christian Metz, Gi<strong>org</strong>io Agamben,<br />
Laura Mulvey, Peter Wollen, C<strong>on</strong>stance penley.<br />
2) Auteur Theory :-<br />
In film critism, auteur theory holds that a directors film reflects the<br />
director’s pers<strong>on</strong>al creative visi<strong>on</strong>. Auteur French word meaning<br />
“author”. The producti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film as a part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> an industrial process,<br />
the auteurs creative voice is distinct enough to Shine through all<br />
kinds <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> studio interference and through the collective process. The<br />
auteur, as the creator <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film, is the original copyright holder.<br />
European Uni<strong>on</strong> Law Says –<br />
“The film director is c<strong>on</strong>sidered the author or <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
authors <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a film, largely as a result <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the influence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
auteur theory.”<br />
The theory influences film criticism since 1954, it was advocated by<br />
film director and critic Francois Truffaut. This was originally associated with<br />
534 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
French New Wave, French film review periodical “Cahiers du cinema”. It was<br />
developed later in America through the writings <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ‘The village voice’ critic<br />
Andrew Sarris. He analysed it as a serious work through the stuty <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> respected<br />
directors, and their films. This theory comes from “Alexandre Astrue’s” noti<strong>on</strong><br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the camera stylo or camera pen. Andre Bazin and Roger Leenharot presented<br />
the theory that it is the director that brings the film to life and uses the film to<br />
express their thoughts and feelings <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the subject matter as well as a world view<br />
as an auteur.<br />
3) Feminist Film Theory :-<br />
Feminist Film Theory is theoretical film criticism derived from<br />
feminist politics and feminist theory. Feminists have many<br />
approaches to cinema analysis, regarding the film elements<br />
analysed and their theoretical underpinnings. It was influenced by<br />
“Sec<strong>on</strong>d wave Feminism”, and the development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ‘Women’s<br />
studies’, within the academy. Early 1970s, were based <strong>on</strong><br />
sociological theory and focused <strong>on</strong> the functi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women<br />
characters in particular film narratives or genres and <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
stereotypes as reflecti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a society’s view <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women. Marjorie<br />
Rosen’s “Women, Movies and the American Dream” (1973)<br />
Molly Haskell’s “The Treatment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Women In Movies” (1974)<br />
analyze how the women portrayed in film as active or passive and<br />
the amount <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> screen time given to women. Analysis Say –<br />
Cynthia Says-<br />
“The producti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> meaning in a film text, the way<br />
text c<strong>on</strong>structs a viewing subject, and the ways in<br />
which the very mechanisms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinematic<br />
producti<strong>on</strong> affect the representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women and<br />
reinforce sexism”<br />
“ Feminist frameworks for horror films focused <strong>on</strong> psychodynamics and<br />
chief interest in watching horror films”.<br />
Feminist film theory focused <strong>on</strong> –<br />
“ Disparate feminisms, nati<strong>on</strong>alisms, and media in various locati<strong>on</strong> and<br />
across class, racial and ethnic groups throughout the world”<br />
Film theorists and critics like – Carol J. Clover, Molly Haskell, Dai Jinhua,<br />
Claire Johnst<strong>on</strong>g Teresa de Lauretis, Laura Mulvey, Griselda Pollack, Ruby<br />
Rich, Keja silverman.<br />
4) Genre Studies :-<br />
Genre studies are a structuralist approach to literary theory, film<br />
theory and other cultural theories. Genre theory or studies got<br />
underway with the Greeks. They felt that –<br />
535 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Aristotle said,<br />
“The type <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> pers<strong>on</strong> an author was directly resp<strong>on</strong>sible for<br />
the type <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> poetry they wrote”.<br />
“ We have, a natural instinct <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> representati<strong>on</strong> and for tune and<br />
rhythm and starting with these instincts men very gradually<br />
developed them until they produced poetry.”<br />
This is all based <strong>on</strong> platos mimetic theory. The Romans carried <strong>on</strong> the Greek<br />
traditi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> literary criticism. At the end <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 18 th century, the theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> genre<br />
based <strong>on</strong> classical thought. Pamphlets and broadsides began to diffuse<br />
informati<strong>on</strong>, new genres like novel were being generated. Lock’s “An Essay<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cerning Human Understanding”, (1690). In 18 th century literary critics find<br />
a theory more commensurate with the realities <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> individual texts within<br />
genres. In 19 th and 20 th century it was influenced by dec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>ist thought<br />
and the c<strong>on</strong>cept <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> reality. ex. Jacques Derrida wrote “The Law <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Genre”.<br />
Current state <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> genre theory focuses <strong>on</strong> rhetorical genre. The category <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> genre<br />
is divided into – aesthetic, ritual, ideological. Genre works to promote<br />
<strong>org</strong>anizati<strong>on</strong>, classify works. “Metagenre is nothing” but “Situated language<br />
about situated language.” The c<strong>on</strong>cept metagenre provides a valuable way to<br />
understand the dynamics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> instituti<strong>on</strong>al at interrelati<strong>on</strong>s between genres.<br />
Miller defines it as “Typified rhetorical acti<strong>on</strong>s”. It evolves as “a form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> social<br />
knowledge.” Some are computer and video game genres, film genre, formula<br />
ficti<strong>on</strong>, genre ficti<strong>on</strong>, literary genre, Music genre, Plot device, stock character,<br />
genre criticism.<br />
5) Marxist Film Theory :-<br />
