...Insightful

Reassemblage...I find this film masterful when I think about it...however the delivery still sits poorly with me...this is not because of the filmmaker, but because of the stereotypes [the filmmaker visually represented] placed on African people in general...i can remember when my classmates [and on occasion some adults] used to ask me questions about my home as if they expected it to still be a tribal setting filled with half-naked men and women who's every action somehow depicted them as uncivilized...i make this connection to the film because although it was about senegal, it was about all Africans...Africans share a connection that is unexplainable...even though we are separated by borders on a map and tribal differences, we are the same people in the end, and i think that's why i was almost offended by the images because i could feel the filmmaker depicting my people in ways i wasn't comfortable with...i enjoyed how the filmmaker didn’t abuse her outsider perspective of the Senegalese…she chose to speak of them without labeling them or using stereotypes to establish who they were as people… her approach was commendable, I believe this is the most appropriate way to view people of all races and creeds…overall, after gaining understanding of the film, i realized how profound Trinh T. Minh-ha's thought process and delivery for this film was…i really appreciated this one...it made me THINK!!!

p.s. [not that the others haven't...but this thought process was unique and more personal…I really like that about both films; they had personality]

Reassemblage

I have no idea what this film was about but from the first statement, "I wish not to speak about, just near by" I assume that the meaning behind the film was meant to be ambiguous. Unfortunately the accent with which Trinh Minh-Ha spoke made her statements difficult to understand.
From what I do understand, the film seems to be about the lifestyle of the villagers in Senegal. My guess (this being an avant-garde film) is that there's more to it than that. Why would she want to speak near and not about? Probably because it's impossible to totally describe a group of people by making direct and presumably precise statements. By speaking near, Trinh Minh-Ha is able to speak subjectively and provide a portrait with more perspective than if she spoke directly about these people of Senegal.
But then again, these are all assumptions. Whether these ideas were executed well in this film is up for question. I didn't enjoy watching this film.

Sink or Swim

I was very moved by Su Friedrich’s Sink or Swim. The story of the young girl desperately trying to gain her father’s love was very sad, yet Friedrich seems to have grown up to be a strong and confident woman. Some people don’t have the best childhood or relationship with their parents and they feel pain and anger because of this. The best they can do is to learn to forgive their parents and learn from their experiences. I feel Friedrich made the film partly as a way of releasing the anger and pain that she has experienced. The ending where she realizes that she doesn’t need to swim across the lake was the most poignant and showed that she had really moved on from the constant pain in her life. In the article she mentions how she feels ambivalence towards her father, so I feel that this film does accomplish creating closure in feeling this pain and anger towards him.

Also, I really loved the technical aspects of the film. The visuals during each story went perfectly along with the voiceover. I agree with others that this film is very reminiscent of a novel or a memoir. Sometimes I can’t recall if what I picture in my mind was what really what happened on screen, because of the influence of the voiceover. The cinematography, home movies, and type writer scenes, create a nostalgic quality that reminds me of childhood.

"Sink or Swim" and "Reassemblage"

I especially enjoyed Su Friedrich's "Sink or Swim." The ending particularly resonated with me. She was singing the ABC's in a series of rounds and ended with a peculiar "What do you think of me?". "Sink or Swim" is easily one of my most favorite Avant Garde films we have seen thus far. As I was watching the film, I thought that each mini story referred back to certain part of her life. In a more societal context, whenever the narrator talked about Greek myths in which the girl was just as good as the boy, I felt she was using it as a metaphor for gender roles. I did not see the fatherhood nor divorce themes. The most enduring theme was gender roles and Friedrich was making a statement of that issue through her film. Her film comes around full circle with the provocative ending of singing the ABC's and her challenging question. The cinematic techniques utilized with the singing of the ABC's were visually as well as aesthetically pleasing to see on screen.

After our discussion in class, I have now understand and have greater respect for Minh-Ha's film, "Reassemblage." Her film makes so much more sense now. Through her editing of sound, she has distorted our perception of sound to the point that our previous perceptions of Africa as an underdeveloped society full of poverty and unhappiness is completed reverted. She induces a paradigm shift in our frame of mind, knowingly challenging the way we perceive Africa. We are made aware of our own judgmental perceptions of Africa. Needless to say, "Reassemblage" is a "reassemblage" of our perceptions of Africa. Minh-Ha breaks down the stereotypes through her distortion of sound in the film. Although, I was not immediately impressed by her film, "Reassemblage" is a film that must be digested slowly in order to be fully understood.

History...

Remember La Jetée?
Well I remember it…the week we watched it wasn’t a thrilling one in avant-garde film, however this film managed to be my favorite. As we reflected upon in it class, I found it interesting that a lot of us forgot the movie was comprised of pictures rather than continuous footage. I watched bits of it again and found the “waking up” series to be my favorite. It was extremely relatable; it seemed slow paced an lagging; words generally not used in a positive manner, but I feel they presented the action of waking up very well. Watching the film again reminded me of picture books. I used to love seeing each image after the page was narrated. The film also had that nonchalant pace that a picture book reader takes upon.
Honestly, I didn’t gain much insight as I watched the film the first time. After, looking up what it was about [The survivors of a destroyed, post-apocalyptic Paris in the aftermath of World War III live underground in the Palais de Chaillot galleries; Wikipedia] I wanted to watch again with this new perspective; but once again, I was left in a state of ambiguity. I like sci-fi films with this type of plot line, but I feel La Jetée didn’t live up to my “twilight zone” expectations. However, I’m glad the film was black and white, even though it was supposed to be depicting the future. I also appreciate the continuous and narrative nature of the film, even though its images were disconnected.

[[[Koyaanisqatsi]]]
Life was, is, and will forever be out of balance. Why else would we be here if not to try and find a balance if not the ultimate balance [42]. We all interpreted this film in different ways independent of one another yet resulting in the same general ideas. There is always something wrong, but how are we expected to interpret what “ails” the world. Is it the existence of what is manmade, or man himself. This film is excellent because it leaves so much room for interpretation. It allows us to each create our own understanding of the world today, and furthermore determine what we believe the history of the relationship between man and earth consists of. Some of us were positive, and others negative, but the interesting thing was we were all right in our justifications. This film was full of contradictions because of the various juxtapositions featured throughout it. It challenged the representation of the superficial versus natural, which I thought was more dominantly represented as manmade vs. nature. All in all the most significant debate, to me, was the debate on whether it was too long a film. I believe it wasn’t; sometimes it’s more important to be in the moment and appreciate what has been presented to you especially if it’s a reflection of what you would otherwise unable to visualize or grasp. Furthermore, the film was time lapsed, compressing hundreds of hours worth of film into short reels; thus the overall film was a combination of multiple reels representing the larger more complex “history of the world”. This film spoke to me; it was inspiring visually and its message was short and bittersweet.

Sink or Swim

My favorite film from last weeks screening was definitely Su Friedrich's "Sink or Swim" It felt sort of like I was seeing a woman's diary over her lifetime. Her memories played out for us in a very simplistic and straightforward manner, and even though they didn't match the narration exactly (I'm not sure if the narration is non-diegetic or non-synchronous, or if those catagories even apply to narration?) hearing her voice explain the significance of particular scenes helped to make the film more audience friendly. I think the reason that I enjoyed "Sink or Swim" so much is because Friedrich works hard to make her presence felt in the film, and even though there isn't a very strong story line, there is a character that you can identify with. Hearing the stories about a little girl in a time when her parents were getting a divorce, its hard to not care. The seemingly random aspects of the film, like the part about the birth of Athena, made the film more whimsicle and helped us remember that the film is from memory, not from reality. As a child she probably thought she had come directly from her father, just as Athena did.

Questions Unanswered

After watching "Reassemblage: From the Firelight to the Screen", I was left a bit confused. The narrator said multiple times that her friends would ask her what her film was about, and she would tell them a place in Africa. But she never elaborated on exactly what in Africa. I was deeply intrigued by the way of life of the women in the tribe, and how they openly displayed their breasts without shame. The narrator's statement that it was not inappropriate nudity for them struck me and encouraged me to not view the nudity with distaste, as I have been conditioned to do, but rather accept it as natural and beautiful, which it is. I also noticed the limitations of their work, how the women were confined to domestic work, but in the way that the narrator spoke about the tribe, she emphasized that the women were essential in the fact that they were the only ones who knew how to make the food and prepare it. I liked the calm atmosphere of the film, overall, but wondered what the significance of fires in the woods was.

sink back or swim foward

I think my favorite thing behind sink or swim was the linkages it made between past and present without overanalyzing them in a phsychiatric sense. The film allowed the narrator to rehash memories through a new light as she struggled to come to terms with her past, but yet she did not blame these events for her present state but rather she was just taking them into consideration. The filmmaker crossed into what seemed to be several different "camps" of film- she clearly used autobiographical techniques in telling the story, but she combined these with what seemed to be structural qualities of formalism and perspective like that used by Stan Brakhage to show the way in which she really saw the world. I found this combination to allow the film to be able to go beyond a simple analyzation of self, and I think this makes it one of the better films we have seen this year. It allows for constant re-evaluation of self through the ties of present and past events.

