In:A Comparative History of the Literary Draft in Europe
Edited by Olga Beloborodova and Dirk Van Hulle
[Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages XXXV] 2024
► pp. 458–472
Get fulltext
2.3.1Film
Authorship, versions and revisions
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 8 November 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/chlel.xxxv.32pau
https://doi.org/10.1075/chlel.xxxv.32pau
Abstract
This chapter aims to test the saliency of textual or genetic criticism for film studies. My suggestions
take two directions: on the one hand, I propose that the philological task of the genetic critic to compare different versions of
a literary text, finds an equivalent in the job of the film preservationist. In a second move, I look at the problematic of
creative control in an art rooted from the beginning in an industrial model. Considering the American “auteur” cinema of the
1970s, I argue that the filmmaker’s newly-won right of “final cut” led to endless revisions and the “modernist” sense that the
“text” can never be finished.
References (34)
Films
Other sources
Benjamin, Walter. 2015. “The
Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical
Reproduction.” In Illuminations, ed.
by Hannah Arendt, trans.
by Harry Zorn, 211–245. London: The Bodley Head.
Bordwell, David, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson. 1985. The
Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to
1960. New York: Columbia University Press.
Cavell, Stanley. 1979. The
World Viewed: Reflections on the Ontology of Film (Enlarged
Edition). Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
Kael, Pauline. 1984. “Close
Encounters of the Third Kind, The Special
Edition.” In Taking It All
In, 53–54. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
