Gray Gardens

Having seen the more recent film with Drew Barrymore a few months ago I have to give credit to both the old and new filmmakers. I think Gray Gardens is one of the truest of documentaries. I feel The Maysles did an awesome job of showing us the lives of 2 women, besides the fact of them being extragravent, they were just people and that's what he showed. They did not focus on the filthy home or the zany acts of Edie and her mom. That would of only sensationalized a true documentary, my favorite types of films. I just love seeing the inside of people, how they live, think and feel. This raw footage of real life was a pleasure to watch and the recent Gray Gardens with Barrymore did an great job in keeping with the Maysles style of documentary film.

The Whitney's, very patient men

It's hard to believe how long it took the Whitney's to complete 1 dot, let alone the millions they used in their first computerized films. I can see how they had IT backgrounds and not film originally, It takes a special brain to figure out the complicated process to make a computer do the types of things they did and to see past the functional side to the possibilities of using the computer creatively is pure genius. During class I could not remember the name of the game/craft I had as a kid that reminded me of their films it was the Spirograph! I'm going to order one on e-bay for my kids for Christmas, soooo cool. Art at that time was also similar, remember the nails with the yarn pictures? Anyway, I can really appreciate the work they did and how quickly it advanced, the scene in 2001 Space Odyssey was really impressive for 1968.

Bruce Conner's Breakaway gotta see it!

Bruce Conner was a genius in his time. The movies we saw in class were interesting in that he was a recycler who turned various throw aways from panty hose to film scraps into art. I think he used alot of irony to point out the way society was living. The readings made me want to see more of his stuff and I did. I have to say Breakawy featuring Toni Basil was my favorite it is just awesome. I love the editing, lighting-sometimes strobe, the outfits and sometimes lack of. It was so fresh and creative. A quote from the readings sums up Mr. Conner best "to create art For better and sometimes worse, scores of other filmmakers in both the avant-garde and the commercial mainstream have been influenced by Mr. Conner’s shocking juxtapositions and propulsive, rhythmically sophisticated montage. MTV should have paid him royalties." If more of this type of work was features on MTV I might start watching again.

Patterson & Bailey

The Cage, Patterson being from the West Coast and having a background with Hollywood work used The Cage successfully I feel to let those who might not be exposed to the work going on on the East Coast see what was happening in film. He did a great job incorporating all the works of the other artists in his film to make a film that summed up so many different ideas and techniques of the artists already doing Avant Gard. The one thing I remember most from The Cage is the eye falling and the view from the eye, it was clever and unexpected.
I really enjoyed Baily's work, I'm a nature lover and enjoy documentaries and felt the film had a documentary feeling, telling the story of how people were making tracks into the wilderness with the train. He was ahead of the industry in pointing out social awareness as to what humans were doing to invade nature. He did a great job with the blue tint in making the ocean more beautiful than it already is and the quick cut to the contrast of the deep red of the fish blood. Castor St. reminded me of the mechanical films we saw previously, showing the flow of the machines and the cuts in the music, hearing the Grateful Dead Good Lovin' was a surprise, it's the first time we've heard contemporary music in our films, I guess as the years progress we are in the 1960's we will notice things such as the music used becoming more familiar to us.

Stan & Ken

Reflections of Black was interesting, I liked how it could be interpreted differently by everyone. It had a different feel from the other films we saw, the darkness of it both in sight and theme. The subtle shots that give you a glimpse of the world, as a blind man might see it through hearing. The scratching of the eyes was an unusual technique that might seem basic now but appeared dramatic for its time.
The other films we saw although beautiful and painsteaking to make were too much for me to watch, just too fast, they almost made me dizzy. If you took an individul frame or a grouping for a photo display I think they would be beautiful like stained glass, but to watch even for more than a few minutes was too much.
I liked Kenneth Anger's Fireworks, its funny he made it while his parents were away. I've had 2 experiences when I've come home and my boys were playing with the video tape, making movies for U-Tube (not like Anger's!) just dancing hip hop, the one is so funny because you hear the door open and me not knowing the tape is running start bitching "I can hear the music from outside, wasting my batteries on this bullshit!" Its pretty funny, anyway.....for 17 years old you have to give him credit, although the penis firework scene is a little corny, the sailors going after him, the opening & ending scenes, he had a real talent early on for how to cut the scenes, and his use of light is amazing especially in Waterworks, the water, the reflections, the music and how he paced it and used slow and zoom, a pleasure to watch.

