Search results
maintain, with some accuracy, that ‘the field of film studies has ignored a rather important component of the film industry, its audience’.38 The growth of academic interest in the people who watched films, the ways in which they watched and thought about them and the places in which they were screened means that cinemagoing and the exhibition industry are no longer the mysteries that they once were.39 It is still the case, though, that if we hope to comprehend how the cinema as an institution functioned within society, we need to supplement the literature on individual
), Reinventing Film Studies (London: Arnold, 2000 ). 17 Heard, ‘The Magic Lantern’s Wild Years’. See also L. Mannoni, The Great Art of Light and Shadow: Archaeology of the Cinema , trans. and ed. R. Crangle, (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 2000 ) for other examples. 18
Every Night: An Account of London Cinemas Under Fire (London: Quality Press, 1948), p. 23. 55 Kinematograph Weekly, 7 May 1942, p. 39. 56 The ways in which stars were commodified and consumed in the period is discussed in Charles Eckert, ‘The Carole Lombard in Macy’s window’, Quarterly Review of Film Studies, 3:1 (1978). 57 The influence that Hollywood gangsters had on British youths – criminal and otherwise – is discussed in Mark Roodhouse, ‘In racket town: gangster chic in austerity Britain, 1939–1953’, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 31
and he wrote the dialogue’, nothing more. However, Hayes went on to script Peyton Place (1957), winning another Oscar nomination, The Carpetbaggers (1963), The Chalk Garden (1964), Harlow (1965) and Nevada Smith (1966) before turning to television. He ended his career as professor of film studies and screenwriting at Dartmouth College. 23 Radio directors were conspicuously less successful in switching media than writers. The three