I didnt understand a word.

Sharon Lockhart defiantly made me think in a different manner with her use of photography and film. Ive often loved the production photos from films and the way they catch a beautiful moment of people whose jobs it is to create stories that touch our hearts. But the idea of using photos to expand on film and piggy back each other in a 1-2 combo, thats brilliant.
As fare as the film we watched in class, I enjoyed the use of rhythm in her piece. From the basketballs being thrown and bounced in time to the chanting, it really seemed to glue every player on the screen together and create a unit as opposed to individual players. I feel like that was the point of her film, aside from just wonderful ascetics.
This short post brought to you by the fact that we all have 20 other things to worry about getting done in the next 3 weeks.

"Hamilton"

One thing that stands out in my minds eye regarding "Hamilton" is that I
was reminded how much I hate idle talk. This is not to say that I hated the
film. The new twist on this idea is that sometimes the lack of idle talk
only leads to idle time. Its the whole idea of time that is shaping this
thought I believe.
Sure sometimes the acting may lead us out of the moment, but it may just be
the extended time without verbal communication that gives our minds time to
scrutinize said acting? All these people walking around with ipods, thinking
about talking or talking without thinking. Who could ask every walking
Holster billboard to pay attention to the people not saying anything on
screen instead of their hair? Not me. But Ive had this wicked pain in neck
for two weeks now so I may just be short on a nerve.
In moments like in this film, I remember what some actor (cant remember
who) said was one of the most over looked concepts in acting. He said
something about how he tries to retrace the mental thoughts that would lead
a character to the next line of dialogue. Kind of reliving the scene from in
the brain out. That idea may be best used in extended time scenes like the
ones in "Hamilton". But something tells me people were not doing that here.
The use of time is done well for the most part, but I think Im with Dan on
this one. The tempo of the masses must be controlled! (just kidding) Some
scenes could have used something more or just ran for less.

Graphic? Hell yes it was graphic. So hell yes!

Jennifer Montgomery was awesome. Her films really got to some people in a "what do you think of....... THIS!" kind of way. I heard one guy say " Oh my God!" during what appeared to be a women rubbing her menstruation on some over exposed film.
The part I was the most intrigued in was the urine scenes. Which I had to ask a question that I thought I heard some snickers to. But it dawned on me while I was thinking of how to word my question, "I went through a peeing in public phase." I dont know why I did it at the time, but I did go through a phase about 7 years ago where I peed where ever I felt like it. Once I even peed on a bon fire surrounded by people. Thank god we were all drinking or people may have been kind of angry.
But I liked her answer. She said it was part sexual and part liberating. The fact that she said it was part sexual, hell yes. I love people who refuse to be ashamed of them selves and their art. Sure some people can take anything you throw at them, but throw it at their art and its a whole different story. Hell I know a bunch of people that get all hot under the collar when I tell them that their favorite band sucks.
As far as the liberating side goes, I agree. Look at the Vagina Monologues. There is a problem with people feeling comfortable with their bodies. I guess peeing all over the place (never on the floor in a house or anything like that) was a way to be o.k. with me. Weird?

But how do you feel?

I liked "More than Meets the Eye: Remaking Jane Fonda", a lot. Maybe to much. I cant help it. The obscure and ridiculous just draw me in. I dont know how much I can talk about how it made me feel because it made me think more than feel.
One thing that I have always loved to think about is why film directors put the things in the movies. By things I mean everything. Why that type of phone? why those clothes? Why did the main character order that kind of sandwich? The way I see it, if there is no answer to any of these questions, then someone didn't do their job and I hate them. But I digest. (thats a joke)
I asked myself a bunch of questions. This is what I have come up with. Jane Fonda may be one of the worlds biggest former hippy/activist turned yuppie that has ever walked the earth. Who else could you choose to show how a life can spin a 180 because you cant live up to your own expectations. Its like Jello Biafra says in regards vegetarians and protesters and anti big business folk, "Dont walk around being a holier than tho type. Keep it simple and manageable. Or you can crack and become one of them."
Which is exactly what happened to Miss Fonda. Some of the things she said in her life helped make a difference. I commend her on that. But she dug a hole to deep to climb out of.
Any who, I think Mr. Stark used his back drops well. To me they represented the places where missis Fonda message finally came to rest. In the living room where women worked out to her tape. At the grocery store where people talked about her and read about her in tabloids. Outside in the rain where her activist ways washed away. And on and on like that with sarcasm.
What Mr. Stark did was take what and who Jane Fonda was and showed us all where she went. Kudos.

