Conceptualizing the Hollywood biopic

Title: Conceptualizing the Hollywood biopic
Source document: Theatralia. 2014, vol. 17, iss. 2, pp. 50-59
  • ISSN
    1803-845X (print)
    2336-4548 (online)
Type: Article
License: Not specified license

Notice: These citations are automatically created and might not follow citation rules properly.

The biopic has been traditionally regarded as a minor, audience-limiting genre. As a consequence of this, producers, directors and actors have tended to avoid this term when referring to their work. This paper discusses how, despite the allegedly minor status of this genre, in recent years a fair amount of Academy Awards ('Oscars') has been awarded to actors and actresses engaged in biopic performances that are celebrated as the highest exercise of acting virtuosity. Since 1998, at least one of the Oscars has been awarded to a biopic performance. In this respect, the film critic Guy Lodge notes that the Academy Awards have gone to performances "calculated as bait, ostentatiously advertising their 'degree of difficulty'". Today, the American academy understands the idea of transformation in literal terms, since the highest aesthetic value is allocated to the reproduction of physical and vocal mannerisms of the persons they impersonate. I approach the contemporary biopic fever from two different but complementary theoretical perspectives, the Prague School research on acting (Zich, Veltruský) and the theory of fictional worlds (Doležel). Finally, because of the cultural and ideological implications of the apparently transparent biopic industry, I engage in a brief philosophical reflection and argue that Hollywood privileges the copy over the simulacrum in a very Platonic fashion.
[1] 81st Annual Academy Awards, Best Actress Award. 2009. Nicole Kidman et al. Kodak Theatre, Los Angeles, USA. Feb. 22, 2009 [accessed Oct. 30, 2013]. Available online at

[2] BINGHAM, Dennis. 2010a. Living Stories: Performance in the Contemporary Biopic. Genre and Performance: Film and Television. Ed. Christine Cornea. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2010: 76‒95.

[3] BINGHAM, Dennis. 2010b. Whose Lives Are They Anyway? The Biopic as Contemporary Film Genre. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Rutgers UP, 2010.

[4] CRUZ, Gilberto. 2008. Q&A Changeling Writer J. Michael Straczynski. Time [online]. Oct. 23, 2008 [accessed Oct. 30, 2013]. Available online at

[5] DOLEŽEL, Lubomír. 1998. Heterocosmica: Fiction and Possible Worlds. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins UP, 1998.

[6] DOLEŽEL, Lubomír. 1990. Occidental Poetics. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1990.

[7] DOLEŽEL, Lubomír. 2010. Possible Worlds of Fiction and History: The Postmodern Stage. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UP, 2010.

[8] ELLISON, Stefan. 2005. Capote. The Film Archives [online]. 2005. [Accessed Jan. 20, 2014]. Available online at

[9] ERICKSON, Jon. Presence. Staging Philosophy: Intersections of Theater, Performance and Philosophy. Eds. David Krasner and David Z. Saltz. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006: 142‒59.

[10] FISCHBACH, Bob. 2011. Oscar Rewards Real-Life Roles. The Omaha World Herald [online]. Dec. 29, 2011 [accessed Oct. 30, 2013]. Available online at

[11] HABERMAS, Jürgen. 2003. Truth and Justification. Trans. B. Fultner. Cambridge, MIT Press: 2003.

[12] JAKOBSON, Roman. 1976. Pëtr Bogatyrëv (29. I. 93‒18. VIII. 71). Expert in Transfiguration. Sound, Sign and Meaning. Eds. Ladislav Matějka. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1976: 29‒39.

[13] LODGE, GUY. 2012. Breaking Oscar's Biopic Addiction. Hitfix [Jan. 31, 2012, accessed Jan. 20, 2014]. Available online at

[14] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1978. Art as a Semiotic Fact. In id. Structure, Sign, and Function. Trans. and ed. John Burbank and Peter Steiner. New Haven and London: Yale UP, 1978: 82‒8.

[15] MUKAŘOVSKÝ, Jan. 1976. On Poetic Language. In id. The World and Verbal Art. Trans. and ed. John Burbank and Peter Steiner. New Haven and London: Yale UP, 1976: 1‒64.

[16] PÉREZ-SIMÓN, Andrés. 2011. The Concept of Metatheatre: A Functional Approach. TRANS- Revue de Littérature Générale et Comparée 11 (2011): 1‒9. [Accessed Oct. 30, 2013]. Available online at

[17] PLATO. Sophist. 1993. Ed. and trans. Nicholas P. White. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishers, 1993.

[18] SLÁDEK, Ondrej. 2006. Types of Worlds: On Relations between the Prague School and the Theory of Fictional Worlds. Style 40 (2006): 3: 210‒20.

[19] VELTRUSKÝ, Jiří. 1964. Man and Object in the Theatre. In Paul Garvin (ed.). A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure and Style. Washington: Georgetown UP, 1964: 83‒91.

[20] VOLEK, Emil. 2012. Theatrology an Zich, and Beyond: Notes Towards a Metacritical Repositioning of Theory, Semiotics, Theatre, and Aesthetics. Theatralia (2012): 2: 168‒85.

[21] ZICH, Otakar. 1931. Estetika dramatického umění: teoretická dramaturgie [Aesthetics of the Dramatic Art. Theoretical Dramaturgy]. Prague: Melantrich, 1931.