[Videolib] re: review of new horror film

Stephen Davies (SDavies@mtroyal.ab.ca)
Fri, 23 May 2003 08:49:07 -0600

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 005166F587256D2F_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Steve F. wrote:
<<<
I am sure that Canada has lots of places known for being "in-bred", etc.
>>>
We think of ourselves more as wonderbred.

I think film, even more than pulp paperbacks, is susceptible to
relying on quickly interpreted stereotypes. They are visual cues which
don't need much set up or explanation. It seems more likely that a film
will be produced if the initial pitch can be quickly understood by use of
stereotypes and trite plot mechanism. (I'm quite removed from the
production end, but I'm guessing this is as equally true of documentaries
as it is of dramas.)
Stereotypes often have a grain of truth at their root, but the
representation usually removes the context. The context may not be an
excuse, but it is an explanation.

I think the public libraries need to focus more on smaller,
quality movies rather than giving the public what it wants. In fact, I
would underbuy what the public wants. To be snobbish, I don't think the
public is making an informed choice about the kinds of movies it elevates
to popular status. It must be the age-old, give them what they
want/educate them to want better dilemma.

Stephen Davies
Mount Royal College, Calgary

(Calgary: where the recent "Tom Stone" series was set,
altho that was filmed in Toronto, too.)
--=_alternative 005166F587256D2F_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Steve F. wrote:</b></font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">&lt;&lt;&lt;</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">I am sure that Canada has lots of places known for being &quot;in-bred&quot;, etc. <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">&gt;&gt;&gt;</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; We think of ourselves more as wonderbred. &nbsp;</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I think film, even more than pulp paperbacks, is susceptible to relying on quickly interpreted stereotypes. &nbsp;They are visual cues which don't need much set up or explanation. &nbsp;It seems more likely that a film will be produced if the initial pitch can be quickly understood by use of stereotypes and trite plot mechanism. &nbsp;(I'm quite removed from the production end, but I'm guessing this is as equally true of documentaries as it is of dramas.)</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Stereotypes often have a grain of truth at their root, but the representation usually removes the context. &nbsp;The context may not be an excuse, but it is an explanation.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I think the public libraries need to focus more on smaller, quality movies rather than giving the public what it wants. &nbsp;In fact, I would underbuy what the public wants. &nbsp;To be snobbish, I don't think the public is making an informed choice about the kinds of movies it elevates to popular status. &nbsp;It must be the age-old, give them what they want/educate them to want better dilemma.</font>
<br>
<div align=center>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Stephen Davies</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Mount Royal College, Calgary</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">(Calgary: where the recent &quot;Tom Stone&quot; series was set, </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">altho that was filmed in Toronto, too.)</font></div>
--=_alternative 005166F587256D2F_=--