Maya Deren, interesting...

I found the Maya Deren films interesting, I especially liked the Meshes of the Afternoon, I think you can see how having a father as a psychologist might make you more inclined to have an interest in the mind and how it works and it shows in her films. She quotes in our reading "...the sub-conscious of an individual will develop, interpret and elaborate an apparently simple and casual incident into a critical emotional experience....". I much more enjoy films that make you think, not films that make you think "what were they thinking" when they made this film, such as Un Chein Andalou. For not having a script and doing the film on a whim the film gave us alot to think about. The actual filming was also very interesting, it is one of the first films to show what the protagonist is seeing or thinking and I'm sure the original audiences were entranced in the film.
As far as the reading for the week I personally don't see the connection to Un Chien Andalou. I think Meshes had so much more to offer. Andalou seemed to me as a mismatch of different ideas as Bunuel states "Nothing in the film symbolizes Anything" which contradicts our previous reading that claims Bunuel and Dali had messages or puns for the audience.
The last 3 weeks have been great films, the documentaries, propaganda and last weeks Deren films are getting better and better each week!

Propaganda

I have to say the filming of Triumph of the Will was very artistic and Leni R was a master in her day. The shots were amazing, the angles she shot from, the cuts to the crowd, the way she had Hitler descend from the heavens, it's no wonder Hitler was happy with the film. She definitely captured the feeling he was looking for, if we were not educated in to what was really going on at the time I could see how the people would have a good, patriotoic feeling after watching it. It did its job in making the country seem like a power house ready to conquer the world.
On the other had Why we fight! although it did get its message across also, its filming did not compare to Triumph. The editing of the shots used were not as good, it just didnt have the high quality look that Triumph did, its no wonder Triumph won awards for the film.
As far as propaganda films go, its amazing what you can do with film, how you can influence people and entire countries by what you choose to show and what you choose to leave out.
I think there is an invisible line between documentary and propaganda because everyone has different views. I like to watch documentaries and always assumed the info is true. It is true but as to the person or group who puts the films out point of view as to whats true. I'm going to have a much more objective view of documentaries due to this class. Just because it on History or Discovery Channel does not make it fact.

Vertov, Gave us life in the raw.

As I stated in my blog about Nanook, I love documentaries and Nanook was great, however I feel Vertov captured a different type of humanity on film, a very emotional and raw look at people. Nanook showed how he lived, Man with the Movie Camera showed more of why we live. The emotions of the people were clear. The things we go thru were shown, marriage-divorce, birth-death, work-play, etc. And he did it with all different film techniques to accentuate things. The stop frames on a face emphasised the emotion the person was feeling. The slow or fast motions of live. It was by far the best film we saw so far. My only complaint was that he could of cut off about 10 min. it ran a bit long. Otherwise, awesome.

Best Week Yet!

Ok, so i'm a big fan of documentaries and thoroughly enjoyed Nanook. I did a little Internet search on the crew he had and such. Nanook was amazing, to think that Flaherty spend 1+ years & his previous visits with the Nanook family shows that he was an adventurer, explorer before a film maker. I love learning about other cultures and how people live first hand the way Flaherty took us there. Flaherty was originally exploring the area for the rail road co. to search for iron ore and they felt if he got film of the territory and the Eskimos it could help defray the cost of the expedition. He did have a crew with him and they had living quarters at the post (where the trading took place) and a film room. He was also able to print out some stills for the Eskimos to see. At one point he talks about the Eskimos amazement of the still pics, it was a shot of them catching an walrus, he said they got so excited looking at the picture as if they were in that same time again. Flaherty did meet and film some other families but Nanook was like the leader of the area and he ended up focusing his efforts on him. What a wonderful film, you have to give Flaherty credit for pulling off such an adventurous project. Working with a crew & film, following around a family in 130 degree below zero temperatures and ending up with the final Nanook film, its just amazing. Really enjoyed this one.

