Mar 132013
 

Got home last night, pretty beat after two days’s intensive teaching, so I dialled up Apple TV, which has a very limited selection of movies to choose from, mainly B grade (but much better for TV). Anyway, I chose, to my regret, Taken 2 (Dir. Luc Besson, starring Liam Neeson). Pretty sure Neeson knows how bad it is. But it’s the editing style, known as intensified continuity, which is taken to extremes in this movie and really got on my nerves. Split-second cuts in the action scenes, which makes you think that the protagonists’ fists aren’t really coming anywhere near each other, so they’re using editing to cover up the gap. I remember one brilliant, breath-taking moment in which a single take is allowed to rest on an air-borne car before it crashes. Completely restful. Then on the with show…

Anyway, it reminded me of this video essay by Matthias Stork.

Stork argues that the techniques of ‘chaos cinema’ extend beyond the editing into camerawork and CGI integration.

It’s a shotgun aesthetic, firing a wide swath of sensationalistic technique that tears the old classical film-making style to bits.

These directors’ bi-word is spectator disorientation, to the extent of narrative break-down. “The only art here is the art of confusion”, Stork argues. Intelligibility – such as it is – is derived from the soundtrack. The sound design saved these movies.

Stork goes on to illustrate how the techniques of chaos cinema extend to other genres, and inhibit the actor’s ability to communicate. I’m wondering whether a lot of the transmedia phenomenon is an extension fo chaos cinema – a profusion of media in which order is threatened, the spectator is meant to piece it together, sometimes rather impressionistically.

Narrative will never be threatened, only projects that fail to strike a balance between the chaos aesthetic and narrative convention. What drives people to wade through the chaos to make sense? It must be the core narrative values of character, drama, location, etc.

 

proust
Marcel Proust, as pointed out by de Botton, Alain (1997). How Proust can change your life. Picador, p. 183.

The most hopeless of emotions, for it can never can be satisfied ? Or a drive that makes us try to be better ? Or both at once, the paradox of desire: without it, we’d be pigs; even possibly murderers … But with it, we are condemned to a life of frustration. A great insight from Proust, which once I read, but now can only glimpse via clever redactions, from a great distance….

Jan 102013
 

arbuckleHaving just watched enough of Kenneth Anger’s Hollywood Bablyon to get the gist, I thought the least I could do was digitally memorialise Virginia Rappe, the starlet murdered by silent-screen comedian Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle with his weight while savagely raping her.

Year: 1921.
Place: San Francisco.

Virginia, you were a beautiful girl. I don’t really recommend this doco. There’s something sick about being obsessed with this sick stuff.

[still from Hollywood Babylon, reprocessed]

supermax

 documentary, Reviews, web  Comments Off
Jan 102013
 

supermaxPrison valley, an interactive documentary about the America prison system focusses on the supermax prison in the Colorado desert. It is a surprisingly narrative driven work, given it functions in an interactive environments, its structure seems somewhat inspired by gameplay. You are caught up with the highly professionally produced story-telling and the characters of the indidivudals who deal with the prison.

Although this project has plenty of rich interactive elements, it has no UGC, nor the ability of users to add content beyond a forum. It is driven by strong storytelling, great characters, and wonderful imagery enhanced sensitively with a great audio track. An expository voice over is slightly softened because the directors have put their own actions in the frame, however really the things that make this docoumentary so strong are its conventional elements.

So I love this documentary, but really, I love you conventionally.

[image: still from Prison Valley - as close as you can get to the supermax]

Dec 312012
 

Screen Shot 2012-11-27 at 4.27.19 PM

According to Angela Watercutter on Wired, One Millionth Tower by Katerina Cizek, Mike Robbins + friends:

…was carefully crafted to be watched on the internet. It uses interactive tools to illustrate the Toronto residents’ ideas about how to improve the decaying high-rise in which they live. Powered entirely by HTML5, WebGL, and other open source JavaScript libraries, One Millionth Tower is loaded with photos and information from all over the web, and exists in an online environment that is about as close to three-dimensional as something on a flat screen can get.

“We’ve added an entire new layer to the web and One Millionth Tower is one of the first examples of that,” said Mark Surman, executive director of the Mozilla Foundation, the force behind the Popcorn.js toolkit that powers the film. “In the same way we all got really excited when you could highlight a word on a page and create a hyperlink … that’s happening now with film. I think of this as the first real web-made documentary.”

The resulting film is unlike any before it. It can be watched without much interaction, but it’s much more fun to play with it (see “How to Watch This Movie” at right). Some aspects change even without viewer input: For instance, the time of day and weather in the film change based on actual conditions in Toronto….

