>35 Shots of Claire Denis (and more)

>

Film Studies For Free‘s author is excitedly preparing to give a talk at the event ‘Drifting: The Films of Claire Denis‘. This is the first of an annual series of symposia on ‘Modern Directors’ to be held at the University of Sussex on May 2nd (programme here), and is organised by Rosalind Galt and Michael Lawrence.

Below are more than sixty links to freely-accessible, mostly scholarly (or otherwise top-notch) material about Denis‘s work that FSFF‘s author has found helpful for this and previous work on this filmmaker (HERE‘s a link to the text of her paper on Denis‘s 2002 film Vendredi soir). The lists will be added to (all suggestions welcome), so please bookmark this post (last updated June 1, 2009).

Audio and/or Visual Resources Online:

In English/or with subtitles:

In French:

Scholarly Articles and Chapters:

Relevant (and Informative) Book Reviews:

Excellent Items of Film Criticism:

Enlightening Interviews in English:

Unmissable Articles, Criticism, and Interviews in French:

Relevant Google Books Links (limited previews):

Open Access campaigning note:
(Film Studies For Free‘s hobby horse…)
There are, of course, many further, excellent Denis resources available ‘for free’ if one is a student or member of faculty at an educational institution with a well-supplied library or with relevant online subscriptions. But the above list indicates, if nothing else, that truly openly accessible, high-quality, and, indeed, essential
resources for researchers in and outside the academy are plentiful nowadays, especially on contemporary topics.

A big thanks, then, to the authors, artists, editors and publishers of the above works who helped to ensure that their writings, recordings, or videos about Claire Denis’s films were freely available to any reader or viewer on the internet.

35 Shots of Claire Denis (and more)

Film Studies For Free‘s author is excitedly preparing to give a talk at the event ‘Drifting: The Films of Claire Denis‘. This is the first of an annual series of symposia on ‘Modern Directors’ to be held at the University of Sussex on May 2nd (programme here), and is organised by Rosalind Galt and Michael Lawrence.

Below are more than sixty links to freely-accessible, mostly scholarly (or otherwise top-notch) material about Denis‘s work that FSFF‘s author has found helpful for this and previous work on this filmmaker (HERE‘s a link to the text of her paper on Denis‘s 2002 film Vendredi soir). The lists will be added to (all suggestions welcome), so please bookmark this post (last updated June 1, 2009).

Audio and/or Visual Resources Online:

In English/or with subtitles:

In French:

Scholarly Articles and Chapters:

Relevant (and Informative) Book Reviews:

Excellent Items of Film Criticism:

Enlightening Interviews in English:

Unmissable Articles, Criticism, and Interviews in French:

Relevant Google Books Links (limited previews):

Open Access campaigning note:
(Film Studies For Free‘s hobby horse…)
There are, of course, many further, excellent Denis resources available ‘for free’ if one is a student or member of faculty at an educational institution with a well-supplied library or with relevant online subscriptions. But the above list indicates, if nothing else, that truly openly accessible, high-quality, and, indeed, essential
resources for researchers in and outside the academy are plentiful nowadays, especially on contemporary topics.

A big thanks, then, to the authors, artists, editors and publishers of the above works who helped to ensure that their writings, recordings, or videos about Claire Denis’s films were freely available to any reader or viewer on the internet.

Film Festival Studies Online

As regular Film Studies For Free readers will know, this blog likes to flag up worthwhile examples of innovative online pedagogy in the film and media studies field (see previous related posts HERE, HERE, and HERE).

It was thrilled to hear, therefore, that internationally regarded film writer Adrian Martin, Senior Research Fellow in Film and Television Studies in Monash University’s Faculty of Arts, is teaching part of a World Film Festivals unit more or less entirely online.

