Notes

Introduction: The Remake Paradox

1. Søren Kierkegaard, “Repetition, A Venture in Experimenting Psychology”,in The Essential Kierkegaard, ed. by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 108.

2. Encore Hollywood: Remaking French Cinema (London: BFI, 2000), 3.3. Robert Eberwein suggests a fully preliminary taxonomy of the different kinds

of remakes in “Remakes and Cultural Studies”, in Play It Again, Sam: Retakeson Remakes, ed. by Andrew Horton and Stuart Y. McDougal (Berkeley and LosAngeles, and London: University of California Press, 1998), 28.

4. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 214.

5. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:Continuum, 2009), xix. Emphasis added.

6. Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition (London and New York: Continuum,2011), 51.

7. Difference and Repetition, xix.8. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? (Winchester and Washington: Zero

Books, 2009), 24.9. Deleuze: The Clamour of Being, trans. by Louise Burchill (Minneapolis: The

University of Minnesota, 2000), 17.10. Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences (New York and London:

Routledge, 2004), xi.11. “Twice-Told Tales”, in Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice, ed. by

Jennifer Forrest and Leonard R. Koos (Albany: State University of New YorkPress, 2002), 50.

12. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and BarbaraHabberjam (London: Continuum, 2008), xii.

13. Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image (London: Reaktion Books,2006), 85.

14. “Series Foreword”, in The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two,ed. by Alenka Zupancic (Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 2003).

15. Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Cinema, ed. by Ian Buchanan and PatriciaMacCormack (London and New York: Continuum, 2008), 11.

16. “Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories andOther Writings, ed. by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: PenguinClassics, 2000), 65.

17. Philosophy in the Present, ed. by Peter Engelmann, trans. by Peter Thomas andAlberto Toscano (Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press, 2010), 13.

18. “Indiana Jones Rides Again”, The Guardian (May 2004), first published inVanity Fair as “Raiders of the Lost Backyard”, at www.guardian.co.uk/film/2004, retrieved 13 August 2009.

181

182 Notes

1 Shot for Shot Remakes

1. The Death of Cinema: History, Cultural Memory and the Digital Dark Age(London: BFI, 2001), 99.

2. Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise: From Carmen to Ripley (Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press, 2006), 121.

3. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:Continuum, 2009), 153.

4. Difference and Repetition, 154.5. “The tale Parfit tells: A Wittgensteinian use of film and literature to question

Analytic metaphysics of personal identity”, at www.rupertread.fastmail.co.uk/Parfit, retrieved 03 February 2013.

6. Philosophy in the Present, ed. by Peter Engelmann, trans. by Peter Thomas andAlberto Toscano (Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press, 2010), 5.

7. “The tale Parfit tells”.8. Cited in François Truffaut, Hitchcock, rev. ed. (London: Simon and Schuster,

1983), 94. Other directors who have done something similar include FrankCapra, (Lady for a Day, remade as Pocketful of Miracles), and Howard Hawks(Ball of Fire, remade as A Song is Born).

9. Difference and Repetition, 300.10. The Tyranny of Choice (London: Profile Books, 2011), 93.11. “Taking another Stab”, in The Village Voice (December 1998), at http://www.

villagevoice.com/1998, retrieved 20 September 2008.12. “Two Essays”, trans. by Arthur B. Evans, Science Fiction Studies, 1991,

18(3), 312.13. Difference and Repetition, 14.14. The Moment of Psycho: How Alfred Hitchcock Taught America to Love Murder

(New York: Basic Books, 2009), 70.15. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud:

Volume VII (1901–1905), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage,2001), 20.

16. The Metastases of Enjoyment: On Women and Causality (London and New York:Verso, 2005), 134n. The connection is to Munch’s The Scream.

17. “Film Notes”, Funny Games (Michael Haneke, Austria, 2006), 1.18. “God from the machine”, a plot device in which a narrative prob-

lem is abruptly resolved by a contrived and unexpected intervention, asif divine. Perhaps in this case, we should substitute “diable [devil] exmachina”.

19. “Fun and Games: On Michael Haneke’s 2007 Remake of his 1997Funny Games” (August 2008), issue 61, at brightlightsfilm.com, retrieved08 March 2013.

20. “Dead Again: Michael Haneke‘s ‘Funny Games’ ”, Indiewire, (11 March 2008),at www.indiewire.com, retrieved 12 September 2012.

21. “Funny Games”, Variety (20 October 2007).22. “Dead Again”.23. Ibid.24. How to Read Kierkegaard (London: Granta Books, 2007), 16.25. Cited in Peter Hallward, Badiou: A Subject to Truth (Minneapolis and London:

University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 107.

Notes 183

26. The comma does some important work here, providing a nice counterpointto the maxim that “nothing happens twice”, as in the Heideggerian sensethat “one cannot cross the same river twice”.

27. Fragments: Cool Memories III, 1990–1995 (London and New York: Verso,2007), 33.

28. Filmosophy (London and New York: Wallflower Press, 2006), 132.29. Cinema after Deleuze (London and New York: Continuum, 2012), 9.30. “Dead Again”.31. Cited in Donald Spoto, The Dark Side of Genius: The Life of Alfred Hitchcock

(London: Collins, 1983), 419.32. Hollywood Cinema, 2nd ed. (Malden, Oxford, and Victoria: Blackwell,

2011), 354.33. Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York and

London: Routledge, 2008), 234.34. Film Remakes (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), 58.35. Cited in Verevis, Film Remakes, 71. However, as Thomas Leitch points out,

this is already a contradiction in terms, since “the most faithful homagewould be a re-release.” See “Twice-Told Tales”, in Dead Ringers: The Remakein Theory and Practice, ed. by Jennifer Forrest and Leonard R. Koos (Albany:State University of New York Press, 2002), 47.

36. Fragments, 33.37. Over Her Dead Body: Death, Femininity and the Aesthetic (Manchester:

Manchester University Press, 1992), 324.38. Speaking in video documentary short, “Psycho” Path (D-J, USA, 1999).39. Cited in Deleuze, Difference and Repetition, 162n.40. Difference and Repetition, 162n.41. Haneke points out that “because of the German speaking cast, the origi-

nal film worked only on the arthouse circuit”, an observation echoed byHamish McAlpine, the producer of the remake, who, while noting that thefilm had been something of a cause célèbre in Europe, pointed out that itmade “something like $5,732” in the US, and that “if it had been an enor-mous success in America, then there wouldn’t be much point in doing aremake.” Thus the entire point of the remake was, effectively, to introduce“American” audiences to an original they never saw.

42. “Marion Crane Dies Twice”, in Monstrous Adaptations: Generic and ThematicMutations in Horror Film, ed. by Richard J. Hand and Jay McRoy (Manchesterand New York: University of Manchester Press, 2007), 148–9. Is this transi-tion from depth to flatness not why all of the Psycho sequels feature somemoment in which the scene transitions from black and white to colour? Psy-cho II, Psycho IV: The Beginning, and the failed television spin off, Bates Motel,transition into colour through the opening credits. Psycho III features a hal-lucinatory jump cut in which Norman fantasises in black and white aboutkilling a woman in a café. Anthony Perkins, who directed Psycho III himself,reportedly wanted to make the entire film in black and white, but Universalopposed it. If he had gotten his wish, perhaps this transitory feel in the serieswould have been lost.

43. “Hack Job” (25 December 1998), at www.jonathanrosenbaum.com, retrieved12 April 2012.

44. Speaking in “Psycho” Path (D-J, USA, 1999).

184 Notes

45. Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise, 18.46. Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image (London: Reaktion Books,

2006), 86.47. Hitchcock’s Films Revisited (London: Faber and Faber, 1989), 109.48. Cited in Stephen Rebello, Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho (New York:

Harper Perennial, 1991), 190.49. The Logic of Sense, trans. by Mark Lester with Charles Stivale, ed. by

Constantin V. Boundas (London: Continuum, 2009), 8.50. The Logic of Sense, 41.51. “The Texture of Performance in Psycho and its Remake”.52. The Logic of Sense, 251.53. A Long Hard Look at “Psycho” (London: BFI, 2002), 124.54. Less than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism (London and

New York: Verso, 2012), 14.55. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two (Cambridge and

London: The MIT Press, 2003), 144.56. Difference and Repetition, 36.57. “Practice Makes Imperfect”, Reverse Shot, 2008, (22), at www.reverseshot.com,

retrieved, 24 May 2008.58. Cited in The Logic of Sense, 38.59. Ibid., 40.60. Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed. by Donald A. Yates and

James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000), 69.61. “Preface”, trans. by Sherry Mangan, in Jorge Luis Borges, Labyrinths, 12.62. 1998, 250. Konigsberg is clearly recalling Voltaire’s statement that “Si Dieu

n’existait pas, il faudrait l’inventer”, translated as “if God did not exist,it would be necessary to invent Him”, Epître à l’Auteur du Livre des TroisImposteurs.

63. “Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories andOther Writings, ed. by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: PenguinClassics, 2000), 66.

64. “Pierre Menard”, in Labyrinths, 68.65. The Metastases of Enjoyment, 32.66. “Kafka and His Precursors”, in Labyrinths, 236.67. Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English, trans. by Bruce Fink (New York

and London: W. W. Norton, 2006), 502.68. Cited in Truffaut, Hitchcock, 138. A MacGuffin is usually a small object sought

after by the protagonist and antagonist, thereby stimulating the action, butwhich, in itself, is of no relevance whatsoever (for example, the lighter inStrangers on a Train, or the wedding ring in Rear Window).

69. Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (London: Vintage, 2007), 88–9.70. Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and

Barbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1987), 7.71. Difference and Repetition, 1.72. “Practice Makes Imperfect”.73. Of Grammatology, trans. by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (Baltimore and

London: Johns Hopkins Press, 1997), 144–5.74. Difference and Repetition, 24.75. Ibid., 5.

Notes 185

76. The Psychoses, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. by Russell Grigg (New Yorkand London: W. W. Norton, 1997), 242.

77. Badiou: A Subject to Truth, 14.78. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 15.79. “Some Thoughts on Hitchcock’s Authorship”, in Alfred Hitchcock Centenary

Essays, ed. by Richard Allen and S. Ishii Gonzalès (London: BFI, 1999), 29.80. “400 Screens, 400 Blows – Going Psycho”, Cinematical, (30 October 2008), at

www.cinematical.com, retrieved 07 January 2009.81. Écrits: A Selection (London: Routledge, 2003), 142.82. Dialogues, 8.83. On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge, ed. by Jacques-

Alain Miller, trans. by Bruce Fink (New York and London: W. W. Norton,1999), 58.

84. The Sublime Object of Ideology (London and New York: Verso, 2008), 92.

2 Transnational Remaking

1. “Avatars of the Tortoise”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed.by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000), 237.

2. On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge, ed. by Jacques-AlainMiller, trans. by Bruce Fink (New York and London: W. W. Norton, 1999), 8.

3. For example, if presented with two photographs of a glass, one in whichthe glass is smashed, and one in which it is whole, the order in which theyare presented is irrelevant. No one draws the conclusion that the smashedglass was made whole. Nonetheless, in thermodynamics, physical processare theoretically fully reversible, irrespective of the law of entropy. In relationto the film, everything “begins” in the womb if one goes far enough backin time or space, hence, the close up at the end of the film on a poster forStanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey.

4. Fragments: Cool Memories III, 1990–1995 (London and New York: Verso,2007), 61. In English in the original.

5. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two (Cambridge andLondon: The MIT Press, 2003), 10, 147.

6. The Shortest Shadow, 147.7. On Feminine Sexuality, 7–8, 8n.8. The Shortest Shadow, 148, 146–7. One is tempted to cite David Fincher’s The

Curious Case of Benjamin Button, in which the hero is born an old man, andages backwards, dying chronologically at 84 years of age, but physically as aninfant. Throughout the film, Benjamin is in love with Daisy. However, in thefirst half of the film he refuses her affections on account of her youth; inthe second half of the film he leaves her on account of his increasing youth;the pivot in the film comes when Benjamin and Daisy meet at a comparablephysical age, whereupon Daisy falls pregnant with Benjamin’s child.

9. “The Vanishing”, The Washington Post (05 February 1993).10. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts

(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008), 1.11. Besides, does not Deleuze characterise his relationship with Guattari in such

terms? In Negotiations, he explains that he and Guattari relate to one anotherin a series of “negotiations”, where

186 Notes

we do not work together, we work between the two [ . . . ] never in thesame rhythm, we were always out of step: I understood and could makeuse of what Félix said to me six months later; he understood whatI said to him immediately, too quickly for my liking – he was alreadyelsewhere.