The interactive movie is chock-full of photos from Flickr, street-views from Google Maps and changing environments fueled by real-time weather data from Yahoo. Everything is triggered by Popcorn.js, which acts like a conductor signaling which instruments play at what times.

This documentary can never be the same on two viewings, no matter how carefully you try to retrace your steps, because the data it pulls in is always evolving. It doesn’t make great use of UGC, but it could, the principle is there. The data being pulled in is quite well integrated too.

So well done them, this may indeed represent a future direction for participatory documentary.

Dec 162012
 

According to Sean Edgar & Hillary Brown,

The biggest challenge for webcomics authors isn’t just providing captivating content, but letting the public know it exists. Every binary nook and cranny hides an amazing amount of talent that could very well be published by any major comic hub, which unsurprisingly, has been happening quite a bit lately.

In this post, I analyse various ways of distributing comics online with a view to my own possible project with colleague Christine Rogers.

Three Word Phrase by Ryan Pequin has its own blog and asks for donations via a Paypal Tip Jar.

Saturday morning breakfast cereal by Zach Weiner has an online shop attached to their site.

Cyanide & Happiness by Kris Wilson, Rob DenBleyker, Matt Melvin, and Dave McElfatrick has advertising on its site, plus an online shop

Girl Genius by Kaja Foglio, Phil Foglio, and Cheyenne Wright has a Paypal donate button and a shop and online advertising. They also publish hardcopy versions.

Penny Arcade by Jerry Holkins and Mike Krahulik have an online shop, mostly clothing based on their designs

Girls With Slingshots by Danielle Corsetto have their own shop, but also sell through Etsy, and their have onsite advertising.

Stop Paying Attention by Lucy Knisley has a shop and a paypal donate button.

The Oatmeal by Matthew Inman has an online shop.

These are all fantastic comics, but I’m thinking it must be pocket money only.

[thanks to Paste magazine]

 


PressPausePlay (free bittorrent download) is a documentary about freedom and digital creativity. Most of the examples are from the music ‘industry’. Rahrahs from the likes of Seth Godin are balanced by the dour warnings of Andrew Keen.

This doco contains the bones of the controversy over UGC, whose major critic is Andrew Keen:

When you fall into the trap of confusing the artist and the audience, when you believe that the audience knows more than the artist, is more authoritative, is more creative, is more talented, then art ends. Then you have something else, you have cacophany, you have simply an apology for radical democratisation, and it’s wrong to confuse democratisation in cultural and political terms with the creation of art, which is by definition for better or worse, an elitist business.

I have trouble with the logic of Keen’s argument. If the audience thinks they are better than the artist, they surely wouldn’t be there? And anyway, what does he mean by ‘art’? He seems to be referring to types of creative practice that have been validated by ‘experts’, and even if you think that this is what art is, there doesn’t seem to be any way for new artists to become validated. He doesn’t give any room for discovery or development. Intead, he offers a psychologised explanation of the makers of UGC:

In our post-industrial age, because of atomisation, loneliness, because of the brak-up of community, the way to somehow reify or deify ourselves is through the creative act.

Are there no other reasons for creativity than therapy? What about the desire to communicate? An interest in aesthetic and technical experimentation? The transition to ‘serious art’ seems to be entirely magical if it is meant to develop from Keen’s idea of non-successful art.

Raw popularity – ‘number of clicks’ – is not the criteria for art, in Keen’s opinion, presumably because we are meant to let experts judge art and we are meant to follow that judgement? Keen seems to remove any right of individuals to form their own critical opinion. Once again, this leads us into a cul-de-sac in which aesthetic criteria can never develop, and art is reified into heritage forms forever.

The other thing that Keen doesn’t appear to understand is how we find things on the web – through use of our networks, metadata and referrer systems, and private networked which Alexis Madrigal calls the dark social.

However, the note of foreboding Keen sounds when he declares us to be ‘on the verge of a new dark age’ can not altogether be ignored. Moby, for example ponders whether ‘people might start to become comfortable with mediocrity’. The digital revolution has:

…separated, to an extent, knowledge of cract and creativity, it’s like to be a good photography you had to know how to develop your own film, to print your own film, and you had to understand the way the camera worked and now that doesn’t matter.

Someone else (apologies, I missed the name) comments ‘The craft is no longer necessary. The craft of writing or the craft of making art or the craft of the musician is gone’ because everything can all be fixed in post. The price is that any idiosyncracy in performance can be removed and what remains is sterile precision.

Moby concludes:

I get intimidated and bored by perfect digital art.

