"Goshogaoka"

"It's about the idea and not the technology.."

I think Lockhart's quote pretty much explains the concept for her film "Goshogaoka." When I think of this film and what I saw, technology is the last thing that comes to mind. My favorite part of the film was the still camera focused on the stage. I tried to imagine how different the film would be had she used a moving camera, used close-ups of the girls, and shown the surrounding gym. It still would have been an awesome image but it would be too similar to sports movies, shows, etc. I just got to sit back and wait for someone new to pop out on the court with the curtain as the focus. The pounding of the feet on the court was like an introduction for the players. I liked how their movements in the warm-ups, drills, and tricks were orchestrated like a dance, but also how mistakes were not excluded. Showing the girls fall out of line or drop the ball just kept things more realistic and humorous. It seemed like the team went from being tough and machine-like in the beginning, then zombies walking around in green jumpsuits in the end.

Even if I hadn't known beforehand that Lockhart was a photographer, I still would get that sense. Especially during the part when one or two girls would walk out, stop, do a trick, stop, then exit. This reminded me of the stills of the children we saw previous to watching the film.

The fact that Lockhart was in a foreign country and wasn't familiar with the language or culture greatly adds to "Goshogaoka". The film was more about the art of movement and choreography to me personally than anything else. It was interesting to see basketball in such an artistic way. Nothing really about the sport was changed, just the timing and placement. All in all, I thought it was great.

Wait n' See

For me, "Hamilton" by Matthew Porterfield, was all about waiting for something to happen. I was so curious about these people and their lives that it made it difficult for me to just watch them live normally. I honestly just wanted something bad or at least interesting to happen to them. I'm so use to drama and action with narrative films and this threw me off. At some point in the film I finally just accepted that I wasn't going to see anything exciting. I tried to figure out if and when a climax occurred and the only thing that I could come up with was the scene where Joe and the little boy are speeding on their bikes trying to bring flowers to Leena in the truck.(I think) If it had been any other film, I would have expected the truck to hit the bike.
I agree that the dialogue wasn't the greatest part of the film. I preferred when the characters were doing their own thing and not talking at all. I think in class someone mentioned how only during these scenes with no dialogue could we see who these people really were.
The situations in the film were so real, no outrageous or unnecessary actions and words were added. It just reminded me of the normal shit everyone has to go through. One of my favorite scenes was where Joe gets up to play videogames and really just wants nothing to do with his girlfriend/wife. I think that is what worked so well for me and probably is what turned some people away. It was almost like we were eavesdropping on this family and they didn't know it.
Some obvious questions that came to mind were: What was the mother thinking during the car ride? Will Joe get the flowers to Leena in time? Does Joe really love Leena? I think yes...

Intentional Vulnerablity

Why did Scott Stark intentionally make himself look foolish? I have no idea. Maybe to prove a point, to help us relate, or maybe to make fun of Jane Fonda? He put himself out there in those ridiculously tight pants, in public, and even worse rocked out to Jane Fonda. I liked how in class, Stark was compared to the guys in "Jackass" because it seemed like some of what he was doing was solely to get a reaction. In his case, no one really reacted. At least it makes the experience funnier. Another way to look at it is that he was trying to relate to the audience. We all do embarrassing stuff, whether it be intentional or unintentional, and by Stark filming himself, he seemed vulnerable, therefore easy to relate to. Then we could pay attention to the words and appreciate them. Before we saw the film, we learned that Stark became disgusted with Fonda and lost appreciation for her when she began advocating fitness instead of other issues. Because of this, when I first saw him, I thought he was making fun of Fonda's videos. I really don't know if its any of these reasons, maybe all three.