It is <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the oldest form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film theory. Serget Eisenstein and<br />
Many other soviet filmmakers in 1920s expressed ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Marxism through film. Hegelian dialectic was c<strong>on</strong>sidered best<br />
displayed in film editing through the Kuleshov Experiment and<br />
the development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> m<strong>on</strong>tage. Structuralist approach to Marxism<br />
and filmmaking was used. Russian filmmakers had the narrative<br />
structure <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Hollywood filmmaking. French Marxist film makers,<br />
such as Jean-Luc Godard, would employ radical editing and<br />
choice <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> subject matter, as well as subversive parody, to<br />
heighten class c<strong>on</strong>sciousness and promote Marxist ideas.<br />
Situati<strong>on</strong>ist film maker Guy Debord author <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> “The Society <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the Spectacle.” began his film “In girum imus nocte et<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sumimur igni” (Wadering around in the night we are<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sumed by fire) Marxist film theory has developed from these<br />
precise and historical beginnings and in now sometimes viewed<br />
in a wider way to refer to any power relati<strong>on</strong>ships or structures<br />
within a moving image text.<br />
6) Philosophy <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Language Film Analysis:-<br />
536 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
The philosophy <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> language film analysis is a form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film analysis that<br />
studies the aesthetics <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film by investigating the c<strong>on</strong>cepts and practices<br />
that comprise the experience and interpretati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> movies. It is based <strong>on</strong><br />
the philosophical traditi<strong>on</strong> begun by Ludwig Wittgenstein. Critics from<br />
this traditi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten clarify misc<strong>on</strong>cepti<strong>on</strong>s (citati<strong>on</strong> needed) used in<br />
theoretical film studies and instead produce analysis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a films<br />
vocabulary and its link to a form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> life. Richard Allen –<br />
“Cognitive Film Theory”, Stephen Mulhall “<strong>on</strong> film”, Rupert Read and<br />
Jerry Good enough “Essays <strong>on</strong> cinema” are some examples.<br />
7) Psychoanalytical Film Theory:-<br />
Psychoanalytical film theory is a school <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> academic film<br />
criticism that developed in the 1970s and 80s, is closely allied<br />
with critical theory, and that analyzes films form the perspective<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> psychoanalysis, generally the works <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Jacques Lacan. The<br />
film viewer is seen as the subject <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a ‘gaze’ that is largely<br />
c<strong>on</strong>structed by a film itself, where what is <strong>on</strong> screen becomes the<br />
object <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> that subject’s desire. The theory stresses the subject’s<br />
l<strong>on</strong>ging for a completeness which the film may appear to <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fer<br />
through identificati<strong>on</strong> with an image.<br />
8) Screen Theory:-<br />
Screen theory is a Marxist film theory associated with the British<br />
Journal Screen in the 1970s. The theoreticians <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> this approach Colin<br />
Maccabe, Stephen Heath and Laura mulvey describe the “Cinematic<br />
apparatus” as versi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> “Althusser’s Ideological state Apparatus”<br />
(ISA). According to screen theory, it is the spectacle that creates the<br />
spectator and the other way round. The subject is created and subjected<br />
at the same time by the narrative <strong>on</strong> screen is masked by the apparent<br />
realism <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the communicated c<strong>on</strong>tent. Some works – Stephen (1981)<br />
“Theoretical Essays”.<br />
9) Structuralist Film Theory:-<br />
Structuralist film theory is a branch <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film theory that is rooted<br />
in structuralism, itself based <strong>on</strong> structural linguistics, nowobsolete<br />
branch <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> linguistics. Structurealist film theory<br />
emphasizes how films c<strong>on</strong>vey meaning through the use <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> codes<br />
and c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>s not dissimilar to the way languages are used to<br />
c<strong>on</strong>struct meaning n communicati<strong>on</strong>. The Juxtapositi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
images c<strong>on</strong>vey the meaning to the audience. Some works –<br />
Christrian Metz, Kuleshov Experiment.<br />
10) Ficti<strong>on</strong>al Film:-<br />
Ficti<strong>on</strong>al film or narrative film is film that tells a ficti<strong>on</strong>al story or<br />
narrative. Narrative cinema is ususlly c<strong>on</strong>trasted to films that<br />
present informati<strong>on</strong>, such as nature documentary, as well as to<br />
some experimental films Michael Snow’s “Wavelength”, “Dziga<br />
537 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Vertoy’s” Man with a Movie Camera”, or film by Chantal<br />
Akeraman in such instances documentary films, while n<strong>on</strong>ficti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
may n<strong>on</strong>etheless recount a story. Unlike literary ficti<strong>on</strong> which is<br />
based <strong>on</strong> characters, situati<strong>on</strong>s and events that are entirely<br />
imaginary; cinema always has a real referent called the “Pr<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ilmic”,<br />
which encompasses everything existing and d<strong>on</strong>e infr<strong>on</strong>t<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> camera. In classical Hollywood, i.e. in 20 th century, narrative<br />
usually in the form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the feature film, has held dominance in<br />
commercial cinema and has become popularly syn<strong>on</strong>ymous with<br />
“The Movies”. Classical, invisible filmmaking is realist ficti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
and its key element is c<strong>on</strong>tinuity editing.<br />
11) Film:-<br />
A film also called a movie or moti<strong>on</strong> picture, is a series <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> still or<br />
moving images. It is produced by recording photographic images<br />
with cameras, or by creating images using animati<strong>on</strong> techniques<br />