Martin introduces this excellent venture as follows:

This Monash University 2009 Unit aims to give an understanding of the contemporary phenomenon of the International Film Festival as an event within global circuits of film culture. It is not a Unit devoted to film analysis per se; but rather to the socio-cultural institutions of the Festival circuit – taking in issues of audience, economics, promotion, programming and curation, cultural and ideological agendas, etc, and the relationship to other circuits of film culture such as mainstream exhibition/distribution, cinémathèques and museums, etc.

FSFF very much recommends that you visit the World Film Festivals blog (here) and read the work produced by the Unit’s four festival reporters (Lesley Chow, Farah Azalea Mohamed Al Amin, Alida Tomaszewski, and Nienke Huitenga). They have been posting on a variety of topics, to date, as follows: What Tongue? (Chow); Interview with Amir Muhammad (Azalea and Chow); Albert Serra’s Birdsong (Chow); Amir Muhammad’s Malaysian Gods (Azalea); The [Audi Festival of German Films] Festival as a Cultural Meeting Point (Huitenga); Interview with Amos Gitai (Chow and Azalea); Reconstructed Homelands [on the Gitai mini-retrospective at the Singapore International Film Festival] (Chow); Singapore Panorama (Azalea); and Sprechen Ze Deutsche? [on audience development at the German Film festival] (Tomaszewski).

Film Studies For Free‘s author very much approves of Martin’s teaching practice on this unit. (She established an undergraduate course on Film Programming a couple of years ago, which is still running, albeit under new management these days.)

So here, to celebrate Martin’s work, are a few excellent online (and, of course) Open Access film festival-studies resources (on festival programming, politics, business and other matters) from FSFF‘s dusty reading-list archive (last updated June 17, 2009):

Also, further essential reading can always be found at Professor Dina Iordanova‘s brilliant blog DinaView: Film Culture Technology Money (see all her postings on Film Festivals and Film Programming).

Professor Iordanova is one the lead team members of the Dynamics of World Cinema research project undertaken by the Centre for Film Studies at the University of St Andrews and sponsored by The Leverhulme Trust. (Full disclosure note: Adrian Martin and FSFF‘s own author are both members of the International Advisory Board of this project). The project describes itself thus:

This two-and-a- half-year-long study will examine the patterns and cycles of various distinctly active circuits of contemporary film distribution and exhibition, and the dynamic patterns of complex interaction between them.

[Project attention] attention focuses predominantly in four areas of the global circulation of non-Hollywood cinema: the international penetration of international blockbusters mainstream distribution, the film festival circuit, the film circulation via diasporic channels, as well as the various Internet-enabled forms of dissemination. The project’s distinctiveness is in the endeavour to correlate these diverse strands and foreground their dynamic interactions.

For updated news, as it happens, the Dynamics of World Cinema Blog can be found here.

Note added: This blog brought news (on June 17th) of the following great online resources:

Film Festival Workshop – Video Clips

During the Film Festival Workshop held on 4 April 2009 in St Andrews, our discussants talked about some of the most pressing issues that were concerned with the development of Film Festival Studies.

Click on the links below to hear what they said:

Clip 1

Michael Gubbins, former Editor, Screen International, UK

Clip 2

Richard Porton, Editor, Cineaste Magazine, USA

Clip 3

Nick Roddick (aka Mr. Busy), film journalist and critic, Sight & Sound, UK

Clip 4

Nick Roddick (aka Mr. Busy), film journalist and critic, Sight & Sound, UK

Clip 5

Stuart Cunningham, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Clip 6

Irene Bignardi, Filmitalia and former Locarno Festival Director, Italy

Clip 7

Núria Triana Toribio, University of Manchester, UK

Clip 8

Dina Iordanova, Director, Centre for Film Studies, University of St Andrews, Scotland


Also, please check out the Fipresci (international federation of film critics) website for an abundance of fascinating and useful material about film festivals.

Film Festival Studies Online

As regular Film Studies For Free readers will know, this blog likes to flag up worthwhile examples of innovative online pedagogy in the film and media studies field (see previous related posts HERE, HERE, and HERE).

