圖書館

ABSTRACT

THE STUDY BUILTS ON BATEMAN AND SCHMIDT’S (2011) AND TSENG’S (2009) RESEARCH ON FILM AS A FORM OF “CINEMATOGRAPHIC DOCUMENT,” AND CONTINUES THEIR EFFORTS TO CONSTRUCT A SEMIOTIC MODE OF FILM. THE AUTHOR RECOGNIZES THE COMPLEXITY OF UNDERTAKING RESEARCH IN THE DOMAIN OF SEMIOTIC DISCOURSE. THIS STUDY ARGUES THAT AS FILM ANALYSIS IS ABOUT WAYS OF SEEING AND SYNTHESIZING DIFFERENT CINEMATIC STYLES, STRATEGIES; LEARNT CINEMATIC CONVENTIONS AND REFLECTIVE VIEWING IS IMPERATIVE. THE INTERACTION OF ROBUST MULTIMODAL RESOURCES, WELL-DEFINED ANALYTIC UNITS, BASED ON DEPENDABLE MODELS, AND CONDUCTED THROUGH A DISCURSIVE PROCESS SHOULD ALIGN TO PRODUCE FRUITFUL FILMIC DISCOURSE. THE STUDY PREMISED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT FILM IS MORE THAN A “SELF-ENCLOSED SIGNIFICATION SYSTEM” BUT A CRUCIAL “CULTURAL PRACTICE” THAT “REFLECT AND INFLECT CULTURE.” TAKEN TOGETHER, THIS VIEW UNDERSCORES THE IMPORTANCE AND INTERACTIVITY OF CINEMA, CULTURE AND SOCIETY. TO THIS END, THE STUDY CONTRIBUTES TO FILMIC MEANING MAKING, THE NEW HONG KONG CINEMA, AND FINALLY, THE PRESENT STUDY INVARIABLY SERVES AS A FORM OF “SOCIAL DOCUMENT” OR “CULTURAL ARTIFACTS” IN ITS EXPLORATION OF HONG KONG EVER CHANGING IDENTITY, CULTURE AND MOODS.