Reading Response 10: Due April 19
Ray Privett & James Kreul, “A Cinema of Possibilities: Brian Frye Interview”
How does Frye relate his work (including his film programming) to the following movements / concepts / genres:
Performance (and performance art)
-He tends to poke fun at it a bit. The idea of not doing anything in front of a group of people is still performing, such as in "Brian Frye Fails to Masturbate".
Minimalism
-Frye doesn't like to call himself a minimalist, and he isn't trying to be one. However, he does admit that some of his films could fall into that category, and while he doesn't object to them being called that, he also doesn't promote them as such.
Fluxus
-Some of his work was certainly about the performance and the making of it, as well as being relatively simple, for example "Disappearing Music for Face".
--How does Frye respond to the question about what he “adds” to films such as Anatomy of Melancholy?
Scott MacDonald, “Maintenance”
--What are some of the reasons for rental income growth at Canyon Cinema between 1980 and 2003? How did Canyon distinguish itself from the Filmmakers Cooperative and the Museum of Modern Art?
Canyon Cinema can probably attribute rental income growth from the 1980s to the early 2000s to educational institutions teaching more avant-garde films and classes devoted to avant-garde films. They were able to distinguish themselves from the Filmmakers Cooperative and MoMA because they regularly updated and revised their catalogs with new and updated content, while the Filmmakers Coop and MoMA rarely did. The catalogs were also interesting, uniquely designed, and sometimes even contained surprise articles by filmmakers.
--What problems and controversies did video distribution cause for Canyon in the 1990s? To what degree were the sides of the debate related to the age of the filmmakers on each side? Based upon the interview with Dominic Angerame at the end of the chapter, what was his position on the video debate?
Canyon had to decide if they would allow video makers (instead of FILMmakers) into the group and allow them to vote and distribute their work. The older generation of filmmakers was more focused one the preservation of the work that Canyon already had, as well as keeping with their original bylaws that stated they worked with 16mm, 8mm, and other related light and image production media. The younger filmmakers were more keen to add video and were more open in general to the new technologies citing that if Canyon wanted to remain in business, they would have to be friendly to new technologies.
Angerame's views on the video debate were more neutral. He was more or less just concerned with keeping Canyon together and not letting it dissolve.
--What were the advantages and disadvantages to funding from the National Endowment from the Arts? What controversies developed related to the publication of Canyon Cinema Catalog #5?
The advantage of the funding from the National Endowment from the Arts was that they had stable funding for a number of years and didn't really have to worry about money. However, the government got involved and didn't approve of some of the things that were published in some of the catalog issues (such as male nudity and lesbian kissing -- stills from various films). In the end, the government's hold won and the NEA had to essentially pull all of their grant money from Canyon.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
Reading Response 9
Catching up from last week: Christie Milliken, "The Pixel Visions of Sadie Benning"
1. How is Sadie Benning's work related to general trends and characteristics in Riot Grrl subculture? How is Riot Grrl subculture similar to and different from punk subculture?
Her work is done in a girl power, just do it sort of way. She promotes the idea of girls in punk and breaking away from their gender stereotypes both in her videos, as well as her own punk band and zine. Riot Grrl is similar to punk in that it’s more about the doing than the final product. One doesn’t need to know how to play an instrument in order to form a band. However, Riot Grrl subculture favors the females and encourage them to “get tough, get angry”.
2. Why does Milliken refer to Benning's work as visual essays? What are the advantages of viewing the work in relation to this genre? What is meant by "radical feminist essayistic" form?
Benning’s work can be considered a visual essay in the way that they are similar to adolescent diaries. Many young girls write in diaries, and Benning was able to bring that written word to life in her videos. They also follow the many forms of the written essay, which generally resist generic classification into one category or another.
Radical Feminist Essays are those in which the author, or filmmaker, sets out not only to persuade or answer a question, but they serve more to pose a question and make the reader/viewer think. The topic is also very often political, and the essay is used as a jumping off point from words to action.
Keller and Ward, "Matthew Barney and the Paradox of the Neo-Avant-Garde Blockbuster"
3. What has changed in the gallery art world that allows Barney to describe his work as “sculpture”? In other words, how has the definition of sculpture changed since the 1960s, and why?
The definition of “sculpture” has become a lot more broad and unstable, and it now ranges from media based works, to performances, to architecture. After Kranuss defined sculpture as an “expanded field” in 1979, art historians have been more open to the interpretation of the medium of sculpture.
