Talk:Third Cinema

So, am I correct in understanding:

first cinema -- studio production

second cinema -- independent director

third cinema -- socialist effort

--Elijah 20:11, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

yep i think so.

---

NO NO NO, you're so wrong. Third Cinema has a close relation to socialist efforts through the political views of the filmmakers, but the films are not political acts themselves. Glauber Rocha was strongly a leftist (at least at the beginning and the middle of his carrer), but his films were praised by filmmakers such as Luchino Visconti as not only political but also poetic and reflexive in their own way. When Third Cinema directors claim not to be part of what they call Second Cinema, it's not because they reject independent filmmaking (many of these directors were independent), nor they reject the idea that a film should not be just a merely political effort but also a work of art. The point is that they reject this independent/artistic approach when it's not closely related to politics in a more objective way. If you just call their films "socialist efforts", it sounds like they didn't care about cinema as a form of art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.206.76.122 (talk) 10:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Category "women screenwriters" up for discussion

Thought people interested in this article might like to know that Category:Women screenwriters is being considered for deletion. — scribblingwoman 02:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Fanon quote

The Fanon quote in the original Spanish version of the manifesto is "hay que descubrir, hay que inventar" – "we must discover, we must invent". Discuss is not among the meanings of descubrir, so the quote in the English translation is a mistranslation. While the quote has a prominent position, being up in the article's lead, it does not have a clear role in the present version of the article. Rather than correct it, I've taken the simple approach of editing it away.  --Lambiam 08:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)