(Somewhat) Non-Fiction Films

The films we saw on April 2 were a lot easier for me to get in to in comparison to most of the previous films we've seen. I was interested in most of the issues they were talking about. I think a big part of my interest was the fact that these filmmakers were actually discussing issues more than anything else. I felt that these films had so much more to offer in my experience. I might have felt different perhaps had the topics been uninteresting to me, but luckily these were. All of the information was sort of thrown in our faces, whether it be bold words scrolling across the screen, or flashy images displayed. It was like an overload for my brain, but I liked it because I never really lost interest or felt like sleeping. The film by Frederic Moffet portraying Jean Genet in Chicago reminded me of a newspaper but with movable images. It was like a more entertaining and somewhat biased documentary. I loved how the heads on the talking figures remained as the same cut-out for each person. This helped me follow a some-what confusing story. While what was being talked about was hazy, I at least had Genet's cut-out head and voice to follow. "More than Meets the Eye: Remaking Jane Fonda," by Scott Stark had so many interesting quotes from Fonda, it was hard to follow. However, I thought it worked well how he displayed the quotes about her femininity and eating disorders scrolling horizontally on the bottom and her political views vertically from the top. Being a woman, I felt like I could relate to what she was saying about the pressures and hardships and I also agreed with a lot of what she was saying about the war, presidents, military, and politics in general. A lot of what she was saying then can be compared to how many feel about what is going on today, which also caught my attention. As for Stark working out in the back, at first it was funny, then it just got old. He looked ridiculous but maybe that's what he was going for. I'm not sure what else he could have done for a background. At least it wasn't dull. The last film we watched, "Stranger Comes to Town," by Jacqueline Goss was awesome. Everything was so out of the ordinary and each new character was more interesting and outrageous than the last. For me it was like I had been trying to get a sense of how these people feel when they come to America, and by animating themselves as video game characters, I finally understood...to a degree. Some of their stories were amazing, what each of them had to do and how they were interrogated was ridiculous. Goss's way of displaying these six people and their experiences in coming to the United States was a great way to help us get inside their heads. We got a chance to see how they feel like monsters or aliens when they've done nothing wrong.

Vladmaster

The four Vladmaster videos or slide shows shown reminded me of a children's story book being told by narration. This was in part because of the fact that we all got to use a "toy" for the first time, and because we had a voice sharing a story that went along with each picture. This made the experience similar to a child visiting a museum, because they are both hands on. The greatest part of these works was how they involved the viewer. Unlike most films, these programs gave us control over what we were seeing. Using the View-Master, we could decide when to change the slide, how much light was available, and whether or not to follow along with the narrator. I'm always amazed at how someone can pull even farther away from the norms of film-making; Vladmir definitely showed me something new. I couldn't believe how much time and thought went into each beautiful little packet holding the slides. Each one was so different in detail, for some reason I couldn't wait to see how she wrote the "1,2,3, and 4" on each new set of slides.

I think my favorite piece was "Lucifugia Thigmotaxis," simply because I was interested in what would happen to the cockroach. I liked how we got to experience Stanley's adventures with him. On Vladmaster's website she explains that "Lucifugia" means light-fleeing. "Thigmotaxis" is how in order to feel safe there must be pressure on all four sides of the body. These two words together describe the character of a cockroach and what is necessary for them to survive.

Ethan Jackson and Camera Obscura

I find the use of camera obscura to be one of the most interesting forms of art because like Jackson explained, everything is left up to chance; the artist has literally no control. In "Panopticon 1," Ethan Jackson explained how he was forced to let go of all his previous intentions. He had to let small changes or intuitions take place, whether he wanted them to or not. He did also say that most of the time he enjoys the changes that are made and that with the variations of light, something can be made much more beautiful. Comparing this to the use of a regular camera Jackson said that with a camera, he can control variables and everything is very much about control. The limitations of photography show him just how little he can do.
In some of the cloud installation clips he showed, he explained how in the room, you could feel yourself shifting because of the actual movement in the clouds. It was the same effect that one would get when looking at a body of water, but more fast paced. When the mirror on the outside of the lens would rotate, color was picked up from the mirror twice, altering it. The color of the clouds appeared realistic and natural, I wouldn't have known they were changed. I would have loved to see the real installation of the clouds because it seemed like one could be engulfed in clouds, kind of like a dream state for me. They were beautiful on the rippled cloth and they looked as if real clouds were coming at you from every corner.
The instillation shown today(wed. 14) of the street traffic and people walking was fun to watch because at first, it was confusing. It looked as though the people and cars were coming or fading in and out, then disappearing. Trippy. The color was dull but that made it realistic, kind of a dull day today. The repetition of the same image was cool because even though I knew what was further down the wall, I skimmed every part of it.
The way Jackson creates a dark empty room into an alive square of imagery is definitely something worth seeing. It's also interesting to know that so much went into making the piece. Actually just a light ray, small opening, mirror, and a dark room. The continual projection of images makes it like the viewer is experiencing an optical illusion or magic trick. The visual effects and varying light make the camera obscura experience show the ordinary world in a new way. I think this is a good example of how watching Jackson's work is such a different experience from looking at a photograph or watching a video. We are looking at the same material that could be seen in both but the camera obscura and the different angles result in a new experience. Its like looking at a moving photograph or a video of the outdoors but all around you.