Sink or Swim

I really enjoyed watching Sink or Swim during last week's screening. I thought that it described a great story about a woman's relationship with her father during her life.

The voice over used by Friedrich was extremely powerful, especially as it moved from the girl's viewpoint to when she becomes a woman later on. It anchored the film into a narrative, even though the images on screen remained more disjointed, even complementary to the story at hand. I liked watching the graph of the "American Family" drawn, especially after the metaphor of how wives should be and the woman's father's dissatisfaction in married life. While nothing worked for him within these structures, the narrative would reveal that he still had strong feelings for his daughter.

The end tied up the film quite nicely. I like that it allowed the woman to finally let go of her father through the lake-water moccasin repeated symbol.

To be simple, I loved Su Friedrich's Sink or Swim.

From start to finish, I was captivated by the short stories, all adding up to one telling tale. In the beginning, I felt a strong connection to the young girl, who looked up to her father so lovingly. Being a girl who loves her dad, it hit me in the best way. Even though our stories are different, her father being someone she can't seem to make a love/hate decision about and mine being someone who has always been there for me, I could still relate. There are always times when your parents feel like they're just drifting further and further away from you; for a girl and her dad, those are the worst.

I found myself trying to find the relation between Friedrich's one word titles and the clips of stories she was telling; some were obvious, others hidden beneath irony or sarcasm, others still seemed completely ambiguous. But, whether you understood them or not, each one drew you more invested into the story.

A Look at Life

Trinh T. Minh-ha's piece “Reassemblage: From the Firelight to the Screen” gives its viewers an excellent view into the life of a different society. This film showcases the lives of people in Senegal, but it is not an entirely objective work. Throughout the movie, Minh-ha reminds her audience that she holds the power of persuasion in this scenario because she created the piece. For example, the brief jumps in the sound or the complete lack of sound at certain points in the piece work to show viewers the filmmaker’s voice. “Sink or Swim” was a bit slow at times, but I feel like the timing was excellent for this piece to be made since the '90s were definitely a decade filled with divorce. Coming from a home with two parents, certain aspects of this film were really interesting to me. I particularly liked the scene in negative where the girl writes a letter to her dad on the typewriter. The last part where she says she wishes she could actually mail the letter depicts just how awkward her relationship with her estranged father is. I have some friends with similar stories, and I think it’s great that Friedrich took the time to make a movie about this subject.

I really enjoyed the view into the African tribe we saw in last weeks screening. It was an interesting perspective to take on something that would normally be presented in a very dry, history book sort of way. Also, she clearly made her stand as a woman filmmaker, focusing her film mainly around the women and their roles in life in the tribe. She emphasized how important they were to survival and overall I thought the film had a nice effect.

The second film was a little more depressing than the first. The storyof the daughter always trying to please her father, and his stern, and often cruel responses to her was something that made you sympathetic toward the unnamed girl. I thought it was interesting of Friedrich to include the poems written by the father, it was as if she was trying to vindictively show the fathers cruelty, but still wanted to demonstrate his more humane side and prove that there were things that made him the way he was, and he wasn't all bad, just certain things he did to her were. I also thought the idea of using the ABC's helped the film have that feeling of childhood and naivety, especially with the inclusion of the song at the end, acting as almost an epilogue to the whole thing.

Last week's viewing was intense. I admired the rhythm that appeared out of the daily routine. It was inspiring to see the work that goes into another way of life. What we as Americans are so accustomed to is so much different than what the Africans were doing. I don't know if it is necessarily harder work, but it is another type completely. The tribe life was romanticized to a certain degree, as it refrained from showing the sorts of modern advancements that defeat the small sicknesses that can wipe out a people. I was left feeling a bit disoriented by the montage of culture that I watched. It just isn't something I could ever understand, no matter how hard I could try.

Life out of Balance

Koyaanisqatsi. It was beautiful and engaging with a vibrant score reverberating underneath the images but what did it mean? To me, I think Koyannisqatsi, which means "life out of balance" in Hoti, was an attempt to make people think. It's not a film you would go to the midnight screening of but its elegance and prestige shown through its elaborate National Geographic like shots allow the audience to think in a way that no blockbuster has even tried to do. I like the way the class was split on what it meant because to me that expressed the diversity not only of our class but also the entire country and world. I was overwhelmed by the responses from other class members because of the intensity and passion each person had for the film regardless of their take on it. As mentioned in class, the film resonated with the same idea and structure that our film essays are attempting to achieve. Greggio asks many questions to stimulate the audience into their own imaginations and to answer questions about life and nature and human existence for themselves.

Koyaanisqatsi

I must admit that on the first viewing of the film, I found it to be boring (although beautiful) and I fell asleep during the middle of film. However after rewatching it, I gained a greater appreciation for the film and its message. I'm not sure if I am as amazed as everyone else by the film, but I do think it does raise some interesting social and political questions. I don't think that it is solely anti-technology/anti-modernization as the city scenes, particularly the amazing time-lapse of the traffic, have a rhythm that is similar to blood flow and the human body as Erika mentioned. I also think there were more scenes depicting modernization as beautiful than there weredepicting it as ugly- mainly the scenes of explosions and the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex. I think what Reggio meant by life out of balance is that humans should try to live in ways which does not impede so much on the environment, maybe even like the simple life that Reggio described in the interview. I’m curious as to if this film was ahead of its time in thinking of ideas like conservation and recycling and maybe even today’s trend of being "Green".

I feel like Reggio’s Koyaanisqatsi was an extremely strong film. The scenes were utterly breathtaking. I do, however, have to agree with Stewart who said he found the film to be longer than necessary. I feel like such a strong point could have easily been conveyed just as well in 10 minutes rather than eighty seven. I really enjoyed Reggio’s use of time lapse and camera angles. The film made me feel so small an insignificant. Lots of shots from the bottom pointing up made the buildings and landmarks seem looming and powerful. He made the ocean and the sky seem endless. Some shots reminded me of the old movie advertisements that made you feel like you were on a space ship as he offered birds eye views rolling across huge plains and bodies of water. His use of time lapse is also very instrumental throughout the film. It makes the clouds appear to be big fluffy pillows rolling along and cars and people appear to be tiny ants scurrying about their every day business. Sometimes it is easy to feel like we are the center of the world and become wrapped up in all of our own issues but shots like these really put into perspective how small we actually are in the grand scheme of things.

best film so far

After watching Koyaanisqatsi a second time, I still thoroughly enjoyed it. It was a wonderful film full of beautiful landscapes, cityscapes, and skyscrapers. I enjoyed the balance between the nature and industrialization, and some of the most beautiful scenes were when that balance was being depicted. The moon behind the skyscraper or the clouds reflected in the glass were both wonderful depictions of this balance. I believe the message was that this balance is what we should strive for, and that nature and man can coexist harmoniously if we make it happen.

Put simply, this was a beautiful film with a great message that I will probably watch again at some point.

la vida loca

I am guilty of falling asleep after about the first fifteen minutes or so of the film had passed. Although the nature sequences were absolutely extraordinary—especially the gathering and rolling of the clouds— the images, combined with an extremely stressful day, simply put me to sleep. Conversely, the sequences featuring the bustling city life renewed my energy. I actually found the nighttime footage of the city, captured from a bird’s-eye point of view, to be extremely beautiful. From above, the human activity did not seem nearly as chaotic or unnatural as seen from street level. Rather, the motion of cars represented by fast streaks of light reminded me of blood racing through the organized arteries and veins of a living, pulsating body. Everything and everyone seemed as though it was headed for something, with a definite purpose. It was not until the motion slowed down and the music synchronically slowed tempo that the city seemed like a dreary concrete jungle, constructed for an offensive purpose. Once the camera focused on the faces of individual persons, we could notice how dissatisfying the invasive existence of man can become. I agree with what was said in class: we do not need to eradicate the presence of humans to make an ideal Earth. We just need to learn to live in harmony with our planet, and not strive to conquer or distance ourselves from it.

