Dr Constantine Verevis (Film & Television Studies, Monash)

Transcription

1 CV C. Verevis Dr Constantine Verevis (Film & Television Studies, Monash) Qualifications: PhD (1996, La Trobe University, Melbourne VIC) Bachelor of Communication Studies, Honours (1991, Murdoch University, Perth WA) Bachelor of Arts (1990, Curtin University, Perth WA) Books (authored and edited): Australian Film Theory and Criticism, Vol 1: Critical Positions. Co-authored with Noel King and Deane Williams. Bristol: Intellect, In press, due Remake-Remodel: Film Remakes, Adaptations and Fan Productions. Coedited with Kathleen Loock. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, In press, due Film Trilogies: New Critical Approaches. Co-edited with Claire Perkins. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, After Taste: Cultural Value and the Moving Image. Co-edited with Julia Vassilieva. London: Routledge, Second Takes: Critical Approaches to the Film Sequel. Co-edited with Carolyn Jess-Cooke. SUNY Press, Film Remakes. Edinburgh University Press, Edited Journal Issues (w. A. Danks). Australian International Pictures. Studies in Australasian Cinema 4.3 (2010). (w. C. Perkins). Documenting Filmmakers. Studies in Documentary Film 4.2 (2010). (w. J. Vassilieva). After Taste: Cultural Value and the Moving Image. Continuum 24.5 (October 2010). (w. A. Danks, D. Verhoeven, D. Williams), Telling Stories: Cinema, History and Experience. Senses of Cinema 41 (Oct-Dec 2006). Recent chapters and articles: Raoul Walsh. Film Noir: The Directors. Ed. Alain Silver and James Ursini. New York: Limelight, Bizarre Love Triangle: The Creature Trilogy. Film Trilogies: New Critical Approaches. Ed. Constantine Verevis and Claire Perkins. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, (w. C. Perkins). Three Times. Film Trilogies: New Critical Approaches. Ed. Constantine Verevis and Claire Perkins. Basingstoke: Palgrave- Macmillan, (w. J. Vassilieva). Introduction: After Taste: Cultural Value and the Moving Image. After Taste: Cultural Value and the Moving Image. London; Routledge, 2012.

2 Ricordo-Immagine: memorie sullo schermo, remake cinematografici. L'ombra del passato. La nostalgia tra cinema e televisione. Ed. Leonardo Gandini, Daniela Cecchin, and Matteo Gentilini. Trento: Fondazione Museo storico del Trentino, Under a Distemperate Star: Under Capricorn (1949). Hitchcock at the Source. Ed. David Boyd and R. Barton Palmer. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, Dead on Arrival; The Fate of Australian Film Noir. Studies in Australasian Cinema 4.3 (2010). (w. A. Danks). Australian International Pictures. Studies in Australasian Cinema 4.3 (2010). Moldy Art: The Exotic World of Jack Smith. Studies in Documentary Film 4.2 (2010). (w. C. Perkins). Documenting Filmmakers. Studies in Documentary Film 4.2 (2010). Screen Theory Goes to Australia. Framework 51.2 (Fall 2010). In press. Against All Odds, Breathless, Collateral, DOA, No Way Out, Point of No Return. Film Noir: An Encyclopedic Reference to the American Style. 4th Edition. Ed. Alain Silver, James Ursini and Elizabeth Ward. Overlook Press, In press. Planet of the Apes. Directory of World Cinema: American Hollywood. Ed. Lincoln Geraghty. Bristol: Intellect, In Press. Re-defining the Sequel: The Case of the (Living) Dead. Second Takes: Critical Approaches to the Sequel. Ed. Carolyn Jess-Cooke and Constantine Verevis. New York: State University of New York Press, (with C. Jess-Cooke). Introduction. Second Takes: Critical Approaches to the Sequel. Ed. Carolyn Jess-Cooke and Constantine Verevis. New York: State University of New York Press, Mad Dog Morgan. Metro 164 (2010). (with N. King and D. Williams). Mapping Film Studies in Australia: Institutions, Personnel, and Critical Positions. Creative Nation: Australian Cinema and Cultural Studies Reader. Ed. Amit Sarwal and Reema Sarwal. New Delhi: SSS Publications, Second Chance: Remaking Solaris. Fear, Cultural Anxiety and Transformation: Horror, Science Fiction and Fantasy Films Remade. Ed. Scott Lucas and John Marmysz. Lanham MD: Rowman and Littlefield, Thieves Like Us. 101 Gangster Movies. Ed. Steven Jay Schneider. London: Quintessence, 2009 Dawn of the Dead. 101 Horror Movies. Ed. Steven Jay Schneider. London: Quintessence, 2009 Planet of the Apes. 101 Sci-Fi Movies. Ed. Steven Jay Schneider. London: Quintessence, 2009 Disorder: Joy Division. Studies in Documentary Film 2.3 (2008): (with N. King and D. Williams). Australia. Handbook of Film Studies. Ed. James Donald and Michael Renov. London: SAGE, Paul Schrader. 501 Directors. Ed. Steven Schneider. London: Quintet, 2007.