or visual effects. The process <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> filmmaking has developed into<br />
an art form and industry. Films are cultural artifacts created by<br />
specific cultures, which reflect those culture and in turn affect<br />
them. The word ‘film’ comes from the fact that photographic film<br />
(film stock ) has historically been the primary medium for<br />
recording and displaying moti<strong>on</strong> pictures. Many other term like –<br />
picture, picture show, Moving picture, photo-play, flick, the big<br />
screen, the silver screen, the cinema and the movies. Films are<br />
made up <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a series <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> individual images called ‘Frames’.<br />
However film theory seeks to develop c<strong>on</strong>cise and systematic<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cepts that apply to the study <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film as “Art”<br />
References:-<br />
1) Robert stam, Film Theory : an introducti<strong>on</strong>. Orford ;<br />
Blackwell Publishers, 2000.<br />
2) A Film Theory Reader, Columbia University press 1986.<br />
3) Los Angeles Times Magazine, “Lip Service”, March 25,<br />
2001.<br />
4) Bordwell, David, and Thoms<strong>on</strong>, Kristin (2010) “Film History<br />
: An Introducti<strong>on</strong>, Third Editi<strong>on</strong>” New York, NY : MCGraw –<br />
Hill. P. 382.<br />
5) Braudy and Cohen, Film Theory and critisim, sixth editi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
Oxford University press, 2004, page 861.<br />
6) Jacques Derrida, ‘The Law <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Genre’, Critical Inquiry,<br />
Autumn, 1980, Vol. 7, p.g.55.<br />
7) Stanley Cavell, “The World viewed : Reflecti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> the<br />
Ontology <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Film’ (1971)<br />
8) Heath, Stephen (1981) : Questi<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Cinema Bloomingt<strong>on</strong> :<br />
Indiana university press.<br />
538 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
9) Bordwell, David/ Mark Cuevas, Kristin Thomps<strong>on</strong>, 1997.<br />
Film Art : An In<br />
10) ‘Silent Film Speed’, Cinemaweb.com 1911 -12-02.<br />
- Dr. Auradkar Sarika Pradiprao<br />
Department <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> English,<br />
Indira Gandhi (Sr.) College<br />
Cidco, Nanded<br />
539 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Literature and Film: A Retrospective.<br />
- Nitin S. Kendre<br />
Vivekanand College,<br />
Aurangabad.<br />
“Adaptati<strong>on</strong>s are the future <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Indian cinema.”<br />
- Chetan Bhagat.<br />
Numerous films are adapted into literary works. The process <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> adaptati<strong>on</strong> actually amalgamates<br />
the interpretati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the spectators and the art <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film itself. Most adaptati<strong>on</strong>s are films based <strong>on</strong> the<br />
literary works. Literature provides filmmakers rich source <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> materials for movies. Dudley Andrews, a<br />
film critic and theorist, states that literary work is the basis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> more than half <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> all commercial films.<br />
Both for the serious students <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film and the c<strong>on</strong>scientious practiti<strong>on</strong>er <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the art, it is instructive to<br />
know how film as art and entertainment has related to literature. There is a percepti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> some people<br />
that the enjoyment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a pers<strong>on</strong> in watching a film will be hindered by readers’ knowledge in the film<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cepts and process. However, there are film enthusiasts who stressed that “studying films increases<br />
their enjoyment … and appreciati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the effort and creativity involved in making them.” Therefore,<br />
having background knowledge in film will add to the viewers’ comprehensi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> why a film is produced<br />
the way it is and in the case <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> adapted films, why the filmmaker came up with such adaptati<strong>on</strong> knowing<br />
each medium’s limitati<strong>on</strong>s and strengths.<br />
This paper is intended to act as how adaptati<strong>on</strong> works. It is important to note that its focus is<br />
heavily slanted toward a literary approach. Adaptati<strong>on</strong> theory is a subject that many different disciplines<br />
are interested in it.<br />
Bollywood is much c<strong>on</strong>cerned about enough stories and it finally turn to the Indian literature. So<br />
because <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the lack <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> good scripts Bollywood is turning towards literature. We can say that Bollywood is<br />
hungry for fresh ideas to put <strong>on</strong> silver screen, and in accordance with that quest they are turning their<br />
attenti<strong>on</strong> towards literature. Novelty and originality are a rear in today’s Bollywood films. There have<br />
been quite a few good adaptati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a literary work. But adapting the literary text <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> hundreds <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> pages<br />
into a 3 hour movie is not easy task. While a book takes a couple <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> words to express a particular<br />
massage, a movie will require a combinati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the precise script, setting, character and other essential<br />
factors.<br />
540 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Books by Indian writers and writers having Indian origin have always proved appealing to Indian<br />
film makers; it is <strong>on</strong>ly in recent times that there has been an increase in numbers <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> adaptati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Indian<br />
author writing in English. The unf<strong>org</strong>ettable brilliant film “Guide” was possibly <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the first cinematic<br />
adaptati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> an English novel by an Indian author.<br />
As far as cinematic adaptati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> novels in Indian languages is c<strong>on</strong>cerned special menti<strong>on</strong> must<br />
be made <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the repeatedly remade and widely successful “Devdas” based <strong>on</strong> famous novel by Sarat<br />
Chandra Chattopadhyay. In fact there are some five films with the same name, based <strong>on</strong> this novel al<strong>on</strong>e.<br />
It even got adapted to fit today’s youth by changing the tragic ending and not killing the protag<strong>on</strong>ist, but<br />