One of the aspects of Reggio's Koyaanisqatsi I loved the most was its unabashed ambiguity that highlights most of the film. While the grand images of nature in the opening of the film would seem to suggest a particular viewpoint, I often felt disoriented during this screening, as cityscapes were often filmed with the same sense of grandeur as nature. I couldn't tell if Reggio was celebrating our "progress", condemning it, or simply suggesting more moderation. Reggio's careful ambiguity makes viewing this film an intensely personal experience. For example, as I said in class, I was struck by the beauty of the moon rising behind a large skyscraper and really, for me, this one scene could be used to summarize my thoughts during most of the film. Thinking about it more, I was not so sure I was supposed to garner the sense of peace that I did from this image. Maybe I was supposed to be outraged at the skyscraper blocking the gorgeous moon. Is the skyscraper a blot on a beautiful scene of nature, or an integral part of the beauty? This realization made me question my initial satisfaction with the image-- have I already been ingratiated into the mentality that "progress" is necessary-- that we cannot exist without it, that the glowing moon cannot stand on its own? How did we get to such a point? Is our course irreversible, and should it be reversed? It's questions such as these that Reggio's ambiguity gives rise to. Skyscrapers and sand dunes are filmed with the same degree of care-- almost everything in this film appears beautiful; even the bustling urbanization. The viewer is forced to question their surroundings and the idea of progress. As Reggio said, "the question is the mother of the answer" and his often disorientating, but always beautiful film, has hopefully cleared the path for many answers.

Koyaanisqatsi

I missed class on Tuesday so I hope I don't really say anything too derivative.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that noticed the incredible similarities between this film and Man With A Movie Camera. This film had perhaps a bigger universal sense about it as to literally describe the world that we live in rather than focus on a single city.
The beginning was really beautiful with all of its landscapes and the movement of nature. Without showing any lifeforms, the film showed that there was a different kind of life on earth. Earth was shown as a really dynamic and animate "being." (Props to the cinematographer for achieving these shots. They seemed almost impossible to capture at least to me.)
When humans were introduced to the film, things got incredibly hectic quickly. I'm not really sure precisely what theme was coming through to me at this point. Later on, I got the impression that things were speeding up and soon it was too much too quickly and the film ended. I was confuse as to whether this was a feel-good film like Dr. Langston described because the title means life out of balance and such and the film seemed to support it. All the stuff about ashes and cobwebs and the purification of the world kind of confused me though.
I thought the first and last scenes were really powerful. Thinking about it, maybe the director was trying to say that it was bad for mankind to try and reach the stars so to speak and that mankind was writing it's own death sentence by "progressing" technologically. It seemed as though there was some critical point where things have gone too far because of our own modernization and so nature takes it's own action against people. Crazy Stuff.
Philip Glass' soundtrack was really good but got old with the endless repetition. I know a little bit about minimalist music and it's cool how it was used for such a non-minimal topic, but in the end I wish he had broadened the music up a bit.

Let the Movie Speak

(I have resigned myself to the fact that I will never be able to spell the title right).

I like the movie a lot; I thought the interview was so-so.

Seeing the powerful nature shots in the beginning reminded me of the recent influx of feature films right now that are natural world base, but my expectations were ruined when the film changed to looking at human creations. I really loved how the film was framed with the rocket launching and then exploding. The music was really powerful as well, as Philip Glass works usually is.

In the interview, I liked hearing some of Godfrey Reggio's points about his works, especially how he decided to use time lapse photography as the main style for his movie and the important influence of other contributors. While I can't separate his morals from the reason why he made Koyaanisqati, I wish I hadn't heard about it like that in the interview. In many ways, the film spoke for itself in that respect, and reading how he put those moral beliefs into words made him sound like a pedagogue again.

koyaanisqatsitojuojrppthoiswqa

Not even in the mood to use pretentious language right now so this is going to be really frank and short.

Loved, loved, loved this film. This was not my favorite film of the semester, but I have absolutely nothing negative to say about it. Regardless of whether or not it was avant-garde, regardless of whether or not it was too long, regardless of whether or not it was conceptually unoriginal, it was beautiful. I feel like Koyaanisqatsi influenced the trend of "Plant Earth" type films and specials with its jaw-dropping interpretation of the majestic world that we live in. To be honest, I did not even see the theme of negative attitudes towards the human impact (civilization, technology, etc) because I thought that even these scenes were beautiful. The colors are crisp, the angles are interesting, the music is powerful, etc, etc etc. The most striking image for me was the shot above the waterfall, showing the rocky cliff face through the clear, flowing water. Damn damn damn das art if I had eva seen it. Also, I would like to say that I did not accuse this film of being a cheap rip off of Man with a Moviecamera as Dr. Langston joked at the end of class. I agree with how Katelyn put it in her post, it shares a similar exploration of city/nature - especially in juxtaposition. There are obvious similarities, but I think that they took different spins on this theme of presenting the world in its best light. Might I add that I wish a lot more filmmakers would explore this theme for, if nothing else, my viewing pleasure. Please and thank you.

Koy-aan-i-sqat-si

I had no idea what to expect from this film when it began. At the very beginning it looked kind of like a DVD version of a Iron Maiden concert, what with the red block letters against the black background and the low, ominous tones that seemed to foreshadow some kind of chaos to come. Though the chaos was not heavy metal, it did come. The nature scenes that followed the immediate beginning (of the debris falling business that is repeated at the end) were overwhelming in their beauty and scope. I couldn't believe how excited I was to be seeing them...from the majestic towers of red rock in Utah to the rolling clouds that looked like flowing water, WOW. I'm pretty sure I could have taken 86 minutes of just that. Part of the reason I liked this film so much was personal and has to with connections I feel to the desert, the ocean and the moon as well as my love for New York, despite the fact that many of the scenes filmed there had a negative, over-crowded-yet-empty, broken angle. I don't agree with the idea that this film is about one straightforward concept. I don't think it's too long for its content. Especially after reading MacDonald's interview with Reggio, it is clear that this film comes from a completely new and different angle and is concerned with the state of the modern world. It looks to and calls for change in a way we had not encountered. I think it's important to look to the title. I don't think the Hopi word "Koyaanisqatsi" can be justly translated into English, that's why there's several different definitions that apply to it including: 1) crazy life 2) life in turmoil 3) life disintegrating 4) life out of balance and 5) a state of life that calls for another way of living. None of these are the same idea. The only thing that really remains constant is "life" as well as some sort of movement or change. You can't watch Koyaaniqatsi all the way through and say: 'Reggio is saying that life is out of balance. Man now values technology over nature.' Yes, he is saying that, but that's not the end of it. This film has a social agenda and an artistic one. More importantly, it has a personal agenda. It IS Reggio's personal struggle for social justice but it is also meant to be a visual feeding ground for the viewer. We are supposed to watch this film and make what we will of it. It is supposed to inspire us, make us aware, overwhelm us, whatever. Reggio stressed that its meaning was totally subjective. Personally, I don't think it's anti-technology or urbanization. I think it's kind of defeatist in the sense that it acknowledges that our world has been consumed by modernization and technology--that part is irreversible--the question now is what to do with that. How can we reconcile the images of nature with the realities within cities? I think it's a crucial question in the world we live in. I think Reggio was brilliant to turn to the film medium to convey his ideas. I still have the chant stuck in my head.

koyaanisqatsi

Koyaanisqatsi was a truly empowering film. The meaning behind this pieceis still resonating within me; I just can?t seem to get it completely outof my head. I must admit that this is one of the few times this semesterthat one of the movies we?ve watched has had such a strong impact on mydaily life. Unlike some of the other pieces we have seen, say Drifters orRhythmus 21, Koyaanisqatsi was relatable to me. In this modern day andage, society is changing as fast as technology is allowing it to. Justthink about how different people?s lives, both at work and at home, arecompared to a mere fifty years ago. This time frame that is so minusculein the existence of the world has brought about countless change. Modernsocieties are facing new problems like the disappearance of the nuclearfamily and a new found reliance on technology. In Koyaanisqatsi, GodfreyReggio was able to show audiences the importance of leading a balancedlifestyle without seeming like he was preaching. It was this attributethat I most appreciated about this work. Reggio was able to make viewerssee the difference between man and nature, while still emphasizing thebeauty in both. For example, one of my favorite scenes in the piece is theone at left where the moon is being compared to a night lit building. Bothare sources of light, but this does not mean that they are competing withone another. I feel like, in this movie, Reggio was simply trying toexplain that we shouldn?t be competing with our surroundings. Instead, weshould be finding a way to harmoniously bring together human ingenuity andthe environment to create a better, brighter future for the both of us.

mmm i think i'll write about...Koyaanisqatsi

In comparison to other films we've watched this semester, I would say that I enjoyed Koyannisqatsi more thoroughly than many. I liked that its sould purpose was devoted to one idea- the balance of man and nature- and that it sought to explore this through time. I think by focusing on one element, the film was able to achieve a higher level of not really understanding, but of questioning. I think the film seeks to explore this balance rather than understand it, and I thought the use of time lapse helped show that this exploration is everlasting, insatiable. By speeding up time, the film is able to establish the premise that this exploration of the balance between man and nature has neither a beginning nor an end, but it merely fluctuates through time. I never really play much into editing techniques but after class on tuesday, I really think that the use of a still camera helps to reinforce this one idea through time, rather than show many ideas at one time. I really liked the idea that this film was in the reverse- that instead of a picture being worth 1,000 words, it is 1,000 pictures to display 1 word: balance.

