| Sažetak | Učestalost tematiziranja moderniteta u filmologiji, s prevlašću analitičko-interpretacijskih radova u odnosu na metodološke rasprave, motivacija su za usporedno istraživanje nekoliko paradigmi moderniteta u prvom dijelu rada. U prvom je poglavlju
predstavljena filmska teorija moderniteta Siegfrieda Kracauera, revalorizirana u novije vrijeme kao, između ostalog, jedan od prvih pokušaja širenja čiste teorije filma (film theory) na filmologiju (cinema theory).
U fokusu je drugog poglavlja rada tzv. „teza o modernitetu“, što je skupni naziv za tzv. revizionističke povijesti filma (Gunning, Hansen, Singer) koje su ispitivale diskurzivni okvir moderniteta na početku 20. stoljeća, posebno intermedijalnost ranog filma (film atrakcije). Uz rekonstrukciju njihovih teza, kao i preispitivanja takvih metoda filmske teorije i historiografije (Bordwell), obrađena su još dva recentna pristupa temi moderniteta unutar tzv. paradigme film-grad-modernitet i filmološkog opisa vernakularnog modernizma. Ukazivanje na analitički potencijal tih teorija u artikuliranju filmskih i kinematografskih činjenica praćeno je i kraćim analizama (gradskih simfonija, hrvatskih nijemih dokumentarnih filmova, amaterskih filmova Oktavijana Miletića).
Na temelju tih zaključaka su u drugom dijelu rada promišljani i razrađeni filmološki pristupi mrežnim naracijama. Mrežna naracija (engl. network narrative) je ustaljen naziv za vrstu filmske priče, posebno frekventnu od ranih 1990-ih, koja spaja više međusobno neovisnih ili samo tangencijalno povezanih priča. Uz dosadašnje filmološke pristupe fenomenu, u fokusu je analize i do sada neobrađeni odjek forme u suvremenom švedskom filmu. Zadnje je poglavlje posvećeno filmovima Roya Anderssona koji su u malom broju postojećih analiza dominantno čitani u ključu (vernakularnog, švedskog) moderniteta.
Razrađujući te uvide, zaključna analiza naracije i „filmskih slika“ Anderssonovih filmova polazi od analogije s (klasičnim filmskim) tabloima. |
| Sažetak (engleski) | The research focus of this dissertation is twofold; the first part presents a comparative analysis of several paradigms of modernity in film theory, while the remaining chapters analyze the proliferation of “network narratives” in contemporary cinema, focusing on their previously unexamined presence in the post 1990s Swedish cinema. The final segment draws on these theoretical and analytical insights, as well as existing (sparse) scholarly work on the director Roy Andersson, to offer a closer reading of his films.
The widespread topic of modernity in contemporary film theory, appearing predominantly in analytical and interpretative works rather than methodological discussions, calls for a comparative study of different paradigms. After describing pioneering works in early film theories, focusing on Kracauer’s film theory of modernity in the first chapter, the second chapter presents several paradigms of modernity in contemporary film studies (the revisionist history of early cinema, followed by a discussion of the “modernity thesis”, an overview of the “cinema-city-modernity paradigm” and the notion of vernacular modernity or modernism). These various attempts to make a transition from “film theory” to “cinema theory” and to address the questions of intermediality and discursive networks of modernity also form the methodological basis for the discussion of network narratives in the following two chapters.
Network narrative is a type of storytelling that combines several largely independent plotlines and its popularity in post-1990s global cinema has been the subject of substantial scholarly interest (Bordwell, Tröhler, Altman, Azcona, Elsaesser, Cameron etc.). After discussing the dominant interpretative frameworks (postmodernity, intermediality, postclassical narration etc.), the thesis focuses on the previously unexplored echo of this film phenomenon in recent Swedish cinema. A comparative analysis of around twenty Swedish films (released from 1997 to 2011) shows how they reflect the conventions and proliferation of network narratives on an international scale.
Among few notable exceptions are the films of director Roy Andersson (4th chapter), the existing interpretations of which also revolve around the readings of (vernacular) modernity (Andersson, Dahlén et. al., Brodén). At the same time, the lack of closer analyses of Andersson’s idiosyncratic film style calls for an elaboration of these readings, so the concluding chapter uses an analogy with tableau (as described by Burch, Heath, Deleuze, Bazin, Dalle Vacche, Peucker, Stojanović, etc.) as a starting point for a detailed analysis of Andersson’s films and images |