Lights and Sounds

This week's screenings had an interesting variety of length, color, sound, and subject. Some of the films gave me a headache, one in particular, was soothing. My favorite by far was "The Dark Room," by Minyong Jang. With the use of camera obscura and a rotating lense, Jang uniquely captured the flow of the ocean. It felt as though we were surrounded by water, surfing in slow motion. Carl described this experience as being in "a container of the ocean," I agree. I can't even remember if it was a silent film because I was so involved with the image, which rarely happens. Usually whether or not a film has sound determines my liking it or not. Altogether, Jang beautifully filmed the peacefulness and delicacy of water.

One thing I liked about "Lace of Summer" was the way it reminded me of a home-made movie. With the super-eight film and "cinema songs"(?) the filmmaker realistically showed the feeling one gets when they think of summer. I liked the repeated images of tents and how the film appeared colorless but there were hints of mint green and light blue at certain times. At first I didn't understand why there was a scene with a woman behind a curtain, later we learned this was the filmmaker. The film reminded me of what you see in a feature length movie, a snippet of someone else's memory of childhood, but this was sincere.

"Third Eye Butterfly," by Storm De Hirsch was intense. The combination of color and sound was incredible. I think my favorite part was how the music sounded so much like a drum circle and no color was left out. I felt like the film was all over the place, my eyes jumped all around the screen. The multiplication of the images created a unique experience for each viewer. I liked how Carl put it; "one could look across the screen, side to side, or combine all of the images into a single frame." Also, the hints of a butterfly that appeared once and a while(eye, wing, color, or an entire butterfly) was a nice touch.

"Available Light Shift" was probably my least favorite simply because I kept nodding off. I don't have much to say about it because I feel like there wasn't a lot to it. No offense to the filmmaker, of course. There was a thin amount of random color kept me going, also I thought it was interesting how the entirety of the film was based on the element of chance.

I definitely enjoyed "Night Flight Transmissions," by Brent Coughenour because of the bursts of light correlating with the bursts of image and sound. I liked how he paired the random images and constructed a harmonizing feel altogether. The innocent image of the child riding the bike became somewhat scary because of the sounds behind him. I think the uneasy feeling it produced is what was so likable. At first I didn't know what or if someone was talking in the background, then the noises became recognizable numbers. The noisy sounds that turned into words, finally eased its way into what sounded like church music. At the end, we learned that Coughenour wasn't just pulling random images, he was using family members and personal ideas to construct actual memories.

On "Letters From Beirut"

Before reading some of the letters from Laura Marks, I tried to answer the questions about what comes to mind when I think of Beirut and Lebanon. I thought of the news, history, as well as stories I've heard from a friend of mine that is from Lebanon. Sadly, this is all I could come up with before reading.

Images: bombing, sand, death, blood
Words: war, kill, pain, threats, injury, pray, tourists, oil, fragile, religion, protest, strike
Sounds: BOOM
Facts: Middle East, Confessionalism, civil war, Rafik Hariri, Israel-Lebanon conflict

After reading Marks' letters, these views didn't change much. These are some of the things that really shocked and stood out to me in her letters.....

She talks about "A quiet day, other than two big bombs in Dahiyeh at 2:30 at night and another just now." wow.

"Lebanon has approximately 3.5 million people. On a per-capita basis, that means that as of Wednesday, the rough equivalent of 9/11 has happened here for eight days."

"I only learned today that almost half of the Lebanese dead are children. There's a picture going around of an Israeli girl writing on an Israeli rocket, 'To the children of Lebanon from the children of Isreal.' Well, children were buried in a mass grave in Tyr in the south today." She said how she can't believe this. I too cannot imagine such hatred.

Comparing "All My Life" and "D'Est"

These two films are completely different in every context but I still felt the need to compare them. "All My Life" lasts only three minutes while "D'Est" is close to two hours. "All My Life" has piercing color with beautiful sound and "D'Est" has dull and uninteresting colors and only the sounds of people muttering and passing by can be heard. The first film has no people or objects in it, only the fence and surrounding wheat and grass. The second film has hundreds of people, buildings, and objects. Also, while I considered the first film to be one of my favorites, "D'Est" is low on my list of goodies. However, while these films are ultimately opposites, parts of "D'Est" are similar to "All My Life." The scenes in the train station where the camera slides along the sideways reminded me of the qualities I saw in its opposite. This is the only part of the film that I actually enjoyed because there's always someone or something new to look at. It leaves you wondering what happened to the previous subject that we just saw. In "All My Life," I knew what I was going to see next, but I was still intrigued. I guess one technique that won't fail to catch my eye is the sideways sliding camera. Hmmmm.