Listen to as well as Look

After reading Liebman’s theories on the meaning or lack of meaning in the film Un Chien Andalou, you come to realize that although the film appears to be a mismatch of random dream like images I like Lieban feel that Dali and Bunuel put a lot of thought and planning into the film. He states they “do not attempt to recount a dream” and that they more likely were using gestures and visual images in place of verbal expressions. The only words or verbal’s in the film were 5 short sentences that are thrown into the film to distract us from making any sense of the story.
Liebman goes on to explain how the scenes in the film correspond with words and many of these words have various meanings. In a way the jokes on us. As the saying goes “We’ve been had in the eye” or “ants in the pants” He connects these saying, some not as familiar in our time, to the scenes in the film, the cutting of the eye and the ants crawling out of the hand. If you think about it these avant garde films were not made for the general public but more likely the elite in society or those who think they have a broader outlook on life, writers, artists, those who think they have an edge on what’s hip. Dali and Bunuel were playing games with them, challenging their minds to find the puns on words and images, a lot of the wording in the reading explaining the theory was in French but I was still able to get the point he was making, it’s interesting once you break down a seemingly random movie the way he did how you can see all these things, as Liebman said you have to listen as well as look.

Abstract Art & Randon Form

I enjoyed the history about Germany and the UFA it's always interesting to learn something new. The film Rhythmus 21 and its art deco "look" really showed how film was advancing with the light and shadows, the depht and movement, the intricate designs and how they flowed, it amazing the drawings took 3 years to create, patience is one thing Richter sure had!
Fischinger's work is amazing. The first film reminded me of an ocean and a school of fish swimming together, how he scycronized it all to music is amazing and much more enjoyable to me than the abstract squares and such of the earlier films we saw, not to take away from them, its unbelieveable what people were able to do with film in such a short time, you have to start somewhere. I think the addition of not only music but color also added to Fischinger's impressive work, I'm not a film major so I find it incredible as to how he did what he did.
I really liked Smith's work, the little bit we got to see in color really did make a difference. It reminded me a bit of soft watercolor paintings, a fuzzy layered texture. I guess it was accomplished by his unconvential manipulation of the film, vaseline? I also liked the music, I visited the Grand Canyon in Dec. and watched some Native American dance and song and the film took me back. I can understand Smith's attraction to their music and chanting, it very soothing and spiritual. They are very private though and I wonder how they feel about him using thier sounds for his film, they are very much into nature and I can't imagine they would want their "sound" associated with such an "unusual" film. I could be wrong, just a thought.

Surrealist & DaDa Weekly Reading

The one quote from the reading that struck me was "two people watching the film at the same time would not perceive it in the same way" and this is so true. The article discusses how Anemic Cinema was erotic but in an androgynous way. I did not see that at all, maybe for its time but not today. I saw it more as a trick to the eyes with the swirls not male and female organs.
The article also discusses Ballet Macaniqu which the class gave various opinions as to what it was about when we saw it on Wednesday. The article seems to favor the idea of rythemic movement and no real plot which is what I think was our conclusion as a class. I personally felt a connection to the thought that as machinery was becomming more common place it was taking over the jobs of humans, how the film would show the woman carrying the sack, repeating her movements just like the machinery repeated its movements.

Enjoyed the History Lesson

I really enjoyed the history lesson we got in class. It really helps to understand what the artisits were thinking and what motivated them to do the things they did with art. I learned about this group of artists including Gertrude Stein in my Women of the 1800's Literature. She was a member of this group of artisting pushing the limits for their time. She was a writer and I have to say I did not enjoy the poems she did during the Cubism Dada stage but it was interesting to see and hear about the connections to the films we saw by her buddies.
I normally do not like Surrealism art or films but I really enjoyed Entr' Acte by Clair, I think he took us on a little fun journey, the baloon heads were interesting and I thought the people following the casket was funny as they started to run faster and faster. Maybe I'm just silly but I found it entertaining and interesting, wacky and very dreamlike, it was probably the most enjoyable film so far this course.

