Director: Jacques TourneurCast: Simone Simon, Kent Smith, Tom ConwayWith Universal knocking out horror films like there was no tomorrow, RKO tasked producer Val Lewton with creating some similar action. The results were not what the studio expected. Far from the monster mash they'd asked for, Cat People opted for more psychological chills, and a still surprising concept centred on a woman who's afraid to consummate her marriage because of her belief that sexual climax will turn her into a panther. Paul Schrader's '80s remake took full advantage of the modern potential for FX and erotica, but Tourneur's more subtle scares are all about stalking and shadows.Read The Empire Review
Director: Robert EggersStarring: Anya Taylor-Joy, Ralph Ineson, Kate DickieWith its meticulous period setting and language, The Witch comes across as much like The Crucible as it does your average demonic possession horror. In fact, there's really nothing average about The Witch at all: a devastating psychological ordeal that works as well taken at face value (the goat IS the Devil) as according to more complex theories. The cryptic events are never fully explained, leaving The Witch ambiguously unsettling.Read The Empire Review
Director: Neil MarshallCast: Shauna Macdonald, Natalie Mendoza, Alex ReidSomewhat like Aliens, Neil Marshall's masterstroke here is in keeping the monsters off screen for a good hour. And after the almost unendurable cave-bound claustrophobia of the first half, it's almost a relief when they finally show up to provide a more solid, familiar focus for the audience's fear. Before that comes an unbearably tense series of character clashes and potholing injuries: a pressure-cooker building to a head of steam that brutally climaxes with a shocking accident and the full reveal of... well, we won't spoil it for those who haven't explored the depths themselves. From then on it's intense action all the way to a devastating conclusion. American audiences got an upbeat ending from which the sequel continues. Here in the UK, the final moments are horrifyingly bleak.Read The Empire Review
Director: Alfred HitchcockCast: Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, Vera MilesImagine a trip to see Psycho in 1960. Its deliberately oblique marketing, fronted by Hitchcock himself, would have prepared you for a motel to feature prominently but not much else. The opening 20-odd minutes must have seemed like a pretty standard noir set-up, with Janet Leigh eloping with a bunch of money and the tantalising possibility of a new life that lasts precisely as long as her next trip to the shower. Then came the full-bore shock of that brutal knifing, each stab driven home by Bernard Herrmann's jarring score, unexpected and almost entirely without precedent. Audiences must have wondered if it wasn't Hitch himself who, in the nicest possible way, was the real psycho here.Read The Empire Review
If you have not previously registered for an account, please do so by clicking on the registration link below. To fully utilize the capabilities of the BSA Brand Center, you must be logged in every time you use the tool. This will allow you to customize and download \"Dynamic Templates\" for your specific marketing needs. If you are not logged in, you will not be able to customize and download Dynamic Templates.
This paper focuses on different types of agreement asymmetries within the DP in which postnominal modifiers exhibit full agreement while in prenominal modifiers agreement can fail in different ways. The main lines of the optimality-theoretic proposal in Bonet, Lloret & Mascaró (2015) are followed, but it is shown, through a comparison of two Northern Italian varieties, that their constraint set cannot account for varieties of Friulian, where the plural exponent fails to surface in plural contexts. It is argued that one of their constraints must be split into two separate ones, a strictly phonological constraint, Max(segment), on the one hand, and, on the other, a constraint on exponence, Max-M[F], proposed by Wolf (2008).
While in many Romance languages there is generally full agreement in gender and number within the DP, some varieties show agreement asymmetries, under specific conditions. The example in (1), corresponding to the Cazet subvariety of Fassan Ladin (Rasom 2008), shows feminine plural agreement on the noun and postnominal modifiers, while only feminine agreement is present in prenominal elements. In (1) the noun and the agreement markers appear in boldface.
Crucially, the impoverishment rule in (20) does not affect the set of nouns that include agua, arma, or área, in the context of [PLURAL]. Therefore, the presence of the features [PLURAL] and [FEMININE] on the noun, turns CONC(F,PL) into a fully relevant constraint, violated twice in (25c), where the feature [FEMININE] of the noun is not present on its modifiers. The ranking of CONCORD(F,PL) above *FEM causes the candidate with full agreement (25b) to beat the candidate with partial agreement (25a). The prenominal elements in (25a, c) also violate MATCH, not included in the tableau, because the values for gender between these elements and the noun are contradictory.
In (28c), there is a fatal violation of the highly ranked constraint MAX(SEG), because the [PLURAL] feature that was assigned syntactically to the postnominal adjective has been deleted.7 The candidate with full agreement, (28b), violates only one of the constraints, *PL, but it does so in more instances than the winning candidate, (28a). The constraint MAX(MPH) is violated by the prenominal adjective in (28a) and (28c), because it lacks a value for number; in (28c) there is a second violation of MAX(MPH) because the feature [PLURAL] that appears in the input for the postnominal adjective is missing in the output. The rankings CONCORD(F) >> *FEM but *PL >> CONCORD(PL) cause full feminine agreement but only partial plural agreement.
In many agreement patterns within the DP, there is postnominal full agreement, while prenominal agreement often fails. The split concord view in BLM2015 has been assumed in the analysis of Northern Italian varieties. The comparison between the Cazet subvariety of Fassan Ladin and the FO variety of Friulian (as well as early stages of acquisition in Fassan Ladin) has shown that the distinction between deletion of a segment and lack of exponence for a morphosyntactic feature cannot be encoded within the same constraint, MAX(SEGMENT), as proposed in BLM2015. This is based not only on conceptual grounds, because the constraint is mixing different types of relations, but also on empirical grounds, because it gives rise to a ranking paradox in FO. As argued, MAX(SEGMENT) must exclusively make reference to deletion of segments, a strictly phonological operation, which has been renamed MAX(SEGMENT)T for the sake of clarity. The relation between a morphosyntactic feature and its exponent, a Vocabulary Item in Distributed Morphology terms, has been captured through the constraint MAX-M[F], proposed in Wolf (2008), Vocabulary Items themselves being part of GEN. 1e1e36bf2d