Mary Shelley Biopic (2017): A filmic discourse analysis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/cinej.2024.618

Keywords:

Mary Shelley biopic, Filmic analysis, Critical Discourse Analysis, Male domination, Female resistance

Abstract

This work analyzes the discourses that compound Mary Shelley biopic (2017), concerning male domination and female resistance. To do so, the specific objectives are: to verify how this domination permeates the main character with a view to publish her work Frankenstein; identify the elements that cross the relation author-character in the biopic; describe these elements into categories within a filmic discourse analysis. The theoretical-methodology contribution is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), within the dialectical-relational developed by Fairclough (1989; 2001) in conjunction with the filmic analysis. The corpus of the analysis is constituted by 02 long takes. It is used the Bakhtinian categories (2003), which are dialogism, polyphony and alterity, followed by the categories of Fairclough (2001), which are intertextuality and presupposition.

Author Biographies

Thanya Araujo, Universidade Federal do Piauí -UFPI

Master's degree in Communication - Federal University of Piaui

Lívia Fernanda Silva, Federal University of Piaui - UFPI

Managing Director of Center for Open and Distance 

Education – CEAD and Associate Professor of 

Postgraduate Program in Communication / UFPI 

References

Araujo, T., & Silva, L. F. Mary Shelley Biopic (2017): A filmic discourse analysis. CINEJ Cinema Journal, 12(2), 66–92. https://doi.org/10.5195/cinej.2024.618.

Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (trans. and ed. C. Emerson). Minneapolis, Minn.; University of Minnesota Press.

Bingham, D. (1999). “I Do Want to Live!”: Female Voices, Male Discourse, and Hollywood Biopics. Cinema Journal, 38(3), 3–26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1225522.

Ducrot, O. (1987). O dizer e o dito. São Paulo: Pontes.

Fairclough, N. (2001). Discurso e mudança social. Brasília: UNB.

Gubernikoff, G. (2016). Cinema, identidade e feminismo. São Paulo: Pontocom.

Heller, E. (2013). A psicologia das cores: como as cores afetam a emoção e razão. São Paulo: Gustavo Gili.

Holanda, K (org.). (2019). Mulheres de cinema. Rio de Janeiro: Numa.

Hollinger, K. (2020). Biopics of women. Routledge: London and NewYork.

Louro, G. L. (2017). Gênero, sexualidade e educação: Uma perspectiva pós-estruturalista. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.

Mansour, H. (Director). (2017). Mary Shelley. Luxembourg Studio.

Martin, M. (2005). A linguagem cinematográfica. Lisboa: Dinalivros.

Marshall, Mrs. J. (1889). The life & letters of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. London: Richard Bentley & Son.

Nogueira, L. (2010). Manuais de cinema III: géneros cinematográficos. Livros Labcom. ISBN: 978-989-654-042-5

Orlandi, E. P. (1995). As formas do silêncio: no movimento dos sentidos, 3. Campinas, SP: UNICAMP.

Sampson, F. (2018). In search of Mary Shelley. New York: Pegasus Book.

Silva, L; Araújo, T. A interação autor-personagem na cinebiografia Mary Shelley (2017): Percepções de Bakhtin em torno da análise de discurso fílmica. In: Fluxos discursivos na sociedade em rede. Moura, J. B; Magalhães, F. L. J. (org.). São Carlos: Pedro e João, 2021. P. 199-216.

Vanoye, F; Goliot-Lété, A. (1994). Ensaio sobre a análise fílmica, 2. Campinas, SP: Papirus.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-03

How to Cite

Araujo, T., & Silva, L. F. (2024). Mary Shelley Biopic (2017): A filmic discourse analysis . CINEJ Cinema Journal, 12(2), 66–92. https://doi.org/10.5195/cinej.2024.618

Issue

Section

Articles