It was thrilled to hear, therefore, that internationally regarded film writer Adrian Martin, Senior Research Fellow in Film and Television Studies in Monash University’s Faculty of Arts, is teaching part of a World Film Festivals unit more or less entirely online.

Martin introduces this excellent venture as follows:

This Monash University 2009 Unit aims to give an understanding of the contemporary phenomenon of the International Film Festival as an event within global circuits of film culture. It is not a Unit devoted to film analysis per se; but rather to the socio-cultural institutions of the Festival circuit – taking in issues of audience, economics, promotion, programming and curation, cultural and ideological agendas, etc, and the relationship to other circuits of film culture such as mainstream exhibition/distribution, cinémathèques and museums, etc.

FSFF very much recommends that you visit the World Film Festivals blog (here) and read the work produced by the Unit’s four festival reporters (Lesley Chow, Farah Azalea Mohamed Al Amin, Alida Tomaszewski, and Nienke Huitenga). They have been posting on a variety of topics, to date, as follows: What Tongue? (Chow); Interview with Amir Muhammad (Azalea and Chow); Albert Serra’s Birdsong (Chow); Amir Muhammad’s Malaysian Gods (Azalea); The [Audi Festival of German Films] Festival as a Cultural Meeting Point (Huitenga); Interview with Amos Gitai (Chow and Azalea); Reconstructed Homelands [on the Gitai mini-retrospective at the Singapore International Film Festival] (Chow); Singapore Panorama (Azalea); and Sprechen Ze Deutsche? [on audience development at the German Film festival] (Tomaszewski).

Film Studies For Free‘s author very much approves of Martin’s teaching practice on this unit. (She established an undergraduate course on Film Programming a couple of years ago, which is still running, albeit under new management these days.)

So here, to celebrate Martin’s work, are a few excellent online (and, of course) Open Access film festival-studies resources (on festival programming, politics, business and other matters) from FSFF‘s dusty reading-list archive (last updated June 17, 2009):

Also, further essential reading can always be found at Professor Dina Iordanova‘s brilliant blog DinaView: Film Culture Technology Money (see all her postings on Film Festivals and Film Programming).

Professor Iordanova is one the lead team members of the Dynamics of World Cinema research project undertaken by the Centre for Film Studies at the University of St Andrews and sponsored by The Leverhulme Trust. (Full disclosure note: Adrian Martin and FSFF‘s own author are both members of the International Advisory Board of this project). The project describes itself thus:

This two-and-a- half-year-long study will examine the patterns and cycles of various distinctly active circuits of contemporary film distribution and exhibition, and the dynamic patterns of complex interaction between them.

[Project attention] attention focuses predominantly in four areas of the global circulation of non-Hollywood cinema: the international penetration of international blockbusters mainstream distribution, the film festival circuit, the film circulation via diasporic channels, as well as the various Internet-enabled forms of dissemination. The project’s distinctiveness is in the endeavour to correlate these diverse strands and foreground their dynamic interactions.

For updated news, as it happens, the Dynamics of World Cinema Blog can be found here.

Note added: This blog brought news (on June 17th) of the following great online resources:

Film Festival Workshop – Video Clips

During the Film Festival Workshop held on 4 April 2009 in St Andrews, our discussants talked about some of the most pressing issues that were concerned with the development of Film Festival Studies.

Click on the links below to hear what they said:

Clip 1

Michael Gubbins, former Editor, Screen International, UK

Clip 2

Richard Porton, Editor, Cineaste Magazine, USA

Clip 3

Nick Roddick (aka Mr. Busy), film journalist and critic, Sight & Sound, UK

Clip 4

Nick Roddick (aka Mr. Busy), film journalist and critic, Sight & Sound, UK

Clip 5

Stuart Cunningham, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Clip 6

Irene Bignardi, Filmitalia and former Locarno Festival Director, Italy

Clip 7

Núria Triana Toribio, University of Manchester, UK

Clip 8

Dina Iordanova, Director, Centre for Film Studies, University of St Andrews, Scotland


Also, please check out the Fipresci (international federation of film critics) website for an abundance of fascinating and useful material about film festivals.