See Negotiations 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1995), 17. Deleuze characterises this as his working on theultra flat surface of “white walls” against Guattari’s working on the supergravitational pull of “black holes”.

12. “French Film Remakes”, Contemporary French Civilisation, 1989, 13(1), 33.Paul Schiff, producer of The Vanishing remake, wanted an American toremake Spoorloos, but Sluizer, along with the author, Tim Krabbé, of thenovella on which the film was based, held the rights. Hence, Sluizer managedto fend off the mysterious “health problems” that stopped Coline Serreauremaking her own 3 hommes et un couffin.

13. Film Adaptation (London: Athlone, 2000), 8.14. “Adaptation, Fidelity, and Gendered Discourses”, Adaptation, 2011, 4(1),

28–37.15. Philip Horne, “Something Happened”, The Guardian (04 October 2008), at

www.theguardian.com, retrieved 20 October 2010. We could add Univer-sal to the list, who were no less guilty when they stopped distributingHitchcock’s Psycho up to a month before the release of Gus Van Sant’s ver-sion. However, Hitchcock himself bought all of the copies of Robert Bloch’snovel to stop readers from discovering the twist at the end, so perhaps noone is innocent of this.

16. “The Best French Films You’ll Never See”, The New York Times (30 October1994).

17. Forestier, cited in Durham, Double Takes: Culture and Gender in French Filmsand their American Remakes (Hanover: University Press of New England,1998), 180.

18. “Psycho”, The New Yorker (1998), at www.newyorker.com, retrieved 05January 2009.

19. “The Vanishing”, Chicago Sun Times (February 1993), at rogerebert.suntimes.com, retrieved 09 November 2008.

20. Cited in Mimi Avins, “A Dutch Director Trafficks in a Bit of Deja Voodoo”,The New York Times (14 February 1993), 20.

21. Speaking on The Vanishing.22. Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice (Albany: State University of

New York Press, 2002), 8. Marc Foster’s Stranger Than Fiction provides theperfect narrative accompaniment to this fantasmatic “happy ending overharsh reality” sensibility in Hollywood, where a famous author is provideda choice: either she can kill off the protagonist of her novel and confirm itas her magnum opus, but live with the consequence of killing a real man; orshe can have a happy ending and save this man’s life, but consign her mas-terpiece to the status of popular fiction. She chooses the latter and ruins herbook and reputation, making Foster’s Stranger Than Fiction a comedy ratherthan a drama.

23. “The Vanishing”.

Notes 187

24. Being and Event, trans. by Oliver Feltham (London and New York: Contin-uum, 2010), 99.

25. Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism (Durham and London: DukeUniversity Press, 2003), 58.

26. How to Read Lacan (London: Granta Books, 2006), 19.27. “Twice-Told Tales”, in Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice, ed. by

Jennifer Forrest and Leonard R. Koos (Albany: State University of New YorkPress, 2002), 57.

28. Don Quixote: Which was a Dream (New York: Grove, 1986), 33.29. Blanchot writes that “they never cease to die, and they never succeed in

dying.” Cited in Deleuze, The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas,trans. by Mark Lester with Charles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009), 172.

30. Vanishing Women, 15.31. Encore Hollywood: Remaking French Cinema (London: BFI, 2000), 78.32. “The Most Brutal Film Ever Made. Made Again”, in Esquire (March 2008), at

www.esquire.com, retrieved 02 December 2009.33. Cited in Katey Rich, “Interview: Funny Games Director Michael Haneke”,

in Cinemablend (March 2008), at www.cinemablend.com, retrieved 10December 2009.

34. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, trans. by A. Sheridan(London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1998), 63.

35. The Myth of Sisyphus, and Other Essays, trans. by Justin O’Brien (London:Hamish Hamilton, 1973), 38, 36.

36. Speaking on The Vanishing.37. Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York and

London: Routledge, 2008), 13–14.38. “Ecce Homo”, in The Portable Nietzsche, ed. and trans. by Walter Kaufmann

(New York and London: Penguin Books, 1982), 660.39. The Four Fundamental Concepts, 211.40. The Tyranny of Choice (London: Profile Books, 2011), 125.41. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara

Habberjam (London and New York: Continuum, 2008), 117.42. As well as being identical in the remake, these lines are also repeated near ver-

batim in the otherwise rather poor Neo Noir, 8MM (Joel Schumacher, USA,1999), another film about a man who “wants to know” the whereabouts ofa vanished girl.

43. The Shortest Shadow, 11, 143.44. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 87.45. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi

(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 31.46. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Robert Hurley, Mark

Seem, and Helen R. Lane (London and New York: Continuum, 2004),17–19, 21.

47. “Schizoanalysis and Baudelaire”, in Deleuze: A Critical Reader, ed. by PaulPatton (Malden and Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), 242.

48. The Logic of Sense, 30.49. The Tyranny of Choice, 93.50. Double Takes: Culture and Gender in French Films and their American Remakes

(Hanover: University Press of New England, 1998), 11.

188 Notes

51. Speaking in an interview on The Vanishing (USA, 2003).52. European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood (Amsterdam: Amsterdam

University Press, 2005), 28. Durham also points out that Europeans andAmericans use the word “translation” differently: where Europeans think oftranslating a foreign text into the mother tongue, the Anglo American senseis of translating a foreign text from another language. In Double Takes, 5.

53. “Non, Nosferatu n’est pas mort”, Positif, 460 (June 1999), 97. The example israther ironic given Murnau had illegally adapted his film from Bram Stoker’sDracula without permission from the Stoker estate.

54. Although Bazin calls them “reprises” in his 1951 article.55. “Economy and Aesthetics”, in Dead Ringers, ed. Jennifer Forrest and Leonard

R. Koos, 74. We can suggest the homophony “putting into the States” asappropriate here.

56. “Twice-Told Tales”, in Dead Ringers, 57.57. Double Takes, 200.58. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, ed. by Caryl Emerson and Michael

Holquist, trans. by Vern W. McGee (Austin: University of Texas Press,2004), 7.

59. Cited in Timothy Corrigan, A Cinema without Walls: Movies and Culture afterVietnam (New Brunswick and New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1991), 80.

60. Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (London: TheAthlone Press, 1987), 5.

61. “Cinemas of Minor Frenchness”, in Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Cin-ema, ed. by Ian Buchanan and Patricia MacCormack (London and New York:Continuum, 2008), 90.

62. “The Concept of a National Cinema”, Screen, (1989), 30(4), 36.63. Encore Hollywood, 78.64. Cinema 2: The Time-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta

(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 145, 208.65. “The Vietnam Oscars”, Vanity Fair (March 2008), at www.vanityfair.com,

retrieved 07 June 2013.66. Lost Illusions: American Cinema in the Shadow of Watergate and Vietnam 1970–

1979 (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press,2000), 6, xvii.

67. Ibid.68. Forrest and Koos, Dead Ringers, 6.69. Simulacra and Simulation, trans. by Sheila Faria Glaser (Michigan: University

of Michigan Press, 2009), 47.70. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Trans-culturation (London: Routledge, 1995),

6–7. Also, following Lúcia Nagib’s repositioning of Hollywood as a “cin-ema among others” David Martin-Jones suggests that Hollywood should beconsidered “one more player (albeit a very dominant one) alongside myr-iad cinemas of varying scale and influence”. See Deleuze and World Cinemas(London and New York: Continuum, 2011), 5.

71. “Virgin Spring and Last House on the Left”, in Play It Again, Sam: Retakes onRemakes, ed. by Andrew Horton and Stuart Y. McDougal (Berkeley and LosAngeles, and London: University of California Press, 1998), 169.

72. Film and Nationalism (New Brunswick, New Jersey and London: RutgersUniversity Press, 2002), 5–6.

73. Translator’s note, in Jacques Lacan, On Feminine Sexuality, 8.

Notes 189

3 The Vicious Circles of Postmodern Representations

1. Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle, trans. by Daniel W. Smith (London: Contin-uum, 2008), 23.

2. The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters (London andNew York: Verso, 2007), 53. And, can we not extend Žižek’s analysis to TheTenant, imagining a variation in which, having continually messed up hisrelationship with Stella, Trelkovsky finally manages to settle down with her,thus ending his suicidal repetition of Simone’s fate?

3. The Portable Nietzsche, ed. and trans. by Walter Kaufmann (New York:Penguin Books, 1982), 101–2.

4. Nietzsche, Vol. II: The Eternal Recurrence of the Same, trans. by David FarrellKrell (New York: Harper and Row, 1984), 25.

5. The Myth of Sisyphus, and Other Essays, trans. by Justin O’Brien (London:Hamish Hamilton, 1973), 96–9.

6. “Either/Or, A Fragment of Life”, in The Essential Kierkegaard, ed. by HowardV. Hong and Edna H. Hong (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 70.

7. “Either/Or”, 67.8. Cited in John D. Caputo, How to Read Kierkegaard (London: Granta Books,

2007), 33.9. Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation, trans. by Daniel W. Smith (London and

New York: Continuum, 2010), 20.10. The Myth of Sisyphus, 19.11. The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas, trans. by Mark Lester with

Charles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009), 169, 173–4.12. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, trans. by A. Sheridan

(London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis,1998), 26.

13. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008), 52. In this sense there issomething quite exceptional about David Lee Fisher’s shot for shot remakeof The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, in that it incorporates all of the scenery fromthe original film using digital effects and green screen. The original is famousfor a scene in which the somnambulist, Cesare, slides along what is clearlya two-dimensional painted background. Fisher’s use of green “screen”, inthis sense, approximates the spatial flatness of a film made almost a centurybefore.

14. The Logic of Sense, 329.15. Postscript to the Name of the Rose (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,

1984), 67–8.16. How to Read Kierkegaard, 16.17. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:

Continuum, 2009), 1. Emphasis added.18. Difference and Repetition, vii.19. Difference and Repetition, 154.20. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud:

Vol. VII (1901–1905), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage, 2001), 205.21. Deleuze and Film, ed. by William Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press, 2012), 13.22. Francis Bacon, 20.

190 Notes

23. Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan Through Popular Culture(Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1992), 144–5. We must complement the pointin “Lamb to the Slaughter” with the “Eureka!” moment in Frenzy. Havingbeen stumped by the identity of the serial killer, Chief Inspector Oxford isserved gourmet French cuisine by his wife, to his evident distaste. At the pre-cise moment the inspector spits out part of the inedible pig trotter his wifehas served him, he also “spits out”, so to speak, the solution to his murderinvestigation. The scene is ridiculous, and yet it resonates perfectly with thenotion of spitting out the bone stuck in the throat – the object causing animpasse – in order to speak the truth. Lacan describes this truth as “the objectthat cannot be swallowed, as it were, which remains stuck in the gullet of thesignifier. It is at this point of lack that the subject has to recognize himself.”See The Four Fundamental Concepts, 270.

24. Francis Bacon, 43.25. Deleuze, Difference and Repetition, 303–4, 297.26. Žižek also suggests that when Marion checks in to the Bates Motel, and

she hesitates before writing her name and the city from which she comes,Norman also briefly hesitates before picking the cabin into which he willput Marion. “While Marion hesitates as to which town to write (which lieto tell), Norman hesitates as to in [sic] which unit to put her (if it’s 1, thismeans that he will be able to observe her secretly through the peephole)”.See “Is there a Proper Way to Remake a Hitchcock Film?”, Lacanian Ink, atwww.lacan.com/hitch, retrieved 02 April 2012.

27. The Logic of Sense, 51.28. The Four Fundamental Concepts, 184.29. Francis Bacon, 21.30. Difference and Repetition, 37.31. Germinal Life: The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze (London and New York:

Routledge, 1999), 18.32. Almost identical dialogue can be found in David Lynch’s Blue Velvet, in

which a wannabe detective, Jeffrey Beaumont, is challenged by his girl-friend, Sandy, who can’t “figure out” if he is a “detective or a pervert”, theanswer to which even he seems unsure, replying, “well, that’s for me to knowand for you to find out”. Steve and Jeffrey are, we must conclude, “pervertdetectives”.

33. “Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher Film”, in Screening Violence, ed.by Stephen Prince (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 2000), 131. RobertEberwein points out that this is even more complex when the sequel is itselfremade, for example Rob Zombie’s Halloween II, in 2009. See “Remakes andCultural Studies”, in Horton and McDougal, Play It Again, Sam: Retakes onRemakes (Berkeley and Los Angeles, and London: University of CaliforniaPress, 1998), 30.

34. “Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher Film”, 130.35. Difference and Repetition, 162n.36. Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (London: The

Athlone Press, 1987), 131.37. “Secrets of the Psycho Shower”, The Guardian (29 March 2010), at www.

guardian.co.uk/film/2010, retrieved 20 May 2012.38. Fight Club (London: Vintage Books, 2006), 173.

