Jump to content

Talk:Cult film: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Larry_Sanger (talk)
No edit summary
Line 73: Line 73:
<I>Apocalypse Now</I> and particularly <I>The Graduate</I> don't strike me as particularly cultish, by the way - certainly not in the way that Withnail and I is. --[[Robert Merkel]]
<I>Apocalypse Now</I> and particularly <I>The Graduate</I> don't strike me as particularly cultish, by the way - certainly not in the way that Withnail and I is. --[[Robert Merkel]]


----


The article at present reads very much like someone's essay about what cult films are. If this is studied academically, as the article says, then can we explicitly represent the bulleted list of "cult film characteristics" as the mainstream view in academia of what cult films are?



Let me put it a different way. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to ''evaluate'' the contents of this article. What makes the various claims in the article ''true''? I'm not asking anyone to justify them, I'm asking: what phenomenon in reality are we trying to describe? Common usage of the term "cult film"? Perhaps some academic usage of the term? Or one of these ''and'' some general description of cult films generally, given that usage? --[[LMS]]



Revision as of 22:00, 17 January 2002

Hmmm. I think to be regarded as a cult film, you can't have massive mainstream success on first-run cinema release. Hence I doubt that the James Bond films, nor Pulp Fiction, should be on this list. Robert Merkel





The non-definition of "cult film" is a cop-out and is likely to annoy anybody looking for a definition, IMHO.


Some key points (not every film that has "cult" status has all of these):


  • Cult film is in the eye of the beholder.
  • Cult films attract obsessive fans
  • Cult films generally don't gain that status until some time after their release.
  • A film that attracts too large a number of fans cannot be regarded as a cult film.
  • Films of certain genres (horror, science fiction) are more likely to be regarded as "cult" films.
  • The attraction of cult films is often totally different to the original intentions of the director,

and often contains "subversive" elements like references to homosexuality.


What do others think RM


The non-definition was put up in an attempt to drive out exactly these sorts of ideas... Why don't you ramp up the definition accordingly? sjc


I must have misinterpreted your original article - I thought that you meant that saying *anything* about what makes a film a "cult film" is pointless.

I apologise. In any case, if nobody else comes to the party I'll write some more on the topic in a bit-- RM


No, I can see how you took it that way. I maybe didn't phrase it too well: I wasn't saying it was pointless, more that as soon as one position becomes apparent, another contradictory one will tend to refute it. I think you have some well thought out ideas about it, though, and I'm interested to see what you come up with. sjc



I think that a series films like the Bond flicks might qualify differently that one-offs like Pulp Fiction, no matter the audience. The category seems to me like a different FLAVOR of cultishness from, say, Rocky Horror, but not a totally different phenomenon. --MichaelTinkler


Hi. Do you think that the Elvis films are considered cult ex.Viva Las Vegas and in what terms?I'm writing an essay on paracinema in relation with Elvis musicals and I'm quite stuck because I can't find an example of Elvis films as cult. basil


Yes, WRT some of the criteria I put up earlier (that haven't been transferred to the main article yet, unfortunately), I think Elvis films might well qualify. You might consider Elvis films as cult in the context of the Elvis (as a whole) cult. However, as criteria number one said, cult is in the eye of the beholder. My parents probably consider Star Wars a cult film. --Robert Merkel





Apocalypse Now and particularly The Graduate don't strike me as particularly cultish, by the way - certainly not in the way that Withnail and I is. --Robert Merkel


The article at present reads very much like someone's essay about what cult films are. If this is studied academically, as the article says, then can we explicitly represent the bulleted list of "cult film characteristics" as the mainstream view in academia of what cult films are?


Let me put it a different way. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to evaluate the contents of this article. What makes the various claims in the article true? I'm not asking anyone to justify them, I'm asking: what phenomenon in reality are we trying to describe? Common usage of the term "cult film"? Perhaps some academic usage of the term? Or one of these and some general description of cult films generally, given that usage? --LMS