3 Way of Life: GoodFellas and Casino. Gangster Film Reader. Ed. Alain Silver and James Ursini. New York: Limelight, "For Ever Hitchcock: Psycho and Its Remakes." After Hitchcock: Imitation/Influence/Intertextuality. Ed. David Boyd and R. Barton Palmer. Austin: U of Texas P, Mike Figgis: Time Code and the Screen. New Punk Cinema. Ed. Nicholas Rombes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, Cinema, Minoritarian cinema, Repetition and cinema, Sensation and cinema. Deleuze Dictionary. Ed. Adrian Parr. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, "Through the Past Darkly: Noir Remakes of the 1980s." Film Noir Reader 4. Ed. Alain Silver and James Ursini. New York: Limelight, "Remaking Film." Film Studies 4 (Summer 2004): Some Web publications: The Jack and Andy Club La Furia Umana no.2 (2009) 8:constantin-verevis&catid=46:la-furia-umana2-autumn- 2009&Itemid=61 Andy Warhol. Senses of Cinema 23 (November December 2002). Candy, or Libertinism. Bright Lights Film Journal (November 2002). Flaming Creatures. Senses of Cinema 21 (July-August 2002). Higher degree research (HDR) completions: James Curnow. (MA 2011) Imagining the Next Disaster: The Third Wave of SF Disaster Cinema Claire Perkins. The Hollywood Smart Film (PhD 2009) main supervisor Guinevere Narraway. Making Nature: Visions of Mastery in Third Reich Cinema (PhD 2007) associate supervisor Paul Coughlin. The Same Old Song: Ironic Revisions in the Films of Joel and Ethan Coen (PhD 2004) sole supervisor Adrian Parr. Creative Production: from da Vinci to Deleuze (PhD 2002) associate supervisor Graham Jones. Difference and Determination: Prolegomena concerning Deleuze s early metaphysic (PhD 2002) main supervisor Current editorial boards: Associate Editor for Refereed Articles for Metro (Melbourne) (2000 present). Associate Editor for Refereed Articles for Senses of Cinema (Melbourne) (2000 present). Editorial Board for Screening the Past (Melbourne) (2003 present). Associate Editor for Refereed Articles for Screen Education (Melbourne) (2006 present). Cover: Film Remakes

