Thursday, November 08, 2007

Sherlock Jr.



Anonymous Perezoso said...

Cinema as bogus phenomena? (maybe that's what Baudrillard was sort of hinting at) Theatre of Solipsism, peep show, carny thrills mistaken for something literary or philosophical (and Flicks were showing trollop T n A a few weeks after Melies or whoever synchronized the projectors and film).

Crime reveals itself as social-historical phenomena (as does the reporting of crime (accurate, or not so accurate)). A part of modern capitalism. Pulpmeisters like Conan Doyle (or POE) then develop the theme: noir, detective fiction, mystery BS. Or on higher level Dostoyevsky, as in Crime and Punishment. (Or lower, as in the romance of bandits, pirates, rogues, etc. President Blackbeard!)

Cinema merely continues the abstraction, the disassociation, though the moving photograph somehow realizes the crime spectacle, while at the same time the cinema misconstrues, misrepresents, iconizes the crime, and the crime pulp. The image of Basil Rathbone then effaces not only Conan-Doyle's fictional abstractions, or journalism but the social phenomena itself. Pirates appear, with some cute staged violence (the real Capn Kidd, for instance, was a rapist and murderer, along with the robberies. No forcible sodomy and cut-throat kicks appear in say Depp's pop-buccaneer tales however) The moving photograph at once realizes social-reality (i.e. murder, robbery, rape, predation of all sorts, etc. at both micro (crime) and macro (war) levels ) and neuters it, falsifies it.

12/16/2007 11:20 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home