I thought I had posted these a while ago. Not sure how they never made it up on my blog.
2. How is structural film different from the tradition of Deren/Brakhage/Anger, and what are its four typical characteristics?
The modernist movement that Deren, Brakhage and Anger were a part of was more about representing dreams and vision. Structural is a "cinema of the mind father than the eye." The four formal properties of structural film are the fixed camera, loop printing, re-photography, and the flicker effect.
3. If Brakhage’s cinema emphasized metaphors of perception, vision, and body movement, what is the central metaphor of structural film? Hint: It fits into Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde that we have discussed previously in class
The techniques used in structural film are used to induce states of the mind. The metaphor is that of consciousness. Structural film still follows Sitney's argument about the American avant garde representing the human mind, just through different means than the modernist tradition.
4. Why does Sitney argue that Andy Warhol is the major precursor to the structural film?
Warhol as well as Fluxus (which was an influence of Warhol) techniques are the backbone of Structural film. Fixed camera and the idea of letting the film evolving in front of frame spontaneously are common techniques and themes in both.
5. The trickiest part of Sitney’s chapter is to understand the similarities and differences between Warhol and the structural filmmakers. He argues that Warhol in a sense is anti-Romantic and stands in opposition to the visionary tradition represented by psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. But for Sitney’s central argument to make sense, he needs to place structural film within the tradition of psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. Trace the steps in this argument by following the following questions:
a. Why does Sitney call Warhol anti-Romantic?
Sitney says that wahol described himself as "anti-romantic", but what he means in the opposite of Abstract Expressionism, or almost a commentary on the whole romantic movement.
b. Why does Sitney argue that spiritually the distance between Warhol and structural filmmakers such as Michael Snow or Ernie Gehr cannot be reconciled?
c. What is meant by the phrase “conscious ontology of the viewing experience”? How does this relate to Warhol’s films? How does this relate to structural films?
Its the idea awareness to the viewing process in simple terms. Warhols films were often mean to be boring in order to allow one to become fixated on other aspects of the films. Screen Tests allowed the chance to study a person's face when attempting to be still. Structural films like wavelength used this idea with a slow zoom to allow the viewer to become aware of every detail in the mise-en-scene to the most extreme level.
d. Why does Sitney argue that structural film is related to the psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical tradition, and in fact responds to Warhol’s attack on that tradition by using Warhol’s own tactics?
6. What metaphor is crucial to Sitney’s and Annette Michelson’s interpretation of Michael Snow’s Wavelength?
The metaphor is that of all Structural film, consciousness. This idea of the film bingeing the mind rather than the eye is present in wavelength not only visually but audibly with its experimental soundscape.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Structural film part 1 - |ˈstrək ch ərəl|
2. Sitneys says structural film takes these previous concepts of film further into the human mind. Whereas Brahkage was trying to represent vision and Deren was trying to represent dreams, the structural film attempts to recreate consciousness (cinema of the mind rather than the eye). Characteristics include fixed camera, loop printing, re-photography, and the flicker effect.
3. I think sort of hit on this is the last answer. Brahkage’s camera is that of the eye, Structural film makes are one step further back into the brain. Structural film attempts to challenge the conciseness of its viewers through numerous aural and visual cues.
4. Warhol as well as the fluxus filmmakers used many of the same characteristics in their films, just to achieve different products. The filmmaking process was very similar (fixed camera/flicker film) and many fluxus filmmakers actually made their way into structural film in these early years.
( to be continued)
3. I think sort of hit on this is the last answer. Brahkage’s camera is that of the eye, Structural film makes are one step further back into the brain. Structural film attempts to challenge the conciseness of its viewers through numerous aural and visual cues.
4. Warhol as well as the fluxus filmmakers used many of the same characteristics in their films, just to achieve different products. The filmmaking process was very similar (fixed camera/flicker film) and many fluxus filmmakers actually made their way into structural film in these early years.
( to be continued)
Fuses - |ˈbyoōtē|
Fused may have been not only one of the most beautiful films i have ever seen but evoked the most intense emotional response i have ever experienced as well. The sex scene is an interesting thing to take about in conjunction with this film. Hollywood sex scene to me have always seemed so ridiculous in many ways. The music, the framing, the pacing, and then awkward choreographed off beat thrusting. There are few sex scene in the entirety of films I have seen that seem authentic in anyway (most seem to be French New Wave or Neorealist for what i can recall.) Fuses is an experimental documentary, so i guess that would give it so authenticity, but it still seems loosely narrative. There is clear beginning (foreplay) to climax to ending (cuddling) structure. To me the awkward or clumsy moments are the ones that make this film so real and emotional. Besides the fact that this film is manipulated and hand painted and such (which give it a scrap book, nostalgic kind of feeling), the camera work seems very sensory driven much like Brahkage's work. This idea of the camera being the eye of the protagonist comes in and out of this film. Some shots seem to be shot by the two partners who are engaging in the act and some seem to be voyeuristic (filmed by a third party/pornographic style.) The combination of the two types of footage give this internal external rhythm throughout the sexual experience. I think the used of a type of memory drive b-roll cut in and even layers sometimes is very interesting as well. I really loved it. the end.
