Abstract
Abstract: The article analyzes the political and theoretical potentialof cinematographic language to express and rebuild the relationship between sexual and gender differences. As cultural products, the three films analyzed - A Casa Assassinada (1972), Sunday, bloody Sunday (1971) and Les Amities Particulières (1964) - allude to feminist issues of the time, as well as instigating a reading of gender beyond the narratives, by historicizing the visibility of the female body, heteronormativity, and the subversiveness of forbidden loves as represented through the films’ structure. The text argues, from a queer perspective, that the aesthetic nature of twist cinema, within the limits of each style and period, was precisely the boldness to run risks in its visual grammar, not making political concessions in challenging the moral canons of current society.
Highlights
The article analyzes the political and theoretical potential of cinematographic language to express and rebuild the relationship between sexual and gender differences
It is important to highlight the place this filmoccupies in the history of cinema and in the constitution of a visual sensitivity in film producers and viewers[29]. My argument in this reflection on gender, queer criticism and cinema as political media and art is that the boldness and what I call twist cinema do not follow thesame aesthetics, nor do they constitute a single political position
The three films, of different geographical origins and with distinct aesthetic affiliations, were chosen because they have been underestimated in terms of their potential for displacing and subverting the conventions of visual culture, as they screen plots and characters with sexualities and gender performances outside hegemonic norms
Summary
This article analyzes the political and theoretical potential of film language as a mechanism of production/ dissemination of images and imagination. It considers film as an integral part of the great media device of making (in)visible[1] existing and/or idealized ways of life. One of the political potentials that stands out from the very start is precisely to bring to the big screen the visibility of what seemed intimate and restricted to the interiors (of houses, bodies, institutions), disclosing this intimacy to the gaze of a heterogeneous audience, and exposing it in a political way. There is a resonant atunement in the camera turns that provides a critical perspective in relation to modern subjectivities (and oppressions and hierarchies) and to the feminist claim of the end of the 1960s (the private is political)against the domestic violence intrinsic to the patriarchal structure and values of the nuclear family
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