4. Tricky but important question: Why was minimalist sculpture seen as a reaction against the “modernist hymns to the purity and specificity of aesthetic experience”? In other words: Why do they say that minimalist sculpture is post-modernist?
Minimalist sculpture worked to make the viewers of the piece more reflexively aware of themselves and their interaction with it. This goes along with the idea of postmodernism in that the role of the artist is questioned because “anyone could do this”. Medium specificity is brought into question and more mixing of medias is seen.
5. Describe the role of the body in the works of Vito Acconci and Chris Burden. You may wish to consult the following links to supplement the descriptions in the readings:
Acconci and Burden used their own bodies as minimalist sculpture. They would treat their bodies as objects, doing masochistic things to them (such as letting a volunteer from the audience put push pins into Burden’s skin)
5. In the opinion of the authors, what are the key differences between performance art of the 1960s/1970s and Barney’s Cremaster cycle? What do they mean by the term "blockbuster" in relation to the gallery art world?
The Cremaster films are deemed blockbusters in the gallery art world, because it (rumored) takes on the qualities of blockbuster films such as costing a lot of money to make, merchandise, and making a lot of money at the box office, which, by avant-garde and gallery standards, Cremester did.
His work is also very different from the performance art of the 60s and 70s because it didn’t have an underlying cause or purpose. Much of the performance art from the 60s/70s was a commentary on Vietnam, or atomic weapons.
Walley, "Modes of Film Practice in the Avant-Garde"
6. What is meant by “mode of film practice”? Give two well known examples of non-experimental modes of film practice. Why does Walley argue that the concept of the mode of film practice can help distinguish between the experimental film and gallery art worlds?
Modes of film practice refers to the cluster of historically bound institutions, practices, and concepts that form a context within which cinematic media are used, both in production, distribution and exhibition. Some non-experimental modes of film practice include art cinema by auteurs such as Godard and Fellini.
The mode of film practice may help distinguish between the experimental film and gallery art films because modes go beyond the general aesthetic qualities of the medium and look at the circumstances which they were made and in which they can be understood.
7. What are some of the key differences between the experimental and gallery art worlds in terms of production and distribution?
In the world of experimental film, collaboration between artists is not super common, and the distribution of work or “division of labor” between the director, cinematographer, sound mixer, etc. are all given credit at the end. In the art gallery world, however, collaboration between artists is common, and rarely is anyone given credit by the means of credits in a traditional film.
In distribution, avant-garde films aren’t given wide releases in theaters, and because funding comes mostly from private investors or grants, the artists no longer have enough money to strike many prints of the film in order to make money from distribution. In the art gallery world, however, having very few prints of a piece is something that is done on purpose, for the fewer prints there are, the more valuable it is seen in the art world.
1. How is Sadie Benning's work related to general trends and characteristics in Riot Grrl subculture? How is Riot Grrl subculture similar to and different from punk subculture?
Her work is done in a girl power, just do it sort of way. She promotes the idea of girls in punk and breaking away from their gender stereotypes both in her videos, as well as her own punk band and zine. Riot Grrl is similar to punk in that it’s more about the doing than the final product. One doesn’t need to know how to play an instrument in order to form a band. However, Riot Grrl subculture favors the females and encourage them to “get tough, get angry”.
2. Why does Milliken refer to Benning's work as visual essays? What are the advantages of viewing the work in relation to this genre? What is meant by "radical feminist essayistic" form?
Benning’s work can be considered a visual essay in the way that they are similar to adolescent diaries. Many young girls write in diaries, and Benning was able to bring that written word to life in her videos. They also follow the many forms of the written essay, which generally resist generic classification into one category or another.
Radical Feminist Essays are those in which the author, or filmmaker, sets out not only to persuade or answer a question, but they serve more to pose a question and make the reader/viewer think. The topic is also very often political, and the essay is used as a jumping off point from words to action.
Keller and Ward, "Matthew Barney and the Paradox of the Neo-Avant-Garde Blockbuster"
3. What has changed in the gallery art world that allows Barney to describe his work as “sculpture”? In other words, how has the definition of sculpture changed since the 1960s, and why?
The definition of “sculpture” has become a lot more broad and unstable, and it now ranges from media based works, to performances, to architecture. After Kranuss defined sculpture as an “expanded field” in 1979, art historians have been more open to the interpretation of the medium of sculpture.