Nostalgia - |näˈstaljə; nə-|
As I mentioned in class it took me a while to catch onto what was happening with this film. I'm not sure if this has to do with my physical state after traveling for 24 hours straight. I believe I was still trying comprehend the setting and photographs and image of them burning for a while before i started to pay attention to the voice over. Once i started to realized he was talking about the next picture coming up, the new factor made why slowly rotating mind work over time to comprehend what was happening. I remember thinking it was very simple in the beginning but by the end a was going through this complex process of anticipation. I think i was honestly most interested in the period of time when the voice over ended and the pictures remained on screen burning until it was unrecognizable. Before i realized that he was talking about the next picture i found it very arbitrary and boring. Once i figured out the pattern, this time became so important to the film. This gave me a chance to think about exactly what i was about to see. I found it soo interesting how much more important the waiting period was due to this structure.
(lawls) - |ˈidēət|
(lawls) - |ˈidēət|
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Chelsea Girls - |ˈ ch elsē| |gərl|
After the reading the Underground article I was really excited to see Chelsea Girls. I was interested how the DVD version would show the multiple projections and experimental sound design. I was a bit upset to find there was no interplay between the multiple dialogues but after watching a few sections I found it to be effective. The long interviews seemed like a ongoing conversation that i would come in and out of. The second screen served as a kinds of commercial. I never found myself bored with what i was watching and hearing. If i became detached from the interview, I would find myself interested in the visuals on the other side of the screen. The camera work in the screen without sound seemed to be more extreme and visually stimulating than the side with sync sound. I also seemed to compare these interviews to the screen tests. Although there was a lot of camera movement and the subjects were encouraged to talk and engage with the camera, the outcome was somewhat similar. The subjects became awkward and didn't know what to do in front of the camera. On of the subjects even became enraged and lashed out at a woman who seemed to be stealing his lime light. This may have been do to the drugs he shot up earlier in the scene, but i think its interesting that he reacted to extreme. By the end he didn't even know what to say, he wanted to be the focus but once he was alone again, he was at a loss for words, and continued to talk about how he got violent with her almost just to waste time. I found the first interview more visually interesting. I honestly don't even remember what the second screen was showing because i was so engaged with the interview. The man had hard red and blue lights on either side of his face that became very abstracted with the snap zooms and handheld camera movement. This shot would have been interesting enough to stand on its own, unlike the last interview. I think I would find similar trends though the whole film visually and would like to watch the film as a whole.
Monday, February 22, 2010
The Underground - |ˌəndərˈground|
J. Hoberman, Jonathan Rosenbaum, The Underground
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
The Living Theater was a popular experimental film venue in which cinema 16 programed many of their films. The Thalia, The New Yorker, and Bleecker Street Cinema were other East side theaters that offered experimental viewings. The charles was a 700 seat theater which played an array of shows including musicals as well as Hollywood features. The lobby served as an art gallery of local artists as well as concert hall for jazz musicians.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
Mekas used this term to describe the work of Ron Rice, Jack Smith, and Ken Jacobs. This experimental filmmakers made sexual explicit almost absurdist experimental films often using eachother as actors often using improvisation. MEkas called the “Baudelairean Cinema” "A world of flowers of evil, of illuminations, of torn and tortured flesh, a poetry which is at once beautiful and terrible, good and evil, delicate and dirty" in the Village Voice.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
All films had to registered under the City of New York and follow a code of ethics. Many of these underground film wouldn't pass this code, therefore Mekas never attempted to get any kinda of legal license because he didn't believe in the principals of this legal system. Kenneth Anger's Scorpio Rising ran into similar problem all the way across the coast in Los Angeles.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Vinyl was an adaptation the A Clockwork Orange written by Tavel. He only wanted to show the bear essentials of the plot. The film was shot with a single camera set up much like any other aery 1960's Warhol film. Edie Sedgewich wasn't even written into the film, and even showed up after shooting had already begun. Travel says "the camera just went berserk looking at those eyes… The film became like one of those vehicles for a famous star." Technically Edie stole the movie by just being there.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
In 1965 Warhol shot My Hustler, a feature length film that featured multiple locations, 70 minutes of dialogue, a camera pan, and a cut. In mid Jan of 66's MY hustler started to catch on outside of the underground world. The Cinematheque was the first venue to show this film in a large venue in february or 66. Not only were larger cround going to see underground films, but almost every magazine in the country was taking note of underground films. Othere theaters associated with this crossover were the Bridge, and the Gate.
