Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.10> Article
Research Article

The Effectiveness of Ideological Communication in Mainstream Films Based on Semantic Networks --Taking the Chinese and American Movie Reviews of Top Gun: Maverick as an Example

Zhinan XuBeijing Technology and Business University*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

The co-occurrence networks are used as a tool for examining and interpreting discourse analysis to reveal the attitudes and perceptions implicit in film reviews. Based on the self-constructed corpus of online movie reviews in China and the United States, this research generates co-occurrence word-sense networks and summarizes three frameworks: “sequel narrative,” “heroic narrative,” and “military narrative,” and further reveals and explains the ideologies and linguistic features revealed in the different discourse frames. At the macro level, the Chinese and American audiences’ evaluation of the film shows different results of medium and medium-high. At the micro level, corresponding to the three frames, Chinese and American audiences construct images of commercial sentiment films and dramatic action films, national propaganda films and Hollywood hero films, U.S. Air Force propaganda films and U.S. Army recruitment advertising films; under the hero narrative frame, individual heroism and collectivism are realized side by side in the audiences’ discourse; under the military narrative frame, the political identity of transnational narratives is not realized in Chinese audiences.

Keywords: mainstream films; film reviews; semantic network; analysis; ideology
Published: October 31, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/10/20231317
Volume: CHR Vol.10
pp. 193-206
Download PDF

References

  1. Przylipiak, M. The Notion of Mainstream Film in Contemporary Cinema. Panoptikum 2018, No. 19 (26), 14–31.
  2. Zhou, X. Boosting China’s Film Production: An Assessment of the Subsidies for China’s ‘Mainstream Films.’ Global Policy 2020, 11 (S2), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12831.
  3. Althusser, L. On The Reproduction Of Capitalism: Ideology And Ideological State Apparatuses; Verso Books, 2014.
  4. Baudry, J.-L.; Williams, A. Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus. Film Quarterly 1974, 28 (2), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.2307/1211632.
  5. Baumann, S. Intellectualization and Art World Development: Film in the United States. American Sociological Review 2001, 66 (3), 404–426. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088886.
  6. Holbrook, M. B. Popular Appeal versus Expert Judgments of Motion Pictures. Journal of Consumer Research 1999, 26 (2), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1086/209556.
  7. 유경철. The Discussion and Consideration of ‘Chinese Mainstream Film.’ Modern Chinese Literature 2017, 82, 187–215.
  8. Meng, F. Chuan mei shidai wenhua lingdaoquan de chongjian/’Rebuilding the Leadership in Culture in Times of Communication-Media’. Journal of Liaoning University 2004, No. 01, 25–32.
  9. Wu, X.; Xu, S. Comments on Chinese Films Made in the 1990s. Beijing: Culture and Art Publishing House 2005.
  10. Cherneff, J. B. R. Dreams Are Made like This: Hortense Powdermaker and the Hollywood Film Industry. Journal of Anthropological Research 1991, 47 (4), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.47.4.3630352.
  11. Bordwell, D. The Art Cinema as a Mode of Film Practice. Film Criticism 1979, 4 (1), 56–64.
  12. Belton, J. American Cinema/American Culture; New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012.
  13. Romão, A. The Cultural Impact of UNSC Resolution 1325: Fictional Representations of Wartime Sexual Violence. Nação e Defesa 2021, 158 (02), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.47906/ND2021.158.02.
  14. Neve, B. Frames of Presidential and Candidate Politics in American Films of the 1990s. Javnost - The Public 2000, 7 (2), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2000.11008741.
  15. Goodwin, A.; Whannel, G. Understanding Television; Routledge, 1990.
  16. Foucoult, M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison; Vintage, 2012.
  17. Cho, S. E.; Park, H. W. Government Organizations’ Innovative Use of the Internet: The Case of the Twitter Activity of South Korea’s Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Scientometrics 2012, 90 (1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0519-2.
  18. Paul, E. S. Empathy with Animals and with Humans: Are They Linked? Anthrozoös 2000, 13 (4), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279300786999699.
  19. Carnovale, F.; Jin, X.; Arney, D.; Descovich, K.; Guo, W.; Shi, B.; Phillips, C. J. C. Chinese Public Attitudes towards, and Knowledge of, Animal Welfare. Animals 2021, 11 (3), 855. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11030855.
  20. Wei, S. Animal Welfare Legislation in China: Public Understanding and Education. In Animals, Ethics and Trade; Routledge, 2006.
  21. Xu, H. The Possibility and Strategy of Tale Film Series. Beijing:Contemporary Film 2009.