instead making him realize his folly in the critically acclaimed “Dev D”. So this is the change according<br />
to the commercial c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong>s and youth centric views.<br />
A good novel by itself is not enough; bur a director has to lean <strong>on</strong> the crutches <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> good dialogues<br />
and script to create the desire impact <strong>on</strong> his audience. The originality <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> thought and subject matter<br />
attracts film makers to make the film <strong>on</strong> the book. Besides, the simple narrative style <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the book also<br />
made it easy to make a film script out <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the book. Nazarian Eric comments <strong>on</strong> adaptati<strong>on</strong> as:<br />
“Adapting novel into films is no easy task. The job is by no means simpler because a<br />
story already exits. Adapting literature requires a great deal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> reading, thinking,<br />
eliminating and compressing words, character and time frames.”<br />
Nazarian, Eric (2000). Prose and Pictures: Adapting Literature into Film.<br />
Definiti<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film adaptati<strong>on</strong> include transfer <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong>e medium to another. Film adaptati<strong>on</strong> is<br />
defined as,<br />
“The process <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> changing or transforming material from <strong>on</strong>e medium (novel, stage play,<br />
short story, real life story etc) into another (i.e. film <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> TV)”.<br />
Frensham, R. (Eds) (2003). Teach Yourself: Ies (3 rd Ed) Prentice Hall.<br />
Following are few fundamental obstacles to c<strong>on</strong>sider while adapting a literary text into cinema/film.<br />
1. When adapting it is important not to loose the spirit <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the literary texts, because the original<br />
meaning <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> that text is the reas<strong>on</strong> for picking that text into film.<br />
2. Novels about in minor characters, subplots and incidental events which add to the richness <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
work however, in film you have to c<strong>on</strong>centrate <strong>on</strong> your main characters because <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the time<br />
c<strong>on</strong>straints.<br />
3. In novel characters and acti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten revealed through extended dialogue between characters. But<br />
screen writers frequently aim for screens that eliminate the need for dialogue. The c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong> is<br />
that because film is so visual, it is best not to create dialogue when the meaning could easily be<br />
c<strong>on</strong>veyed in an acti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
4. Film making is essentially a co-operative team work rather than the work <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> an individual, such<br />
as a novel writing. This therefore entails the necessity <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> demanding <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> high level <strong>org</strong>anized<br />
work.<br />
5. A film is limited in the aspect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> length and depth as well as the amount <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> material, thus, it is<br />
forced to suggest pictorially a great many things that novel can explore in more depth.<br />
541 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
In adapting a novel into film, a film maker must decide if s/he will <strong>on</strong>ly include a specific part <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a<br />
novel or to ‘capture a sense <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the whole novel by writing the high points’.<br />
Indian-born Canadian-based filmmaker Deepa Mehta represents the Partiti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> India in her film<br />
Earth (1999). While representing the Partiti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the screen, Mehta’s film provides a different point<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view when set al<strong>on</strong>gside Bapsi Sidhwa’s novel “Cracking India”. Mehta’s film represents the<br />
story from an unfixed point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view rather than from the first-pers<strong>on</strong> point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Lenny. This<br />
modificati<strong>on</strong> provides us with an alternative representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Partiti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Transforming a literary work into the medium <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film entails tremendous alterati<strong>on</strong>s. DeWitt Bodeen<br />
says:<br />
“Adapting literary works to film is […] a creative undertaking, but the task requires a<br />
kind <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> selective interpretati<strong>on</strong>, al<strong>on</strong>g with the ability to recreate and sustain an<br />
established mood”<br />
(qtd. in McFarlane 7)<br />
While sticking to Bapsi Sidhwa’s plot, Deepa Mehta not <strong>on</strong>ly recreates Sidhwa’s representati<strong>on</strong><br />
but also creates what Sidhwa does not (or is not able to) represent. A striking example is Mehta’s<br />
visualizati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the bloody train scene. In Sidhwa’s literary account, this scene is not represented<br />
directly. Lenny does not present this scene to us. The absence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a direct descripti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the train scene<br />
results from the first-pers<strong>on</strong> point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view employed in Sidhwa’s novel. In additi<strong>on</strong> to the train scene,<br />
a sec<strong>on</strong>d striking example represented in Mehta’s film is <strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the most important impact <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
Partiti<strong>on</strong>—the great migrati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> people. In Sidhwa’s novel, this phenomen<strong>on</strong> is rarely portrayed.<br />
Mehta’s representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the migrati<strong>on</strong> is impressive. In this respect, Mehta’s film represents an<br />
aspect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Partiti<strong>on</strong> that has been neglected not <strong>on</strong>ly by Sidhwa’s novel but by Indian historians.<br />
Sidhwa represents the Partiti<strong>on</strong> by telling, while Mehta represents it by showing. More than<br />
visualizing the events in Cracking India, Mehta alters the point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view in the novel—and thereby<br />
transforms the functi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Lenny’s narrati<strong>on</strong>. In Mehta’s film, Lenny’s voice-over <strong>on</strong>ly appears at the<br />
