Seditious Suspicion: Toward a Hermeneutics of Resistance

The Important Message in Romero [1] Can film as a medium make any sense of History? Most of the time that seems not even to be the issue. So-called “historical” movies such as Pocahontas and Glory have been attacked for straying from the recorded facts of the events they portray in an attempt to tell a more attractive story. This practice has its roots in the movie-making process. Hollywood exists to make money, do not be fooled.

As time goes on, history has a way of getting distorted from its most truthful form. Time causes people to drift away from accuracy and become more interested in what they want to remember. Hollywood has a reputation of creating films that cater more to the average viewer, rather than the history buff. Inglorious Basterds, by Quentin Taratino, take very liberal liberty with a history story, and creates a story that will sell to the crowd. This may seem dubious, but it is often not such a bad thing.

Compared to Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur have movies lost sight of what the Arthurian legend tries to teach? Le Morte d’Arthur has several different themes working within in for Hollywood to choose from. An easy one for moviemakers is the glorification of the hero. In Malory’s work it appears that he is glorifying Arthur but really his work is being very critical. Arthur is an interesting man, and Malory constructs his character to stand out.

Art cinema utilizes its own set of artistic expression. Hollywood classical films on the other hand, are at odds with the artistic concept, and are considered to be mainstream. When we look at Classical films, we think of the basic Hollywood movie where there is a beginning, middle and end, and the whole movie comes together at the end, with a little bit of romance. In this specific movie, the audience is faced with a confusing dilemma of choosing whether this movie is an art film or a classical film. Most even think it has a documentary approach, but what makes this movie even more successful and even more entertaining, is that it is both art cinema and classical cinema.

Many directors of films try to incorporate a number of genres so the film will appeal to a wider audience. For example the film, 'Pearl Harbour' has action, history, love, which are contained in this war epic, this means it attracts 3 different audiences, boosting film ratings. The use of special effects and the quality of the production of the film can also dec... ... middle of paper ... ...ncluded sword, fights. Theatre productions of 'Romeo and Juliet' still occur, yet these do not tend to appeal to a large modern day audience. Several films have been made of 'Romeo and Juliet'; this may put modern film producers off, as a modern audience may seek an original text.

It would be easy to say a lie is something that is not true, but this would demand the definition of truth. A more adequate definition might be that a lie is something that is said with the knowledge of some other facts relative to issue at hand. But this would result as everything being a lie, because there is always something that isn't said. I am not going to go on further, this was just to give an idea how difficult it a... ... middle of paper ... ...le as it might seem on the first glance. Returning to the small notation on subtext, to the "hidden" or not obvious messages sent through language.

Yet, fantasy is not unreal for any reason but the old one: the terms are counterdefined and a matched pair of a dichotomy - people think so. “The aim of psychoanalytic treatment is thus to (re)focus attention from factual accuracy to hysterical lies, which unknowingly articulate the truth” (37). Your truth in terms of, uh, ours. Whereas fantasy can be experienced as completely compelling reality, Žižek nearly denudes it of alternative associations and frameworks. For him, fantasy cannot take a hold any more important than one inhering to desire, the real, and all the rest.

André Gilde once fittingly said, “The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity”; in other words, one blinded by delusion, whose actions and thoughts are a dichotomy is a true hypocrite. I agree with Gilde. A true hypocrite according to Gilde is someone who zealously enforces their thoughts and stops recognizing their deception in the process. When one ceases to perceive one’s own deception, s/he is preaching thoughts blindly; preaching thoughts blindly spurs only semblance not reality. Ideas expressed zealously and blindly often lead to the creation of a utopian aim for oneself.

The skeptical challenge’s goal is to take all of reality and the accompanying “truths” into question. The skeptical argument tries to show that even the most basic facts that we take to be true are not guaranteed. In order to bring to light the amount of information we take for granted, the argument uses the mundane statement of “we have hands” and attempts to question it as well. To do so, the skeptical argument refers to a figurative antagonist called the Evil Genius. The Evil Genius is a figurehead for doubt, representing the alternate possibilities to our reality.

When did Hollywood become such a philosophizer? But more importantly, why has Hollywood taken to creating powerful films that manipulate the emotions and beliefs of their viewers as specifically concerns reality and their understanding of it? Surely the foundations of reality have not always been so heavily emphasized in Hollywood in years past. Looking to motion pictures such as Casablanca, The Sound of Music, Clint Eastwood Western’s, Indiana Jones, and James Bond 007 (a handful of famous films), we do find questions posed and important scenarios of life brought to the screen. However, such movies were... ... middle of paper ... ...wood with a nice paycheck.