Another sort of critique about contemporary music culture is that digitality and sharability of music has made it ubiquitous, we don’t concentrate on it so much, it’s just ‘the noise of our lives’. But whatever is happening, it sure is interesting. This digital moment is analogous to the 1920′s, when TV, radio – the heritage media era – was beginning to take off. Nobody knew what would happen, but the results have been playing out over the last eighty years.

As one interviewee says, we’re all operating in the dark. it depends on whether you think this is exciting or devastating.

[This is one of two posts written about PressPausePlay. Here's the other. Still from PressPausePlay.]

 


PressPausePlay (free legal bittorrent download) is an uplifting and informative documentary about freedom and digital creativity. Most of the examples are from the music ‘industry’. Rahrahs from the likes of Seth Godin are balanced by the dour tones of Andrew Keen.

Is the status of creativity and creatives changing? In this wide-ranging documentary, we are asked to reflect upon the creatives ‘industries’, and consider whether changing production methods means that we are entering a post-industrial creative era. Some love it, some hate it, and some, most interestingly, are equivocal. Among the more or less fully converted is Seth Godin:

It used to be you didn’t become an artist to be rich, you became an artist because you had an idea to share, you had an emotion to share, and that’s where we’re heading again, and we’re going to see more people do more art in more ways than ever before.

Yes, but how? And what are the financial practicalities? And is it really ‘art’? In an environment in which ‘Any kid can use a cracked version or buy a version of Reason or Logic or Ableton and in about five minutes do what took 6 months or years 20 years ago’, Moby wonders:

Everybody’s equally excited and afraid, noone really knows where their next paycheck is coming from, but they’re really excited at their ability to create work and communicate directly with an audience.

These people are technological determinists. Bill Drummond says: ‘The technology always comes first. Then the artist comes along (Jimi Hendrix) … And abuses it and changes it …. So in that sense technology is great. I’m not so sure it’s as simple as that, for in the use and abuse the technology gets changed, but anyway, that’s perhaps not the most important issue. Rather, it’s what digital does to the very concept of art and media. According to David Weinberger:

In the creative world, it used to be that we knew where to go to get art, where to get entertainment, and they were in boxes, sometimes the boxes were Tv boxes, sometimes they were building boxes or the front page of newspaper which is a nice little box. That’s fantastic but of course there’s a price to pay to that old way as well, which is that somebody else is making your decisions and they are also human beings, its’s a very limited necessarily range of tastes and opinions and ideas and traditionally unfortunately fairly typically its been representative of particular empowered groups… Typically white guys …

I’m not sure art is a good term to use with digital products. It seems to me tied to a means of production and a historical production period in which reproducability was difficult if not impossible. So when Seth Godin says something like:

Art has been round for a really long time, but its only in the last fifty years that there’s been an industry, eg the music indusy, the movie industry. That’s new.

I just wish he’d use a less loaded phrase, such as ‘creative products’. It would avoid a whole lot of problems. That aside, I love the way several interviewees historically contextualise our creative period.

PressPausePlay also interviews the founders of production company Shilo, Andre Stringer and Tracy Chandler:

Andre Stringer:

The easiest way to understand Shilo is we’re a traditional production company for the most part, but we’ve come at it from a very untraditional sort of way. The traditional model says, there’s a director, there’s a post house, there’s an editorial company, there’s an advertising agency… And each of them has their own stake in what they’re making and there’s always this fight against it. By…harnessing all those things and saying like nowadays the guys who direct are sometimes the guys who design, the guys who direct are also sometiems the dudes who edit. That blended model really changes the whole landscape and it also sort says that anybody can do anything.

They must have worked out how to deal with egos very well … in industrial media, everyone likes to have their patch of expertese. Or is it more that that’s how we learned to function? It was safe, maybe even easy, maybe even necessary given the gear we had. But it didn’t give you much freedom unless you were at the top of the tree.

Tracy Chandler:

If a designer comes at directing something they might have a different approach than a traditional director might have and so comes out with a different product . It’s not just about whether something is better or worse, its about something can be different because people are coming at it from a different perspective.

Andre:

What having the ability to do more of the work ourselves gives us is the abili to be more free, more visceral, more alchemic with the way that the components come together. A lot less of it has to be extremely pre-planned and mo of it can be entirely improvisational, very much of the moment…Most of it comes out of the grassroots, learn-it-yourself, do-it-yourself mentality

Tracy:

There’s no formal training for what’s going on in the professional world right now.

[This is one of two posts written about PressPausePlay. Here's the other. Still from PressPausePlay.]