>Werner Herzog Links inc YouTube Fest

>

Film Studies For Free wanted to let academic fans of Werner Herzog know that (certainly in the UK, but most probably elsewhere, too, if no geoblocking) they can currently watch eight of his films on YouTube in their glorious entirety. This is thanks to the video distributor Starzmedia, one of the companies participating in YouTube’s growing efforts to stream full-length films with the support of the movie companies who own the rights. Below, FSFF has embedded the trailers of seven of the Herzog films that are currently available. Click on the titles to visit the YouTube pages for the full-length films, which can be watched freely online in relatively good quality versions (Even YouTube Screens Started Small…). (Click HERE for The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser added later. The Starzmedia channel for Herzog is HERE).

And, if that weren’t enough excitement for one FSFF day, beneath the video-trailers, at the foot of this post, are some other choice links to freely available Herzog material online.

Aguirre The Wrath Of God

My Best Fiend

Even Dwarfs Started Small

Fitzcarraldo

Lessons Of Darkness

Woyzeck

Little Dieter Needs To Fly

Scholarly online writing about Herzog:

Werner Herzog Links inc YouTube Fest

Film Studies For Free wanted to let academic fans of Werner Herzog know that (certainly in the UK, but most probably elsewhere, too, if no geoblocking) they can currently watch eight of his films on YouTube in their glorious entirety. This is thanks to the video distributor Starzmedia, one of the companies participating in YouTube’s growing efforts to stream full-length films with the support of the movie companies who own the rights. Below, FSFF has embedded the trailers of seven of the Herzog films that are currently available. Click on the titles to visit the YouTube pages for the full-length films, which can be watched freely online in relatively good quality versions (Even YouTube Screens Started Small…). (Click HERE for The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser added later. The Starzmedia channel for Herzog is HERE).

And, if that weren’t enough excitement for one FSFF day, beneath the video-trailers, at the foot of this post, are some other choice links to freely available Herzog material online.

Aguirre The Wrath Of God

My Best Fiend

Even Dwarfs Started Small

Fitzcarraldo

Lessons Of Darkness

Woyzeck

Little Dieter Needs To Fly

Scholarly online writing about Herzog:

>Queer Film and Theory Links In Memory of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick

>

Film Studies For Free was very sad to hear of the death at 58 of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, one of the founders of the discourse of ‘queer theory’, and an inspirational teacher and critic.

Like many other film researchers, some of FSFF‘s author’s own writing on queer films was deeply influenced by Sedgwick’s brilliant exploration of the epistemology of the closet.

In memory of Sedgwick, FSFF has assembled a webliography, below, of links to pieces of high quality, freely accessible, scholarly writing (or recordings/videos) on the web on the topic of queer/glbt films and/or queer film theory, a number of which, unsurprisingly, employ her critical insights. Further links added since original post: last updated June 2, 2009.

P.S. Another set of must-reads from the Reverse Shot website – just click on the film-title links below for some great reading on queer cinema and television:

Broken Sky

The Wire

Lan Yu

Hairspray

Be Like Others

The House of Mirth

Far from Heaven

Milk

Queer Film and Theory Links In Memory of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick

Film Studies For Free was very sad to hear of the death at 58 of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, one of the founders of the discourse of ‘queer theory’, and an inspirational teacher and critic.

Like many other film researchers, some of FSFF‘s author’s own writing on queer films was deeply influenced by Sedgwick’s brilliant exploration of the epistemology of the closet.

In memory of Sedgwick, FSFF has assembled a webliography, below, of links to pieces of high quality, freely accessible, scholarly writing (or recordings/videos) on the web on the topic of queer/glbt films and/or queer film theory, a number of which, unsurprisingly, employ her critical insights. Further links added since original post: last updated June 2, 2009.