Laura Marks' Guest Lecture

"People get involved in experimental film because they feel compelled to." This was one of the first things Laura Marks discussed during her lecture. I found this statement to be very true throughout viewing many of the films she showed us. The film-makers each had something to say that was important to them in different ways. The film, "Les Egares" by Mounir Fatmi showed us some western influences that were brought to attention concerning the Islamic culture. Some of the sounds and images that stood out were the beautiful buildings and landscapes as well as the piercing sound of the bell and the strength of the wind. I liked how they continued to show the structure on top of the building from all angles, sometimes a human was present, sometimes not. The few men and women that were shown on top of the buildings seemed to be the only life forms for miles. What were they looking at and what for? At first, the people appeared to be free but when we were shown different images and the voice and text appeared, the people appeared to be seen in the light of a prisoner. In class, Marks explained that the film-maker is showing us typical Western TV images of Islams praying and he is saying, "this is not us." Also, the bells we hear during this segment of the film represent the pressure of fundamentalism. This film in relation to the next one we saw can be interpreted as offensive to the Islamic religion because it is unlike traditional forms of Islamic prayer. The next film we saw, "Allahu Akbat" by Usama Alshaibi, has the word "Resistances" or resistance in the title page. It can be described as a "Mandela film," it is very exciting from the beginning. "It's optical presence is like a dance performance," commented Marks. She also explained how the film was also an optical experiment because it had Western lineage influence. It was also a "trance film," the music was exciting, like rave music but better. The music was later described as belly-dancing music. Because of this type of music, the spirituality was taken away. It begins with slow traditional Arabic music, then leads to a fast-paced beat. In the Islamic culture, the geometric patterns have content but with the wrong type of music, the content is gone. The content of worship of Islam is taken away and altered and this could be offensive to the religion. This relates to the previous films because the people are not praying inside of the masque where they should be, they are standing on top of it. When the text begins, we get the impression that it is dis-satisfying to other people. I very much enjoyed both films but especially liked "Allahu Akbat." Comparing this film to Cory Archangel's "Data Diaries" is worlds different. While I found the "Data Diaries" disrupting, offensive, and loud, "Allahu Akbat" kept my attention and pleased my ears. I loved the music and how it went right along with what I was looking at. I think the black and white images worked well as they flashed to the beat. I wasn't running for the door.
"In This House" by Akram Zaatari, was a little confusing for me because of the way it was made. It was enticing and I felt very involved in the process, but too much was going on at once. My eyes were jumping all over the screen to keep up, but I guess that could be a good thing. Every sentence and image was important for this story about archiving but as someone said in class, there was an imbalance of information. There were eerie tones given to the voices and because of their refusal to be photographed, it was like a film of people talking while we view their ankles. The police showed up, the Christian family was scared, many people were gathered around, and there was talk of a bomb. I thought it was interesting how all of the excitement leads up to a climax of a piece of paper. An important piece of paper, but still a piece of paper.
One of the last works we saw, "Sadman," by Lina Ghaibeh was important to me because it was Lebanese TV animation, unlike any of the previous films. At first I thought it was very different from American animation, but then it started to remind me of Richard Linklater's work, "Waking Life(2001)." The type of animation was different, but it gave me the sense of a dream-like state or hallucination. The way the man kept coming back to the same activity in the bathroom, but every time he would dream something different. It was like each time he tried to preserve a happy face or state of mind, but it was impossible.

"D'Est"

I have mixed feelings about the feature film we saw on Monday. "D'Est" by Chantal Akerman began with an interesting "people watching" feel. Being a "people watcher" myself, I enjoyed watching the rolls of different people walking around the city. It felt like I could be right there, just observing(one of my favorite activities). After many of these similar scenes, the weather seemed to get colder and with that, the mood of the film changed. We started to see people alone in their homes. Some of these people were either sitting and starring or performing a meaningless act like putting on lipstick or clipping toenails. Usually, the people were all alone. The people watching just became depressing at this point. It seems like the shots jumped from groups of people to one person sitting at home alone. I felt like we visited every home and scene in the Soviet Union, each one more depressing than the last. I distinctly remember two different women sitting at home alone with a cup of coffee/tea, just starring. The only happiness I saw was the scene of the boys sledding. The shot of the people waiting outside and at the train station caught my eye because everyone just seemed unhappy to be there. I wondered if the people in the crowd were informed of the camera because everyone just sat and starred in awe. They looked at the camera as if it were an alien. Maybe they were instructed to do so. Some looked embarrassed and uneasy, few giggled uncomfortably. The film ended with a woman playing a sad song on stage. I don't know what to think of this. Maybe a perfect ending for this kind of film. I wonder if Akerman had the intent of making a piece with such a low mood. If a similar film was shot in America, would it be at all different and more uplifting? Probably not. "D'Est" left me depressed.