Notes 191

39. “Practice Makes Imperfect”, Reverse Shot, 2008, (22), at http://www.reverseshot.com/article/psycho, retrieved 24 May 2008.

40. Cited in Truffaut, Hitchcock, rev. ed. (London: Simon and Schuster, 1983),282. To return to The Tenant, perhaps the “lightness” of modernity is observ-able simply in the effacement of the actor’s personality from the body ofthe film. Despite starring as Trelkovsky, Roman Polanski removed his namefrom the credits as starring in the role. By contrast, the name “PACINO” waswritten in a bigger font than the title, “CRUISING”, on all promotional mate-rials for the latter, which, in addition to the tagline, which read, “Al Pacinois cruising for a killer”, all indicates that Pacino overdetermines the role (thekiller is, after all, styled after the actor).

41. The Logic of Sense, 171–2. This logic is complicated by Connie Willis’ Sci-ence Fiction novel, Remake, which conceives of a near future Hollywoodwhere the digital recreation of classical movie stars has rendered the use ofmodern actors obsolete (Humphrey Bogart and Marilyn Monroe, for exam-ple, co star in A Star Is Born). This recalls the digital recreation of stars inRobert Zemeckis’ Forrest Gump (including John F. Kennedy and John Lennon,among others).

42. Cited in Zanger, Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise: From Carmen to Ripley(Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006), 108.

43. “The Texture of Performance in Psycho and its Remake”, Movie: A Journal ofFilm Criticism, at www.warwick.ac.uk, retrieved 02 December 2012, 76.

44. “Screen Acting and the Commutation Test”, in Stardom: Industry of Desire, ed.by Christine Gledhill (Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2003), 183.

45. “Remaking Psycho”, in Hitchcock Annual, 1999–2000, 8, 3–12.46. “Some Thoughts on Hitchcock’s Authorship”, in Alfred Hitchcock: Centenary

Essays, ed. by Richard Allen and Ishii Gonzalès (London: BFI, 1999), 30.47. Psycho (London: Robert Hale, 2013), 10. Also, Norman is 40-years-old in the

book, unlike the 28-year-old Anthony Perkins (the same age as Vaughn whenhe played Norman).

48. The Four Fundamental Concepts, 185.49. The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch’s Lost Highway (Seattle:

Walter Chapin Simpson Center for the Humanities, 2002), 12.50. “Taking another Stab”, The Village Voice (December 1998), at www.

villagevoice.com, retrieved 20 September 2008.51. “Psycho”, Chicago Sun Times (December 1998), at rogerebert.suntimes.com,

retrieved 19 May 2008.52. Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York and

London: Routledge, 2008), 235, 149. In Van Sant’s remake, Lila also finds apornographic magazine lazily perched on top of a pile of books, not presentin the original.

53. “Psycho Review”, TV Guide (1998), at www.metacritic.com, retrieved24 May 2009.

54. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two (Cambridge andLondon: The MIT Press, 2003). Summary on back.

55. Nathan Phillips, cited in Philip J. Skerry, Psycho in the Shower: The Historyof Cinema’s Most Famous Scene (New York and London: Continuum, 2009),282–3.

56. Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle, 41.

192 Notes

57. The Indivisible Remainder, 87.58. Cited in Borges, “Avatars of the Tortoise”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories and

Other Writings, ed. by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: PenguinClassics, 2000), 240.

59. Dialogues, 2.60. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi

(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 368.61. Dialogues, 124–5, viii.62. Dialogues, 126–7.63. “The Eye of the Outside”, in Deleuze: A Critical Reader, ed. by Paul Patton

(Malden and Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), 19.64. The Indivisible Remainder, 24.65. Midnight’s Children (London: Vintage, 1995), 165–6.66. “400 Screens, 400 Blows – Going Psycho”, Cinematical (30 October 2008), at

www.cinematical.com, retrieved 03 February 2008.67. Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image (London: Reaktion Books,

2006), 102.68. Death 24x a Second, 87.69. Ibid., 89.70. Ibid., 100–1.71. Film Remakes (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), 75–6.72. Filmosophy (London and New York: Wallflower Press, 2006), 207.73. Death 24x a Second, 101.74. Ibid., 102.75. “Monsters Inc”, The Guardian (05 November 2002), at www.guardian.co.uk,

retrieved 01 May 2012.76. “Monsters Inc”.77. Amy Taubin, “Douglas Gordon”, in Spellbound: Art and Film, ed. by Philip

Dodd and Ian Christie (London: Hayward Gallery and BFI, 1996), 72.78. The Logic of Sense, 3.79. See Linda Williams, “Disipline and Fun: Psycho and Postmodern Cinema”,

in Re-inventing Film Studies, ed. by Christine Gledhill and Linda Williams(London: Edward Arnold; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

80. Death 24x a Second, 86.81. Ibid., 102.82. Difference and Repetition, 303.83. Thus Spoke Zarathustra: Third Part, in The Portable Nietzsche, 333.84. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 329–32.

4 Remake Series and the “Case” of Film Noir

1. Kant’s Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of the Faculties, trans. by HughTomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1995), vii.

2. “High Culture is being Corrupted by a Culture of Fakes”, The Guardian(19 December 2012), at www.guardian.co.uk, retrieved 19 December2012.

3. Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition (London and New York: Continuum,2011), 23.

Notes 193

4. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:Continuum, 2009), xvii. D. N. Rodowick also offers some suggestions onthe order in which Deleuze’s volumes on Cinema should be read: one shouldbegin with The Time-Image, and start reading Chapter 2 and sections two andthree of Chapter 10. Further, one should familiarise oneself with his com-ments on cinema in Negotiations. See Gilles Deleuze’s Time Machine (Durhamand London: Duke University Press, 1997), 211n. Furthermore, Paul Pattonand John Protevi point out that while Deleuze’s works with Guattari weretranslated “quite rapidly” into English, Deleuze’s earlier work was unavail-able until the mid 1990s. See Between Deleuze and Derrida, ed. by Paul Pattonand John Protevi (London and New York: Continuum, 2003), 9. Hence,Deleuze’s work is in some ways doubly “out of joint”, especially for Englishlanguage scholars.

5. Negotiations 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1995), 171.

6. “Remakes and Cultural Studies”, in Play It Again, Sam: Retakes on Remakes,ed. by Andrew Horton and Stuart Y. McDougal (Berkeley and Los Angeles,and London: University of California Press, 1998), 16–17.

7. Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York andLondon: Routledge, 2008), 92.

8. Gilles Deleuze: Vitalism and Multiplicity (London and Sterling: Pluto Press,2003), 36. Deleuze calls this a “natural history”, the benefit of which, hesuggests, is that “it aims to classify types of images and the correspondingsigns, as one classifies animals”. See Negotiations, 46.

9. “The Rebirth of the World: Cinema According to Baz Luhrmann”, inDeleuze and Film, ed. by William Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press, 2012), 75.

10. Philosophical Fragments: Johannes Climacus, Kierkegaard’s Writings, VII, ed.and trans. by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong (New Jersey: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1987), 79, 77, 80, 96.

11. Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (London: TheAthlone Press, 1987), 66.

12. Illuminations, ed. by Hannah Arendt, trans. by Harry Zom (London: Pimlico,1999), 245–56. See also Deleuze’s discussion of revolutionaries in Negotia-tions, 171.

13. The Sublime Object of Ideology (London and New York: Verso, 2008), 58, 153–4.14. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 91–2, 94, 90–1.15. Genre and Hollywood (London: Routledge, 2000), 174.16. “Kill Me Again: Movement Becomes a Genre”, in Film Noir Reader, ed. Alain

Silver and James Ursini (New York: Limelight Editions, 1996), 307–329.Emphasis added.

17. Genre and Hollywood, 173.18. Difference and Repetition, 90–1, 93.19. Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition, 11. Deleuze suggests that Kant does this

himself, by grounding the first two Critiques in the third (leading to thefoundation of Romanticism). See Kant’s Critical Philosophy, xi–xii.

20. Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice (Albany: State University ofNew York Press, 2002), 5.

21. Film/Genre (London: BFI Publishing, 1999), 54.

194 Notes

22. Cited in Linda Ruth Williams, The Erotic Thriller in Contemporary Cinema(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), 104.

23. Fragments: Cool Memories III, 1990–1995 (London and New York: Verso,2007), 32.

24. The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters (London andNew York: Verso, 2007), 23.

25. Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences (New York and London:Routledge, 2004), 58. The Coen brothers’ homage to Classic Film Noir, TheMan Who Wasn’t There, repeats the same idea, except here the protagonist isexcluded from the social order altogether. Ed Crane escapes punishment fora crime he committed and confesses to, but he is eventually executed for acrime of which he is innocent.

26. Femmes Fatales: Feminism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis (New York and London:Routledge, 1991), 1.

27. “Feminine Energies, or the Outside of Noir”, in Deleuze and Film, ed. byWilliam Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh: Edinburgh UniversityPress, 2012), 157.

28. Cinema 2: The Time-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 38, 39–40.

29. First, a “pre-occupation with the re-enactment of the original trauma (inves-tigating the woman, demystifying her mystery)”. Second, the “devaluation,punishment or saving of the guilty object”. In “Visual Pleasure and Narra-tive Cinema”, in Film Theory and Criticism, ed. by Leo Braudy and MarshallCohen, 6th ed. (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 844.

30. There is an entire thread of moments in Neo Noir which connect to Bridget’sproposition, “rape me”, amounting to the vulgar expression of women “ask-ing for it”; the expression is split between two senses. On the one side, it isthe male aggressor who is in control, pushing a vulnerable woman to ask forher own abuse. In Blue Velvet, when Dorothy pleads with Jeffrey, “hit me”,during sadomasochistic sex and in Fatal Attraction, when Alex (the original“bunny boiler”), screams at Dan to “go ahead hit me, if you can’t fuck me,why don’t you just hit me?” In Blade Runner and Wild At Heart, this consentis demanded by the aggressor: in the former, Deckard effectively rapes Rachael,telling her, “Now you kiss me . . . Say ‘kiss me’ ”; in Wild At Heart Bobby tellsLula that he will leave her alone on the condition that she “say, ‘fuck me’ ”.Žižek points out that the latter is the purest expression, since what Bobbyreally wants is her symbolic consent, not the real act itself, to “extort theinscription, the ‘registration’, of her consent” (see The Metastases of Enjoy-ment: On Women and Causality [London and New York: Verso, 2005], 101).Further examples can be found in two ambiguous scenes of anal rape in BasicInstinct and Body of Evidence. Closer to Bridget’s demand, “rape me, Mike”, isKill Me Again, in which a Femme Fatale employs a private detective to helpher fake her own death, asking him: “will you kill me?”.

31. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan (But Were Afraid to AskHitchcock) (London: Verso, 2002), 242.

32. Cinema 2, 109, 68. Does Orson Welles not get his own husbandly revenge forGilda on Rita Hayworth in this film, forcing her to cut short her famous redcurls into a peroxide blonde bob? The Femme Fatale, who Doane portrays ashaving absolute power only insofar as she can “manipulate her own image”

Notes 195

(Femmes Fatales, 106), in this film has her own image manipulated by herhusband.

33. Cinema 2, 135.34. Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Lacan, 271n.35. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 86.36. The Metastases of Enjoyment, 103.37. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, trans. by A. Sheridan

(London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1998), 20.38. Cinema 2, 150, 147, 128.39. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. by Michael Holquist, trans. by Caryl

Emerson and Michael Holquist (Texas: University of Texas Press, 2004), 125.40. The relation, for instance, between and husband and wife, itself requires

relating (“married”); as does the relation that relates, and so on.41. Being and Nothingness, trans. by Hazel E. Barnes (London and New York:

Routledge Classics, 2003), 255.42. Cinema 2, 110. In keeping with the titles explored in Chapter 2, we could

also cite Felix E. Feist’s The Man Who Cheated Himself, a film in which adetective investigates his own cover up, as an analogue here, or Alain Robbe-Grillet’s The Man Who Lies, a film in which the duplicitous narration of itsprotagonist can never be trusted.

43. Fragments, 135.44. Cinema 2, 138, 139.45. Kant’s Critical Philosophy, ix.46. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts

(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008), 46–7.47. On Stories (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), 81.48. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi

(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 212–14.49. Fragments, 33.50. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud:

Vol. VII (1901–1905), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage, 2001), 222.51. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity, 145, 152.52. “Subjective Discourse or the Non-Functional System of Objects”, in Revenge

of the Crystal: Selected Writings on the Modern Object and its Destiny, 1968–1983,ed. and trans. by Paul Foss and Julian Pefanis (London, Sterling and Virginia:Pluto Press, 1999), 36–7.