Koyaanisqatsi on Koyaanisqatsi

Reggio's "Koyaanisquatsie" was an intensely, moving film that was had a profound impression on me. The time lapse scenes were especially compelling to me. However, throughout the first fifteen minutes of the film, I felt rather bored. The nature scenes were nice to look at, but got old after a while. Upon reaching the scenes portraying the city, I became pumped and absorbed into the film. The music complemented the time lapse of the traffic and passing of days. Although I felt quite overwhelmed, I also was struck by the ability of Reggio to create something out of the ordinary. Normally, one would not find observing people crossing a street or cars traveling in and out of traffic to be of any interest. Through this film, on the surface level, Reggio captures the mayhem and chaos that modern life consists of. One would think that he or she would be numb to the time lapse moments of bustling pedestrians and cars, but rather, one is captivated by the sheer impact of the mayhem of modern society. Reggio has a way of allowing the viewer to see modern society in a new perspective never quite visualized in such a way. Similar to Vertov's "Man with a Movie Camera", Reggio's "Koyaanisquatsie" contains that same element of familiarity. The entirety of "Koyaanisquatsie" was a film of looking at the inside from the outside. Reggio's "Koyaanisqatsi" would have to be my second most enjoyable film after Vertov's "Man with a Movie Camera."

This Crazy Life

For me, obviously, I was somewhat underwhelmed by "Koyaanisqatsi." Which isn't at all to say I didn't like it, because I did, and the visuals were literally stunning. Reggio captures the majesty of nature and human creation side by side in a jaw-dropping way. My problem with the movie as an avant-garde film in this course is that, at 86 minutes, I believe it needs more to say with all that time. It was frustrating to watch such a long movie whose only point seemed to be: Nature is awesome, and Man has tarnished that. The films we have watched this semester have all been very intellectually complex and been as much about changing the film medium as the ideas they present; at times this film reminded me of "2 or 3 Things I Know About Her," but without that film's deeply curious sense of thought. The other fundamental problem that bothers me is that the pure & perfect natural world that Reggio focuses on is completely devoid of man, and then he contrasts this with the tackiness and industrialization of man. It feels like he could be advocating that man should not be here rather than that we should be finding a different path in life, which I do not support. But, maybe I am wrong, and he is just observing the changes that we have caused. Still, it's a beautiful film with a beautiful score. I just wanted it to delve a little deeper, and in a more condensed fashion.

Koyaanisqatsi

Koyaanisqatsi was an incredibly powerful movie. I enjoyed it to no end. The quality of the footage was extremely impressive, as was Reggio's usage of slow-motion. It really emphasized how majestic all of the landscape was. I did find it ironic that it was a rejection of high technology, yet the only way this film could be shot was with the most advanced film technology available at the time. Reggio admitted in an interview that he saw how ironic and 'hypocritical' it was that we would do such a thing, but that he embraced the irony as there would be no other way to convey his message. My favorite part would have to be the zoom-out that begins close on the beach and then out a little bit showing the beach-goers, and then the full scene was the beach with the massive looming nuclear power plant in the background. I loved the music and I think it went extremely well with the movement on screen and I was simply in awe that these places exist on our planet.

Koyaanisqatsi

Koyaanisqatsi was an impressively beautiful film, but I can't say that I enjoyed it quites as much as everyone else did. Yes, the images were exquisite, but there is only so much "pretty" that I can watch for an extended period of time with out becoming impatient. I was reminded of pictures of nature in calenders or on screen savers. They're really pretty, but it doesn't make up for the fact that you're not experiencing it for yourself. I feel like I would've gotten more out of my time had I sat outside and actually watched nature in action in real life and real time. That being said, I like that the film was intended to raise questions instead of answer them. Sometimes the political and social motives of a film can take away from its artistic merit, but Koyaanisqatsi only lightly hints at politcal/social/environmental actions and instead invites the viewer to consider their own point of view. I guess in a way it is the difference between looking and seeing. Instead of looking at the way a filmaker views the subject, we are being invited to see the subject and make our ideas.

Koyaanisqatsi

After the previous week, this weeks screening was a great improvement. I really enjoyed Koyaanisqatsi, its images were poetic and beautiful, even if some of them were trying to convey the essential imbalance between man and nature. Although I agree with what was said today, that maybe the film was a little long for the idea it was trying to present, but I feel as if it was interesting enough to not become redundant or boring. I enjoyed every cloud and city scene, and I also liked how it came full circle in the end. Also, I'm not sure if Reggio ever saw Man With a Movie Camera, but some of the scenes were undeniably similar. I don't think Reggio ripped off the ideas for his scenes, but it is interesting to note how portraying both the greatness and issues with industrialization can come out so similar in two different films. Overall though, Koyaanisqatsi was probably one of my favorite films all semester.

Koyaanisqatsi was awesome, in all senses of the word. It both filled me with awe at the power of environment, whether it's a city or a natural one, and was really, fantastically, just plain cool.

I was struck while watching it at the similarities between it and Vertov's Man with a Movie Camera. Both of the films look at the cities with these omniscient eyes. There's that repetitive, yet perfectly placed music in both, setting the most mundane of actions (like walking through a city or working at a Twinkie factory) against the most awesome of things (the invention and growth of transportation) and working perfectly with both of them.

I don't necessarily think Reggio ripped off Vertov in his filmmaking; it was more of an equally as impressive update from a slightly different point of view. The movies were in the same vein, as all soap operas, for instance,are, but each can survive and be moving and fantastic on its own.

And Phillip Glass, too, fills me with awe. The score is one that seems to embody and define the progression of life, which seems to me like it would be a pretty hard thing to accomplish.

koyaanisqatsi

Some of the films a week before last failed to move me as others in the past have. No matter how seemingly pointless or inaccessible a film we watch seems to be, I can usually form some sort of personal explanation or conclusion about it. Even if it's not exactly what the film is really about, or what the director wanted one to get from it, I like reaching my own conclusions about a film. However, I couldn't form any sort of personal conjecture about these films to give them a deeper meaning. Perhaps that is due to their structural nature, which sets them so far apart from the others anyway. Part of what makes them what they are is the method in which they were compiled, so maybe this just made them seem drier and less emotional to me. And Kren's news pieces didn't seem remotely avant-garde to me. I'm not trying to be a snob; I simply didn't see any distinction between them and any other old news piece.

Koyaanisqatsi. I loved it. I was as absolutely immersed in its existence as I could ever imagine to be. The world became a rhythmic music video of the orchestral score accompanying it. the only thing that disheartened me was the fact that the underlying themes (and methods/content to portray them) are very similar to the ones in my film essay. Or at least my ideal film essay. It's as if Koyaanisqatsi visualized, on a much more grandoise and professional scale, the essence of the idea that I've dreamed of explaining through my essay. Nature is the only true and reliable aspect of this life that we are living in. It is natural, true, and reliable. Technological advances and human conventions muddle this clear view of the natural pure take on life.