beginning and at the end. For the rest <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film, Mehta does not adopt a first-pers<strong>on</strong> narrati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In Earth, because the representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Partiti<strong>on</strong> has been liberated from Lenny’s limited point<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view, we have the chance to see the train scene from Ice-candy-man’s perspective and the<br />
migrati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> people through Masseur’s perspective. Mehta’s alterati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the point <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view enables us<br />
to re-examine and re-c<strong>on</strong>sider the representati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Partiti<strong>on</strong>.<br />
In the film “Heat and Dust,” we somehow c<strong>on</strong>fused because <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the different initiati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the film.<br />
Instead <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> starting with a short introducti<strong>on</strong> as it was in the book the film directly began with Olivia’s<br />
elopement from the hospital after her miscarriage. This anticipated the tensi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the reas<strong>on</strong> why<br />
Olivia ran away from Douglas.<br />
Another point was that the narrator had a name. But I think for a film it is necessary to name the<br />
pers<strong>on</strong>s for a better recogniti<strong>on</strong>. Furthermore, after Olivia’s elopement in the film Douglas married<br />
542 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Olivia’s Sister Marcia whereas in the book he married Beth Crawford’s sister Tessie. I also imagined<br />
Mrs. Saunders as well as Ritu in another way because in my opini<strong>on</strong> their c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> was somehow<br />
worse than it was depicted in the film.<br />
Despite all the negative facts the film also has good aspects.<br />
The viewer gets an idea <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> what India looked like in those days and also about the British-Indian<br />
society in the 1970s. So the film helped to get a closer look to the setting. All things c<strong>on</strong>sidered I<br />
would say that the film helps to imagine India and the living c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s there as a British and as an<br />
Indian.<br />
Adaptati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Jhumpa Lahiri's internati<strong>on</strong>ally acclaimed novel ‘The Namesake’, by the director<br />
Mira Nair vividly portrays a Hindu family's reality in America. ‘The Namesake’ depicts the<br />
struggles <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Ashoke and Ashima Ganguli (Irrfan Khan and Tabu), two first-generati<strong>on</strong> immigrants<br />
from West Bengal, India to the United States, and their American-born children Gogol (Kal Penn)<br />
and S<strong>on</strong>ia (Sahira Nair). The film takes place primarily in Kolkata, India; New York City and places<br />
around it.<br />
A frequent criticism <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film adaptati<strong>on</strong>s is that where the book allows us to participate in the<br />
creative process (using our imaginati<strong>on</strong>s to fill in the characters and settings; for instance), while the<br />
film by its very nature makes everything explicit, closing the door <strong>on</strong> imaginati<strong>on</strong>. But I thought<br />
Nair's film was more satisfying than the novel precisely because these characters are presented to us<br />
in specific terms, we see them talking to each other, and most importantly all this is d<strong>on</strong>e extremely<br />
well. The casting is near-perfect – Irfan Khan, Tabu and Kal Penn bring an immediacy to the<br />
characters <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Ashoke, Ashima and Gogol that we sometimes missed in the book. On the whole this is<br />
a gentle feel-good film, full <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> well-meaning characters.<br />
The lack <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> good quality screenplays together with the viewers hopes are the most basic cause<br />
for the inclinati<strong>on</strong> to go back to the literary area. In analyzing a movie based <strong>on</strong> novel, it is better that<br />
<strong>on</strong>e has an insight into the changes that bound to happen in adaptati<strong>on</strong> and an understanding that<br />
novels and films are two different media which have their own strengths and weaknesses. So that the<br />
viewer would have a proper frame <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> mind in approaching the two mediums. . However, most <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
times, it has been seen that the audience prefer books to the films based <strong>on</strong> them. It shows that people<br />
prefer to visualize themselves rather than depending <strong>on</strong> some<strong>on</strong>e else’s imaginati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
*********************---------------*********************<br />
543 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
References:<br />
BOOKS:<br />
• Nazarian, Eric (2000). ‘Prose And Pictures: Adapting Literature Into Film.’<br />
• Frensham, R. (Eds) (2003). ‘Treach Yourself:Ies’ (3 rd Ed) Prentice Hall Pub.<br />
• McFarlane, Brian. “Backgrounds, Issues, and a New Agenda.” Novel to Film: An<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong> to the Theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Adaptati<strong>on</strong>. New York: Oxford UP, 1996.<br />
• Griffith, James. ‘Adaptati<strong>on</strong>s As Imitati<strong>on</strong>s: Films From Novels.’ Newark: University <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
Delaware Press, 1997.<br />
Electr<strong>on</strong>ic Media:<br />
544 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
• http://www.moviemaker.com/issues/38/38_prose.htm<br />
• http://www.wikipedia.<strong>org</strong>/wiki/Film_adaptati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
***********---------------***********<br />
Brief Resume<br />
• Name: Nitin S. Kendre<br />
• Qualificati<strong>on</strong>: M.A. (Eng), B.Ed<br />
• C<strong>on</strong>tact No: 9823043329, 02402392000.<br />
• E-mail Id: n_nik3@rediffmail.com<br />
• Submitted Synopsis for Ph.D registrati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the topic “Adaptati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> novels into films: a case<br />
study <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> five adapted novels”.<br />
• Presently working as a lecturer (for U.G. & P.G.) in Vivekanand Arts, S.D. Commerce & Science<br />
College, Aurangabad.<br />
545 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
FEMINIST FILM THEORY IN HOLLYWOOD CINEMA :<br />
AN INTRODUCTION<br />
--Shuddhodhan P. Kamble,<br />
Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Mahavidyalaya,<br />
Amravati (M.S.)<br />
Abstract: Feminism is a social movement which has had an enormous impact <strong>on</strong> film theory and criticism. Cinema is taken<br />