The First American Avante-Garde (Horak)

This was an interesting read, the Avante-Garde movement was quite bigger than I would have imagined considering film was only around for 20 years or so. A few things that surprised me were that in 1928 Universities were offering film classes and independent theatres were popping up all over the North East. The Little Theatre in Rochester is still functioning til this day and is the oldest theatre in the US. That would be a fun class trip!
Professionalism = Commercialism and Amateurism = Artistic Beauty, a quote from this era which I still believe is accurate in today's film world.
A few of the films talked about in the reading sound really interesting and I hope we see some of them in class. Knee Deep in Love 1926, with narration and they never showed the actors faces sounds interesting. I'm a big nature lover and I was surprised that some of the films were trying to make people more aware of cities and their effects on nature even at that time. Flaherty's Manhattan 1921 sounded interesting with the story line showing man over nature and Weinberg showing mans lost connection with the wilderness. It's amazing that the points they were trying to make approx. 80 years ago are still valid today.

Happy Germs, Gertie and Trip to the Moon

Let me start off by saying I have no interest in SciFi and prefer a documentary any day. With that said Trip to the Moon didn't do much for me. I understand some new techniques were used to make things disappear and such but it really just looked like a play with an elaborate set and a few tricks and way too many people on stage at once. The face with like whip cream on it representing the moon was bad!
Happy Germs on the other hand was creative Chol being a puppeteer you could see how he had the characters joints move like puppets and how the faces morphed into other faces was really cool, it remined me of Michael Jackson's video for Black or White (I think thats the name).
Most of all I liked Gertie, the plot was clever cutting back and forth from live people to Gertie, the emotions of Gertie and the sound track really brought her to life as did the conversation going on with her. The little touches McCay put in like the pumpkin to show her size was creative. Fun Stuff!

Philadelphia Fringe/Live Arts Festival

Some of you may be interested in this festival, it runs now thru Sept 19th. It was promoted on the cover of the To Do section of the Bucks County Courier Times. The festival is described as daring, innovative, cutting-edge, it features various art forms. You can find out more at www.phillyburbs.com

History in the Gaps Reading

The reading mentions tons of filmmakers I'm sure we will get to know better as the class progresses. It was interesting to see that as early as the 1920's people were pushing boundaries in film with politics and other controversial issues. Some things never change, these films like independent films of today did not get the exposure because even at that time money was more important than the message. I would much rather watch independent films because they usually have so much more to say and are more interesting than the main stream movies. The main stream movies of today are usually so predicitible. The reading mentioned one artist Florey who managed to get his work seen by incorporating some of the main stream ideas of film making with his independent ideas and it seemed to bring him more success.
These early films not only opened new doors as to what we saw but how we saw it, new techniques in filming also made these films avant-garde and with each era came different progressions and ideas about film making. Its funny how the various film makers over time argued as to what was considred avant-garde and how some film makers were written about in history and others ignored.
I'm looking forward to seeing some of the work of these artists we read about.

Viewing of the first films in class.

I enjoyed the first class, it was interesting to see how the pioneers of the first films discovered various ways to make moving pictures. One of the most interesting things about the films they made was what they chose to film. Some of the more everyday things like The Kiss, The Woman Walking and the Serpentine Dance were expected but I found it a little weird that most of the films were a little controversial. You had nudity, drinking, gambling, cockfighting, a woman spanking her child and such. An interesting mix!
It was also fun to learn how the people who first viewed the films acted. Jumping out of the way of the train or running outside to see if he went thru the wall. It's hard to imagine when we have been exposed to TV since we were born how we would react to something like the first moving pictures. It's interesting that the first films were all shot from one spot, I guess when you get used to doing photography a certain way it takes awhile to discover and try out new techniques. It's suprising some viewed film as a fad, I would think they would of thought of the recreational and educational things film could bring for instance filming the ocean to show people who have never saw it or showing machinery used in factories to workers so they could see how it worked. I would think the brain would be exploding with ideas of things to film!