POSTMODERNİST FİLM: BIR SİNEMA TÜRÜ

Year 2011, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 65 - 79, 03.05.2019

Sibel Çelik Norman

Abstract

Makale, film kuramlarındaki çağdaş gelişmelerin içinde postmodernizmin yerini anlamlı bir şekilde belirleme sorununu ele alıyor. İddia üç parçalı: Postmodernizm teriminin tanımını çevreleyen anlamsal karışıklık tanımlanmış, postmodern estetiğe özgü bir dizi biçemsel ve yapısal elementlerle karşılaştırılmış sinema çalışmalarını temsil eden bir örnek yığını incelemek amacıyla söylemsel parametreler oluşturulmuş; bu analizin bulguları, “filmde postmodernizm, birçok bakımdan kuramsal durumu da aynı şekilde tartışmalı olan film noir’a benzeyen kapsamlı bir eleştirel kategori veya sinema türü oluşturmaktadır” hipotezini kurmak amacıyla kullanılmıştır.

Keywords

Film kuramı, postmodernizm, anlam bilim, estetik, tür

POSTMODERNIST FILM: A CINEMATIC GENRE

Abstract

The essay addresses the problem of locating postmodernism meaningfully within contemporary developments in film theory. The argument is tripartite: the semantic confusion surrounding the definition of the term postmodernism is delineated; discursive parameters are established in terms of a representative body of cinematic works matched against a set of stylistic and structural elements characteristic of the postmodern aesthetic; the findings of this analysis are used to construct a hypothesis that postmodernism in film constitutes a generic critical category or cinematic genre coordinate in many respects to film noir, the theoretical status of which is similarly contentious.

Keywords

Film theory, postmodernism, semantics, aesthetic, genre

References

• Altman, R. (1998). Re-usable Packaging: Generic Products and the Recycling Process. N. Browne (Ed.), Refiguring American Film Genres (pp. 1-42). Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Belton, J. (1994). American Cinema, American Culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
• Booker, M. K. (2007). Postmodern Hollywood: What's New in Film and Why it Makes Us Feel So Strange. Westport CT: Praeger.
• Booker, M. K. (2001). Monsters, Mushroom Clouds and the Cold War: American Science Fiction and the Roots of Postmodernism, 1946-1964. Westport CT: Greenwood.
• Brooker, P. & Brooker, W. (Eds.). Postmodern After-Images: A Reader in Film, Television and Video. London: Arnold.
• Carroll, N. (1998). Film in the Age of Postmodernism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Clifford, J. & Marcus, G. (1986). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Cowie, E. (1993). Film Noir and Women. J. Copjec (Ed.), Shades of Noir (pp. 121-165). London: Verso.
• Çelik-Norman, S. (2008). The Disaster Movie and its Implications for Genre Theory. İletişim (Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi) 2008/8, 145-160.
• Eco, U. (1988). Casablanca, Cult Movies and Intertextual Collage. D. Lodge (Ed.), Modern Criticism and Theory (pp. 450-464). London: Longman.
• Friedberg, A. (1993). Window Shopping: Cinema and the Postmodern. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Fuery, P. (2000). New Developments in Film Theory. New York: Palgrave. Garrett, R. (2007). Postmodern Chick-Flicks: The Return of the Woman's Film. London: Macmillan.
• Gellner, E. (1992). Postmodernism, Reason and Religion. London: Routledge.
• Gormley, P. (2005). The New Brutality Film. Bristol UK: Intellect Books.
• Harvey, D. (1997). Time and Space in the Postmodern Cinema. P. Brooker & W. Brooker (Eds.), Postmodern After-Images (pp. 43-69). London: Arnold.
• Hebdige, D. (1986). Postmodernism and ‘The Other Side’. Journal of Communication Enquiry 10/2, 88-100.
• Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London: Verso.
• Jauss, H. R. (1982). Towards an Aesthetic of Reception. Brighton U.K.: Harvester Press.
• Juhasz, A. (2001). The Phallus Unfetished. J. Lewis (Ed.), The End of Cinema as We Know it: American Film in the Late Nineties (pp. 210-225). London: New York University Press.
• Lyotard, J.F. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: a Report on Knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Neale, S. (2000). Genre and Hollywood. London: Routledge.
• Pérez Soler, B. & Lawrenson, E. (2001). Pup Fiction. Sight and Sound 11/5I, 28-30.
• Phillips, R. (1996). Genre, Star and Auteur: An Approach to Hollywood Cinema. J. Nelmes (Ed.), An Introduction to Film Studies (pp. 121-163). London: Routledge.
• Ryall, T. (1975/6). Teaching through Genre. Screen Education, 17, 27-33.
• Said, E. (1993). Culture and Imperialism. London: Chatto & Windus.
• Sobchack, V. (1997), Postmodern Modes of Ethnicity. P. Brooker & W. Brooker (Eds.), Postmodern After-Images (pp. 101-121). London: Arnold.
• Sobchack, V. (1998). Lounge Time, Postwar Crises and the Chronotope of Film Noir. N. Browne (Ed.) Refiguring American Film Genres (pp. 45-61). Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Stam, R. (2000). Film Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Taylor, C. (1988). Black Cinema in the Post-aesthetic Era. J. Pines & P. Willemen (Eds.), Questions of Third Cinema (pp. 95-110). London: British Film Institute.
• Tredell, N. (2002). Cinemas of the Mind. London: Icon Books.
• Tuska, J. (1984). Dark Cinema: American Film Noir in Cultural Perspective. Westport: Greenwood Press.
• Walsh, M. (1996). Jameson and ‘Global Aesthetics’. D. Bordwell & N. Carroll (Eds.), Post Theory (pp. 472-490). Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Willis, S. (2000). Style, Posture and Idiom: Tarantino's Figures of Masculinity. C. Gledhill & L. Williams (Eds.), Reinventing Film Studies (pp. 272-289). London: Arnold.
• Žižek, S. (1993). The Thing that Thinks: the Kantian Background of the Noir Subject. J. Copjec (Ed.), Shades of Noir (pp. 199-226). London: Verso.