Trees

Out of all of the films we watched last week, 3/60 Bäume im Herbst was probably my favorite. Not only because it was two minutes long but also because I loved the sound and images. I love looking up at webs of branches and thinking about the different interesting pictures that could be taken of them so to see an endless sequence of them was really interesting to me. I cannot even begin to grasp the amount of dedication and patience it must have taken to make this film. Two years of work for a five minute film is a mind blowing concept to me. I have never attempted any sort of stop animation or still shot filmmaking but I understand that it is quite a tedious process, something hard for an ADD mind such as my own to handle. The metriculous planning of each and every shot must have been overwhelming. I don’t quite understand the concept of sound being written into the film because I am only familiar with the editing techniques used in film making today. I did feel like the sound contributed to the film a lot. The roaring seemed to give the whole movie a more intense tone about it and made the trees seem almost menacing and frightening. It could have been a sequence in a horror movie.

moviessss

I must agree with Katherine, the screening last week was anything but captivating. Kurt Kren’s 15/67 TV seemed completely ridiculous. What was supposed to be so interesting or innovative about watching a German guy puff on a cigar and say a few random news briefs? Malcolm Le Grice’s Berlin Horse was visually appealing at first, but as time went I found it to be rather repetitive. However, this film was much easier to endure than many of the films we previously viewed. I really enjoyed the seeing crazy colors and watching the horse’s movements. Chris Marker’s La Jetée was one of the more narrative pieces we’ve seen, so I liked that aspect of it. On the other hand, it didn’t hold my attention as well as I thought it would. Maybe it was the drab coloring or the monotonous voice that lured me into a state of stupor, but I did appreciate the concept Marker was aiming for. My favorite piece of the night was by far Peter Weiss’ Studie II: Hallucinationer. The images he created were truly enchanting, and every scene made me think of a new idea. The angles that he explored and the juxtaposition of body parts from different people were great.

Kurt Kren

I liked the idea that Kurt Kren had such a set idea of what he was going to make in 3/60 Bäume im Herbst. Initially I thought that it was just a bunch of random stills of different angles of trees. It's really cool that he knew precisely what angles he wanted to create this film. To me, it was almost like a kaleidoscope or some abstract painting. The entire film seemed circular and this was apparently achieved through the speed in which the frames were switched. In some ways the pseudo-randomness of it reminded me of the free-form, naked eye kind of camera use in Brakhage's films.
I also enjoyed Peter Weiss' work. The body parts appeared to be from the same body but did not connect. I'm not sure why I liked it. I guess it was cool looking.
I wish I had the attention span to fully enjoy Chris Marker's film but alas I fell asleep for some of it. The film seemed to be one of the few films with a certain narrative but what was portrayed on-screen was quite different.

15/67 TV

Our last screening was kind of a blur. Watching so many short films, a few of them blended together, or were forgotten almost completely until a review of the syllabus. The two pieces that stuck out the most in my memory were Kren's 15/67 TV and the News series.

I liked the simplicity of repetition that 15/67 was composed of. Learning that the five or however many scenes were cut apart and puzzle-pieced back together from our readings was not so much enlightening -- you could definitely find shots repeated and some of the cuts were jumpy and noticeable -- but just interesting. I put '15/67 TV kurt kren' into a Google search and the first result was "Lord of the Frames: Kurt Kren." This random website really tied together the readings about Kren's cut and remake methods with his reputation.

I also remember reading that Kren added the TV to the end of the title because, to him, it reminded him of watching TV. I didn't get this feeling at all, really. I felt more like I was in the pub, near the dock, watching the girls pass time rather than sitting on my couch at home, watching it all from my own world. However, once we watched the TV news series at the end, which was simply a bunch of short shots of a man reading the news while smoking a cigar, I felt like I was watching TV and could, in a way, relate to Kren. It almost seemed like the casual manner of the newscaster, smoking his cigar, reading news from the paper, should have been more connectable but, because it was in the setting of a newsroom, I immediately related it to television.

Kren's films, though clearly not driven by narrative, are very intricate in their details. His technical work makes them more watchable and enjoyable, for me at least.

Last week

Last week was, in my opinion, the most boring screening that I have endured so far this semester. A few films were interesting, such as Berlin Horse, but the majority of them merely put me to sleep. Unfortunately, the film I thought was the most interesting was the one that I slept through the most of. La Jetée interested me, and I believed it had great potential to be a complex, interesting film. However, once the sound was turned off, I was out like a light. I am disappointed that I missed much of the second half of this film. Berlin Horse interested me because it reminded me of the artwork of Kandinsky and the film was just beautiful.

To be honest, last week's screening was probably one of the most forgettable for me. None of the films in particular really stood out or spoke to me (at least in comparison to many of the other films we have watched this semester). but just because these films didn't initially enchant me doesn't mean they are boring or without merit. I've been re-watching some of them and one that I have completely changed my mind about is LeGrice's Berlin Horse. Last Thursday I was horribly annoyed by the seemingly mindless repetition, both in terms of Eno's music and LeGrice's visuals. But watching it again, I was struck by the beauty of the colors and the haunting quality the visuals obtain through such repetition (even if the endless circling did start to make me feel sick).
I can't say I've achieved quite the same appreciation for the repetition of Breme's Baume im Herbst, but I am very interested to discuss it more and try to find the same beauty in it that I found in LeGrice's film.

La Jetée

Chris Marker's film "La Jetée" is probably one of the top five films that I have most enjoyed this semester. So much of the film is unique - from its plot to the use of screenshots. The post- apocalyptic setting and time travel combined with the romance aspect works so well together. I’m not sure if I would have liked the film if it didn’t have the romance aspect, because I probably would be to creeped out by the idea of the world ending and time travel. However the man’s obsession with this image of this woman and the science experiments that allow him to imagine his life with this woman raised a lot of questions when I was watching the film. Is he really imagining this woman or does she actually exist? In the end we learn what really happened, but I think this does relate to our life through our dreams. Can people really imagine the person of our dreams while we sleep? Can we really control what we dream of?

I especially loved the use of screen shots. It added a genuine romantic quality, like photographs of a real couple together. The music is another element I must mention. I rewatched the film online with sound and I was struck by the juxtaposition between the haunting gothic-like music in the beginning of the film that goes along with the post-apocalyptic setting and the beautiful romantic music in the scene where the couple visits the museum.

Overall, I was very pleased with film.

second time's a charm

So I have a confession… this was actually my second time watching Chris Marker’s La Jetee. I last watched the film over a year ago, and my feelings towards it have not changed. I was happy to realize that I still found the film as beautifully and tragically intriguing as before, despite the loss of sound. Marker’s decision to use still photographs seems so very appropriate, especially during the sequences depicting the man’s time spent with the woman of his dreams. It is the only time when you can witness pure joy in the laughter and amusement of the characters. It is almost as though Marker has captured a treasured memory, trapped in a time which can never be lost. The camera sort of freezes motion and yet preserves it in such a perfect way that, in my opinion, surpasses the ideas of cinematic motion of the 1920s avant-garde artists. I love how he inserts just one clip of motion within the film; the woman blinks and smiles so naturally that the viewer has difficulty ascertaining if she just imagined it. Watching the film on Thursday, I vaguely noticed a few similarities in theme with Meshes in the Afternoon, particularly the concept of drifting in and out of time, of being unsure whether you are awake or asleep. And, of course, they both have that crazy twist at the end. What does it mean for a man to witness his own death?

Blow Job Revisited

Sorry for the out of order posts, after this I will stop. I don't feel as though I can attack or defend Andy Warhol's Blow Job. Both have been done--we're over it. Yes it was boring. I couldn't help thinking, 'Wow, this is taking forever...' as I was watching it. And that was pretty much the point. Warhol was totally interested in the temporal axis, in investigating film's nuances as a medium and the characteristics that make it unique. Although the guy in the film probably got more out of it than I did, it was NEW and totally obsessed with the passage of time, and that's what really mattered to this structuralist film movement. It's interesting how Warhol slowed the number of frames per second to a crawl when thinking back to filmmakers like Breer who were pushing the human eye past its limits by speeding up the pace of the film. I like the way Blow Job forces you to pay close attention to what is happening because of the sheer lack of action and movement. Each blink of the man's eye and the tilt of his head is a major happening within the context of this film. The shadows he creates unintentionally add to the chirascuro happening in the basic shot, which adds to the overall mood of the film and its interest in low-lifeness. Reading the interview with Warhol actually made me a little more annoyed with this film, just because of the randomosity that he was spewing about his views as a filmmaker and the fast pace with which he was making films at the time. It almost felt as though individual films like this one didn't count for much in his crazy whirlwind world of film exploration. I guess his inability to speak clearly about his work and even to take it seriously made me a little more skeptical of the value of an experiment in time like Blow Job.

