{Talkheader} {

WikiProject Films     (Rated Start-Class)
	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Improving this article: See how this article can be improved to B-Class status. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Contents 1 genre 2 Neutral Point of View Discussion 3 Merge with List of movie genres? 4 Bordwell quote 5 Big merge 6 Genre vs. subgenre? 7 Fantasy? 8 Modes vs. Genres 9 Format and Genre 10 Blended genres 11 anonymous editor 12 dont put obscure minor genres here 13 Requested move 13.1 Survey 13.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 13.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 13.2 Discussion 14 "Genre movie" 15 "YUG" 16 Unclear reference 17 Genres according to settings.

[edit] genre

Shouldnt mocumentry be in there?

[edit] Neutral Point of View Discussion

This page has very little to do with genre theory. In fact, it states that "we define Film genre as the categorization of film based upon the subject matter of the film - what it is about," when defining a genre is naturally one of the most highly contended topics in the field. Also "it is due time for some resource to take a firm stand on setting firm boundaries to facilitate understanding" is pretty opinionated.

Agreed. This article does not seem to be from a "neutral point of view" as it's advocating a specific understanding of the term, genre. I put the NPOV template on it so that this may be discussed.--JButler 13:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

---

This article doesn't concern genre film theory per se, does it? Doesn't it concern film genres--and in that case, should its content be on film genres? I would simply move the article myself, but I would like to give the author(s) a chance to reply.

I think it could go both here and the film history page, with different emphasis on each. But no, I'm not the original author; I merely moved it from an inconveniently titled page. Just out of curiosity, what would you put here, if not this? --KQ

I would put it on film genres, which now has just a list of links and no content per se, or perhaps on film genre (which is probably where film genres should point). What I would put in an article called "film genre theory" is information about the field of film genre theory--people, their theories, their jargon, etc. --LMS

Personally, I think this page should be restructured. Many of the genres listed are clearly subgenres. If no one objects, I'll do it myself. --213.169.3.217 21:35, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with List of movie genres?

At first sight this list seems to overlap considerably with List of movie genres. Would there be any objections to my merging them and redirecting one article to another? --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:41, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

• please proceed! Niz 18:30, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
• please proceed! Jahsonic 13:59, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• If so, List of movie genres should be merged into this one, rather than vice versa. The Singing Badger 16:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bordwell quote

I removed the following because the quote on its own out of context makes no sense - what point is Bordwell drawing from this list? Also, the title of the book would be helpful too... The Singing Badger 16:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

The quote evidently comes from "Bordwell, David (1989): Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the Interpretation of Cinema. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press," or at least that's what this paper Introduction to Genre Theory by Daniel Chandler http://www.pragmaticschina.com/Article_Show2.asp?ArticleID=457 says, according to the references list.

[edit] Big merge

all these different articles: Film style Cinematic genre List of film genres Fictional film all overlapping and contradictory and highly confusing for the layman. i suggest *one * single article that has sub-sections for each of these things, in order to give a sensible overview of all these different theoretic definitions for film classification (together with those long list of genres, although are they really necessary if "Category:Film genres" exists? Niz 21:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

disagree with Fictional film, but merged the others.

[edit] Genre vs. subgenre?

There's no mention of subgenres here; sometimes the terms seem to be used interchangably, as with the separate entry for Screwball comedy which is called a genre rather than a subgenre of comedy, whereas the Comedy film entry calls the screwball a type of romantic comedy, and classes the romantic comedy as a sub-genre of comedy (as does the entry for Romantic comedy film). Schizombie 21:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fantasy?