53. “Avatars of the Tortoise”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed.by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000), 243.

54. How To Read Nietzsche (London: Granta Books, 2005), 54–5, 58.55. Difference and Repetition, 7–9.56. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two (Cambridge and

London: The MIT Press, 2003), 19.57. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 15. A similar sense is contained in the tagline for David

Fincher’s remake of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, a film about filial crimes“buried in the snow” which are revealed “in the thaw”, which announcedthat “Evil shall with evil be expelled”.

58. How to Read Freud (London: Granta Books, 2005), 70.59. Cinema 2, 39, 41. It is little wonder then that Foster Hirsch’s study on Neo

Noir, excellent though it is, fails to encapsulate the genre with its taxonomic

196 Notes

approach. Indeed, the title of the book – Detours and Lost Highways: A Map ofNeo-Noir – becomes somewhat ironic, given Hirsch still manages to get lost,even with a map (possibly more so).

60. Difference and Repetition, 146.61. “Idea and Destination”, in Deleuze: A Critical Reader, ed. by Paul Patton

(Malden and Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), 65.62. Logic and Existence, trans. by Leonard Lawlor and Amit Sen (Albany: State

University of New York Press, 1997), 115.63. The Indivisible Remainder, 83.64. Cited in Joe Hughes, “Schizoanalysis and the Phenomenology of Cinema”,

in Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Cinema, ed. by Ian Buchanan and PatriciaMacCormack (London and New York: Continuum, 2008), 17.

65. Cinema 2, 128.66. Žižek points out that this opening, or cutting open, of cinematic space is a

Lynchian shot, par excellence: in Eraserhead, it is through the radiator; inBlue Velvet, through a severed ear; in Twin Peaks, through an opening in theSycamore trees to the Black Lodge; in Wild At Heart, through the crystal ballfrom The Wizard of Oz; in Mulholland Dr., through the blue box; in INLANDEMPIRE, through the cigarette burn in the fabric.

67. “Fictions of the Imagination: Habit, Genre and the Powers of the False”, inDeleuze and Film, ed. by William Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press, 2012), 139–40.

68. Cinema 2, 128.69. For Žižek, the Möbius loop is the same as the one of psychoanalytic

treatment:

at the beginning, the patient is troubled by some obscure, indecipherable,but insistent message (the symptom) which, as it were, bombards himfrom outside, and then, at the conclusion of the treatment, the patient isable to assume this message as his own, to pronounce it in the first personsingular,

in The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch’s Lost Highway (Seattle:Walter Chapin Simpson Center for the Humanities, 2002), 18. The Classi-cal Hollywood equivalent, of course, is Citizen Kane, whose own “Rosebud”is marked as a similarly nonsensical “contract” in search of its eventualregistration.

70. Cinema 2, 128.71. “Feminine Energies, or the Outside of Noir”, in Deleuze and Film, ed. by

William Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh: Edinburgh UniversityPress, 2012), 166.

72. The Shortest Shadow, 19.73. Organs without Bodies, 112. Other obvious “vanishing mediators” in Lynch’s

cinema, who open the way to making forgers of the protagonists, includethe Cowboy in Mulholland Dr. and the Phantom in INLAND EMPIRE. It isalso worth noting that Deleuze’s figure of the dark precursor is more complexthan Žižek’s figure of the vanishing mediator.

74. Difference and Repetition, 144–6.75. Deleuzism: A Metacommentary (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,

2000), 5.76. Cinema 2, 138.

Notes 197

5 The Other Side of Remakes

1. “Raiders of the Lost Text: Remaking as Contested Homage in Always”, inHorton and McDougal, Play It Again, Sam: Retakes on Remakes, ed. by AndrewHorton and Stuart Y. McDougal (Berkeley and Los Angeles, and London:University of California Press, 1998), 115.

2. Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson andBarbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1987), 20.

3. Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise: From Carmen to Ripley (Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press, 2006), 107. One can add Darren Aronofsky’sdecision to spend a significant part of his meagre budget for Requiem for aDream on buying the remake rights to the Japanese anime thriller, PerfectBlue, just so he could remake one single overhead shot of a woman scream-ing underwater in a bathtub, a shot he has repeated in many of his otherfilms.

4. The Plague of Fantasies (London and New York: Verso, 2008), 197.5. Cinema 2: The Time-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta

(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 22.6. Negotiations, 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York: Columbia Uni-

versity Press, 1995), 38–9. In addition, is not Jean-Luc Godard the greatoptimist of the cinema, suggesting that while photography is truth, “thecinema is truth twenty four times per second”? By contrast, Michael Haneke(who must be cinema’s great pessimist) says “film is 24 lies per second at theservice of truth, or at the service of the attempt to find the truth”.

7. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi(London and New York: Continuum, 2009), 5–7.

8. “Fictions of the Imagination: Habit, Genre and the Powers of the False”, inDeleuze and Film, ed. by William Brown and David Martin-Jones (Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press, 2012), 142.

9. Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York andLondon: Routledge, 2008), 94.

10. Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise, 107, 103–4.11. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:

Continuum, 2009), xix.12. Hitchcock and 20th Century Cinema (London and New York: Wallflower Press,

2005), 3.13. “Marion Crane Dies Twice”, in Monstrous Adaptations: Generic and Thematic

Mutations in Horror Film, ed. by Richard J. Hand and Jay McRoy (Manchesterand New York: Manchester University Press, 2007), 141. Emphasis added.

14. Film Remakes (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), vii.15. Cinema 2, 66.16. Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed. by Donald A. Yates and

James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000), 53. In his preface toCatherine Malabou’s work on Hegel, Derrida suggests that the key figure isas much Freud as it is Hegel. “Freud?”, Derrida writes, “Yes, if this book nevernames him per se, everything in it seems to address him, point by point, ineach and every word.” The Future of Hegel, x.

17. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 234.18. Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences (New York and London:

Routledge, 2004), 58.

198 Notes

19. Haneke, “Interview”, in The Michael Haneke Trilogy (Tartan, DVD, 2006).There is a further connection to be made between the swirling of the waterdown the toilet, and the flapping of the fish on the carpet as they gasp forair. “Is that not the perfect visual image of life and death”, asks the epony-mous Bill in Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill: Vol. 2, that of “a fish flapping onthe carpet and a fish not flapping on the carpet?” Tarantino could have beenreferring in the death of the fish in The Seventh Continent, or, in an analo-gous way, to the lifeless stare of Marion, between “a girl blinking on whitetiles, and a girl not blinking on white tiles”. Further, is this not the perfectvisual image of cinematic time? Death is ordered via a series of images: bloodswirls down the plug hole, torn paper swirls down the toilet, a car sinks intoa swamp. No wonder, then, that the moment these places into which wasteis disposed start to malfunction and spew their contents back, we are dealingwith something quite challenging to cinematic temporality.

20. Cited in Jim Emerson, “Plumbing the Depths: How the Movies Use Plumb-ing as a Pipeline to the Subconscious”, Cinepad, at cinepad.com/plumbing,retrieved 10 December 2010.

21. Cited in Stephen Rebello, Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho (New York:Harper Perennial, 1991), 47.

22. The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema (Sophie Fiennes, UK/Austria/Netherlands,2006).

23. Cited in Psycho in the Shower: The History of Cinema’s Most Famous Scene(New York and London: Continuum, 2009), 291.

24. The shift from a female to a male victim also reflects a gendered division,as Frances Pheasant-Kelly has pointed out, for while “women are killed inbathrooms in mainstream cinema, their death tends to be contiguous withcleanliness rather than dirt”. See “In the Men’s Room: Death and Derisionin Cinematic Toilets”, in Ladies and Gents: Public Toilets and Gender, ed. byOlga Gershenson and Barbara Penner (Philadelphia: Temple University Press,2009), 205. Men, by contrast, tend to be killed in or on the toilet which is adirty “masculine” space, one which threatens the borders of the body withperforation (as well as reminding us of the orifices we disavow).

25. Time Regained (Le temps retrouvé), at ebooks.adelaide.edu.au, retrieved06 July 2012.

26. Cinema 2, 66.27. Slavoj Žižek, The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters

(London and New York: Verso, 2007), 86n.28. The double entendre of being a “bugger” and being “bugg(er)ed” is worth

bearing in mind, as are the words associated with the infamous scan-dal which evoke the toilet/bathroom: wiping evidence, tapping phones,“Watergate”, etc., all of which led to the resignation of President Nixon.However, Coppola insists that the script preexisted the revelation of thescandal in 1972, and that the film simply coincided with the “unfolding”of history.

29. Some critics, however, have suggested that the character “Brill” in Enemyof the State is an older version of Harry Caul, both of whom are played byGene Hackman. Kenneth Turan, for example, writes that Hackman’s Brill is“uncannily like what the actor’s Harry Caul persona in ‘The Conversation’would be like more than 20 hard years down the road”, pointing out that

Notes 199

Brill is clearly an alias, and that his outdated identity badge is actually a shotof Harry Caul from the earlier film. Other connections include the fact thatwhen Congressman Hammersley and Rachel Banks are murdered, it is afterboth utter the line “this conversation is over”. Perhaps in Enemy of the State,then, Harry Caul finally gets his revenge on the authorities, returning himto the active “bugger”.

30. Analogous scenes can be detected in Sleeping with the Enemy and Dirty PrettyThings. In the former, a wife suffering domestic abuse fakes her death andflushes her shorn hair and wedding ring down the toilet, the latter of whichreemerges, signifying her deception. In Dirty Pretty Things, a night clerk ina London hotel finds a blocked toilet in one of the rooms, and discoversthe cause of the blockage to be a flushed human heart, revealing a clandes-tine operation at the hotel where illegal immigrants swap kidneys for forgedpassports.

31. The Address of the Eye: A Phenomenology of Film Experience (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1992), 143.

32. A Long Hard Look at “Psycho” (London: BFI, 2002), 140–1.33. The Moment of Psycho: How Alfred Hitchcock Taught America to Love Murder

(New York: Basic Books, 2009), 71–2.34. The Moment of Psycho, 70.35. Cited in Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho, 191.36. See Philip J. Skerry (2009), and the BFI’s recent press release (2011) connect-

ing the two scenes.37. The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For?

(London and New York: Verso, 2008), 24.38. The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas, trans. by Mark Lester with

Charles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009), 60.39. The Big Necessity: Adventure in the World of Human Waste (London: Portobello

Books, 2009), back cover.40. Cited in Dominique Laporte, The History of Shit, trans. by Nadia Benabid and

Rodolphe el-Khoury (Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 2002), 10.41. Psycho in the Shower, 89.42. “Hack Job”.43. “Practice Makes Imperfect”.44. Enjoy Your Symptom!, 265n.45. Speaking of fabric, whereas Nicole and Christina in the original use the table

cloth to wrap Michel’s body, Nicole and Mia – in a clear nod to Psycho – usethe shower curtain to wrap Guy’s.

46. Simulacra and Simulation, trans. by Sheila Faria Glaser (Michigan: TheUniversity of Michigan Press, 2010), 144–5.

47. “Simulations”, in The Hysterical Male: New Feminist Theory, ed. by ArthurKroker and Marilouise Kroker (London: Macmillan, 1991), 188.

48. Cited in Peter Osborne, How To Read Marx (London: Granta Books, 2005), 1.49. Cited in D. N. Rodowick, The Difficulty of Difference: Psychoanalysis, Sexual

Difference, and Film Theory (New York and London: Routledge, 1991), 135.50. The Tyranny of Choice (London: Profile Books, 2011), 130. An interesting film

exploring this theme is Dumplings.51. How to Read Freud (London: Granta Books, 2005), 111.52. Speaking in “Psycho” Path (D-J, USA, 1999).

200 Notes

53. Cited in Leonardo Quaresima, “Loving Texts Two at a Time: The FilmRemake”, in Cinémas: Journal of Film Studies, vol. 12, no.3, 2002, 73–84 atwww.erudit.org/revue/cine/2002, retrieved 19 May 2014.

54. Cited in Lucy Mazdon, Encore Hollywood: Remaking French Cinema (London:BFI, 2000), 85.

55. Cited in Verevis, Film Remakes, 72.56. “Hitchcockian Suspense”, in Everything You Always Wanted to Know About

Lacan (But were Afraid to Ask Hitchcock), ed. by Slavoj Žižek (London and NewYork: Verso, 2002), 15–16.

57. Cited in Jeffrey Ressner, “Cinema: His Own Private Psycho”, Time,07 September 1998, 152(10), 74. However, Van Sant is not alone here. In Psy-cho II, three years after his death, Hitchcock briefly appeared in silhouettein Norman’s mother’s room where, just before the lights are turned on, hisfamous portly shadow from Alfred Hitchcock Presents can be seen, hidden inthe mise en scène to the far right. Mary then remarks to Norman, “See, noghosts.”