4 Sample review comments for Film Remakes: 1. A fine work of scholarship, Film Remakes promises to change the way we think about the phenomenon of the remake, and indeed about films, culture and intertextuality. This is the most authoritative, subtle and complex work on the cinematic remake that I have encountered. Lesley Stern, Professor of Film and Media, Visual Arts Department, University of California 2. In this groundbreaking study [Film Remakes], Constantine Verevis explores an aspect of commercial film production interesting to the scholar and movie enthusiast alike: remaking. Film remakes can be profitably viewed from a number of perspectives, and this book provides an intriguing and revealing anatomy of the phenomenon. Verevis writes with verve and insight; an important feature of Film Remakes is the series of individual analyses that sparkle with revealing and intelligent comment as they clarify general points about remaking. R. Barton Palmer, Calhoun Lemon Professor of Literature at Clemson University 3. Constantine Verevis new book Film Remakes joins this already-impressive body of work [that is, scholarship developed over the last twenty years that examines the remake in a serious way] and indeed makes an important contribution to the field. Synthesizing and productively modifying numerous other theorists and critics, Verevis provides the most sustained and systematic study devoted exclusively to film remakes that exists in English [ ] The author advances a polemic regarding the theorization of remakes that is worth repeating; although remakes may engage in particular kinds of intertextual relation with other texts, purely textual approaches toward remakes are insufficient. Rather, the complex interpenetration of culture, economics, media technologies, and institutions in historically-specific circumstances demands that the remake be considered within a broader theoretical matrix. [ ] [T]he broad scope, firm theoretical grounding, and salient insights found throughout this book will, in all probability, make it a common point of reference for future studies on the topic. It could certainly play a central role in any course on film remakes. [...] Elucidating a number of theoretical issues as well as clarifying many specific cases, Film Remakes marks a strong addition to the literature on film remakes. Daniel Herbert, Film International 24 (2006) 4. [W]hat do we mean when we talk of a remake? There is surely some real confusion about the use of the term. Why, for instance, do we think of Martin Scorsese s Cape Fear (1991) as a remake of J. Lee-Thompson s 1961 film? Or should we simply think of both as adaptations, made in different social climates and production circumstances, of John D. MacDonald s novel The Executioners (1957)? Is Kenneth Branagh s Henry V (1989) a remake of

5 Laurence Olivier s 1945 version of Shakespeare s play? Does the status of the original film and/or of its literary precursor determine audience identification of a film as a remake? Remakes have sometimes stirred controversy as when, for example, the prints of Thorold Dickinson s Gaslight (1940) were said to have been destroyed so as not to compete with George Cukor s lush MGM version in 1944, both of course derived from Patrick Hamilton s play. Con Verevis stimulating book raises just these sorts of issues and many others from the outset. His approach is nothing if not ecumenical, drawing on an almost bewildering range of views on the matter as he pursues the central question, What is film remaking? which he properly asks in his opening paragraph. [ ] The excellence of Verevis book lies partly in his way of cutting through the thickets of films clamouring to be considered as remakes of one kind or other and through the prolific, if not always clear-headed, discourse on the subject. He proposes in his introductory chapter three ways of considering the concept of the film remake: as an industrial category, as a textual category and as a critical category. He makes a persuasive case in his Introduction for the centrality and comprehensiveness of these three approaches and they provide the framework for the rest of the book. Brian McFarlane, Senses of Cinema (Oct-Dec 2006) Cover: Second Takes Sequels, serials, and remakes have been a staple of cinema since the very beginning, and recent years have seen the emergence of dynamic and progressive variations of these multi-film franchises. Taking a broad range of sequels as case studies, from the Godfather movies to the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, Second Takes confronts the complications posed by film sequels and their aftermaths, proposing new critical approaches to what has become a dominant industrial mode of Hollywood cinema. The contributors explore the sequel s investments in repetition, difference, continuation, and retroactivity, and particularly those attitudes and approaches toward the sequel that hold it up as a kind of figurehead of Hollywood s commercial imperatives. An invaluable resource to the film student, critic, and fan, Second Takes offers new ways of looking at the film sequel s industrial, aesthetic, cultural, political, and theoretical contexts. [Second Takes is a] comprehensive and adventurous exploration of a timely topic. Wheeler Winston Dixon, author of Film Noir and the Cinema of Paranoia Cover: Film Trilogies Sample review comments for Film Trilogies: This collection is interesting, informative and much-needed. It will act as a key resource within the field and cross-over with a number of related subjects within film studies, such as adaptation, sequels and remakes.

6 Jamie Sexton, Northumbria University, UK Film Trilogies is a timely and welcome addition to recent studies of what has been described disparagingly as commercial cinema's financially motivated compulsion to repeat, but with this marked difference; contrary to its association with remakes, series, and sequels, the trilogy, as this volume ably demonstrates, is generally the work of an auteur, and its repetitions are aesthetic and thematic, not formulaic. The essays in this book represent an important contribution to the continuing exploration of the richness of returning to earlier cinematic material. Jennifer Forrest, Texas State University-San Marcos, USA