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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I admire your honesty, Eric. I totally agree that the silence and simplicity of the film allow the audience to analyze the emotions of the character more intensely, and relate to the film as well, whether they actually share the same experience or not. The open and personal aspects of the film invite each audience member to understand, accept, and empathize (somewhat) with what the character is feeling and thinking. One thing I wondered about is whether or not guys or girls (or both) could actually empathize with the film to the level that they could become sexually aroused from watching it, without it being completely explicit and showing the cause of the character's pleasure.
ReplyDelete