Trees in Autumn

I found Baume im Herbst to be very intriguing. Yes, it was simply a film depicting "Trees in Autumn" but to me I found a lot more in it. For my production class' midterm we were asked to pick a theme and film variations on it. Before seeing this film I had chosen fall, specifically leaves falling during autumn. After screening this film I adjusted it to be "Nature during Fall." Kurt Kren was able to use much shorter durations for his shots than I attempted but the feel of my film echoed his in the way the wind dominates the sound and the complexity of trees and their branches weaving in and out of each other. Kren gave me the ability to interpret my footage in a way I'm not sure I could have achieved before viewing this film. The simplicity was helpful in translating it for my uses and I was more able to determine which footage was more interesting to view. This film is a collection of shots that consist only of the trees. The black and white gave it another layer on intensity which was probably subconscious, nature looks a lot more eerie in black and white than it does in color.

My favorite film from last week was La Jetee, because it was just the kind of weird Science Fiction that I love to read. The limited movement created by showing still frames instead of animated film made it wonderfully unique. I only wish that the sound had been working better... maybe the MRC will update to the Criterion Collection version? (ah, I wish).

While the parts that took place during the nuclear holocaust were low budget, literally underground affairs, the atmosphere remained spooky and threatening. Even though the main character succeeded by being useful to the scientists, it still seemed like they would always take the chance to get rid of him needlessly. While the story was beautiful, it also doesn't make too much sense for the scientists to have tried to send him back to the past anyway. It works well for the story because it gives the loop back to the airport, but on the basis of helping the remnants of humanity, nothing happens. Perhaps it was showing that he held the real control during the dream journeys, since he did as he pleased (more or less)?

The looped affect to the end was subtle, unexpected, and a little sad, but it made for a great ending.

Berlin Horse

Berlin Horse caught my eye and kept my attention for many reasons. As separate as it felt from most of the other films we've seen so far, it called upon some earlier pieces in a striking way. There was a serious parallel between the second part of Berlin Horse and the early Lumiere Brothers film Workers Leaving the Factory. I felt a similar sort of relief and calmness (even though the building is on fire...) as the horses were being through the door to what I felt when we watched that film way back when. The simplicity and the variations on a theme called to mind our initial discussion of "looking" vs. "seeing." I felt as though I saw Berlin Horse. I've always thought that horses are particularly fascinating animals. They are so strong and muscular but at the same time are really graceful and beautiful--that rich contrast really propelled the footage that Le Grice used. It was also sad, the way the horse was tied to a rope, running around and around reiterating the same circle over and over again, and yet, especially in the second part, it seemed like the horses were invincible in their strength and beauty. It was dizzying, but in a way I was able to deal with (unlike many of Brakhage's whirlwind sequences of nature). Whereas filmmakers like Warhol were exploring the temporal axis of film, it seems like Le Grice is much more interested in the spatial axis--in realizing the full potential of this found footage within each frame. Le Grice utilizes many stark editing techniques including the use of negative exposure of film, reversing the film to make the horse move backwards, double exposure, speeding-up and vibrant color filters that called to mind the horses in the city of Oz. Often, all these techniques and others I can't name or am not aware of are combined in a single sequence. Le Grice's overwhelming editing and creation of simplistic but beautifully rich abstraction made this film rewarding for me.

15/16

I found the film I most recall from last week's screenings was Kren's 15/16. There was something about the simplicity and repetitive quantity of shots that made me really try to figure out Kren's objective. The film seemed to suck you into its multiple layers- the silhouettes sitting in the cafe, with the people walking in the middle ground and the dockyard in the background. I seemed to focus on different things at different times, yet it all also seemed to be repeating itself. It seemed almost like Kren was trying to mess with you by making you look at one layer, switch to another, and then by the time you came back to the layer you were looking at before it was repeating itself. I think this sets up an abstraction of time that changes the literal perception of things going on around you to constant cycles.

Color & Horses

Re-watching "Berlin Horses" by Le Grice again on YouTube, I have decided it was my favorite of the many movies we watched last week. Its simplistic, lo-fi beauty and shimmering use of color leave a lasting impression. In fact, its use of bright colors is perhaps so fascinating because all of the other films we watched were so devoid of color. Its mixing of negatives, its play with rhythm, and its reverse play give "Berlin Horse" a look and feel that create something unusual from the banality of these two horse scenes. Brian Eno's music throughout gives the film a playful, psychedelic, carnivalesque vibe that accentuates the vibrancy of the color's, and I especially like the way the rounds of music seem to mirror the path and pattern of the trotting horse. In its extreme use of color and exploration of visual texture, Le Grice seems heavily influenced by Len Lye's work, though the lyricism of Brakhage is also very apparent. This is a stirring and addictively beautiful film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDj8Tc6259o

tv-news

My favorite film from last week's viewing is TV-News by Peter Weibel. This was really really humorous to me, but also had some substance behind it. It had all of the makings of an over-the-top parody, yet used these aspects to portray meaning. The newscaster in the film is the typical character - smooth voiced, sharply dressed, excessively hairsprayed. The most important (and campy) part is the fact that he is puffing heavily on a cigar throughout the film. As he drones through the day's news, the frame fills up with his cigar smoke. The smoke begins to haze him out and induce coughing fits which obstruct the flow of his speech. Other than the coughing, he does not seem to acknowledge the developing smokescreen. He continues to smoke, ash the cigar, and roll it in his lips. This is important because it shows his indifference to the effects that it is having on him and the newscast. My interpretation of this is that it relates to the apathy that can be seen at most newsdesks. As he reads critical news (smokes) which should affect him (as the smoke causes coughing) he ignores it until it consumes him (or should.)

Although last weeks screening included some interesting films, I can't say I saw the point in many of them. Kren's "Baume im Herbst" was pretty and powerful in its own way, but 5 minutes of trees is not exactly an awe-inspiring concept. Additionally, I did appreciate how "Berlin Horse" played with color in new ways contrasting different scenes of the horse running, but again, it seemed like a video was way too extended and drawn out. Also, I'm not sure of the title, but I could not see why we needed to hear a foreign news report with a man who smoked too many cigars. The only one with a particular plot was Marker's La Jetee. I really liked the story behind it, though I think our sound issues made it seem a little more tedious than it should have. Overall, I wasn't exactly bored, but we've had better screenings.

Weiss and Marker

My two favorite films from last weeks screenings were Studie II: Hallucinationer and La Jetee (which I believe means the pier in French?) I was interested in how both pieces created film art using still (or mostly still) images, since most avant-garde film makers have been trying to make their films about movement. Studie II was perplexing because of its confusing (and slightly disturbing) sense of space. The figures Weiss created in the film were composed of two or three different people from both sexes from various angles and distances from the camera. While you were looking at a few well placed people, it looked like you were seeing one misshapen and ill proportioned induvidual. One image that sticks out to me in particular is the one where a huge head with an even bigger arm is cutting invisable food on a plate using two different sized hands. Because the frame was held still for so long, I was forced to take in and examine every inch very carefully. I supose the intent was to create the illusion of hallucination through film; its sort of weird that Weiss chose to do that with a series of static frames instead of a fast moving erratic series of lots and lots of distorted images. (Thats probably what I would've done) Perhaps it was done that way to make sure that the images stayed with you after the film was shown, so that the "hallucinations" lasted.

An attempt to study "Studie II"

Studie II was a really interesting concept. Admittedly, I have no real clue what that concept was, but it looked interesting. As the title was "Hallucinations," I believe that each scene was a creation of an awful hallucination, a bad trip if you will. The body parts had no real beginning and could only be seen as being attached to the person who's face was visible, which then meant that person had, six arms or three feet or something odd like that. There was no speaking, just odd ambient noises that had no real source. In one of the scenes, there are two men facing each other with several hands just making odd motions that I perceived as being the words that they could be yelling. As it was a hallucination though, words were hands and that was that. There was also a weird sexual tension in the film, even though there were no sexual scenes. The nudity in itself just perpetuated this sense of intimacy that was manifest in no real place in the film. If the concept in itself was simply to create a feeling of a hallucination in a perfectly sober individual, I think it was well manifested in Studie II.

"La Jette" on La Jette

I enjoyed Chris Marker's "La Jette" immensely! Although the film was marked by only a slide screen of screen shots, it was still quite mesmerizing to me. I was impressed by the plot, the director's use of the screen shots and the music itself. Even though the film would have made an even larger impression had the music been incorporated, "La Jette" remained rather stunning. The rolling of the screen images felt so familiar to the passing of memories within my own mind. At times, I could not help, but fathom at the perplexing familiarity of the images. I was, without a doubt, intrigued by the many manifestations this film undertakes. This was by far the most thought provoking film that I have watched thus far this semester. However, the rolling film shots was essentially a slide show of pictures that in itself could instill such fervor of feelings for me. "La Jette:" is a film of epic proportion for sure. Each of the images between the woman and the man were intimate to the point that I was in awe of the ability for a slide show of images to create such awe. This film was an intoxication of fascination and wonder.

