"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.