4. Tricky but important question: Why was minimalist sculpture seen as a reaction against the “modernist hymns to the purity and specificity of aesthetic experience”? In other words: Why do they say that minimalist sculpture is post-modernist?
Minimalist sculpture worked to make the viewers of the piece more reflexively aware of themselves and their interaction with it. This goes along with the idea of postmodernism in that the role of the artist is questioned because “anyone could do this”. Medium specificity is brought into question and more mixing of medias is seen.
5. Describe the role of the body in the works of Vito Acconci and Chris Burden. You may wish to consult the following links to supplement the descriptions in the readings:
Acconci and Burden used their own bodies as minimalist sculpture. They would treat their bodies as objects, doing masochistic things to them (such as letting a volunteer from the audience put push pins into Burden’s skin)
5. In the opinion of the authors, what are the key differences between performance art of the 1960s/1970s and Barney’s Cremaster cycle? What do they mean by the term "blockbuster" in relation to the gallery art world?
The Cremaster films are deemed blockbusters in the gallery art world, because it (rumored) takes on the qualities of blockbuster films such as costing a lot of money to make, merchandise, and making a lot of money at the box office, which, by avant-garde and gallery standards, Cremester did.
His work is also very different from the performance art of the 60s and 70s because it didn’t have an underlying cause or purpose. Much of the performance art from the 60s/70s was a commentary on Vietnam, or atomic weapons.
Walley, "Modes of Film Practice in the Avant-Garde"
6. What is meant by “mode of film practice”? Give two well known examples of non-experimental modes of film practice. Why does Walley argue that the concept of the mode of film practice can help distinguish between the experimental film and gallery art worlds?
Modes of film practice refers to the cluster of historically bound institutions, practices, and concepts that form a context within which cinematic media are used, both in production, distribution and exhibition. Some non-experimental modes of film practice include art cinema by auteurs such as Godard and Fellini.
The mode of film practice may help distinguish between the experimental film and gallery art films because modes go beyond the general aesthetic qualities of the medium and look at the circumstances which they were made and in which they can be understood.
7. What are some of the key differences between the experimental and gallery art worlds in terms of production and distribution?
In the world of experimental film, collaboration between artists is not super common, and the distribution of work or “division of labor” between the director, cinematographer, sound mixer, etc. are all given credit at the end. In the art gallery world, however, collaboration between artists is common, and rarely is anyone given credit by the means of credits in a traditional film.
In distribution, avant-garde films aren’t given wide releases in theaters, and because funding comes mostly from private investors or grants, the artists no longer have enough money to strike many prints of the film in order to make money from distribution. In the art gallery world, however, having very few prints of a piece is something that is done on purpose, for the fewer prints there are, the more valuable it is seen in the art world.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Post-Spring Break Response
I quite enjoyed (nostalgia). The cleverness of having the description read to us before we ever see the picture helps the audience to get into the same feelings as the narrator. I also loved the way the pictures burned with the coils blackening, and then watching as the tiniest bits of remnants would finally burn away. Once you figure out what exactly is happening, it's almost like a game, trying to remember what the narrator said about the picture you are about to see, while still enjoying the picture that he just explained to you. One of my favorites so far.
Sitney, “Structural Film”
2. How is structural film different from the tradition of Deren/Brakhage/Anger, and what are its four typical characteristics?
The traditions of Brakhage/Deren/Anger's structure where the shape of the film is predetermined and extremely important. While in structural film, the shape is there, but less important than the film's outline.
The four typical characteristics of structural film are, the fixed camera, the flicker effect, loop printing, and rephotography off the screen.
3. If Brakhage’s cinema emphasized metaphors of perception, vision, and body movement, what is the central metaphor of structural film? Hint: It fits into Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde that we have discussed previously in class.
Structural film is a cinema of the mind rather than a cinema of the eye. Instead of trying to represent exactly what the eye sees, like Brakhage, the structuralist filmmakers attempted to represent a mindset, or simply the human mind in general.
4. Why does Sitney argue that Andy Warhol is the major precursor to the structural film?
Sitney argues that Warhol is the major precursor to structural film because he left all of the technical parts out, he was more focused on performance and the film itself. The structure is set, and whatever comes from it will come from it. His films were long, and challenged the viewer who was watching to stay engaged, or if not, question themselves as to why they were not, and explore the consciousness of being conscious of watching a film.