Of all of the movies we have watched this semester, last weeks screening definitely take the cake for most shocking. I have always considered myself to be a fairly open minded person but this got pretty hard to watch. Flaming creatures was just so dark and violent. I have never been a fan of really violent pieces and this seemed to relay a lot of forceful violence. I agree with everyone who has said that they do not really understand how this film is supposed to glorify sex and the intention was stated. I do not understand how it is glorified when it is presented as so violent. The people in the middle of the orgy do not seem to be enjoying it at all and almost seem to be in some sort of trance with no power to fight back. There is no question in my mind, however, that this film was cutting edge and avant garde. The response to this film alone, being kicked out of movie theatres and film festivals, proves that the film is avant garde because it goes against the status quo and what is acceptable. Needless to say the whole experience broadened my horizons.

A Reflection

I found Frampton's "Nostagia" a perplexing and especially, frustrating film to watch. The monotonous sounding voice only further perpetuated the ambiguity to which "Nostalgia" seemed to encompass. It was, without a doubt, an arduous task to remember what Frampton was talking about with each new image. However, one could see that there was a certain theme among all the photos. There was something intriguing with his last comment, "Do you see what I see?" At that moment the words left his lips, I felt there was something profound to which he wished to convey to his audience. Throughout the film, it seemed as if he was merely rambling and musing about the associations he had with each picture. Though, there felt as if there were something else to the ramblings he did, perhaps even larger than life.

On the other hand, Andy Warhol's "Blowjob" was intriguing in the fact that it was interesting to watch him contort his facial features as that was the only way to which he could communicate to his viewer. Although the film was repetitious at times, there appeared to be a genuine note to his reactions. It was not what I expected at all. I did not expect to be observing a face for half an hour. It seemed to capture sexual tension, but at the same time brought down the taboo surrounding sex to a desensitizing manner.

Review

I too thought that last week’s screenings were the most difficult to sit through.

I found Jack’s Smith’s Flaming Creatures to be interesting at first, but the rape-orgy scene and the screaming was very disturbing. The readings and Tuesday’s discussion provided some ideas of what the Smith meant to portray, but I too question how the disturbing violence relates to the glorification of sex.

I found Andy Warhol’s Blow Job to be rather boring as it was so repetitive. I do find it interesting to think that without knowledge of the title, the man could be perceived at doing all sorts of activities. Eventually though, I found myself noticing on how strange the human face looks at different angles.

Hollis Frampton’s (nostalgia) was slightly more interesting. The concept of burning photographs is interesting and I wonder why Frampton decided to have the narration correspond to the future photograph. Maybe this is supposed to represent how it takes a while for our memory to forget something after we decide we want to forget it. I did find the film to get boring after a while and because of the structuralist nature of the film and I couldn’t help but countdown how many photographs were left.

interesting

I found last weeks films to be very interesting-interesting being used in that awkward sense where you say it because you have nothing else really positive to say-I still don't completely know how I feel about them. Flaming Creatures was a pretty disturbing film, and I can understand why it was banned. I think that there is virtue in creating something that no one will want to see or that is controversial, but there is a line where it gets to be too much, and I feel like Flaming Creatures crossed that line. Even if Jack Smith and his friends made this film in jest and laughed during its making, its depiction of rape and sexual violence was highly disturbing. I don't think sexuality needs to be taboo, but I do think it should be done in a little "classier" of a way. I liked Andy Warhol's "Blowjob" significantly more than "Flaming Creatures." I thought it was interesting in that, if we hadn't seen the title and thus assumed sexual connotations, we may not have had any idea of what was going on in the film.

I won't deny that Flaming Creatures was at times difficult to watch. I enjoyed it initially because I thought the whole lipstick sequence was really clever and amusing, but things took a really dark turn with the rape/earthquake scene and, like pretty much everyone else, I'm having trouble seeing how that sequence glorifies sex at all. Pretty much everyone in this film seems like mindless, and frankly disgusting, animals who lack any impulse control. I think to an extent it was careless on Smith's part to not consider that images of rape would disturb his audience. I eventually just got pretty annoyed with this film-- in a way I felt it was overly-indulgent and a little too long.

But I also really want to talk briefly about Frampton's (nostalgia) because it kind of seems like no one else liked it or really wants to talk about it as much. This is totally understandable, given how incendiary the other two films were and, consequentially, how monotonous (nostalgia) seemed. Although I thought it definitely went on a little too long and found my eyes wandering to the clock, I really really liked (nostalgia). I loved the simplicity of the concept and its slow, steady pace-- I thought it was all very reminiscent of how people tend to romanticize their memories. I found the film beautiful and funny, but also a little sad-- all emotions I associate with the concept of nostalgia.

this one was a shocker

Flaming Creatures, more so than any other film we have watched so far, deeply disturbed me. Sure, it is incredible to learn that our class watched a film which, mere decades ago, we would never have been able to watch legally; we have somewhat become a part of the timeline and history of the film. Even after having discussed the film in class, I still have trouble believing that not only did Jack Smith and his friends create this work for laughs, but that I was able to sit through the entire screening without having to excuse myself. The majority of the scenes was so graphic and portrayed such unnormal behavior that, at times, the action seemed paradoxically real. Watching the “gang rape” scene and listening to the horrific screams coming from the women made me feel extremely uncomfortable. However, I think that my revulsion was not exactly a response to the excessive nudity in the film, but rather due to the idea that human beings, my fellow “creatures” of this Earth, could commit such vile and heinous acts against one another, without any hesitation. The offenders seemed unable to empathize with their victims, even though, in a way, they were trying to adopt aspects of their victims’ sexual identity. I fail to understand how this film, in any way, shape, or form, glorifies sexuality.

Lost in Translation?

I forgot everything I wanted to say about this film so I’m just going to go with what I remember. This film epitomized eroticism and I “commend” it for accomplishing that much. As much as I was appalled at how obscene it was, Tuesday’s class discussion helped me minimize my aggression towards the film. I realized that it truly did not cross any bounds; it only created uneasiness amongst its audience since it was so unreserved. The manner in which the film was presented and received reminded me of the scene in which Robert Janson asked the woman in 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her to repeat a particular statement related to sex. Although the statement was factual, the woman was made extremely uneasy by it, and became irritable and defensive throughout the rest of their conversation. I believe Robert Janson’s presentation of the question, was similar to the film and its focus; the concept of sex, and furthermore eroticism. The lady’s response was similar to the multitude of negative responses towards the film over the years; based on shock rather than anything else. It just brought me back to the idea that even though people claim to be unreserved about issues such as sex, they still are unwilling to tackle it headstrong and just admit to the hidden ideas they may wish to explore. Creating this air of taboo around this film just added to its overall success. I feel it was a challenge; of course it’s obscene but honestly not enough to treat it as if it were inhuman and unimaginable; right?

P.S. Andy Warhol’s Exploding Plastic Inevitable is much better in my opinion! …and it’s hard to survive when you’re surrounded by brilliant minds for an hour and fifteen minutes!

Pushing limits

So far in this class I have kept an open mind and have thoroughly enjoyed watching these films. I have to admit, Flaming Creatures was the most difficult film I have ever watched, because of its graphic and violent aspects. However, the rape scene was not even as terrible for me as the appearance of male sex organs on the screen. I suppose because I am a woman, female nudity does not affect me as much as male nudity, at least not anymore, now that I have seen more films with female nudity over the years. Male nudity is not something I am accustomed to, and the camera dwelling on a penis being shaken by a hand, to refer to just one of the scenes, was almost too much for me. I am very innocent, and I don't really get a kick out of male nudity. The rape scene eventually appeared fake to me, as I saw the actors merely moving in the same position, and not really penetrating the girl. Of course her being nude and wrongfully touched affected me, but the way it was portrayed was obviously not very realistic, so it lost its potency and 'shock value' quickly. Dr. Langston suggested that we look past the graphic aspects of the film, and I must say this is the first time that it has been hard to let go of my first impressions of the movie. I am still figuring out how a scene with the camera zooming in on a penis is not pornography; when Dr. Langston said that the film was not pornographic that surprised me. I always thought that anything which focused on nudity in a crude way ( or in a way other than to glorify the beauty of it, such as in Italian sculptures ) was pornographic. But I am now setting aside my previous conceptions of what is and what is not pornographic. I am willing to look deeper within the film, and I hope we delve deep so I can say that I know of a concrete purpose for this film which I appreciate.