by feminists to be a cultural practice representing myths about women and femininity, as well as about men and masculinity.<br />
Issues <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> representati<strong>on</strong> and spectatorship are central to feminist film theory and criticism. Early feminist criticism was directed<br />
at stereotypes <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women, mostly in Hollywood films (Haskell 1973/1987, Rosen 1973). Such fixed and endlessly repeated images<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women were c<strong>on</strong>sidered to be objecti<strong>on</strong>able distorti<strong>on</strong>s which would have a negative impact <strong>on</strong> the female spectator. Hence,<br />
the call for positive images <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women in cinema. So<strong>on</strong>, however, the insight dawned that positive images were not enough to<br />
change underlying structures in film. Feminist critics tried to understand the all-pervasive power <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> patriarchal imagery with the<br />
help <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> structuralist theoretical frameworks such as semiotics and psychoanalysis. These theoretical discourses have proved very<br />
productive in analysing the ways in which sexual difference is encoded in classical narrative. For over a decade psychoanalysis<br />
was to be the dominant paradigm in feminist film theory. More recently there has been a move away from a binary understanding<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> sexual difference to multiple perspectives, identities and possible spectatorships. This opening up has resulted in an increasing<br />
c<strong>on</strong>cern with questi<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ethnicity, masculinity and hybrid sexualities.<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong>:<br />
Feminist film theory has emerged in the<br />
past 20 years to become a large and flourishing<br />
field. Its dominant approach, exemplified by<br />
such journals as Screen and Camera Obscura,<br />
involves a theoretical combinati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> semiotics,<br />
Althusserian Marxism, and Lacanian<br />
psychoanalysis. On this view, human subjects<br />
are formed through complex significatory<br />
processes, including cinema; traditi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
Hollywood cinema's "classic realist texts" are<br />
purveyors <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> bourgeois ideology. Added to this<br />
theory by Laura Mulvey's now-classic essay,<br />
"Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema"<br />
[Mulvey, 1975], was the feminist claim that men<br />
and women are differentially positi<strong>on</strong>ed by<br />
cinema: men as subjects identifying with agents<br />
who drive the film's narrative forward, women<br />
as objects for masculine desire and fetishistic<br />
gazing. Mulvey's essay is heavily invested in<br />
theory. It is cited as "the founding document <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
feminist film theory" [Modleski 1989], as<br />
providing "the theoretical grounds for the<br />
rejecti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Hollywood and its pleasures"<br />
[Penley 1988], and even as setting out feminist<br />
film theory's "axioms" [Silverman, quoted in<br />
Byars 1991]. Mulvey assumed a general picture<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> cinema as a symbolic medium which, like<br />
other aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> mass culture, forms spectators<br />
as bourgeois subjects. She used Lacanian<br />
psychoanalysis to ground her account <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
gendered subjecivity, desire, and visual pleasure.<br />
Mulvey allowed little possibility <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> resistance or<br />
critical spectatorship, and recognized no<br />
variati<strong>on</strong>s in structure or effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> realist cinema.<br />
Unsurprisingly, her view has been much<br />
criticized and further refined, as writers<br />
(including Mulvey herself) have noted issues<br />
raised by differences am<strong>on</strong>g women, phenomena<br />
like male masochism, or genres that functi<strong>on</strong> in<br />
distinctive ways, such as comedy, melodrama,<br />
and horror. Still, writers in feminist film theory<br />
comm<strong>on</strong>ly assume Mulvey's basic parameters<br />
and take some versi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> psychoanalytic theory<br />
as a desideratum. Key issues are <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten seen <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
in terms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> some refinement or qualificati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
psychoanalytic theory. Thus Barbara Creed's<br />
book The M<strong>on</strong>strous-Feminine argues that the<br />
fact that women in horror films are <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten not<br />
victims but m<strong>on</strong>sters "necessitates a rereading <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
key aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Freudian theory, particularly his<br />
theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Oedipus complex and castrati<strong>on</strong><br />
crisis." [Creed 1993] Creed turns instead to<br />
Kristeva's theory <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the abject and the maternal.<br />
Far less <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten, Mulvey's critics have adopted<br />
more sharply different theoretical bases such as<br />
cultural studies, identity politics, dec<strong>on</strong>structi<strong>on</strong>,<br />
or the philosophy <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Foucault.<br />
Feminist Film Theory:<br />
546 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
Early film theory arose in the silent era<br />
and was mostly c<strong>on</strong>cerned with defining the<br />
crucial elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the medium. It largely<br />
evolved from the works <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> directors like<br />
Germaine Dulac, Louis Delluc, Jean Epstein,<br />
Sergei Eisenstein, Lev Kuleshov, and Dziga<br />
Vertov and film theorists like Rudolf Arnheim,<br />
Béla Balázs and Siegfried Kracauer. These<br />
individuals emphasized how film differed from<br />
reality and how it might be c<strong>on</strong>sidered a valid art<br />
form. In the years after World War II, the French<br />
film critic and theorist André Bazin reacted<br />
against this approach to the cinema, arguing that<br />
film's essence lay in its ability to mechanically<br />
reproduce reality, not in its difference from<br />
reality.<br />
In the 1960s and 1970s, film theory took<br />
up residence in academia importing c<strong>on</strong>cepts<br />
from established disciplines like psychoanalysis,<br />
gender studies, anthropology, literary theory,<br />
semiotics and linguistics. However, not until the<br />
late 1980s or early 1990s did film theory per se<br />
achieve much prominence in American<br />
universities by displacing the prevailing<br />
humanistic, auteur theory that had dominated<br />