5. The trickiest part of Sitney’s chapter is to understand the similarities and differences between Warhol and the structural filmmakers. He argues that Warhol in a sense is anti-Romantic and stands in opposition to the visionary tradition represented by psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. But for Sitney’s central argument to make sense, he needs to place structural film within the tradition of psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. Trace the steps in this argument by following the following questions:
a. Why does Sitney call Warhol anti-Romantic?
Because Warhol called himself anti-romantic. He made films that showed how similar and romantic the other avant-garde films at the time were.
b. Why does Sitney argue that spiritually the distance between Warhol and structural filmmakers such as Michael Snow or Ernie Gehr cannot be reconciled?
Because their decisions as to why they used a fixed camera position or not were so similar.
c. What is meant by the phrase “conscious ontology of the viewing experience”? How does this relate to Warhol’s films? How does this relate to structural films?
It means being conscious of watching a film as a film. This fits into structuralism because it deals with the workings of the mind and consciousness. As for Warhol, he was looking for the same consciousness, but of the audience being conscious of watching the film, and not another consciousness.
d. Why does Sitney argue that structural film is related to the psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical tradition, and in fact responds to Warhol’s attack on that tradition by using Warhol’s own tactics?
Structural film orchestrates the sameness and the duration, looking to focus the audience's attention on certain things because of the sameness of it all. Warhol, on the other hand, challenged the audience more as an experiment in a less thought out way, to make the viewer aware of their viewing.
6. What metaphor is crucial to Sitney’s and Annette Michelson’s interpretation of Michael Snow’s Wavelength?
The film is a metaphor for consciousness itself, in that it starts with a question, and eventually answers in in what the viewer should be looking at, and throughout we answer the question ourselves, and are extremely conscious that is what we are doing.
Sitney, “Structural Film”
2. How is structural film different from the tradition of Deren/Brakhage/Anger, and what are its four typical characteristics?
The traditions of Brakhage/Deren/Anger's structure where the shape of the film is predetermined and extremely important. While in structural film, the shape is there, but less important than the film's outline.
The four typical characteristics of structural film are, the fixed camera, the flicker effect, loop printing, and rephotography off the screen.
3. If Brakhage’s cinema emphasized metaphors of perception, vision, and body movement, what is the central metaphor of structural film? Hint: It fits into Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde that we have discussed previously in class.
Structural film is a cinema of the mind rather than a cinema of the eye. Instead of trying to represent exactly what the eye sees, like Brakhage, the structuralist filmmakers attempted to represent a mindset, or simply the human mind in general.
4. Why does Sitney argue that Andy Warhol is the major precursor to the structural film?
Sitney argues that Warhol is the major precursor to structural film because he left all of the technical parts out, he was more focused on performance and the film itself. The structure is set, and whatever comes from it will come from it. His films were long, and challenged the viewer who was watching to stay engaged, or if not, question themselves as to why they were not, and explore the consciousness of being conscious of watching a film.
5. The trickiest part of Sitney’s chapter is to understand the similarities and differences between Warhol and the structural filmmakers. He argues that Warhol in a sense is anti-Romantic and stands in opposition to the visionary tradition represented by psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. But for Sitney’s central argument to make sense, he needs to place structural film within the tradition of psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. Trace the steps in this argument by following the following questions:
a. Why does Sitney call Warhol anti-Romantic?
Because Warhol called himself anti-romantic. He made films that showed how similar and romantic the other avant-garde films at the time were.
b. Why does Sitney argue that spiritually the distance between Warhol and structural filmmakers such as Michael Snow or Ernie Gehr cannot be reconciled?
Because their decisions as to why they used a fixed camera position or not were so similar.
c. What is meant by the phrase “conscious ontology of the viewing experience”? How does this relate to Warhol’s films? How does this relate to structural films?
It means being conscious of watching a film as a film. This fits into structuralism because it deals with the workings of the mind and consciousness. As for Warhol, he was looking for the same consciousness, but of the audience being conscious of watching the film, and not another consciousness.
d. Why does Sitney argue that structural film is related to the psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical tradition, and in fact responds to Warhol’s attack on that tradition by using Warhol’s own tactics?
Structural film orchestrates the sameness and the duration, looking to focus the audience's attention on certain things because of the sameness of it all. Warhol, on the other hand, challenged the audience more as an experiment in a less thought out way, to make the viewer aware of their viewing.