Favorites

Before I even read Shay's fifth consecutive post, I too considered Bruce Baillie's, "All My Life" to be my favorite film so far. I know I've expressed my problem with being able to stay awake during some films but this was far from it. I couldn't look away from the amazing color. The hot oranges and reds were piercing. It was one of the simplest pieces we've seen, yet it all of the detail and continuous movement was perfect. I wish that it would have kept going. Three minutes was not enough to capture this scene. I agree with William when he says that because of its simplicity, the viewer's mind was not clouded or bothered with hectic images. We could sit back and let our minds wander. The song in the background fit perfectly as well, it added even more beauty to the scene. Finally, I think one of my favorite aspects was the continuous movement. The slow roll of tape kept my eyes and attention focused. Even though I was certain what would come next, I was still interested. "All My Life" held the idea of active looking, and I think that is what I respect about Baillie's film making. So much talk about such a simple three minute piece seems silly but for some reason, it worked.

Feb. 14 Class Discussion

I enjoyed the method we used yesterday for discussing the films we saw on Monday. It gave people a chance to say what they really felt and gave them the opportunity to ask the questions they wanted. Often times, going around in a circle can diminish the actual conversation and people may not always say what's really on their minds. I think we brought up some good points about the films and interesting questions were answered. Once I had a topic in mind, I felt like I could write endlessly.
The paper I ended up with discussed Leighton Pierce's "Thursday," a film which I enjoyed as far as I can remember. The peace found in each shot of his home was almost calming and it was interesting to see how such simple everyday scenes could have such deep meaning. The question that was first asked was, "In Leighton Pierce's film, what is the point of showing window blinds or showing us a window instead of showing us what may have been seen on the outside of those objects? " It was answered with "I believe Leighton didn't want to show us what was outside because I think he was more concerned with showing his daily life within his kitchen/home." I agree that he purposefully stayed within his domestic area because he found pleasure in his immediate surroundings and he wanted to share it. There was a definite sense of graphic pleasure in the collection of sights and sounds that he showed. The second question was, "Does Pierce's "Thursday" relate to any other films shown in class?" The response to this was, "I think that Pierce's "Thursday" is a lot like Dorsky's "Variations" because they both paid attention to the detail we see in our lives." The film for me was similar to "Variations" in this sense but I didn't catch the similarity until it was brought up in class. For some reason I liked "Thursday" more than "Variations" and it may have something to do with the fact that it had sound. I think that if "Thursday" lacked sound, I would have felt differently. One example would be the way that the sound of the coffee maker went along with its image. I think I needed to hear its noise to get the full effect. The final question for discussion was, "In Leighton's "Thursday" he broke down time to it's simplest form, a lot like Dorsky's "Variations." How did he go about doing it?" This was answered with, "He broke it down into its simplest form by using extended shots of vague imagery. Allowing the viewer to focus with the intent of seeing a deeper meaning." I liked this idea of "seeing a deeper meaning" because we often lose sight of this when we go about our daily lives. Films like "Thursday" and "Variations" slow things down and help to regain our sense of this. Not many would see anything interesting about the blinds of a window or a pot of coffee being made, but with the "extended shots of vague imagery" it is possible.