 

A declaration of interdependence was directed by Tiffany Schlain and is “an exhilarating montage of user-generated videos and graphics, a global mash-up demonstrating the vast potential of creative collaboration in the 21st century”. Part of a series that Schlain and team are creating, she hopes to develop a new form of cloud documentary. Her principles are:

  1. To use the cloud to collaboratively create films with people from all over the world.
  2. To create films about ideas that speak to the most universal qualities of human life, focusing on what connects us, rather than what divides us.
  3. To give back as much as is received, by offering free customized films to organizations around the world to further their message.
  4. To use the cloud to translate films into as many languages as possible.
  5. To push the boundaries of both filmmaking and distribution by combining the newest collaborative tools available online with the potential of all the people in the world.

Interdependence is visually lovely and uplifting, but is it a documentary? And how deep runs the collaboration? Can we say that this is the sort of social media inspired documentary that I’m looking for?

Let us remind ourselves of Renov’s 4 principles for documentary aesthetics:

  • To record, reveal, or preserve–derived from photographic antecedents, a documentary’s realism, a film-maker’s primary desire to ‘record life as it is’, in Mekas’ words (Renov p 75);
  • To persuade or promote–to mount an argument in favour of a position on some issue of social or cultural import. State-supported propaganda films are extreme examples of this function;
  • To express–perhaps the most controversial, a documentary-makers use of aesethics to ‘add value’ to the raw record, thus possibly distorting it;
  • To analyze or interrogate–perhaps the most overlooked, this function seeks to analyze and question the very record that justifies the doco in the first place (Renov 83).

Interdependence probably achieves the first three, although expression runs amok, and it is easy to lose track of the actual argument. It makes no attempt at the fourth function, but as I’ve said elsewhere, many docos don’t, and Renov sets a high bar. So why am I so suspicious? Yes, I’m feeling conned, and the con goes something like this: I’m a director and going to pretend to give something to the world, but I’m really telling you about me. The message is too slick, too easy and empty. I like the odd idealistic statement, but this time I feel it’s in aid of another message: look at me. The look at me is contained in all the media surrounding the work itself, and the work itself just isn’t enough.

In internet based work in particular, the line between documentary and marketing is becoming so blurry, particularly given the ease with which social media can be made to serve marketing. When I’m talking about using social media in documentary work, I need that use to be much more substantive than marketing.

Schlain invites us to ‘engage’ by

  • Spread your message: We will create a free customized version of this film for your organization that will have your call to action (completing the sentence “Engage by…”) and your url at the end….
  • Tell us how you’ll engage: Not part of an organization? We still want to hear your ideas! After watching Engage, share with us the ways you engage in the world around you.
  • Translate: Help translate Engage [another film in her series] into as many languages as possible!…
  • Share: Please post, tweet, forward this film to your networks for a positive ripple effect….

Well, OK. But real engagement would be adding your own media, telling your own story. EG, become Youtube etc, and in the process dissolve Schlain’s own authorial voice. Instead, the people that appear in Interdependence are reading her script, and I suspect that she and her team have attempted to recruit for diversity rather than accepted whoever knocked on her virtual door (I might be wrong there but the range of people seem too perfectly diverse. Wouldn’t more Americans have been attracted to participating?).

Am I asking too much? Quite possibly. But if Schlain was a little more modest in her claims I probably wouldn’t feel as affronted. The packaging has drowned the message. What remains is artistry and rhetoric, and a latent auteurism that just won’t fly in the context of social media inspired documentary.

Documentaries shouldn’t be glib. They should be complex and multivocal.

Reference

Renov, M (2004). ‘Lost, Lost, Lost: Mekas as Essayist.’ In The subject of documentary, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 69-89

 

The Tell-Tale Heart (1953) is Ted Parmelee’s adaptation of Edgar Allan Poe’s story of the same name. Wonderfully expressive noir x surreal x expressionistic imagery make for one of the most moody and evocative cartoons I’ve ever seen. Narrated rather than lip-synced, James Mason reads the originally with just the right mix of tension and horror. The images are actually mainly stills, panned and faded in and out, but it doesn’t seem to matter.

In the mood for more classic cartoons? Courtesy of Flavorwire, who list their favorites, here’s my cull:

Red Hot Riding Hood (1943) by Tex Avery

Bambi Meets Godzilla (1969) by Marv Newland

Minnie the Moocher (1932) by Max Fliescher and starring Cab Calloway.

Gerald McBoing-Boing (1951) a United Productions of America and director Robert Cannon version of Dr. Seuss’s story.

The Skeleton Dance (1929) by Disney’s Silly Symphony

Yeah, so I like ‘em a little dark.

© 2012 geniwate.com Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Hit Counter provided by Seo Packages