58. “Pass the Pillow”, The Guardian (October 2007), at www.guardian.co.uk,retrieved 11 November 2009.

59. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London:Routledge, 1966), 36.

60. Cited in Frampton, Filmosophy (London and New York: Wallflower Press,2006), 29.

61. Psycho in the Shower, 88.62. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara

Habberjam (London and New York: Continuum, 2008), 122.63. Labyrinths, 77.64. Cinema 2, 145.65. Speaking in Laurent Bouzereau, “The Story of Frenzy” documentary, Frenzy

(USA, 2001).66. Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan, 219. François Truffaut

has pointed out something similar in The Man Who Knew Too Much, thatthe cymbalist who ultimately marks the moment at which the assassinationis to take place is a “dead ringer” for Hitchcock. (Hitchcock, 231) It is alsosomewhat ironic that Žižek points this out, given in his film series The Per-vert’s Guide to . . . Cinema (2006), Ideology (2012), Žižek himself remakes setsand scenarios from classic films, inserting himself in the scene in the placeof the protagonist, in order to undertake a critical analysis.

67. Psychoanalysis and Cinema: The Imaginary Signifier, trans. by Celia Britton,Annwyl Williams, Ben Brewster and Alfred Guzzetti (London: The MacmillanPress, 2001), 92–3.

68. The Moment of Psycho, 69–70.69. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry, 2nd ed. (New York and Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1997), 14–16.70. Negotiations, 133.71. Ibid., 133–4.72. “Avatars of the Tortoise”, in Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed.

by Donald A. Yates and James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000), 243.73. “The World Viewed”, in Film Theory and Criticism, ed. by Leo Braudy and

Marshall Cohen, 6th ed. (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press,2004), 353.

Notes 201

6 The Grandfather Paradox

1. The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas, trans. by Mark Lester withCharles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009), 23. Deleuze’s solution to theproblem of the Möbius band and its paradoxes of sense reflects Hitchcock’s“perfect cure for a sore throat”, a cure of which Norman Bates would haveapproved. “Cut it”.

2. Reed Tucker, “Set Phasers to Dumb”, New York Post (11 May 2013), at www.nypost.com, retrieved 15 May 2013.

3. The Tyranny of Choice (London: Profile Books, 2011), 113–14.4. Interestingly, Bruce Willis, has been in three films in which he plays a char-

acter who encounters an earlier version of himself: Looper, Twelve Monkeys(to be discussed), and The Kid, in which he meets his eight-year-old self ona journey to reconcile the man he dreamed of becoming with the man hebecame.

5. How to Read Derrida (London: Granta Books, 2005), 22.6. Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology (Durham:

Duke University Press, 1993), 131.7. The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two (Cambridge and

London: The MIT Press, 2003), 19.8. The Logic of Sense, 24.9. The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology (London: Verso,

2008), 399–400.10. Simulacra and Simulation, trans. by Sheila Faria Glaser (Michigan: University

of Michigan Press, 2009), 96.11. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by Robert Hurley,

Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane (London and New York: Continuum,2004), 16.

12. Negotiations, 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1995), 6.

13. Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences (New York and London:Routledge, 2004), 48.

14. The Logic of Sense, 250–1. In this sense, would not the perfect ending to Backto the Future have been one in which Marty McFly, unbeknownst to him,actually did consummate the relationship with his mother (perhaps in theback seat of the DeLorean)?

15. Cited in Patton, “Future Politics”, in Between Deleuze and Derrida, ed.by Paul Patton and John Protevi (London and New York: Continuum,2003), 15.

16. The Myth of Sisyphus, and Other Essays, trans. by Justin O’Brien (London:Hamish Hamilton, 1973), 169.

17. Tarrying with the Negative, 240n.18. Speaking in Andrew Abbott, On the Edge of “Blade Runner” (TV Movie, UK,

2000).19. Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and

Barbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1987), 29.20. Cited in The Logic of Sense, 327.21. “Economy and Aesthetics”, in Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Prac-

tice, ed. by Jennifer Forrest and Leonard R. Koos (Albany: State University ofNew York Press, 2002), 81.

202 Notes

22. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud:Volume VIII (1905), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage, 2001),208–9, 210.

23. Cited in Harney, “Economy and Aesthetics”, in Dead Ringers, 79.24. The Logic of Sense, 345–6.25. “Revisionist Herstory: Everywhere is Stepford”, introduction to Ira Levin’s

The Stepford Wives (London: Corsair, 2011), v–vi, viii, ix.26. Marty Roth, “Twice Two: The Fly and Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, in

Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory and Practice, ed. by Jennifer Forrest andLeonard R. Koos (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), 239n.

27. Speaking in Matthies, 2008. We could even suggest a teen version, The Host(2013), as belonging to the series. For more on The Invasion of the BodySnatchers and history, see Chapter 4.

28. Living in the End Times (London and Brooklyn: Verso, 2011), 61.29. An idea which resonates wonderfully with Freud’s question “What good is

a legend to a people that makes their hero into an alien?” See Freud, TheStandard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud: VolumeXXIII (1937–1939), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage, 2001).

30. See Tom Breihan, “Mockbuster Video: How a Ripoff Factory called The Asy-lum makes a Mockery of the Box Office”, Grantland (10 October 2012), atwww.grantland.com, retrieved 09 May 2013. This practice is not particu-larly new. Over 15 variations on the “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” titleestablished a titular link by replicating the first part of the title, “Invasion ofthe . . . ”, with a changing object: “ . . . Body Stealers” (1969), “ . . . Girl Snatchers”(1973), “ . . . Fleshhunters” (1980) and “ . . . Bunny Snatchers” (1992).

31. “The Stepford Wives” (11 June 2004), at www.rogerebert.com, retrieved31 May 2013.

32. Speaking to “Capone” in “Capone With Frank Oz About DEATHAT A FUNERAL, What Went Wrong On STEPFORD, And (Of Course)Yoda!!”

33. The Metastases of Enjoyment: On Women and Causality (London and New York:Verso, 2005), 32.

34. How to Read Lacan (London: Granta Books, 2006), 113.35. Simulacra and Simulation, 3.36. The Logic of Sense, 294–5.37. Germinal Life: The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze (London and New York:

Routledge, 1999), 17.38. The Logic of Sense, 4, 48.39. Organs without Bodies, 157.40. Cited by Žižek, Living in the End Times, 25.41. The Other Side of Psychoanalysis, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. by Russell

Grigg (New York and London: W. W. Norton, 2007), 46.42. Bergsonism, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (New York:

Zone Books, 1991), 37, 56, 103.43. Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London and New York:

Continuum, 2009), xviii–xix.44. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths (Cambridge:

MIT Press, 1986), 162.

Notes 203

45. Dissemination, trans. by Barbara Johnson (Chicago: Chicago University Press,1981), 168.

46. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in National Contexts(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008), 62.

47. The flow of connections from Kathryn’s phrase, “smelling the flowers”,through Proust’s “episode of the madeleine”, to Hitchcock’s Madeleine canbe linked through Chris Marker’s CDROM, Immemory.

48. The Logic of Sense, 87, 90, 299.49. Repetition, in The Essential Kierkegaard, ed. by Howard V. Hong and Edna

H. Hong (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 114.50. Germinal Life, 19.51. Gilles Deleuze’s Time Machine (Durham and London: Duke University Press,

1997), 116.52. Cited in Femi Oyebode, Sims’ Symptoms in the Mind: An Introduction to

Descriptive Psychopathology, 4th ed. (Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier, 2008), 89.53. Gilles Deleuze’s Time Machine, 223n.54. “Time Travel, Primal Scene, and the Critical Dystopia”, in Close Encounters:

Film, Feminism, and Science Fiction, ed. by Constance Penley, Elisabeth Lyon,Lynn Spigel and Janet Bergstrom (Minneapolis and London: University ofMinnesota Press, 1993), 69.

55. Encore Hollywood: Remaking French Cinema (London: BFI, 2000), 4.56. “An Imprint of Godzilla: Deleuze, the Action-Image and Universal His-

tory”, in Deleuze and Film, ed. by William Brown and David Martin-Jones(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2012), 18. Baudrillard says that thereal will never again “have the chance to produce itself”, and yet that isprecisely what Agent Smith in The Matrix (which quotes Baudrillard manytimes) is. Smith is not self reproducing – which requires sex (in which Neoand Trinity engage) – but is self producing. Smith is not sexed, reproductive;he is nuclear, genetic. It is Neo who overcomes the “model in a system ofdeath, or rather of anticipated resurrection” by reintroducing the event ofdeath into the machines: by “killing” Smith, the replicator.

57. The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters (London andNew York: Verso, 2007), 22, 19.

58. Difference and Repetition, 26.59. In Defense of Lost Causes (London and New York: Verso, 2009), 459.60. The Parallax View (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006), 343.61. Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity, 156.62. The Shortest Shadow, 23, 22.63. The Logic of Sense, 328. Such an authentication is indicated also by the shift in

recording medium: from the diegetic tape recorder to the extra diegetic voiceover. Incidentally, the same shift occurs in the Alien trilogy: from Ripley’sfinal recorded message in Alien, to its playback in the sequel, Aliens, and thevoice over from beyond the grave in Alien3.

64. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. byDennis Porter (London: Routledge, 1993), 307.

65. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry, 2nd ed. (New York and Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1997), 3.

66. The Logic of Sense, 169–70.

204 Notes

Conclusion: Encore Deleuze

1. The Plague of Fantasies (London: Verso, 2008), 11–12. It is worth notingthat Borges’ three types of “infinite book” correspond with Münchausen’sTrilemma, in which every proof in the theory of knowledge relies on oneof three forms of problematic argument. First, the “axiomatic argument”which relies on accepted precepts – which it, paradoxically must posit, hencethe existence of the empiricist dilemma. Second, the “regressive argument”,where each proof requires a proof, as we get with the problem of “The ThirdMan” – where a dualistic relationship between two men requires a third manto witness it, and whose subsequent triadic relationship requires a fourth,and so on. Third, “the circular argument” in which the theory and its proofget locked in a vicious circle, a petitio principii (begging the question).

2. On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. by Bruce Fink (New York and London: W. W. Norton,1999), 146.

3. Deleuzism: A Metacommentary (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,2000), 3.

4. “Active Habits and Passive Events or Bartleby”, in Between Deleuze andDerrida, ed. by Paul Patton and John Protevi (London and New York:Continuum, 2003), 151.

5. Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson andBarbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1987), 10.

6. Negotiations, 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1995), 136.

7. The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas, trans. by Mark Lester withCharles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009), 218–19.

8. Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics of the Body (New York:Routledge, 1995), 136.

9. See http://dziga.perrybard.net/, retrieved 26 June 2013.10. The Inhuman: Reflections on Time (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 89–90.11. “ ‘Shit Happens’: Forrest Gump and Historical Consciousness”, Ilha do

Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and CulturalStudies, 1997, 32, 25–6.

Bibliography

Acker, Kathy, Don Quixote: Which was a Dream (New York: Grove, 1986).Allen, Richard and Gonzalès, S. Ishii, Alfred Hitchcock Centenary Essays (London:

BFI, 1999).Altman, Rick, Film/Genre (London: BFI Publishing, 1999).Ansell-Pearson, Keith, Germinal Life: The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze

(London and New York: Routledge, 1999).Ansell-Pearson, Keith, How to Read Nietzsche (London: Granta Books, 2005).Badiou, Alain, Deleuze: The Clamour of Being, trans. by Louise Burchill

(Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota, 2000).Badiou, Alain, Being and Event, trans. by Oliver Feltham (London and New York:

Continuum, 2010).Badiou, Alain and Žižek, Slavoj, Philosophy in the Present, ed. by Peter Engelmann,

trans. by Peter Thomas and Alberto Toscano (Cambridge and Malden: PolityPress, 2010).

Bakhtin, Mikhail, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. by Michael Holquist,trans. by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist (Texas: University of Texas Press,2004).

Bakhtin, Mikhail, Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, ed. by Caryl Emerson andMichael Holquist, trans. by Vern W. McGee (Austin: University of Texas Press,2004).

Baudrillard, Jean, Revenge of the Crystal: Selected Writings on the Modern Object andits Destiny, 1968–1983, ed. and trans. by Paul Foss and Julian Pefanis (London,Sterling and Virginia: Pluto Press, 1999).

Baudrillard, Jean, Fragments: Cool Memories III, 1990–1995 (London and New York:Verso, 2007).