Why is it in Mood and not in Setting like Science Fiction? Jachra 01:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Modes vs. Genres

If we take out "experimental" and "documentary" because they're "modes, not genres", perhaps we should mention this in the article and create a new section or page discussing what a mode is, nay? Esn 17:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Format and Genre

Is format really a proper determinant of genre? I'm questioning the inclusion of animation as a genre. This seems like it would be akin to live action as a genre—and if that's the case, then everything from horror to comedy should be counted as subgenre. According to the article, Format seems an ill fit anyway. The article states: "independent production does not determine a film's storyline" and so "can belong to any genre." The same can be said for animation. I would suggest removing format from the determinants list. - The Dane 00:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I think animation is in here because it's commonly considered a genre, along with independent films,experimental, etc. If we take them out, as I explained above, we should add a section explaining why they were taken out or people will just add them back in. Esn 09:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right, that there should be some explanation. I'm not sure that documentary doesn't fit under the umbrella of genre though - despite feeling pretty secure that animation is no more a genre of film than is color or black & white. Or even silent for that matter. None of those terms describe the kind of story being told, but only the technical aspect of the telling. Just my two cents. -- The Dane 17:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It all depends on how you define "genre". A lot of people in animation don't think that animation should be considered a genre either, but it is something, just like "silent film" is something. The question is, if it's not "genre", what do we call it? "Format", perhaps? Despite the fact that they don't describe the story being told, both "animation" and "silent" are specific and immediately identifiable limitations in the telling of a story. Esn 07:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

In my genre studies class in Film School, we used the word "style" for listing things like animation. Not to be confused with "stylistic filmmaking" like film noir. Anyway, we discussed (for instance) science fiction films wherein some were in the style of animation and some in the style of live-action, and more were a hybrid style, using both. However, I'll admit that while that deliniation worked for the forum of my genre studies class, for the purpose of this article, the word "style" can be a mismatch. I'd like to make a suggestion, but none come to mind at this moment.

Medleystudios72 (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blended genres

Hi, an anonymous editor took out some established, credible mixed genres such as Romantic Comedy and Science Fiction Film Noir. These aren't just hybrids that I just made up...They are established subgenres which are written about by prominent film critics. Arguably we could have the main mixed genresNazamo 21:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] anonymous editor

Dear anonymous editor 82.2.134.162. Your most recent edit gave a misleading (OK, false) edit description. You said the edit was "to avoid the list becoming infinitely long, exclude hybrid genres or subgenres (but add a note about such films), add some explanations and wikilinks)". In fact, it was a total revert to before my edits. Disagree with my edits, change them, re-edit them. Sure, that what Wikipedia is about. But to totally erase all my good faith edits is disrespectful. Was there not one phrase that met your standards? Oh and by the way, I can't check out "your standards" by looking at your other edits, as you are anonymous. You can go and check out all my edits, good, bad, incorrect, etc on my "My contributions" section.Nazamo 20:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] dont put obscure minor genres here

dont put obscure minor genres like "outlaw biker" in the list. it needs to be on the level of "action" or "comedy" or "horror", ie major broad categories. if you want a list of all genres, see Category:Film genres

[edit] Requested move

[edit] "Genre movie"

What is a "genre movie" (the term occurs several times throughout Wikipedia) and does it qualify as a film genre? AxelBoldt 22:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't know if this helps, but in my experience, when someone calls something a "genre movie" they're suggesting something dipping into horror, sci fi, and fantasy. Kind of an "insider" term for fans of those combined genres. I don't know if that would be the correct academic application. Seems to me to be a bit of a misnomer.

Medleystudios72 (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "YUG"

I can find no other references to this 'new english word' on the web - and i certainly have never heard of it. I call Jenkem and am deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.203.93 (talk) 21:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unclear reference

There is a reference given as "Robert Stam, Queer Cinema, 2000, p.14" but I can't find it anywhere. Is it a book reference, magazine reference, or something else? Is the title correct? Is the author correct? Anyone? -- HiEv 11:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed! This is a hopelessly muddled reference, and now it's starting to crop up on other web sites. Completely unacceptable. The closest I can find is the following: Stam, Robert. Film Theory: An Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000. I will change the entry, and plan on visiting the library to check the page number and to confirm that the quotation does indeed come from this book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrowat (talk • contribs) 00:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Stam quotation and reference have been corrected and verified.Mrowat (talk) 16:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Genres according to settings.

NOT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.90.164.58 (talk) 08:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)