Friedberg & Andrew

End of Cinema

Friedburg asks how movies, TV and computer media been altered (Remember that computers haven't always been digital either.. Ed.) by digital technologies. She then goes on to say that its not just digital technologies that have impacted, and that changes have hit these industries before. TV has been hit with many changing factors to its spectatorship. Cable TV, VCRs and even the humble remote all have had a major effect on the way TV has been viewed. She goes on to breakdown the effects of the coming of all these technologies and the impact they have had on both the TV networks and on their audience. She then goes on to say that the same thing now applies to the film with the advent of digital. These controls have now been moved out of the hands of the projectionist and into the hands of the owner of a DVD player, particularly one with a remote in their hand. Of course subsequent innovations in web technology has meant that her findings are even more true today and because of this that we need to re-evaluate not only film theory. Also spectatorship needs to be revisited because the screens by which we watch video all have changed too with the advent of digital projectors, LCD screens, Flat screens, iPods (bet she didn't see that one coming) and so on.

Adaptation
Dudley argues that pretty much everything is an adaptation of something else and that there are basically 3 modes of adaptation. Borrowing, which means taking extensively from a previous work, is the most common form. Trainspotting would be an example. However, Romeo & Julliet set in 1990s Miami with a heartthrob actors playing the leads would probably more likey to be considered by him as an 'intersecting' adaptation, in that the movie faithfully stays true to Sheakspeare's original dialogue even though it set 400 years later, and in America.
Dudley then says that the third mode, fidelity of transformation, is probably the most tiresome of discussion. How well it stays true to the original meaning of the originating text is just one of the factors, and that is fairly easy to see. How its fidelity of spirit, tone, imagery, values etc is much more difficult to qualify.

he concludes that adaptations, which are not only works of art in their own right, but that inform us of the cultures that creat them.