6. Why was Mike Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Getz packaged underground film blocks and sent them to cities around the country with his uncles traveling theater. The films reach Cleveland, Dallas, New Orleans, San Diego, and San Francisco just to name a few. "[Getz] was responsible for introducing underground movies to the American heartland."
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
They described them as "nudeity-filled feature". Warhol was cashing in on the success of TheHustler and Chelsea Girls. The films I, a Man, Bike Boy, and Nude Restaraurant and The Loves of Ondine were produced in the summer of 1967. They describes them as "technically improved but spiritually coarsened."
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
The Living Theater was a popular experimental film venue in which cinema 16 programed many of their films. The Thalia, The New Yorker, and Bleecker Street Cinema were other East side theaters that offered experimental viewings. The charles was a 700 seat theater which played an array of shows including musicals as well as Hollywood features. The lobby served as an art gallery of local artists as well as concert hall for jazz musicians.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
Mekas used this term to describe the work of Ron Rice, Jack Smith, and Ken Jacobs. This experimental filmmakers made sexual explicit almost absurdist experimental films often using eachother as actors often using improvisation. MEkas called the “Baudelairean Cinema” "A world of flowers of evil, of illuminations, of torn and tortured flesh, a poetry which is at once beautiful and terrible, good and evil, delicate and dirty" in the Village Voice.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
All films had to registered under the City of New York and follow a code of ethics. Many of these underground film wouldn't pass this code, therefore Mekas never attempted to get any kinda of legal license because he didn't believe in the principals of this legal system. Kenneth Anger's Scorpio Rising ran into similar problem all the way across the coast in Los Angeles.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Vinyl was an adaptation the A Clockwork Orange written by Tavel. He only wanted to show the bear essentials of the plot. The film was shot with a single camera set up much like any other aery 1960's Warhol film. Edie Sedgewich wasn't even written into the film, and even showed up after shooting had already begun. Travel says "the camera just went berserk looking at those eyes… The film became like one of those vehicles for a famous star." Technically Edie stole the movie by just being there.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
In 1965 Warhol shot My Hustler, a feature length film that featured multiple locations, 70 minutes of dialogue, a camera pan, and a cut. In mid Jan of 66's MY hustler started to catch on outside of the underground world. The Cinematheque was the first venue to show this film in a large venue in february or 66. Not only were larger cround going to see underground films, but almost every magazine in the country was taking note of underground films. Othere theaters associated with this crossover were the Bridge, and the Gate.
6. Why was Mike Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Getz packaged underground film blocks and sent them to cities around the country with his uncles traveling theater. The films reach Cleveland, Dallas, New Orleans, San Diego, and San Francisco just to name a few. "[Getz] was responsible for introducing underground movies to the American heartland."
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
They described them as "nudeity-filled feature". Warhol was cashing in on the success of TheHustler and Chelsea Girls. The films I, a Man, Bike Boy, and Nude Restaraurant and The Loves of Ondine were produced in the summer of 1967. They describes them as "technically improved but spiritually coarsened."
Monday, February 15, 2010
Late Postage -|diˈstrək sh ən| of |ətˈlantis|
Mary Jordan, Jack Smith and the Destruction of Atlantis
3. Chapter 4. What are some of the reasons suggested for Smith’s obsession with Maria Montez? What are some of your responses to the clips from the Montez films (especially Cobra Woman)?
In the film he seemed to be mesmerized by her or the memory of her in relationship to his childhood. Montez being a B rate actress fit in with the Post-modernist idea of blurring the lines between high and low art. He seemed to try and pull exaggerated almost campy performances out of the artists in his own films as well. Many of Smiths films seemed to loosely resemble Cobra Woman is costume/mise-en-scene, as if a child was trying to recreate the film with the available resources they could get a hold of. In Smith's case this was often literally garbage.
4. Chapter 5. What were some attributes of the New York art community in the 1960s, and what was the relationship between the economics of the time and the materials that Smith incorporated in to his work and films? [How could Smith survive and make art if he was so poor in the city so big they named it twice?]
As I said before he made 'trash art' using scraps of materials to create elaborate costumes and debris to make cucaloruses to further abstract his films visually. He also used old out of date film stock to cut cost as well as give the film a gritty feeling especially in Flaming Creatures.
