A serious, jargon-laden, and stubbornly appreciative examination of movies that, according to Paul (Film/Univ. of Michigan), ``embraced the lowest common denominator as an aesthetic principle.'' Citing everyone from Freud to Bill Murray, and with research ranging from Oedipus to Dada to fairy tales, Paul finds not only parallels but the very wellspring of the horror film genre in the Roman circus and Elizabethan drama. Comedies such as Animal House and Bachelor Party, he claims, have roots in the Greek theater and in the later Feast of Fools and Midsummer Eve festivals. They may have ``repulsed critics,'' but gross-out movies represent ``something other than proof of America's cultural decadence.'' Paul credits the makers of these films with being ``creative in the desire to break down inhibitions, to move away from the repression of our traditional society.'' Thus Porky's and Animal House, noted for raunchy, slobbering male sexuality, become ``explorations of the variety of penile expression.'' Slasher films such as the Friday the 13th and Halloween series comprise, in Paul's view, ``art that defines itself as oppositional to the dominant power structure,'' not as films that exploit violence and degradation. There is groundbreaking work here, particularly in tying together the historical, theoretical, and cultural perspectives underpinning the attraction of these genres. But he actually cites the women's movement (as well as other social movements) as a beneficiary of the dashing of sexual and other taboos by these films, overlooking their frequent portrayal of the victimization of women. Ultimately, this is a rationalization and justification—in dense, scholarly prose—of viciousness and sophomoric titillation in film.
Pub Date: May 19, 1994
ISBN: 0-231-08464-1
Page Count: 528
Publisher: Columbia Univ.
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: March 15, 1994
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
This is not the Nutcracker sweet, as passed on by Tchaikovsky and Marius Petipa. No, this is the original Hoffmann tale of 1816, in which the froth of Christmas revelry occasionally parts to let the dark underside of childhood fantasies and fears peek through. The boundaries between dream and reality fade, just as Godfather Drosselmeier, the Nutcracker's creator, is seen as alternately sinister and jolly. And Italian artist Roberto Innocenti gives an errily realistic air to Marie's dreams, in richly detailed illustrations touched by a mysterious light. A beautiful version of this classic tale, which will captivate adults and children alike. (Nutcracker; $35.00; Oct. 28, 1996; 136 pp.; 0-15-100227-4)
Pub Date: Oct. 28, 1996
ISBN: 0-15-100227-4
Page Count: 136
Publisher: Harcourt
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1996
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2026 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