6. What metaphor is crucial to Sitney’s and Annette Michelson’s interpretation of Michael Snow’s Wavelength?
The film is a metaphor for consciousness itself, in that it starts with a question, and eventually answers in in what the viewer should be looking at, and throughout we answer the question ourselves, and are extremely conscious that is what we are doing.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Fuses Response
In this film I can certainly see the Brakhage influence with all of the painting on film, scratching, and manipulation of speed and color. Yet, at the same time, she makes it her own. I may be mistaken, but the way she paints over the sequences of her and her husband stand out and unique to her. Brakhage filmed people and distorted them, and he painted on film, but I don't recall a time where Brakhage took black and white footage and then painted over on that. I think most of his painting was on clear leader. (Disclaimer: I have not seen enough of Brakhage's work to be super certain on this, I'm just going off of the things I have seen both in this class and others.)
There are also times when the color stays consistent between the highlights, lowlights, and midtones, so I wonder if this is some sort of tinting instead of painting.
Overall, it seems a bit of a slap in the face to Brakhage, as this was a response to his film, Loving. She blatantly uses his techniques, but just does them "better". I wonder what Brakhage thought of the film?
There are also times when the color stays consistent between the highlights, lowlights, and midtones, so I wonder if this is some sort of tinting instead of painting.
Overall, it seems a bit of a slap in the face to Brakhage, as this was a response to his film, Loving. She blatantly uses his techniques, but just does them "better". I wonder what Brakhage thought of the film?
Monday, February 22, 2010
Chelsea Girls Response
The lighting used in The Chelsea Girls is a performance in itself. This film would not have the same feel or impact if we saw these people with normal 3-point, un-colored lighting. There is also a lot of camera movement, something we aren't used to seeing from Warhol. But again, the film would not have the same affect or feel if it were a static camera.
Both the lights and the camera movement add to the sense of immediacy. It helps the audience to feel as if they were there, and not just there, but there in the same (drug induced, crazy, incredibly egotistical) state as those we are watching.
With the lights and the camera movement combined, as well as the double projection, it becomes a full visual experience instead of just watching/listening to some people talk about some crazy shit.
In regards to the split projection, sometimes you don't even notice the second screen, but other times I found myself dying to know what was happening on the silent projection and desperately wanted the sound to switch to the other projection.
Overall, on first viewing, it is an extremely overwhelming experience, although (if I wasn't trying to ward off a migraine) an enjoyable one.
Both the lights and the camera movement add to the sense of immediacy. It helps the audience to feel as if they were there, and not just there, but there in the same (drug induced, crazy, incredibly egotistical) state as those we are watching.
With the lights and the camera movement combined, as well as the double projection, it becomes a full visual experience instead of just watching/listening to some people talk about some crazy shit.
In regards to the split projection, sometimes you don't even notice the second screen, but other times I found myself dying to know what was happening on the silent projection and desperately wanted the sound to switch to the other projection.
Overall, on first viewing, it is an extremely overwhelming experience, although (if I wasn't trying to ward off a migraine) an enjoyable one.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Reading Response 5
J. Hoberman, Jonathan Rosenbaum, The Underground
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
Fashion Industries Auditorium, The Charles, The Thalia, The New Yorker, The Bleeker Street Cinema. The Charles Theater was more “seedy” than the other ones where the high class mixed with the lower classes. They also often played Ukranian films that were extremely popular, and started the cult tradition of midnight screenings.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
Flaming Creatures, The Queen of Sheba Meets the Atom Man, Blonde Cobra, and Little Stabs at Happiness were associated with “Baudelairean Cinema”. He used that term because Baudelaire was a writer who helped to revolutionize world literature a century prior, and these films were “the real revolution in cinema” of that time. These films were not afraid to delve into delicate and dirty things, perversity, and they were without sexual inhibitions or inhibitions of any kind.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
Underground films ran into trouble in NYC in 1964 because NYC was trying to clean up it’s act for the 1964 World’s Fair. Scorpio Rising encountered legal problems in LA the same day as Mekas’ second arrest in NYC.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Warhol’s collaborations with Tavel culminated in actors who didn’t know their lines, were afraid of being in front of the camera, came and went whenever they wanted, all while the camera was pointed in their general direction and ran until the film ran out.