We watched a Communist work on Monday?

"Just a play on her name. Great work though. I personally took the most delight in the fact that she was the only one she knew of doing that type of work. If the world would flood and Noah picked up different kinds of artist two by two, she would die alone. Then millions of years later, we would find her and her art and say it disproved the word of god him/her self. Thats whats wrong with this country." Now heres Daniel Johnston with the weather. "Its sad outside with a chance of satan." Thanks Johnston, "Not enough people think outside the box. I guess maybe the box got bigger? Any who, The Public Life of Jeremiah Barnes stole the show for me. The whole story was just so sweet. The way every one tried to figure out why the machines were there and then this guy pops out and it was just great. I think that kind of story line would be her bread and butter. Go get em Vlad!"

Q) How many A.D.D. kids does it take to change a light bulb? A) Wanna ride bikes!

I have a hard time with reading. Not that I cant read, it just that my mind wonders. Thats why film works out for me so well. I can be engaged while having enough room in my head and time in the viewing to wonder and ponder through thought. When I get into a really good book this happens a small bit also, but thats only with a really good book.
This lack of controlled ability has plagued me and would explain why I took so many years off of the structured learning circuit. This also translates directly to a poor paper writing ability. I hate writing papers. One may ask, "But Dave, if you want to write films and make films you are going to have to write a lot. Isn't that going to be a problem?" Id say, "No, leave me alone and bother someone else you nosy bastard!" I say this because I have many many note books and word files full of single scenes. These scenes are going to be the structure of my film career (Or so I hope).
Long story short, I am bad at writing papers and am hating writing this paper that I am so eloquently avoiding right now. I shouldn't say that, Im not "bad" at writing papers, Its just a struggle to do it for me. I know Im not the only one.

In Loving Memory of February 5th 2007.

One amazing thing about this class is that I can never seem to get a grip on what is coming next. That being said, the films we saw today were weird. "Third Eye Butterfly" was quit beautiful. Though I saw no recognizable images in the film, aside from the swirl with the eye in the middle, I was stunned by the beauty and delicateness of the images projected. The cutting, spreading, over lapping and multiplying of colors seemed to be more of a product of the music as opposed to the other way around. That being said, I haven't heard to much of that style of music, but what I have heard I loved. I don't even know what category of music it is. I like it. On a down side, it didn't seem to me that the film was cut to match in tempo or dance along with the soundtrack. My big thing as of late has been confessing to take 80% of the blame in not understanding the meaning behind the art I have been exposed to. From film to poetry, if I dont get it, Im blaming myself and not the artist. So as far as the not matching with the music thing, Ill take my 80 in that regard. I think there was a tempo set by the music that was kept in tact through the film, but I would have liked to seen it more on a "on beat" style. But Im a skateboarder and enjoy the way skateboard videos have evolved to sync a song with the skateboarder. So im sort of programed in that way.

"Available light" didn't have enough going on to keep my attention. I like the idea behind the film, but that wasn't enough to keep my mind on track with it. Given my attention span, Im not sure it ever had a chance. Im quick people. Ill even take 90% on this one.

"Night Flight Transmission" was scary as hell. This film was really loud. It seemed as though the timing behind all the cuts were linked directly to my brain and made to freak the s**t out of me. Id show this film to a dog who behaved badly. I kept waiting for blood to start pouring down the screen and for people to start screaming and other really dark thoughts. I think that may have been a part of the point. Did anyone ever see "Altered States"? This film reminded me of the peyote scene in that movie. If you haven't seen it check it out, Its top 10 on my list easy.

"Luminous" is another film that didn't really hold my attention to well. Im sure people with a projectionist back round would love it. I do not have a projectionist back round. I did not love it.

"The Darkroom" had some amazing angles and motion in it. I have no idea how they did it, but I want to know. This film got me on a film makers level more than a strictly art viewing level. The way the waves would come in and out at the same time and curled just made me want to pick Jang's brain on the production side of it. I came to a strange realization in this one to. I realized that the sight of waves is as calming as the sound of waves. Im sure my psychology professor would remind me that sight and sound have some brain wave similarities and that while viewing silent waves my brain would fill in sound on its own or something like that. I was so inthralled with the image while my brain was telling me to take a nap. I fought my way through this one. Now I feel like I was a guinea pig in an experiment. "Mr. Biesel, try to stay awake while we use science to lull you to sleep. Oh, and if you do fall asleep, we will know it from your brain wave read out. Then you will receive and electric shock to help stimulate alertness in the brain." I dont know why I added the "shock" part. Peace!