cinema studies and which had been focused <strong>on</strong><br />
the practical elements <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> film writing,<br />
producti<strong>on</strong>, editing and criticism. American<br />
scholar David Bordwell has spoken against<br />
many prominent developments film theory since<br />
the 1970s, i.e., he uses the humorously<br />
derogatory term "SLAB theory" to refer to film<br />
studies based <strong>on</strong> the ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Saussure, Lacan,<br />
Althusser, and/or Barthes. Instead, Bordwell<br />
promotes what he describes as "ne<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ormalism."<br />
During the 1990s the digital revoluti<strong>on</strong><br />
in image technologies has had an impact <strong>on</strong> film<br />
theory in various ways. There has been a refocus<br />
<strong>on</strong>to celluloid film's ability to capture an<br />
"indexical" image <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a moment in time by<br />
theorists like Mary Ann Doane, Philip Rosen<br />
and Laura Mulvey who was informed by<br />
psychoanalysis. From a psychoanalytical<br />
perspective, after the Lacanian noti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> "the<br />
Real", Slavoj Žižek <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fered new aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> "the<br />
gaze" extensively used in c<strong>on</strong>temporary film<br />
analysis. There has also been a historical<br />
revisiting <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> early cinema screenings, practices<br />
and spectatorship modes by writers Tom<br />
Gunning, Miriam Hansen and Yuri Tsivian.<br />
Televisi<strong>on</strong> writer/producer David<br />
Weddle suggests that film theory as practiced in<br />
the early 2000s is a form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> bait and switch,<br />
taking advantage <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> young, would-be<br />
filmmakers: any<strong>on</strong>e in Hollywood filmmaking<br />
who used film theory terms like "fabula" and<br />
"syuzhet" would be "laughed <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>f the lot."<br />
Weddle also quotes Roger Ebert's opini<strong>on</strong> that<br />
"Film theory has nothing to do with film" and is<br />
an obscuricantist "cult;" and quotes silent film<br />
historian Kevin Brownlow's alarm that academic<br />
film theorists are typically "quite aggressively<br />
Marxist."<br />
In 2008, German filmmaker Werner<br />
Herzog suggested that "Theoretical film studies<br />
has become really awful. That’s not how you<br />
should study film. Abolish these courses and do<br />
something else which makes much more sense."<br />
The female Spectator <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Hollywood<br />
Cinema:<br />
In c<strong>on</strong>sidering the way that films are put<br />
together, many feminist film critics have pointed<br />
to the "male gaze" that predominates in classical<br />
Hollywood filmmaking. Budd Boetticher<br />
summarises the view thus: "What counts is what<br />
the heroine provokes, or rather what she<br />
represents. She is the <strong>on</strong>e, or rather the love or<br />
fear she inspires in the hero, or else the c<strong>on</strong>cern<br />
he feels for her, who makes him act the way he<br />
does. In herself the woman has not the slightest<br />
importance."<br />
Whilst Laura Mulvey's paper has a<br />
particular place in the feminist film theory, it is<br />
also important to note that her ideas regarding<br />
ways <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> watching the cinema (from the<br />
voyeuristic element to the feelings <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
identificati<strong>on</strong>) have been very important in terms<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> defining spectatorship from the<br />
psychoanalytical view point.<br />
Mulvey identifies three "looks" or<br />
perspectives that occur in film which serve to<br />
sexually objectify women. The first is the<br />
perspective <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the male character <strong>on</strong> screen and<br />
how he perceives the female character. The<br />
sec<strong>on</strong>d is the perspective <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the spectator as they<br />
see the female character <strong>on</strong> screen. The third<br />
547 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
"look" joins the first two looks together: it is the<br />
male audience member's perspective <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the male<br />
character in the film. This third perspective<br />
allows the male audience to take the female<br />
character as his own pers<strong>on</strong>al sex object because<br />
he can relate himself, through looking, to the<br />
male character in the film.<br />
In the paper, Mulvey calls for a<br />
destructi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> modern film structure as the <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
way to free women from their sexual<br />
objectificati<strong>on</strong> in film, arguing for a removal <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the voyeurism encoded into film by creating<br />
distance between the male spectator and the<br />
female character. The <strong>on</strong>ly way to do so,<br />
Mulvey argues, is by destroying the element <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
voyeurism and "the invisible guest".<br />
Mulvey also asserts that the dominance<br />
that men embody is <strong>on</strong>ly so because women<br />
exist, as without a woman for comparis<strong>on</strong>, a<br />
man and his supremacy as the c<strong>on</strong>troller <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
visual pleasure are insignificant. For Mulvey, it<br />
is the presence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the female that defines the<br />
patriarchal order <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> society as well as the male<br />
psychology <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> thought.<br />
Mulvey's argument comes as a product<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the time period in which she was writing.<br />
"Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" was<br />
composed during the period <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> sec<strong>on</strong>d-wave<br />
feminism, which was c<strong>on</strong>cerned with achieving<br />
equality for women in the workplace, and with<br />
exploring the psychological implicati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
sexual stereotypes. Mulvey calls for an<br />
eradicati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> female sexual objectivity in order<br />
to align herself with sec<strong>on</strong>d-wave feminism. She<br />
argues that in order for women to be equally<br />
represented in the workplace, women must be<br />
portrayed as men are: as lacking sexual<br />
objectificati<strong>on</strong>.<br />
Mulvey posits in her notes to the<br />
Criteri<strong>on</strong> Collecti<strong>on</strong> DVD <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Michael Powell's<br />
c<strong>on</strong>troversial film Peeping Tom that the cinema<br />
spectator’s own voyeurism is made shockingly<br />
