The Directory of World Cinema update

Intellect have just published the third printed volume in the Directory of World Cinema series, which focuses on the cinema of Australia & New Zealand. For those of you who aren't familiar with the project, the Directory of World Cinema aims to play a part in moving intelligent, scholarly criticism beyond the academy. Each volume of the Directory provides a culturally representative insight into a national or regional cinema through a collection of reviews, essays, resources, and film stills highlighting significant films and players.

As well as a printed series, part of the project is an online repository made up of reviews submitted by members. Although anyone can be a member and submit a review, these reviews are compiled along with other resources into regional or national groupings and then edited by an expert in the field to produce a volume, which is first published as a free pre-print pdf and then as a printed book.

Although academic in focus (and standard - all volumes are peer-reviewed) the directories are somewhat of a departure from Intellect's usual film titles, and they are certainly a unique set of publications. As such, we thought it would be appropriate to post this review written by Roy Stafford, originally published by POV in August. We feel that Roy has in many ways got to the bottom of what Intellect is trying to achieve through the Directory series. 

'Perhaps the most interesting of Intellect’s wide range of new ventures is the World Cinema Directory [or the Directory of World Cinema}. This ambitious project promises the publication of a series of ‘directories’ covering all the main film industries – either as single country or regional volumes. The first five directories cover Japan, American Independents, Australia/New Zealand, Russia and African Cinema. There are many similar guides already published, so what makes the Intellect project different?'

The directories represent collections of new material written by a varied group of contributors, including younger academics from around the world and some film journalists alongside one or two more established academic writers. This is intended to give the directories a more modern and accessible feel. The process of recruiting writers and developing content is novel. Anyone can offer to contribute or even edit a directory after first registering with Intellect and submitting examples of previous work. Once the editorial process is underway, contributions are published online and anyone registered can view them and comment – rather like an academic version of IMDB. Once the editors decide that they have enough material for a complete directory, it is designed, typeset and published as a free-to-download pdf. This ‘window’ remains open for a couple of months or so and then it closes. After this the directory becomes available as both a hard copy for sale and a digital library copy, also for sale. If the process works, Intellect will have utilised the idea of (suitably moderated) UGC – User Generated Content. This sounds like a very good argument for Web 2.0., offering a more focused and better regulated version of a Wikimedia entry.

But what exactly appears in each directory? At the time of writing three directories are available – the Japanese and American Independents are now in print form and the Australia/New Zealand directory is on free download [replaced by Directory of World Cinema: Russia]. Individual items from the Russian and African directories are viewable online. The pattern appears to be that each directory comprises sections organised mostly by genre, within which are entries on individual films with a focus on specific filmmakers. The chosen directors are a mixture of ‘classic’ names and contemporary figures. There are also some slightly longer essays on institutional or cultural issues. The essays run to perhaps 1500-2000 words and the entries on individual films to around 400. This means that the directories score on accessibility – nothing is overwhelming – but perhaps loses on offering useful detail on specific film titles. I’ve looked through two of the directories so far and reviewed them in detail

I’m a great believer in free material online and this seems like a project that every film and media teacher should at least check out – both as a publishing process and a source of background information. If you have specialist knowledge of your own, you might also want to register and offer your services.'

To find out more, and download a FREE copy of the Directory of World Cinema: Russia (Nov, 2010), visit and experience global culture through the magic of film...

Posted by James Campbell at 13:13 (1) comments
Share this:   ShareMore
Your tags: Please login or register if you don't have a user account.
Post a comment
Valor Alexander  Said...

Cınema is sınama (: test, experience at lingua turkish)

By cause of different, geographic, culturel, historical, autantic, spesific reasons; the differents countries can do and make different artistic culturel activations or realisations by different methotes or mediums. There can not be lived the all kind of them at every where or at every times. The all altenative or similair the artistic things must not be together too. These type life style practices consumed the all the culturelity last quarter century. some countries can be at avant as tecnic or contenu at televisions althought begin to visional arts after the others. Or one underdeveloped country can be more touristic by expositings and festivals. The one mannership can be common general handmade or fabricational art at other countries. Some spesific arts of one countries or centuries can be lived during schools lectures practices at other continenta. If there are increases at television industry or airplanes produces by links; it means that these developments can do artificialificeted after or before their lived. The life materials must not endly finish due to one another country. Especially the small and middle countries are out of these obligations. If there is not life materialities how can we say ly, lies anymore at a lot of countries ? Or are the life livings some humanistic practices under camera registratings instead of godal systematic consciences? The every meats, foods are not obligation, as  list at the tables of every culturel provincia or country for the intelligencia. It is like unobligation of completings or finishing the plates, even as for only experiment or test a little . The cinema filming sector had made our lifes documentaire serilities that is against to secret life obligation under controls. The arts can not be put in order to line for every countries. It is better noticed to these type realities. It means that we must control the suitances and not admit or accept the social, numeric applications as obligation of departmental subjective universialities. Ocüler cultist or optimist populer pubilicities can not punishmental.

Valor Alexander; criticer, editor.

October 24, 2010 23:51