Baudrillard, Jean, Simulacra and Simulation, trans. by Sheila Faria Glaser(Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 2009).

Beckman, Karen, Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism (Durham andLondon: Duke University Press, 2003).

Benjamin, Walter, Illuminations, ed. by Hannah Arendt, trans. by Harry Zom(London: Pimlico, 1999).

Bloom, Harold, The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry, 2nd ed. (New York andOxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).

Borges, Jorge Luis, Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed. by DonaldA. Yates and James E. Irby (London: Penguin Classics, 2000).

Braudy, Leo and Cohen, Marshall (eds.), Film Theory and Criticism, 6th ed.(New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004).

Bronfen, Elisabeth, Over Her Dead Body: Death, Femininity and the Aesthetic(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992).

Brown, William and Martin-Jones, David, Deleuze and Film (Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press, 2012).

205

206 Bibliography

Buchanan, Ian, Deleuzism: A Metacommentary (Edinburgh: Edinburgh UniversityPress, 2000).

Buchanan, Ian and MacCormack, Patricia, Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis ofCinema (London and New York: Continuum, 2008).

Camus, Albert, The Myth of Sisyphus, and Other Essays, trans. by Justin O’Brien(London: Hamish Hamilton, 1973).

Caputo, John D. How to Read Kierkegaard (London: Granta Books, 2007).Cohen, Josh, How to Read Freud (London: Granta Books, 2005).Cook, David A., Lost Illusions: American Cinema in the Shadow of Watergate

and Vietnam 1970–1979 (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University ofCalifornia Press, 2000).

Corrigan, Timothy, A Cinema without Walls: Movies and Culture after Vietnam (NewBrunswick and New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1991).

Deleuze, Gilles, Bergsonism, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam(New York: Zone Books, 1991).

Deleuze, Gilles, Kant’s Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of the Faculties, trans.by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press,1995).

Deleuze, Gilles, Negotiations 1972–1990, trans. by Martin Joughin (New York:Columbia University Press, 1995).

Deleuze, Gilles, Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson andBarbara Habberjam (London: Continuum, 2008).

Deleuze, Gilles, Cinema 2: The Time-Image, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson and RobertGaleta (London and New York: Continuum, 2009).

Deleuze, Gilles, Difference and Repetition, trans. by Paul Patton (London andNew York: Continuum, 2009).

Deleuze, Gilles, The Logic of Sense, ed. by Constantin V. Boundas, trans. by MarkLester with Charles Stivale (London: Continuum, 2009).

Deleuze, Gilles, Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation, trans. by Daniel W. Smith(London and New York: Continuum, 2010).

Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,trans. by Robert Hurley, Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane (London and New York:Continuum, 2004).

Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism andSchizophrenia, trans. by Brian Massumi (London and New York: Continuum,2009).

Deleuze, Gilles and Parnet, Claire, Dialogues, trans. by Hugh Tomlinson andBarbara Habberjam (London: The Athlone Press, 1987).

Derrida, Jacques, Dissemination, trans. by Barbara Johnson (Chicago: ChicagoUniversity Press, 1981).

Derrida, Jacques, Of Grammatology, trans. by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak(Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press, 1997).

Deutsche, Penelope, How to Read Derrida (London: Granta Books, 2005).Doane, Mary Ann, Femmes Fatales: Feminism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis

(New York and London: Routledge, 1991).Dodd, Philip and Christie, Ian (eds.), Spellbound: Art and Film (London: Hayward

Gallery and BFI, 1996).Douglas, Mary, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo

(London: Routledge, 1966).Durgnat, Raymond, A Long Hard Look at “Psycho” (London: BFI, 2002).

Bibliography 207

Durham, Carolyn A., Double Takes: Culture and Gender in French Films and theirAmerican Remakes (Hanover: University Press of New England, 1998).

Eco, Umberto, Postscript to the Name of the Rose (New York: Harcourt BraceJovanovich, 1984).

Elsaesser, Thomas, European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood (Amsterdam:Amsterdam University Press, 2005).

Fisher, Mark, Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? (Winchester andWashington: Zero Books, 2009).

Forrest, Jennifer and Koos, Leonard R. Dead Ringers: The Remake in Theory andPractice (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002).

Frampton, Daniel, Filmosophy (London and New York: Wallflower Press, 2006).Freud, Sigmund, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of

Sigmund Freud: Volume VII (1901–1905), trans. by James Strachey (London:Vintage, 2001).

Freud, Sigmund, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works ofSigmund Freud: Volume VIII (1905), trans. by James Strachey (London: Vintage,2001).

Freud, Sigmund, The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works ofSigmund Freud: Volume XXIII (1937–1939), trans. by James Strachey (London:Vintage, 2001).

George, Rose, The Big Necessity: Adventure in the World of Human Waste (London:Portobello Books, 2009).

Gershenson, Olga and Penner, Barbara (eds.), Ladies and Gents: Public Toilets andGender (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2009).

Gledhill, Christine and Williams, Linda (eds), Re-inventing Film Studies (London:Edward Arnold; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000).

Gledhill, Christine (ed.), Stardom: Industry of Desire (Abingdon and New York:Routledge, 2003).

Grosz, Elizabeth, Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics of the Body(New York: Routledge, 1995).

Hallward, Peter, Badiou: A Subject to Truth (Minneapolis and London: Universityof Minnesota Press, 2003).

Hand, Richard J. and McRoy, Jay (eds.), Monstrous Adaptations: Generic andThematic Mutations in Horror Film (Manchester and New York: ManchesterUniversity Press, 2007).

Heidegger, Martin, Nietzsche, Vol. II: The Eternal Recurrence of the Same, trans. byDavid Farrell Krell (New York: Harper and Row, 1984).

Horton, Andrew and McDougal, Stuart Y. (eds.), Play It Again, Sam: Retakes onRemakes (Berkeley and Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press,1998).

Hughes, Joe, Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition (London and New York: Contin-uum, 2011).

Hyppolite, Jean, Logic and Existence, trans. by Leonard Lawlor and Amit Sen(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997).

Kaufmann, Walter (ed. and trans.), The Portable Nietzsche (New York and London:Penguin Books, 1982).

Kearney, Richard, On Stories (London and New York: Routledge, 2002).Kierkegaard, Søren, Philosophical Fragments: Johannes Climacus, Kierkegaard’s Writ-

ings, VII, ed. and trans. by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong (NewJersey: Princeton University Press, 1987).

208 Bibliography

Kierkegaard, Søren, The Essential Kierkegaard, ed. by Howard V. Hong and EdnaH. Hong (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000).

Klossowski, Pierre, Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle, trans. by Daniel W. Smith(London: Continuum, 2008).

Krauss, Rosalind, The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986).

Kroker, Arthur and Kroker, Marilouise, The Hysterical Male: New Feminist Theory(London: Macmillan, 1991).

Lacan, Jacques, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. byDennis Porter (London: Routledge, 1993).

Lacan, Jacques, The Psychoses, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans. by Russell Grigg(New York and London: W. W. Norton, 1997).

Lacan, Jacques, The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis, trans. byA. Sheridan (London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis,1998).

Lacan, Jacques, On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge, ed. byJacques-Alain Miller, trans. by Bruce Fink (New York and London: W. W.Norton, 1999).

Lacan, Jacques, Écrits: A Selection (London: Routledge, 2003).Lacan, Jacques, Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English, trans. by Bruce Fink

(New York and London: W. W. Norton, 2006).Lacan, Jacques, The Other Side of Psychoanalysis, ed. by Jacques-Alain Miller, trans.

by Russell Grigg (New York and London: W. W. Norton, 2007).Laporte, Dominique, The History of Shit, trans. by Nadia Benabid and Rodolphe

el-Khoury (Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 2002).Lyotard, Jean-François, The Inhuman: Reflections on Time (Cambridge: Polity Press,

1991).Maltby, Richard, Hollywood Cinema, 2nd ed. (Malden, Oxford, and Victoria:

Blackwell, 2011).Marks, John, Gilles Deleuze: Vitalism and Multiplicity (London and Sterling: Pluto

Press, 2003).Martin-Jones, David, Deleuze, Cinema and National Identity: Narrative Time in

National Contexts (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008).Mazdon, Lucy, Encore Hollywood: Remaking French Cinema (London: BFI, 2000).Metz, Christian, Psychoanalysis and Cinema: The Imaginary Signifier, trans. by Celia

Britton, Annwyl Williams, Ben Brewster and Alfred Guzzetti (London: TheMacmillan Press, 2001).

Mulvey, Laura, Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image (London:Reaktion Books, 2006).

Naremore, James, Film Adaptation (London: Athlone, 2000).Neale, Steven, Genre and Hollywood (London: Routledge, 2000).Orr, John, Hitchcock and 20th Century Cinema (London and New York: Wallflower

Press, 2005).Osborne, Peter, How to Read Marx (London: Granta Books, 2005).Oyebode, Femi, Sims’ Symptoms in the Mind: An Introduction to Descriptive

Psychopathology, 4th ed. (Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier, 2008).Patton, Paul (ed.), Deleuze: A Critical Reader (Malden and Oxford: Blackwell,

1997).

Bibliography 209

Patton, Paul and Protevi, John (eds.), Between Deleuze and Derrida (London andNew York: Continuum, 2003).

Penley, Constance, Lyon, Elisabeth, Spigel, Lynn and Bergstrom, Janet (eds.)Close Encounters: Film, Feminism, and Science Fiction (Minneapolis and London:University of Minnesota Press, 1993).

Pratt, Mary-Louise, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Trans-culturation (London:Routledge, 1995).

Prince, Stephen (ed.), Screening Violence (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press,2000).

Rebello, Stephen, Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho (New York: HarperPerennial, 1991).

Rodowick, D. N., The Difficulty of Difference: Psychoanalysis, Sexual Difference, andFilm Theory (New York and London: Routledge, 1991).

Rodowick, D. N., Gilles Deleuze’s Time Machine (Durham and London: DukeUniversity Press, 1997).

Rushton, Richard, Cinema after Deleuze (London and New York: Continuum,2012).

Salecl, Renata, The Tyranny of Choice (London: Profile Books, 2011).Sartre, Jean-Paul, Being and Nothingness, trans. by Hazel E. Barnes (London and

New York: Routledge Classics, 2003).Silver, Alain and Ursini, James, Film Noir Reader (New York: Limelight Editions,

1996).Skerry, Philip J., Psycho in the Shower: The History of Cinema’s Most Famous Scene

(New York and London: Continuum, 2009).Sobchak, Vivian, The Address of the Eye: A Phenomenology of Film Experience

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992).Spoto, Donald, The Dark Side of Genius: The Life of Alfred Hitchcock (London:

Collins, 1983).Thomson, David, The Moment of Psycho: How Alfred Hitchcock Taught America to

Love Murder (New York: Basic Books, 2009).Truffaut, François, Hitchcock, rev. ed. (London: Simon and Schuster, 1983).Usai, Paolo Cherchi, The Death of Cinema: History, Cultural Memory and the Digital

Dark Age (London: BFI, 2001).Verevis, Constantine, Film Remakes (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,

2006).Williams, Alan, Film and Nationalism (New Brunswick, New Jersey and London:

Rutgers University Press, 2002).Williams, Linda Ruth, The Erotic Thriller in Contemporary Cinema (Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press, 2005).Wood, Robin, Hitchcock’s Films Revisited (London: Faber and Faber, 1989).Zanger, Anat, Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise: From Carmen to Ripley

(Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006).Žižek, Slavoj, Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan Through Popular Culture

(Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1992).Žižek, Slavoj, Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology

(Durham: Duke University Press, 1993).Žižek, Slavoj, Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan (But Were Afraid

to Ask Hitchcock) (London: Verso, 2002).

210 Bibliography

Žižek, Slavoj, The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch’s Lost Highway(Seattle: Walter Chapin Simpson Center for the Humanities, 2002).

Žižek, Slavoj, Organs without Bodies: On Deleuze and Consequences (New York andLondon: Routledge, 2004).

Žižek, Slavoj, The Metastases of Enjoyment: On Women and Causality (London andNew York: Verso, 2005).

Žižek, Slavoj, How to Read Lacan (London: Granta Books, 2006).Žižek, Slavoj, The Parallax View (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006).Žižek, Slavoj, The Indivisible Remainder: On Schelling and Related Matters (London

and New York: Verso, 2007).Žižek, Slavoj, Enjoy Your Symptom! Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out (New York

and London: Routledge, 2008).Žižek, Slavoj, The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting

For? (London and New York: Verso, 2008).Žižek, Slavoj, The Plague of Fantasies (London and New York: Verso, 2008).Žižek, Slavoj, The Sublime Object of Ideology (London and New York: Verso, 2008).Žižek, Slavoj, The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology (London:

Verso, 2008).Žižek, Slavoj, In Defense of Lost Causes (London and New York: Verso, 2009).Žižek, Slavoj, Living in the End Times (London and Brooklyn: Verso, 2011).Žižek, Slavoj, Less than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism

(London and New York: Verso, 2012).Zupancic, Alenka, The Shortest Shadow: Nietzsche’s Philosophy of the Two

(Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 2003).