Warhol

I think the last film screening was not particularly enjoyable but the films deserved some respect. Flaming Creatures broke many of the barriers placed on the counter-culture and the underground.
Blowjob was boring but there was a lot underneath it than one may believe. The only way we know that a sexual act is taking place is in the title and no actual blowjob is seen. We only see the rather uncomfortable faces being made by the guy receiving the blowjob. Choices were made in this film that were important in making this a film with deeper implications. The duration, the sketchy wall background, the framing of just the face, the chiaroscuro lighting, were all clearly decisions and they do provide some insight to a meaning. My belief is that Andy Warhol was trying to downplay sex as un-extravagant and bland by making a boring film. He touches on similar themes in pieces like the Marilyn Monroe that accentuates her attractive features to make her seem grotesque.
But to go against this argument, the blowjob depicted is performed by a man apparently and that choice introduces a completely different subject on the matter

shocking or not

I think too much as been stressed about the "shock value" of last weeks films. I feel like, while they are shocking and have been banned, the true value of them lies beyond the shocking images and if they are to be properly understood they must be accepted has inherently shocking and then moved on.

After last weeks discussion of "Flaming Creatures," I feel like the film has more to offer than what I originally classified as an erotic montage. I think that Jack Smith was attempting to portray this underworld of human emotion in the most direct manor possible- by bringing it to the surface. I think this is his true underground standpoint. In his time and even now it is unusual to see such a clear expression of sex and he desires to explore it in his film. I really liked the idea that the people in the film were assumed to be creatures- it added to the whole concept of the underworld. I think by giving the film this title, he wants to really exploit the mind in its visualization of sex but at the same time keeping this in a positive light.

"Blow Job," kept this similar concept but really honed in on the emotions of one individual, making us observe every slight movement and analyze every head tilt. I think that while this technique isnt as exciting to the brain, the eye is allowed to see more into the feelings of the individual while the brain rests in boredom. I found the film difficult to get through, but stimulating to consider.

Underground, structured blowjobs

Last class we talked about how Nostalgia was a structural film, and I believe this is obvious to everyone. The narration was one picture before the picture that went with it, and once it stopped, the current picture was burnt. Even the pattern of burning followed a similar structure. This film was clearly formulaic, and while it contained no narrative, it followed a strict structure.

We also talked about how Flaming Creatures was an underground film. It focused on subject matter that was 'inappropriate', was controversial, used unexpected filming techniques such as a shaky camera, and was completely non-narrative. These techniques were all representative of an anti-hollywood avant-garde sentiment that belonged to the underground film movement in America.

Blowjob by Andy Warhol is a mixture of both of these schools of thought and is hard to classify into either category. It focuses on controversial subject matter, has no narrative, and is wholly different from anything remotely hollywood related. These are all elements of the underground film movement and could be grounds to classify this film as such. On the other hand, it is very repetitive and shows elements of structure as well. Whenever orgasm is reached, a white light fills the screen and bubbles appear over the man's face. This happens 7--is it 7? I might have lost track--times throughout the film, and it follows the same structure every time. There is also some structure in regard to the lighting in the film. Whenever the man appears bored or unhappy his face is obscured by shadows, but when he is in a state of utter bliss, his face is wreathed in white light. This leads the viewer to associate the white light with happiness and pleasure which is reinforced during the scenes of orgasm. I believe that Blowjob falls into the gray area between structural film and underground film.

On a side note, I thought Blowjob was one of the best films we have seen all semester. Its repetitive nature and silence allow the viewer's mind to wander and to relate to the film on a personal level. Fellatio is an incredibly personal experience, and watching someones expressions as they enjoy utter bliss caused me to undergo intense self reflection and nostalgia. It is impossible to watch an experience as personal as that and not personally connect to the film on some level. Watching how another person experiences joy was very interesting to me, and I also enjoyed watching the roller coaster ride of his emotions. His feelings went from utter boredom and disinterest to complete and total joy. Watching those changes and remembering my own experiences brought forth an incredible amount of self reflection for me.

Ummm?

Eh... Well I guess you could say the films from last Thursday were interesting. But I'd rather just simply say I was disturbed by them. After discussing them briefly on Tuesday I decided to reevaluate my view on them. And while I'm still very disturbed, I think Flaming Creatures and Blow Job had another purpose. Flaming Creatures wished to break the boundaries of Hollywood filmmaking just like many of its avant-garde predecessors. It took sexuality to its limit through the use of rape and transgenders disrupting the society it was released into. I'm not sure how to feel about the banning of the film, because on one hand it was vulgar and possibly on the border of pornography but I don't see how it went beyond a person's write for freedom of speech.

Unmoved by the Underground

I can understand why the American underground movements are really fantastic and influential, a turning point in the history of Avant Garde cinema.

During Flaming Creatures, my mind went from having "Sweet Transvestite" stuck in my head to "BAD TOUCH! BAD TOUCH!" during the rape-orgy. You know what? Not an orgy. I'm not considering that an orgy, not with screaming women. And ever after that, Flaming Creatures pretty much lost me. The class on Tuesday made it more comfortable to talk about it and look at it from other angles than just the original reaction, but I don't think I would ever want to watch that movie again.

Blow Job was just really boring. Readings seem to suggest that that was what Andy Warhol was going for, but I don't know. It lasted too long for what it was. I ended up looking for shapes in the crevices of the actor's face. I liked the emphasis of chiaroscuro used on the aesthetic level, but it works better with still art.

And, (nostalgia) left me thinking: Cool concept, bad execution. Watching the photographs be destroyed was interesting the first two, maybe three times, but they all followed a very similar pattern. The memories of the filmmaker never lasted for as long as it took to render the film to crackly black plastic. And why was the sound off from the photographs? Was it to show that memory is faulty? It just lasted way too long for me.

flashback to Godard

This is quite after the fact, but I missed the screening where we watched "Two or Three Things.." and just managed to check it out of the MRC today so I wanted to finally post about it. I would call this the most entertaining film I have seen so far, especially in terms of the ratio between length to attention-keeping. It is a different breed--Godard really gets in the viewer's face about social commentary and the problems of 1960s Paris and the Vietnam War. This does not mean his message is straightforward or simple. This film is so full of, well, life. For the most part, in this case, not in a good way. Few of the many people in this film could be called happy. They are struggling, confined, confused, curious. The way Godard approaches character is really fascinating. There's a lot I have to say about this film, but I want to talk about its main character, Juliette, or Marina in actuality. She is the clearest protagonist we've had so far. As much as she feels out of control, it is her feelings and views that carry the film. She is profoundly sad but is full of wonderful insight. She is flawed but extremely wise. She reminded me of a person described in a sonnet by Robert Frost called "The Silken Tent," where he compares the woman in question to...a silken tent in an extended fourteen-line, one-sentence metaphor.

She is as in a field a silken tent At midday when the sunny summer breeze Has dried the dew and all its ropes relent, So that in guys it gently sways at ease, And its supporting central cedar pole, That is its pinnacle to heavenward And signifies the sureness of the soul, Seems to owe naught to any single cord, But strictly held by none, is loosely bound By countless silken ties of love and thought To every thing on earth the compass round, And only by one's going slightly taut In the capriciousness of summer air Is of the slightest bondage made aware. The woman Frost describes is strong, beautiful and able to take care of herself. At first it seemed to simply be praising her and describing a blissful life, but upon second thought, it is much more somber than that. Juliette, like this woman, has that "sureness of the soul," she is extremely aware of the world around her, but instead of freeing her, that ability to consider herself and her situation so closely only makes her more and more attuned to the "countless" things that tie her down and restrict her. In realizing the infinite connections that she has to the world and to life, she sheds light on a sense of bondage that keeps her from being happy, even though many of the connections are made of "love and thought." She is a really moving narrator, even though she is her own worst enemy.

.s

All three movies last week were difficult to sit through not because of their content but just because I honestly could not find my self entertained by them. Although Flaming Creatures had its moments for the most part I felt unmoved by the movie itself. I, honestly, appreciate the fact that this film was so revolutionary but I feel like it doesn't compare to other movies that we have watched. I felt like it overused the nudity just to be graphic and controversial.
I really like making sense of movies during class but honestly I am going to find it very difficult to find any deeper meaning or greater purpose within Warhol's Blowjob. I read somewhere that Warhol let his actors up to their own devices. I am not completely sure what that means but I feel like if he is suggesting that he is filming a real life event and letting the actor do as he wishes "without the use of intertitles, script, etc" I feel like a better job could have been done and was done by Vertov. I was completely unmoved and I honestly am going to struggle finding a deeper meaning to Blowjob.