P.S. Another set of must-reads from the Reverse Shot website – just click on the film-title links below for some great reading on queer cinema and television:

Broken Sky

The Wire

Lan Yu

Hairspray

Be Like Others

The House of Mirth

Far from Heaven

Milk

Added Sting: New Film-Philosophy Out Now


Film Studies For Free is very happy to report that the latest, excellent issue of Film-Philosophy (Volume 13, Issue No. 1, 2009) is now available online.

There is plenty worth recommending in it. There’s an interesting focus on science fiction cinema in a number of the articles and book reviews. But, as always in the eclectic Film-Philosophy salon, a wide variety of philosophical or theoretical perspectives are invoked or employed — Freudianism, Hegelianism, Deleuzianism, Kierkegaardianism, to name but a few.

Below are links to the pdf files of articles and book reviews furnished with Film Studies For Free‘s selected snippets and occasional comments:

Articles

‘Since commentaries and interviews hitherto have sufficiently addressed the societal concerns (e.g. immigration, parent-child relations, the working poor) and persistent themes (e.g. responsibility, fidelity, forgiveness) of the Dardenne catalog, this article will be concerned less with the representational content of the films and more with how they cinematographically present and resonate as objects of spectatorial affection. The Dardennes reconfigure perception according to its affective rather than intelligible capacity. Their work, in turn, remains ‘open’; the absence of stable situations at both diegetic and cinematographic levels renders impossible the verification of any would-be objects of a proper count.’ (p. 2)

‘Science fiction cinema offers more insight into the functioning of ideology than any other film genre, but this insight arrives – as a result of the genre’s futural mode – in a paranoid form, depicting ideology as the activity of an agent behind the scenes who manipulates subjects. In the standard science fiction film, the closed nature of ideology becomes evident, but this closure appears to be the work of some malevolent agency rather than a structural effect of ideology itself. The futural mode of science fiction film is at once responsible for its most radical insights and its most salient defects. In order to appreciate the former and avoid being seduced by the latter, one must approach science fiction cinema in the way that Hegel approaches Kantian morality, which shares both science fiction’s insights and defects.’ (p. 6)

‘Analyze This is a comedy that derives its humour from a number of sources. First of all, the premise that a Mafia boss should need therapy because he suffers from panic attacks; secondly the idea that Robert de Niro, who has made his career playing ‘wise guys’ and ‘goodfellas’, should parody the conventions of the genre; and most importantly, the continuous play of role reversals – between fathers and sons, doctor and patient, good guys and bad guys. But the thing that makes it really work as a film – at least for me – is that even though it parodies The Godfather it also expresses its basic psychoanalytic truth: that is, that sons endlessly trip over their unconscious when it comes to relations with their fathers. And even though it makes fun of therapy, it shows an understanding of Freud that is uncommon in popular culture.’ (p. 2)

‘[T]o win its viewers’ identification with its characters and, through them, its ideological assumptions, [Thank You For Smoking] organises its content around an ethical form, that of the tragic hero in Søren Kierkegaard’s sense. Consequently, what I hope to enact in this essay is the revenge of content upon form, because the form that produces the tragic hero, in Thank You For Smoking […], ignores its own content and thereby threatens to undermine an authentic ethics, which is often intolerant and not necessarily consensual. In short, the film, based loosely on the ‘smoking wars’ that began in the mid 1990s, ultimately champions an impoverished ethics, an ‘ethics of consumption’ with the ‘right to consume’ figuring as its first principle.'(p. 2)

‘Dune, released in 1984 and directed by David Lynch, from his own adapted screenplay of Frank Herbert’s epic science-fiction novel, provides a rich example for a reception study on ideas of authorship. On the one hand, Herbert’s 1960s cult bestseller has evolved into a franchise and is thus regarded by Dune enthusiasts as a sacrosanct text. From a Lynch perspective, though, the film is usually seen as his least personal work – an event movie no less – and as such it holds the rank of the most uncared for text in his filmic canon. It is the goal of this paper to analyse Dune’s meanings in relation to critical writings founded upon the tenets of early auteurism so we might explore its function as a reception preference for the predisposed reader. But rather than simply dismiss auteurism as humanist idealism (as has been the habit with historical assessments of authors), the outcome of this paper seeks to also take account of the writing pleasures the author might bring to the interpretation of filmed texts.’ (p. 1)