Index

Note: The letter ‘n’ following locators refers to notes.

Achilles and the Tortoise, 33–7Acker, Kathy, 44actor paradox, 76–7, 191nAlfred Hitchcock Presents, 70Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, 73alternative endings, 1, 152–3,

158–60amor fati, 87–8Ansell Pearson, Keith, 74, 109,

163, 168Antonioni, Michelangelo, 126, 130anxiety of influence, 27–8, 31, 78Arsic, Branka, 178audiences, 3, 9–16, 20–5, 39, 79–80,

100, 105, 128, 167, 177disciplining of, 86–7European vs. American, 42–3, 55,

139, 183n, 188nfirst-time, 24–6, 77–8fourth wall, 16–17, 74home video, 86invention of, 55

auto remaking, 5, 13, 37, 51

background, 95, 189nframing, 31rupture of, 66–7sound, 138, 167–8spatialism, 19, 24

Bacon, Francis, 66, 70–1, 178–9Badiou, Alain, 3–4, 12, 18, 42Bakhtin, Mikhail, 54, 103–4barber paradox, 27Bates Motel, 80Baudrillard, Jean, 18, 35, 108–9,

151, 162crime, 106death, 21, 203nHollywood as lost object, 56–7remainder, 139–40

time, 96world of the doppelgänger, 14

Beckett, Samuel, 18Beckman, Karen, 42–4becoming, 70, 72–4, 81–8, 171–3

breaking, 149–53, 174–5fictions, 144geophilosophy, 81, 90–1mad/pure becoming, 65–7, 82,

86, 163monster/machine, 160–1, 172–3mother, 69, 72, 81, 84, 174–6schizoid, 50simulacrum, 163, 165time-image, 103, 108–11, 173truth, 123

beginning, 24–6, 37, 61, 66, 74–5,80–1, 86, 97, 102, 111–15, 150–1,153, 159, 173, 177–8

Benjamin, Walter, 91–2Benny’s Video, 133–4Bergson, Henri, 89–91, 95, 155, 165Blade Runner, 1, 94, 153–5, 158Blanchot, Maurice, 44Bloch, Robert, 77–8, 136Blood Simple, 137Bloom, Harold, 27–8, 146, 175bluff, 122–3Body Heat, 96, 112–14Borges, Jorge Luis, 4, 126

illusion, 144–6infinity, 177Novalis, 109Pierre Menard, 26–8regresses infinitum, 33

break/breaking, 3–4, 34–6, 44, 57,61–2, 67, 72, 74, 92, 109–11,145–6, 148–53, 168, 173–5,176–7, 179

211

212 Index

break/breaking – continuedbreakdown/break-up, 46–7, 55, 57,

82–3, 94, 142, 161fourth wall, 16–17, 74narrative, 34–6, 51–2, 82–3, 110–11,

129–30, 139philosophical, 3–4, 61–2, 72, 81–2,

145–6, 148–53, 168, 173, 175temporal, 62, 72see also rupture; Scream

Bronfen, Elisabeth, 21Brown, William, 70Buchanan, Ian, 4, 116, 178buggery, 148, 152–3, 175

cameo, 142–4, 156, 200nCamus, Albert, 45–6, 64, 67, 153caricature, 155

see also mimicryCarroll, Lewis, 28Cartesian cogito, 107choice

choice of choice, 48forced, 38, 47–51, 56, 186nRussian roulette, 56Sophie’s, 5, 46, 50, 81see also lethal factor

chronology, 34–5, 38, 41, 43–4, 141Chuang Tzu, 147cinema as metaphor, 83cleanliness/dirt, 129–40, 157, 160,

172, 198ncrime scene, 14–15, 17–18, 22, 25,

130–3, 136–40Mary Douglas, 143see also shower scene; toilet

cliché, 66, 70, 78, 114genre, 126

Clouzot, Henri-Georges, 135–6Cobb, Shelley, 39–40Constantius, Constantin, 1, 21, 168Conversation, The, 126, 129–34, 137–8,

198nCook, David A., 56copies-icons, 163counting, 33, 37, 103, 107, 112

creationcreatio ex nihilo, 151creative power, 109, 146creative reinterpretation, 178–9creature, 26

Crimes of Passion, 65, 78–9critique, Deleuzian, 73Cruising, 74, 137crystal, 101, 113–14, 131, 173cuts, cracks and ruptures, 82–3

see also rupture

dark precursor, 116see also vanishing mediator

death drive, 13, 23, 70, 140–1, 164death’s head, 71–2debt, 109–10, 115declaration of declaration, 20–1, 32,

49, 122, 150–1, 178Deer Hunter, The, 56–7déjà vu, 14, 105deleted scenes, 1, 152–3, 159–60Deleuze’s style, 89–90, 146DeLillo, Don, 85–6del Río, Elena, 98–9, 114–15Derrida, Jacques, 150, 165, 178, 197n

différance, 75, 178future, 153origin, 75relations, 150supplement, 29, 143

deterritorialisation, 50, 55Diabolique, 139Diaboliques, Les, 5, 129, 134–7, 139différance, 75, 178director’s cut, 1, 152–4

see also editing proceduresdisguise, 11, 167

disguised remakes, 125, 197ndistaff side, 176

see also mothersDiversion, 40Doane, Mary Ann, 98Dominion: Prequel to the

Exorcist, 81doppelgänger, 14double, 10–13, 28–9, 77–8, 80, 125–6,

156–7Double Indemnity, 96–8, 112

Index 213

Dupuy, Jean-Pierre, 164, 172Durham, Carolyn A., 52–3

Eberwein, Robert, 90, 93Eco, Umberto, 68–9editing procedures, 43, 142

flashback, 97–8, 110–11, 163see also director’s cut

encore, 23, 176–8, 180Escher, M. C., 72, 153eternal return, 61–6, 69, 72, 81–2,

86–8event, 4, 21, 23–7, 44, 49–50, 61–2,

66–8, 73, 76, 85, 91–2, 96–7, 101,105–7, 110, 150–3, 172, 175, 180

Exorcist: The Beginning, 2, 81

failure, 1, 12, 20, 30, 32, 44, 46, 75,79, 92–3, 111–12, 121, 156, 160,163–4, 178

false, power of the, 68–70, 94, 111–15,124, 146

family, 15–17, 39–40, 50, 62, 78, 82,104, 127, 129, 133, 152, 174, 176

see also Oedipus/oedipalFatal Attraction, 39–40fathers, 121–2, 149–53, 173–5

patriarchy, 87, 97–8, 117, 157Real, 151, 175

faultlines, 57feminism, 157–8, 160filmind, 19Fitzgerald, F. Scott, 82flux, 82fold, 8, 90, 148Fontana, Lucio, 19–20, 24forced choice, 38, 47–51, 56foreignness, 53–4forger, 21–2, 103–6, 109, 113–17, 175,

196nForrest, Jennifer, 41, 57, 96Frampton, Daniel, 18–19, 85free indirect discourse, 89Frenzy, 135–7, 190nFreud, Sigmund, 3, 50–1, 108–10, 178,

197ncastration anxiety, 102civilisation/order, 138–40comic, 46–7, 155

drive, 97, 164; see also death drivefort/da, 45–6housewife’s psychosis, 15primal scene, 170Rat Man, see Rat Manuncanny, see uncannywo es war, 32

Funny Games, 15–18, 24, 45Funny Games U.S., 13, 16–17, 20, 45future anterieur, 48, 154, 166–75

see also perfect tense

Gaslight (1940), 40gender, 36–40, 42–3, 101, 160

distaff side, 176genre, 5, 12, 15–16, 20, 38, 65–8, 75,

94–6, 101, 107, 114, 124–5, 153,155, 157, 160

genre cycles, 1, 96see also noir; Slasher genre

geophilosophy, 91–2ghost hands, 121–2, 134Gilda, 95, 100–1good object, 179Gordon, Douglas, 65, 83–7grandfather paradox, 3–4, 148–53, 176grandmothers, see distaff side; mothersgreat precursor/Great Fucker, 175

see also precursorGround, 24–5, 66–7, 69, 73, 80, 87,

95, 113, 126–7, 151Groundhog Day, 61–7Guattari, Félix, 3, 89, 91, 107–8,

140, 176becoming, 82, 91, 161conjunctive synthesis, 50minor language, 55relationship with Deleuze, 89, 140,

176, 185–6nrhizome and schizoanalysis, 123–5,

151–2

Haine, La, 75–6Hallward, Peter, 26, 30Hamlet, 4, 89, 111Haneke, Michael, 15–21, 24, 45–6,

127, 133happy endings, 38, 41–7, 53, 139, 154,

158–60, 186n

214 Index

heaviest remake, 65, 81–8heaviest weight, 63–5, 68Heidegger, Martin, 14, 63, 183nHeinlein, Robert A., 151Herrmann, Bernard, 30, 145,

167–8Herzog, Amy, 114, 124Higson, Andrew, 55historian’s dilemma, 5, 89, 93–4history/historicism, 4–5, 20, 26, 29,

77, 86, 89–95, 124, 154, 158becoming, 81–3, 89–92, 179–80death drive, 141eternal return, 61film noir, 94–5, 101, 111, 114future, 54, 158geophilosophy, 91–2Kierkegaard (inner and outer

history), 64–6molar and molecular lines, 82

Hitchcock, 77Hitchcock, Alfred, 16, 19–30, 40, 51,

68–70, 72, 78–80, 84–7, 117,121–3, 126–31, 135–9, 142–6,153, 163, 167–8

antipastoralism, 138cameo, 142–5, 156cliché, 70Clouzot relationship, 129, 136Hitchcockian, 117, 136, 144master/precursor, 13, 27, 42, 84–7,

142–5modernity/postmodernity, 3

Hollywood, 3–4, 146–7, 152, 172,188n

break, 3, 56, 94–5, 180Classical, 94, 98, 127, 142, 145,

196neternal return, 61, 64–6Europe, 39, 40–2, 52–7history, 86, 90, 94–5, 114, 121misogyny, 39–40, 42–3, 194–5nMockbuster, 159–601970s (lost illusions), 56–7, 861990s, 139

Home Alone, 15, 67horror vacui, 5, 136, 139Hughes, Joe, 2, 89–90, 95Hume, David, 95, 97

Husserl, Edmund, 25, 73, 151Hyppolite, Jean, 24, 113

I Am Legend, 152, 158–9ideal, 41, 55, 101, 103–4, 164–5

ideal remake, 126–7immanence, 35, 37, 82, 150Inception, 146–7indirect semantic priming, 123–5infinite, 33, 36–8, 44, 47–9, 87, 156,

176–7, 179–80internal limit and external boundary,

26, 125, 133Invasion of the Body Snatchers, 90, 152,

155–6, 158, 161involution, 154–5Irréversible, 34–9, 51

jamais vu, 102, 105Jetée, La, 152, 161, 165–6, 168–9, 173

Kafka, Franz, 27Kant, Immanuel, 89, 95

form of interiority, 107passive syntheses, 89, 113temporal paradox, 107

Kierkegaard, Søren, 5, 21, 83,91–3, 168

choice, 48despair, 46eternity, 64–6history, 91–2nostalgia, 92repetition, 1, 10, 93, 102, 164singularity, 68–9trembling, 178truth, 18, 98

Klossowski, Pierre, 61, 80, 154, 158Koos, Leonard R., 1, 57, 96Koresky, Michael, 17, 19, 25, 29,

76, 139Kundera, Milan, 62–3, 65

Lacan, Jacques, 73–4, 97, 164break/fault, 7, 67, 92counting/relating, 103, 107encore, 176–8, 180failure, 32, 164

Index 215

forced choice, 38; see also choice;lethal factor

fort/da, 45–6infinity, 36–7Lacan’s paradox, 112narrative, 177Other, 33, 36–7, 52perversion, 78–9; see also perversionReal, 47, 93, 123, 175, 190n; see also

fathers; Great Fuckerrelationship with Deleuze, 38repression, 43sexual difference, 33–9, 52; see also

Achilles and the Tortoisestealing nothing, 26, 28wo es war/duty, 31–2wordplay/speech, 30–1, 57