obvious and even more shockingly, the spectator<br />
identifies with the perverted protag<strong>on</strong>ist. The<br />
inference is that she includes female spectators<br />
in that, identifying with the male observer rather<br />
than the female object <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the gaze.<br />
B. Ruby Rich argues that women’s<br />
relati<strong>on</strong>ships with film is instead dialectical,<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sciously filtering the images and messages<br />
they receive through cinema, and reprocessing<br />
them to elicit their own meanings.<br />
Coming from a black feminist<br />
perspective, bell hooks put forth the noti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
the “oppositi<strong>on</strong>al gaze,” encouraging black<br />
women not to accept stereotypical<br />
representati<strong>on</strong>s in film, but rather actively<br />
critique them. Janet Bergstrom’s article<br />
“Enunciati<strong>on</strong> and Sexual Difference” (1979)<br />
uses Sigmund Freud’s ideas <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> bisexual<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>ses, arguing that women are capable <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
identifying with male characters and men with<br />
women characters, either successively or<br />
simultaneously. Miriam Hans<strong>on</strong>, in “Pleasure,<br />
Ambivalence, Identificati<strong>on</strong>: Valentino and<br />
Female Spectatorship” (1984) put forth the idea<br />
that women are also able to view male<br />
characters as erotic objects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> desire. In "The<br />
Master's Dollhouse: Rear Window," Tania<br />
Modleski argues that Hitchock's film, Rear<br />
Window, is an example <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the power <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> male<br />
gazer and the positi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the female as a pris<strong>on</strong>er<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the "master's dollhouse".<br />
Carol Clover, in her popular and<br />
influential book "Men, Women, and Chainsaws:<br />
Gender in the Modern Horror Film" (Princet<strong>on</strong><br />
University Press, 1992) argues that young male<br />
viewers <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the Horror Genre (young males being<br />
the primary demographic) are quite prepared to<br />
identify with the female-in-jeopardy, a key<br />
comp<strong>on</strong>ent <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Horror narrative, and to identify<br />
<strong>on</strong> an unexpectedly pr<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ound level. Clover<br />
further argues that the "Final Girl" in the<br />
psychosexual sub-genre <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Exploitati<strong>on</strong> Horror<br />
invariably triumphs through her own<br />
resourcefulness, and is not by any means a<br />
passive, or inevitable, victim. Laura Mulvey, in<br />
resp<strong>on</strong>se to these and other criticisms, revisited<br />
the topic in “Afterthoughts <strong>on</strong> ‘Visual Pleasure<br />
and Narrative Cinema’ inspired by Duel in the<br />
Sun” (1981). In addressing the heterosexual<br />
female spectator, she revised her stance to argue<br />
that women can take two possible roles in<br />
relati<strong>on</strong> to film: a masochistic identificati<strong>on</strong> with<br />
the female object <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> desire that is ultimately selfdefeating<br />
or a transsexual identificati<strong>on</strong> with<br />
men as the active viewers <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the text.[9] A new<br />
versi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the gaze was <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>fered in the early<br />
1990s by Bracha Ettinger, who proposed the<br />
noti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the "matrixial gaze".<br />
548 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1
<str<strong>on</strong>g>Proceedings</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Nati<strong>on</strong>al</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Seminar</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>Postmodern</strong> Literary Theory and Literature , Jan. 27-28, 2012, Nanded<br />
C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>:<br />
The diversity <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>temporary feminist<br />
film theory reflects the variegated producti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
women's cinema <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the 1990s. Women<br />
filmmakers have increasingly c<strong>on</strong>quered<br />
Hollywood. Several <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> them have been able to<br />
maintain a c<strong>on</strong>sistent producti<strong>on</strong> in diverse<br />
genres: comedy (Penny Marshal), romantic<br />
drama (Nora Ephr<strong>on</strong>), and acti<strong>on</strong> movies<br />
(Kathryn Bigelow), to name just a few. This has<br />
also been the case for several women<br />
filmmakers in Europe, such as Margarethe v<strong>on</strong><br />
Trotta (Germany), Claire Denis (France) and<br />
Mari<strong>on</strong> Hensel (Belgium). In a more n<strong>on</strong>commercial<br />
pocket <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the market, there has been<br />
a significant increase in films made by lesbian,<br />
black and post-col<strong>on</strong>ial directors: filmmakers as<br />
diverse as M<strong>on</strong>ika Treut and Patricia Rozema,<br />
Julie Dash and Ngozi Onwurah, Ann Hui and<br />
Clara Law. This decade has witnessed the<br />
popular success <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> feminist art films, like<br />
Orlando by Sally Potter (1992) and the Oscarwinning<br />
films The Piano , a costume drama by<br />
Jane Campi<strong>on</strong> (New Zealand 1994) and<br />
Ant<strong>on</strong>ia's Line , a matriarchal epic by Marleen<br />
Gorris (Netherlands 1995). Dropping a few<br />
names and titles does in no way do justice to the<br />
scale <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> women's cinema <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> this decade. It<br />
merely indicates a prolific diversity which<br />
res<strong>on</strong>ates with film audiences in this decade <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
hybridity. The polyph<strong>on</strong>y <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> voices, multiple<br />
points <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> view, and cinematic styles and genres,<br />
signify women's successful struggle for selfrepresentati<strong>on</strong><br />
<strong>on</strong> the silver screen.<br />
Reference:<br />
1) Robert Stam, Film Theory an<br />
introducti<strong>on</strong>, Oxford: Blackwell<br />
Publishers, 2000.<br />
2) Dudley Andrew, C<strong>on</strong>cpets in Film<br />
Theory, Oxford, New York: Oxford<br />
University Press, 1984.<br />
3) Francesco Casetti, Theories <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Cinema,<br />
1945-1990, Austin: University <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Texas<br />
Press, 1999.<br />
4) www.wikipedia.<strong>org</strong><br />
5) www.google.com<br />
549 PLTL-2012: ISBN 978-81-920120-0-1