5 resultados para sociality of cinema
em Worcester Research and Publications - Worcester Research and Publications - UK
Resumo:
The nature of religion on the domestic front in Britain during the Second World War has, hitherto, been relatively unexplored. This study focuses on Birmingham and describes wartime popular religion, primarily as recounted in oral testimony. The difference the War made to people’s faith, and the consolation wrought by prayer and a religious outlook are explored, as are the religious language and concepts utilised by the wartime popular media of cinema and wireless. Clerical rhetoric about the War and concerns to spiritualise the war effort are dealt with by an analysis of locally published sources, especially parish magazines and other religious ephemera, which set the War on the spiritual as much as the military plane. A final section of the study is devoted to measuring the extent of the influence of the churches in the creation of a vision for post-war Britain and Birmingham.
Resumo:
An outline of the British War film from beginning of cinema.
Resumo:
This chapter traces the image of the gay gangster in British cinema. It draws upon film history and Queer theory to attempt to understand the fascination of this marginal character.
Resumo:
Like its title, Pyramus and Thisbe 4 You, Alexandru Dabija’s production at the Odeon Theatre, Bucharest, was a tongue-in-cheek invitation to the audience that at once aimed to tease past and recent Romanian endeavours and to tease out the stage potential a Shakespeare play holds today. My examination of the production re-constructs the local cultural contexts the production plays with and against, referring to the Romanian ways of making Shakespeare this production enters into dialogue with. Take 1, an all-female version casting the mature stars of the Odeon, I read against both Elizabethan all-male stage practice and Andrei Serban’s all-female Lear at the Bulandra (2008). Take 2, “an old device” (V.1.50): a teacher-student “devising” session at the Academy of Theatre and Cinema, I read against critics’ “more strange than true” (V.1.2) parlance on “theories of perception and reception” and against hi-tech Shakespeare dominating the Romanian stages in the first decade of the third millennium. Take 3, local political banter on ethnic discrimination, I read as “satire keen and critical” (V.1.54) on both communist censorship and the recent rise of nationalism in Romania. Take 4, a “cold” reading-cum-improvisation performed by the technical crew – this production’s mechanicals – I read as “palpable-gross play” (V.1.376) on both acting and spectating practices. What I argue in this article is that Dabija’s production goes beyond its local context and mores, and proposes a re-assessment of Shakespeare’s cultural currency in (European) Romania and Europe at large by exposing current tyrannies in Shakespeare studies: from translation and adaptation, through directing and acting, to viewing and reviewing.