Difference between revisions of "329--Week 1 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
| Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
The “Slaves on Screen” article focused on how the filmmakers created their depictions of history and how they can be a useful tool in understanding the past. It was noticeably silent, though, on how the person who views the movie brings his or her own preconceptions and cultural values to the film. For instance, when the movie Easy Rider was first released, many people thought the director was on the side of the people that kill the main characters at the end because they viewed that action as a good thing. – Wesley Weeks | The “Slaves on Screen” article focused on how the filmmakers created their depictions of history and how they can be a useful tool in understanding the past. It was noticeably silent, though, on how the person who views the movie brings his or her own preconceptions and cultural values to the film. For instance, when the movie Easy Rider was first released, many people thought the director was on the side of the people that kill the main characters at the end because they viewed that action as a good thing. – Wesley Weeks | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with Wesley's earlier comment on movies reproducing culture-- They are responsible for reinforcing and solidifying stereotypes or cultural views already in existence to some extent, and the more that do so, the more discourse created, the more effective they are. -Whitney Holcomb | ||
| + | |||
| + | In ''Why Movies Matter'', Ross tells us that "whether a particular cinematic discourse is true or false is less important than its ability to create a dominant sense of reality." This statement ties together points in the introduction and ''Slaves on Screen'', and means that it doesn't really matter whether a spectator of a 'based on a true story' film leaves wondering how much was accurate. If the director can successfully get his vision across or emphasize a view or stereotype, mission accomplished. | ||