Book Reviews
Film Studies For Free particularly recommends Will Higbee’s thoughtful review of David Martin Jones’s important work on Deleuze and national identity in the cinema, as well as Joshua Shaw’s take on the second edition of Stephen Mulhall’s classic On Film

Leonardo Aldrovandi, Hanns Eisler and Theodor W. Adorno (1947/2007) Composing for the Films (124-129); Daniel Barnett, ‘Daniel Herwitz (2008) Aesthetics’ (130-138); Sarah Boslaugh, ‘ Maria Pramaggiore (2008) Neil Jordan’ (139-144); D.H. Fleming, ‘Patricia Pisters (2003) The Matrix of Visual Culture: Working with Deleuze in Film Theory’ (144-155); Will Higbee, ‘David Martin-Jones (2006) Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts‘ (156-164); John Finlay Kerr, ‘Melanie Swalwell and Jason Wilson, eds. (2008) The Pleasures of Computer Gaming: Essays on Cultural History, Theory and Aesthetics‘ (165-175); Codruta Morari, ‘Sabine Nessel, Winfried Pauleit, Christine Rüffert, eds. (2008) Wort und Fleisch: Kino swischen Text und Körper / Word and Flesh: Cinema between Text and the Body’ (176-186); Joshua Shaw, ‘Stephen Mulhall (2008) On Film, 2nd Edition’ (176-186) Tom Whittaker,; ‘Martin O’Shaughnessy (2007) The New Face of Political Cinema: Commitment in French Film Since 1995‘ (199-205); Sarah Wishart, ‘Gail Cunningham and Stephen Barber (2007) London Eyes: Reflections in Text and Image‘ (206-212)

Added Sting: New Film-Philosophy Out Now


Film Studies For Free is very happy to report that the latest, excellent issue of Film-Philosophy (Volume 13, Issue No. 1, 2009) is now available online.

There is plenty worth recommending in it. There’s an interesting focus on science fiction cinema in a number of the articles and book reviews. But, as always in the eclectic Film-Philosophy salon, a wide variety of philosophical or theoretical perspectives are invoked or employed — Freudianism, Hegelianism, Deleuzianism, Kierkegaardianism, to name but a few.

Below are links to the pdf files of articles and book reviews furnished with Film Studies For Free‘s selected snippets and occasional comments:

Articles

‘Since commentaries and interviews hitherto have sufficiently addressed the societal concerns (e.g. immigration, parent-child relations, the working poor) and persistent themes (e.g. responsibility, fidelity, forgiveness) of the Dardenne catalog, this article will be concerned less with the representational content of the films and more with how they cinematographically present and resonate as objects of spectatorial affection. The Dardennes reconfigure perception according to its affective rather than intelligible capacity. Their work, in turn, remains ‘open’; the absence of stable situations at both diegetic and cinematographic levels renders impossible the verification of any would-be objects of a proper count.’ (p. 2)

‘Science fiction cinema offers more insight into the functioning of ideology than any other film genre, but this insight arrives – as a result of the genre’s futural mode – in a paranoid form, depicting ideology as the activity of an agent behind the scenes who manipulates subjects. In the standard science fiction film, the closed nature of ideology becomes evident, but this closure appears to be the work of some malevolent agency rather than a structural effect of ideology itself. The futural mode of science fiction film is at once responsible for its most radical insights and its most salient defects. In order to appreciate the former and avoid being seduced by the latter, one must approach science fiction cinema in the way that Hegel approaches Kantian morality, which shares both science fiction’s insights and defects.’ (p. 6)