Vinyl, extremely loosely based on the novel A Clockwork Orange, was shot in real time with a single camera setup, performers read lines from cue cards. Edie Sedgewick stole the scene by simply being “spaced out” and present consistently at screen right to add to compositional balance.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
Warhol’s, My Hustler, was to be his first popular success and was showed in midnight screenings at the Cinematheque. Then Chelsea Girls came out, and Newsweek called it “The Illiad of the underground” while the New York Times said Warhol was “pushing a reckless thing too far”. The Film-Makers’ Cinematheque was the main venue associated with the crossover, because it was too small to hold the number of people who wound up wanting to see Chelsea Girls. It then moved to theaters like The Regency and the Cinema Rendezvous. Chelsea Girls also played in LA, Dallas, Washington, San Francisco, Buffalo, Cambrige, Houston, Atlanta, and St. Louis, as well as being invited to the Cannes Film Festival.
6. Why was John Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Getz packaged programs of underground films and sent them to a circuit of movie houses owned by his uncle in 22 cities. They were immensely popular, and Getz is credited for introducing underground cinema to the American heartland.
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
None of them were again truly directed by Warhol after his attempted assassination, and they began to turn a lot more pornographic.
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
Fashion Industries Auditorium, The Charles, The Thalia, The New Yorker, The Bleeker Street Cinema. The Charles Theater was more “seedy” than the other ones where the high class mixed with the lower classes. They also often played Ukranian films that were extremely popular, and started the cult tradition of midnight screenings.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
Flaming Creatures, The Queen of Sheba Meets the Atom Man, Blonde Cobra, and Little Stabs at Happiness were associated with “Baudelairean Cinema”. He used that term because Baudelaire was a writer who helped to revolutionize world literature a century prior, and these films were “the real revolution in cinema” of that time. These films were not afraid to delve into delicate and dirty things, perversity, and they were without sexual inhibitions or inhibitions of any kind.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
Underground films ran into trouble in NYC in 1964 because NYC was trying to clean up it’s act for the 1964 World’s Fair. Scorpio Rising encountered legal problems in LA the same day as Mekas’ second arrest in NYC.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Warhol’s collaborations with Tavel culminated in actors who didn’t know their lines, were afraid of being in front of the camera, came and went whenever they wanted, all while the camera was pointed in their general direction and ran until the film ran out.
Vinyl, extremely loosely based on the novel A Clockwork Orange, was shot in real time with a single camera setup, performers read lines from cue cards. Edie Sedgewick stole the scene by simply being “spaced out” and present consistently at screen right to add to compositional balance.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
Warhol’s, My Hustler, was to be his first popular success and was showed in midnight screenings at the Cinematheque. Then Chelsea Girls came out, and Newsweek called it “The Illiad of the underground” while the New York Times said Warhol was “pushing a reckless thing too far”. The Film-Makers’ Cinematheque was the main venue associated with the crossover, because it was too small to hold the number of people who wound up wanting to see Chelsea Girls. It then moved to theaters like The Regency and the Cinema Rendezvous. Chelsea Girls also played in LA, Dallas, Washington, San Francisco, Buffalo, Cambrige, Houston, Atlanta, and St. Louis, as well as being invited to the Cannes Film Festival.
6. Why was John Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Getz packaged programs of underground films and sent them to a circuit of movie houses owned by his uncle in 22 cities. They were immensely popular, and Getz is credited for introducing underground cinema to the American heartland.
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
None of them were again truly directed by Warhol after his attempted assassination, and they began to turn a lot more pornographic.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Kiss and Mario Banana response
A theme I saw in both Kiss and Mario Banana was the blurring of gender roles. In the first male-male kiss in Kiss, it took me a minute to realize that the man on the bottom was, indeed, a man. By having so many heterosexual couples kissing, one assumes the theme will simply continue.
The same goes for Mario Banana, in the idea that we have a man, dressed as a woman, seducing, whom? Is he seducing a man? A woman? Another transvestite? I suppose he is attempting to seduce anyone who watches the film, which is why his gender is so ambiguous.
Overall, very ahead of its time pieces, and certainly ones that make us consider how we have been raised to view gender roles.
The same goes for Mario Banana, in the idea that we have a man, dressed as a woman, seducing, whom? Is he seducing a man? A woman? Another transvestite? I suppose he is attempting to seduce anyone who watches the film, which is why his gender is so ambiguous.
Overall, very ahead of its time pieces, and certainly ones that make us consider how we have been raised to view gender roles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)