Likes and Dislikes

The films we saw on Monday all touched me in a different way. I enjoyed some and hated the others. The films we saw during the first two weeks of classes done by Snow and Dorsky, for example, were not interesting to me and left me sleepy. However, the more recent films we've seen like "Theme Song," "Birthday Suit," and "A Letter to Jonas," have managed to keep my attention and were much easier to stay awake during. The video diary by Dorsky, to me, was a variety of nature scenes that over-all lacked excitement. I found myself dozing off in the silence. Similarly, "Commingled Containers," by Brackhage, did about the same for me. The various ways to shoot water by playing with reflections and heightened the balance failed to keep my attention. The films by Nishikawa and Kitchen were no different; as much as I tried to pay attention, I was not interested. Also, as much as I enjoy nature, I cannot find pleasure in watching it on film.
In contrast to this, I found the films that we saw on February 5th to be much more interesting and exciting. I wonder if I need to see human interaction on the screen as well as hearing actual sound to be intrigued. "Theme Song" is a perfect example of this. The communication done by face to face contact in this film was what I most enjoyed. The intimacy of Vito Acconci talking to the viewer as if he/she was right there was essential. The viewer can get the feeling that they are being spoken to and drawn in by the filmmaker. Because the camera remains stationary, Acconci successfully grabs hold of the viewer's attention and doesn't let go. Another film that really caught my attention was Lisa Steel's, "Birthday Suit." The camera is much more "in your face," as well as intimate. It is as if Steel is making a confession on camera, and it is hard to look away and ignore. Also, the nudity is a different kind of direct address. It is a specific and passive was of her telling us her story. These films are what make me glad I took the class.
The films we saw on Monday, February 12 were a variety of types of artwork and I enjoyed some and disliked others. The Renato Umali web piece, "I Learn Something New Every Single Day," was something I couldn't take my eyes off. I found it hard to listen to Carl when watching the screen. I enjoyed the way Umali would sometimes morph into a new image slowly. Also, when I could read the captions on the screen, I liked the variety of subject matter he wrote about. His captions ranged from his current crush, to items he wanted, to serious events going on in the world. His picture diary was an inspiring way to remember each day of any one's life. Because I was so intrigued by the screen, all I have written in my notes for his work is simply, "I loved it."
"A Letter to Jonas Mekas," left me in a very relaxed mood. I liked how he talked to the camera and laughed at himself at times. It seemed like a "good-morning" note for Jonas. He recorded all of the quiet and peaceful sounds as if he was waiting. However, as much as he enjoyed the peacefulness, he kept remarking on how much he missed New York.
"Gently Down the Stream," by Su Friedrich, was similar to Snow's but a much different experience. I enjoyed the fact that it was not as easy to read and how the scratching on the film strip to make the words made the film much more interesting than something like Snow's. The in stable fluttering of the words created sounds when there weren't any. Also, the changing of the size and placement of the words had the same affect and made the silent film, non-silent. However, no matter how enticing it is, a silent film always makes me sleepy. The film is like a scrapbook with its use of text and imagery. I liked how the basis of the film was on a series of dreams. The imagery in the film, including water and religious iconography was creepy and unclear. This made the film such a success to me because it made me feel like I was dreaming. The way that the words and images were so hard to read/understand gave the effect that Carl was talking about, where it seemed almost like an "aqueous state reflective of a dream state."
Lastly, I found the "Data Diaries," by Cory Arcangel to be overall repelling and obnoxious. I hated the noise with its piercing sound. I kept waiting for someone to turn it down. I was expecting the unreadable images to disappear and to see some kind of video game character on the screen. It was interesting when someone commented on how it was as if the computer had its own language that only it could understand. While I never want to see the "Data Diaries" again, I did like the way the screen would randomly (or purposefully) show signs of order, almost as if it had a mind of its own.

Experimental vs. Narrative

Can experimental films be narratives?

I'm going to take a political approach to answer this question and say that some experimental films are narratives, while others are not. However, a lot of this question has to do with the definition of "narrative;" and as Amanda says in her blog, "story" comes up in the definition. Looking back to previous films, in my opinion, Dorsky's "Variations" doesn't display much of a story. I see images of walks around San Francisco. I don't really see him telling a tale, but more giving me an idea of balance between the image and the maker. The film also gave me a sense that I was taking a walk with Dorsky, seeing everything he saw. As we talked about in class, the film was more like a visual diary, rather than a story with its own characters. For this film, I would say it is not a narrative, but rather a "sense of heightened vision" into the streets of San Francisco.
On the other hand, "Birthday Suit," by Lisa Steel is much more intimate and confessional. I do get a sense of a narrative in this film where Lisa is the main character and we hear the stories from her birth until age twenty-seven. While it wasn't a traditional story, I did hear a beginning, middle, and end. She told the story of her life so far and the scars and defects she obtained since she was born. I would call this film a narrative.
To answer the question, "are these films important?" I would say both films definitely are significant because they are experimental. Anything that gets you to think is extremely important. If we stop experimenting with film, we would be watching the same thing over and over again, not learning anything. I don't think films require a narrative to have a meaning or even significance.
Does abandoning traditional conventions mean that you have to alienate the viewer?
No, because creating questions and ideas with the viewer does not necessarily mean they are being alienated, it means they are being forced to think. They are being handed something out of the ordinary and asked to try to figure it out. Maybe if they are turned away from nontraditional conventions, they are choosing not to open up their minds and think.