Kennedy Miller Mitchell and the relationality of Australian cinema – global film practice in Australia

IF 0.4 0 FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION Studies in Australasian Cinema Pub Date : 2021-05-03 DOI:10.1080/17503175.2021.1921405
James Douglas
{"title":"Kennedy Miller Mitchell and the relationality of Australian cinema – global film practice in Australia","authors":"James Douglas","doi":"10.1080/17503175.2021.1921405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent work in Australian screen scholarship has been focused on expanding the limitations of our national cinema discourse. Terms like Deb Verhoeven’s ‘Industry 3’ or Ben Goldsmith’s ‘outward-looking Australian cinema’, and the discourse of ‘transnationality’ more generally, exemplify a contemporary tendency that seeks out new conceptual foundations from which to analyse Australian film as interrelated with international industrial contexts. US film historian Janet Staiger has proposed one potentially fruitful alternative conceptual schema. Staiger argues that the concept of ‘film practices’ offers a way to carry out the historiographical grouping of film texts without recourse to categories of nationality or transnationality. In this article, I examine the analytical possibilities of the film practice schema in the Australian context. I focus on the Australian production firm Kennedy Miller Mitchell, which I identify as operating within the contemporary classical Hollywood cinema practice. Scholars have previously encountered conceptual deficiencies in grouping the work of this firm under prevailing terms of national cinema discourse. I show how the application of the film practice schema can make better sense of Kennedy Miller Mitchell’s place in the Australian and international screen industries, and I assess some of the advantages and disadvantages of this approach for future scholarship.","PeriodicalId":51952,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Australasian Cinema","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17503175.2021.1921405","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Australasian Cinema","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17503175.2021.1921405","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Recent work in Australian screen scholarship has been focused on expanding the limitations of our national cinema discourse. Terms like Deb Verhoeven’s ‘Industry 3’ or Ben Goldsmith’s ‘outward-looking Australian cinema’, and the discourse of ‘transnationality’ more generally, exemplify a contemporary tendency that seeks out new conceptual foundations from which to analyse Australian film as interrelated with international industrial contexts. US film historian Janet Staiger has proposed one potentially fruitful alternative conceptual schema. Staiger argues that the concept of ‘film practices’ offers a way to carry out the historiographical grouping of film texts without recourse to categories of nationality or transnationality. In this article, I examine the analytical possibilities of the film practice schema in the Australian context. I focus on the Australian production firm Kennedy Miller Mitchell, which I identify as operating within the contemporary classical Hollywood cinema practice. Scholars have previously encountered conceptual deficiencies in grouping the work of this firm under prevailing terms of national cinema discourse. I show how the application of the film practice schema can make better sense of Kennedy Miller Mitchell’s place in the Australian and international screen industries, and I assess some of the advantages and disadvantages of this approach for future scholarship.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Kennedy Miller Mitchell与澳大利亚电影的相对性——澳大利亚的全球电影实践
摘要澳大利亚电影学术界最近的工作重点是扩大我们国家电影话语的局限性。Deb Verhoeven的《工业3》或Ben Goldsmith的《外向型澳大利亚电影》等术语,以及更普遍的“跨国籍”话语,都体现了一种当代趋势,即寻找新的概念基础,从中分析澳大利亚电影与国际工业背景的相互关联。美国电影历史学家Janet Staiger提出了一种可能富有成效的替代概念模式。Staiger认为,“电影实践”的概念提供了一种对电影文本进行历史分组的方法,而无需求助于国籍或跨国籍类别。在这篇文章中,我考察了电影实践模式在澳大利亚背景下的分析可能性。我关注的是澳大利亚制片公司Kennedy Miller Mitchell,我认为该公司在当代经典好莱坞电影实践中运营。学者们以前在根据国家电影话语的流行术语对该公司的作品进行分组时遇到过概念上的缺陷。我展示了电影实践模式的应用如何更好地理解Kennedy Miller Mitchell在澳大利亚和国际电影行业的地位,并评估了这种方法对未来学术的一些优势和劣势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Australasian Cinema
Studies in Australasian Cinema FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
By way of North: reorienting the feminine other in Australian film The impacts of ethnic and mainstream culture on Māori-themed films Mad Max and the Western ‘Falling leaves return to their roots’? The reception of Chinese blockbusters by Chinese university students in New Zealand The forgotten history of the Australian film musical: tracking the production and development of the genre in Australia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1