‘Analyze This is a comedy that derives its humour from a number of sources. First of all, the premise that a Mafia boss should need therapy because he suffers from panic attacks; secondly the idea that Robert de Niro, who has made his career playing ‘wise guys’ and ‘goodfellas’, should parody the conventions of the genre; and most importantly, the continuous play of role reversals – between fathers and sons, doctor and patient, good guys and bad guys. But the thing that makes it really work as a film – at least for me – is that even though it parodies The Godfather it also expresses its basic psychoanalytic truth: that is, that sons endlessly trip over their unconscious when it comes to relations with their fathers. And even though it makes fun of therapy, it shows an understanding of Freud that is uncommon in popular culture.’ (p. 2)

‘[T]o win its viewers’ identification with its characters and, through them, its ideological assumptions, [Thank You For Smoking] organises its content around an ethical form, that of the tragic hero in Søren Kierkegaard’s sense. Consequently, what I hope to enact in this essay is the revenge of content upon form, because the form that produces the tragic hero, in Thank You For Smoking […], ignores its own content and thereby threatens to undermine an authentic ethics, which is often intolerant and not necessarily consensual. In short, the film, based loosely on the ‘smoking wars’ that began in the mid 1990s, ultimately champions an impoverished ethics, an ‘ethics of consumption’ with the ‘right to consume’ figuring as its first principle.'(p. 2)

‘Dune, released in 1984 and directed by David Lynch, from his own adapted screenplay of Frank Herbert’s epic science-fiction novel, provides a rich example for a reception study on ideas of authorship. On the one hand, Herbert’s 1960s cult bestseller has evolved into a franchise and is thus regarded by Dune enthusiasts as a sacrosanct text. From a Lynch perspective, though, the film is usually seen as his least personal work – an event movie no less – and as such it holds the rank of the most uncared for text in his filmic canon. It is the goal of this paper to analyse Dune’s meanings in relation to critical writings founded upon the tenets of early auteurism so we might explore its function as a reception preference for the predisposed reader. But rather than simply dismiss auteurism as humanist idealism (as has been the habit with historical assessments of authors), the outcome of this paper seeks to also take account of the writing pleasures the author might bring to the interpretation of filmed texts.’ (p. 1)

Book Reviews
Film Studies For Free particularly recommends Will Higbee’s thoughtful review of David Martin Jones’s important work on Deleuze and national identity in the cinema, as well as Joshua Shaw’s take on the second edition of Stephen Mulhall’s classic On Film

Leonardo Aldrovandi, Hanns Eisler and Theodor W. Adorno (1947/2007) Composing for the Films (124-129); Daniel Barnett, ‘Daniel Herwitz (2008) Aesthetics’ (130-138); Sarah Boslaugh, ‘ Maria Pramaggiore (2008) Neil Jordan’ (139-144); D.H. Fleming, ‘Patricia Pisters (2003) The Matrix of Visual Culture: Working with Deleuze in Film Theory’ (144-155); Will Higbee, ‘David Martin-Jones (2006) Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts‘ (156-164); John Finlay Kerr, ‘Melanie Swalwell and Jason Wilson, eds. (2008) The Pleasures of Computer Gaming: Essays on Cultural History, Theory and Aesthetics‘ (165-175); Codruta Morari, ‘Sabine Nessel, Winfried Pauleit, Christine Rüffert, eds. (2008) Wort und Fleisch: Kino swischen Text und Körper / Word and Flesh: Cinema between Text and the Body’ (176-186); Joshua Shaw, ‘Stephen Mulhall (2008) On Film, 2nd Edition’ (176-186) Tom Whittaker,; ‘Martin O’Shaughnessy (2007) The New Face of Political Cinema: Commitment in French Film Since 1995‘ (199-205); Sarah Wishart, ‘Gail Cunningham and Stephen Barber (2007) London Eyes: Reflections in Text and Image‘ (206-212)