Lady from Shanghai, The, 101language, 16, 44, 124, 138

body, 47foreign, 21, 38, 40, 52–5; see also

mise en étatgendered, 39, 44indirect semantic priming, 123–5Real, 175stammer, 55, 123–4

Last Seduction, The, 95, 99–102, 112,114, 117

Leigh, Janet, 23, 76–7Leitch, Thomas, 3, 43lethal factor, 47–8, 51lines, 82–3Looper, 149–50, 169Loschmidt’s paradox, 34Lost Highway, 95, 112–17, 137,

164, 173lost illusions, 56–7Lynch, David, 95, 112, 115, 117,

137, 164

MacGuffin, 28machines, 19, 162, 169–74

cinematic, 145psychoanalytic, 122schizoanalytic/ becoming, 50–1,

156, 160–1, 171–3see also spiritual automaton

Malevich, Kasimir, 24

Man With a Movie Camera: The GlobalRemake, 180

Man Who Knew Too Much, The, 13, 51,146, 200n

marriage, 64–5, 78, 98–9Marshall, Bill, 55Martin-Jones, David, 37–8, 67–8, 70,

76, 107–8, 166, 172–3maternity/matriarchy, see distaff side;

mothersMatrix, The, 14, 203nMazdon, Lucy, 1, 44, 52, 55, 170, 173Melville, Herman, 178Memento, 34, 95, 104–11, 115, 117Menard, Pierre, 26–31Metz, Christian, 145middle, 34, 97, 173Miller’s Crossing, 137mimicry, 155–6

see also caricatureminor, 4, 38, 51, 55mise en état, 51–5Möbius strip, 5, 26, 113, 148, 172, 176

see also vicious circlemockbuster, 159–60molar, 55, 82, 85molecular, 82, 85Moon, 93–4mothers, 30, 34, 43, 45–6, 50, 79, 133,

151–2, 163, 165, 170, 173–6, 201nloss of/sacrifice, 45–6, 50mother-tongue, 188nPsycho, 15, 20–4, 30, 69, 71–3, 76–7,

84–5, 122, 129, 131, 138, 141,166, 176

see also becoming; distaff sidemovement-image, 83–4, 87, 89, 94,

98–9, 106–8, 111–13, 166, 173see also time-image

Mr Arkadin, 106, 116Mulvey, Laura, 3, 22, 84–7, 99

Naremore, James, 39, 77Nietzsche, Friedrich, 152–3, 173

amor fati, 87appearance, 101, 161declaration, 49, 150; see also

break/breakingdifficulty of, 3

216 Index

Nietzsche, Friedrich – continuedfalse, power of, 68–70future, 109, 173, 177, 179–80gaze/crime, 18immortality/eternity, 47, 133Twilight of the Idols, 164untimely, 79–80, 90see also eternal return; heaviest

weightNoir, 89, 94–117

Classic Film Noir, 5, 94, 97–102, 106,111–13, 115

Hybrid Noir, 95, 109–17Neo Noir, 5, 78, 94–6, 101, 104–5,

110–13, 115, 187nNolan, Christopher, 10, 34Norman Bates, 15, 19–26, 30, 65–73,

76–81, 84, 122, 129, 131–8nothing, 15–18, 20, 26, 28, 30–1, 95,

97, 102, 104, 108

Oedipus/oedipal, 3, 51, 171, 176, 178once-only film, 23original/originality, 9–10, 28, 52,

65–6, 75, 79, 84–8, 93, 108,121–7, 133–4, 145, 152–65, 168,171, 178–80

anteriority, 13, 17, 22, 25–7, 34–5,41, 75, 79–81, 90, 93, 122, 154

betrayal of, 4, 27, 29, 53, 73, 79,138–43, 157–8, 186n

fidelity to, 17–18, 20, 26–7, 32, 65,78–9, 84, 189n

illusion, 10, 22, 26, 45, 52, 57, 69,75, 79, 87–8, 90, 147,164–5, 180

inferiority/superiority of, 13, 20,157–8, 162–3

marketing of, 44–5, 159–61, 171term, usefulness as a, 179

overturning Plato, 152, 165Oz, Frank, 157–8, 161

Palahniuk, Chuck, 76, 157–8palimpsest, 134–5paradox, 5, 14, 33, 37, 52, 73–4,

100–4, 158, 160, 165actor, 76, 191nAlice’s (Carroll’s), 28, 73, 82

barber (Russell’s), 27grandfather, 3–5, 149–53, 169–76Great, 175irreversibility (Loschmidt’s), 34Lacan’s, 112narrative closure, of, 100“Spirit is a bone”, 73transnational, 52twins, 14, 18Zeno’s, 33; see also Achilles and the

TortoiseParnet, Claire, 76, 82–3, 92,

121–2, 154paternity/patriarchy, see fathersPatton, Paul, 69, 153perfect tense, 48, 109

see also future anterieurPerkins, Anthony, 5, 23, 65–6, 68–9,

75–9, 135perversion, 78–9, 123, 126, 133, 163phantom, 74, 99, 164, 200n

phantasm, 109, 153phantasmagoria, 109, 113simulacra-phantasm, 163time-image, 99, 111see also dark precursor, forger

pick-up, 179plagiarism, 27–9, 146Platonism, 152, 162–5, 168Polanski, Roman, 66, 152Pomerance, Murray, 22, 125Postman Always Rings Twice, The,

98, 117postmodern, 5, 36, 57, 68–71, 91, 133precursor, 26–7, 40

dark precursor, 116Great Precursor, 175see also anxiety of influence; master

Prestige, The, 10–12, 14, 42proposition, 17–18, 25, 73, 138, 141,

149, 162, 164, 175Proust, Marcel, 131Psycho (1960), 3–5, 10, 13–14, 19–21,

23–5, 28–9, 40, 65, 69–81, 84–8,121–2, 125–47, 153

Psycho (1998), 13–14, 17–22, 25–6,28–32, 40, 65, 77–9, 125, 138–40,142–3, 146

Psycho II, 122, 131–3, 137, 176, 200n

Index 217

Psycho III, 69Psycho IV: The Beginning, 80psychoanalysis, 110, 121–2, 140

Deleuze’s relationship with, 3, 38,121–2, 140, 178

psychoanalyst, 43Pulp Fiction, 53

Quixote, 4, 26–9

Raiders of the Lost Ark: TheAdaptation, 5

Rat Man, 69Read, Rupert, 12–13reterritorialisation, 51, 57rhizome, 123–4Rodowick, D. N., 169Rosemary’s Baby, 152rupture, 2, 5, 82–3

actor paradox, 76Deleuze’s account of, 82–3, 92see also background; break/breaking

Rushton, Richard, 19, 91Russian dolls, 161, 168

same, identical, similar, 9–10, 11–15,23–6, 29

Sartre, Jean-Paul, 104Schiff, Paul, 41schizoanalysis, 4, 123–4

see also becomingSchrödinger’s cat, 5, 9, 11, 13–14, 49Scream, 65, 68–9, 71, 75–6, 78–9Scream 2, 75–6screaming, 15–16, 41, 66–73, 100,

122, 157sense (as flat), 20–6Seventh Continent, The, 127–8,

133–4Shane, 75–6, 116Shining, The, 16–17shot for shot remaking, 4, 9–10,

13–32, 40, 45, 53, 65, 77–8, 138,146–7, 153

aesthetic concept, 19–20, 24–5,30, 180

choice, 5, 13commutation test, 77ideal remake, as, 126–7, 147

mechanical repetition, 13–14pointlessness of, 30–2, 80, 146

shower scene, 14, 19, 22, 25, 29–30,67–70, 73, 84–6, 122, 126–30,133, 198–9n

Bernard Herrmann’s violins,30–1, 145

see also cleanliness/dirt; cliché, toiletsimulacra-phantasms, 154, 162–3,

165, 168Sisyphus, 63–4Slasher genre, 5, 65–8, 75Sluizer, George, 5, 37, 40–1, 43,

46–7, 52sorcerer’s apprentice, 145–7spatialism, 19, 24spiritual automaton, 19Spoorloos (The Vanishing), 37–8, 40,

43–4, 49–54translation of, 44

Star Trek, 148–9Stefano, Joseph, 128Stepford Wives, The, 1, 152, 155–9,

160–1Sunset Blvd, 141–2suprematism, 24–5swamp, 70–4, 115, 134–40, 198n

swimming pool, 135–41see also horror vacui; toilet

Taxi Driver, 75–6Tenant, The (Le Locataire), 66–7, 73Terminator 2: Judgement Day, 152,

169–75Terminator, The, 5, 152, 169–75third man, 102–6, 109, 137Third Man, The, 102–6Thomson, David, 14–16, 40, 135, 1453 hommes et un couffin (Three Men and

a Cradle), 38Three Men and a Baby, 39–40, 43time-image, 98–104, 108, 111, 113–14

crystal-image, 101, 113–14false, power of the, 94, 111, 114–15genre, 96indirect semantic priming, 123–5passive syntheses, 95, 107, 113–15recollection-image/sheets of the

past, 101, 106

218 Index

time-image – continued“Time is out of joint” (Hamlet), 89,

96–7, 111, 117, 176see also forger; movement-image

toilet, 126–35, 138–40, 198–9nin Classical Hollywood, 127–30money, 127, 134shower scene, 126–33see also cleanliness/dirt; shower

scene; swamptransnational remaking, 37–44, 52–7truth, 18, 93, 98, 100–1, 103–6, 111,

122–3, 147, 156, 164–6, 178, 197ndeception, 99, 107, 113, 162knowledge, 37, 41, 92, 98, 100,

105–8, 110–12, 115, 130, 156real, 18, 30, 151see also false, power of

Twelve Monkeys, 5, 166–924 Hour Psycho, 65, 83–7Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me, 148twins, paradox of, 14, 18

Unbearable Lightness of Being, The,62, 66

uncanny, 140–1, 156, 166concept, 110death, 22, 135, 140–1double, 126new cliché, 70role reversals, 38

untimeliness, 75, 80, 168see also Nietzsche, Friedrich

Usai, Paolo Cherchi, 9Usual Suspects, The, 110–11

Vanishing, The, 38, 43–5, 49–54vanishing mediator, 116, 170, 196n

see also dark precursorvanishing woman, 37, 42–9

magic trick, 179Van Sant, Gus, 13–14, 17–25, 27–31,

40, 65, 125–6, 138–9, 142–7,153, 175

criticism of, 17, 19–20, 23, 30–1,77–9, 139

critical errors, 20–1, 28–9Elephant, 125

master/apprentice, 21, 26–7, 30–1,78, 142–7, 156, 175; see alsoanxiety of influence; sorcerer’sapprentice

Pierre Menard, 28–30plagiarism, 26–9, 31, 146

Verevis, Constantine, 20, 85, 125Vertigo, 5, 152, 161–8vicious circle, 61–2, 67, 80, 148

see also Möbius strip; Nietzsche,Friedrich

virtual intensity, 91–2, 95, 98,101, 109

We Need to Talk about Kevin, 79Wood, Robin, 23wordplay, 30, 123–4, 126, 129–30,

134, 138, 141–2, 146, 153, 170

Zanger, Anat, 9, 22, 40, 61, 122disguised remakes, 125

Zarathustra (Nietzsche), 87–8Zeno’s paradox, 33Žižek, Slavoj, 43, 50, 62–3, 97–8, 100,

126–7, 129–36, 158, 161–2,164–5, 177

Conversation, The, 126deadlock/failure, 47, 78–9, 100,

126–7, 164, 177Deleuze, relationship with, 3, 125,

136, 152, 164–5, 177eternity, 62–3, 80, 133fantasy, 15, 28, 72, 78–9, 162frame, 31, 80, 126–7, 144history, 91–3, 113, 124loss/debt, 102, 110, 133modernism/postmodernism, 70,

129–30, 139narrative, 4, 15, 32, 100–2, 116, 122,

144–5, 153–4, 177, 196nnothingness/void, 28, 102, 136,

139, 151parallax view, 24, 70, 133, 144, 150,

158, 161–2, 164, 177Psycho, 20, 72, 78–9, 129–31, 133,

135, 139, 144–5psychoanalysis, 43, 126, 196nReal/reality, 47, 62, 83, 100,

164–5, 177

Index 219

remakes, 122, 126, 139, 145, 154,158, 200n

temporal loop, 27, 62–3, 113, 124,171–2, 177

vanishing mediator, 116, 144–5Zupancic, Alenka, 36–7, 49–50,

150–1, 173affirmation of affirmation, 49–50background, 24

count for two, 37, 173declaration of declaration, 49–50,

109, 150–1; see alsobreak/breaking

pawning, 110, 115–16sexual difference, 36untimeliness, 79–80; see also

Nietzsche, Friedrichsee also Achilles and the Tortoise