《野蛮》和《悲伤》:探索(非土著)对两部澳大利亚后殖民边境电影《南丁格尔》(2018)和《命题》(2005)的批评接受

IF 0.4 0 FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION Studies in Australasian Cinema Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836
C. Elder
{"title":"《野蛮》和《悲伤》:探索(非土著)对两部澳大利亚后殖民边境电影《南丁格尔》(2018)和《命题》(2005)的批评接受","authors":"C. Elder","doi":"10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores the marketing and non-Indigenous critical responses to the film The Nightingale (2018) by reading it alongside the reception and responses to a similar film, made over a decade earlier, a film that also studies the multi-layers of colonial violence. Using the film The Proposition (2005) as a foil this article considers the ways that violence figured by two non-Indigenous directors working in a postcolonial Australian context is interpreted by the critics reviewing films. The articles considers the different tropes, non-Indigenous critics offer viewers of the film. How do they suggest consumers interpret or experience the film? The argument is that the tropes, and cues can be understood both in terms of the immediate film experience, but also, for Australian viewers in terms of two ‘events’ – Reconciliation and the Uluru Statement – that help shape what national and counter histories of Australia have power at different times. The objectives of the article are therefore twofold. The first is to catalogue some of the ways each films’ marketing machine and then some key critics explained or described the plot and narrative of the two films, in particular how they explained the idea of colonial trauma in relation to the two events. The second objective is to examine how the reviewers/marketing material explained how each film deployed these ideas in order to challenge historically powerful understandings of history and belonging – in its multiple meanings – in Australia.","PeriodicalId":51952,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Australasian Cinema","volume":"14 1","pages":"47 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Brutal’ and ‘Grisly’: exploring the (non-Indigenous) critical reception to two Australian postcolonial films of the frontier, The Nightingale (2018) and The Proposition (2005)\",\"authors\":\"C. Elder\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article explores the marketing and non-Indigenous critical responses to the film The Nightingale (2018) by reading it alongside the reception and responses to a similar film, made over a decade earlier, a film that also studies the multi-layers of colonial violence. Using the film The Proposition (2005) as a foil this article considers the ways that violence figured by two non-Indigenous directors working in a postcolonial Australian context is interpreted by the critics reviewing films. The articles considers the different tropes, non-Indigenous critics offer viewers of the film. How do they suggest consumers interpret or experience the film? The argument is that the tropes, and cues can be understood both in terms of the immediate film experience, but also, for Australian viewers in terms of two ‘events’ – Reconciliation and the Uluru Statement – that help shape what national and counter histories of Australia have power at different times. The objectives of the article are therefore twofold. The first is to catalogue some of the ways each films’ marketing machine and then some key critics explained or described the plot and narrative of the two films, in particular how they explained the idea of colonial trauma in relation to the two events. The second objective is to examine how the reviewers/marketing material explained how each film deployed these ideas in order to challenge historically powerful understandings of history and belonging – in its multiple meanings – in Australia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Australasian Cinema\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"47 - 62\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Australasian Cinema\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Australasian Cinema","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17503175.2020.1757836","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: 0

摘要

本文通过阅读电影《夜莺》(2018)以及对十多年前拍摄的一部类似电影的接受和反应,探讨了市场营销和非土著评论对电影《夜莺》(2018)的反应,这部电影也研究了殖民暴力的多层。本文以电影《命题》(2005)为衬托,探讨了两位非原住民导演在后殖民时期的澳大利亚背景下所表现的暴力行为是如何被影评人解读的。文章考虑了不同的比喻,非原住民评论家提供给观众的电影。他们建议消费者如何解读或体验这部电影?论点是,这些比喻和线索既可以从直接的电影体验中理解,也可以从两个“事件”(和解和乌鲁鲁声明)的角度来理解,这两个“事件”有助于塑造澳大利亚在不同时期的国家历史和反历史。因此,这篇文章的目的是双重的。首先是对每部电影的营销方式进行分类,然后是一些关键的评论家对两部电影的情节和叙事进行解释或描述,特别是他们如何解释与这两件事有关的殖民创伤。第二个目标是研究影评人/营销材料如何解释每部电影如何运用这些思想,以挑战澳大利亚对历史和归属感的历史强大理解——在其多重含义中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
‘Brutal’ and ‘Grisly’: exploring the (non-Indigenous) critical reception to two Australian postcolonial films of the frontier, The Nightingale (2018) and The Proposition (2005)
ABSTRACT This article explores the marketing and non-Indigenous critical responses to the film The Nightingale (2018) by reading it alongside the reception and responses to a similar film, made over a decade earlier, a film that also studies the multi-layers of colonial violence. Using the film The Proposition (2005) as a foil this article considers the ways that violence figured by two non-Indigenous directors working in a postcolonial Australian context is interpreted by the critics reviewing films. The articles considers the different tropes, non-Indigenous critics offer viewers of the film. How do they suggest consumers interpret or experience the film? The argument is that the tropes, and cues can be understood both in terms of the immediate film experience, but also, for Australian viewers in terms of two ‘events’ – Reconciliation and the Uluru Statement – that help shape what national and counter histories of Australia have power at different times. The objectives of the article are therefore twofold. The first is to catalogue some of the ways each films’ marketing machine and then some key critics explained or described the plot and narrative of the two films, in particular how they explained the idea of colonial trauma in relation to the two events. The second objective is to examine how the reviewers/marketing material explained how each film deployed these ideas in order to challenge historically powerful understandings of history and belonging – in its multiple meanings – in Australia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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