5. Chapter 6. What problems emerged after the obscenity charges against Flaming Creatures in the relationship between Jack Smith and Jonas Mekas? What metaphor emerged from the conflict between Smith and Mekas?
There was a falling out between the two. John saw Mekas as a scavenger attempting to steel the fame/glory/travel from him, when in fact he was furthering Smiths's career and securing him a spot in american film history. Smith created the Lobster metaphor, comparing Mekas to a bottom feeder of the sea.
6. Chapter 7. What is John Zorn’s argument about Normal Love? How does his argument relate to some of the changes in the New York art world in the 1960s that we discussed in class? What are some arguments made about the influence of Jack Smith on other filmmakers (including Warhol)?
This sections on my copy of the DVD seems to be skipping a lot. From what I could understand Normal Love is about a sort of alternate reality, void of the struggle and problems of 'real life'. The city is the 60's was poor and torn with the War in Vietnam, and this film seemed to ignore the social climate completely and deliberately. The magic in the film was the escapist feeling it projected, which in some way kinda of went along with what was happening in the world, being that everyone wanted to escape the horrors. Normal Love was also described as a documentary of artist and how they live their live, which is exactly what Warhol attempts to do around the same time in New York City.
7. Chapter 9 and 10: In what ways did Jack Smith become “uncommercial film personified”? What is meant by the slogan, “no more masterpieces” and how did Smith resist commodification (or the production of art products)?
Jack smith believed that once his art was packaged and sold i became devalued and all original intend becomes lost. His solution to this was very completely finish a work of art. If he become part of the 'package' then the artist/piece relationship can never be severed. This is how he came about editing and playing live music and rearranging his films as they were playing for live audiences. The art became about the process for making a piece as opposed to a commercial packaged commodity.
3. Chapter 4. What are some of the reasons suggested for Smith’s obsession with Maria Montez? What are some of your responses to the clips from the Montez films (especially Cobra Woman)?
In the film he seemed to be mesmerized by her or the memory of her in relationship to his childhood. Montez being a B rate actress fit in with the Post-modernist idea of blurring the lines between high and low art. He seemed to try and pull exaggerated almost campy performances out of the artists in his own films as well. Many of Smiths films seemed to loosely resemble Cobra Woman is costume/mise-en-scene, as if a child was trying to recreate the film with the available resources they could get a hold of. In Smith's case this was often literally garbage.
4. Chapter 5. What were some attributes of the New York art community in the 1960s, and what was the relationship between the economics of the time and the materials that Smith incorporated in to his work and films? [How could Smith survive and make art if he was so poor in the city so big they named it twice?]
As I said before he made 'trash art' using scraps of materials to create elaborate costumes and debris to make cucaloruses to further abstract his films visually. He also used old out of date film stock to cut cost as well as give the film a gritty feeling especially in Flaming Creatures.
5. Chapter 6. What problems emerged after the obscenity charges against Flaming Creatures in the relationship between Jack Smith and Jonas Mekas? What metaphor emerged from the conflict between Smith and Mekas?
There was a falling out between the two. John saw Mekas as a scavenger attempting to steel the fame/glory/travel from him, when in fact he was furthering Smiths's career and securing him a spot in american film history. Smith created the Lobster metaphor, comparing Mekas to a bottom feeder of the sea.
6. Chapter 7. What is John Zorn’s argument about Normal Love? How does his argument relate to some of the changes in the New York art world in the 1960s that we discussed in class? What are some arguments made about the influence of Jack Smith on other filmmakers (including Warhol)?
This sections on my copy of the DVD seems to be skipping a lot. From what I could understand Normal Love is about a sort of alternate reality, void of the struggle and problems of 'real life'. The city is the 60's was poor and torn with the War in Vietnam, and this film seemed to ignore the social climate completely and deliberately. The magic in the film was the escapist feeling it projected, which in some way kinda of went along with what was happening in the world, being that everyone wanted to escape the horrors. Normal Love was also described as a documentary of artist and how they live their live, which is exactly what Warhol attempts to do around the same time in New York City.
7. Chapter 9 and 10: In what ways did Jack Smith become “uncommercial film personified”? What is meant by the slogan, “no more masterpieces” and how did Smith resist commodification (or the production of art products)?
Jack smith believed that once his art was packaged and sold i became devalued and all original intend becomes lost. His solution to this was very completely finish a work of art. If he become part of the 'package' then the artist/piece relationship can never be severed. This is how he came about editing and playing live music and rearranging his films as they were playing for live audiences. The art became about the process for making a piece as opposed to a commercial packaged commodity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
