1. Window Water Baby Moving bothers me just a bit. I watched it for the second time in class and I just can’t handle the blood and the actual visual of giving birth. It makes me super squeamish. The fact that they repeated some of those things also made me not like it as much. Now I do understand his reasons for making the film, but I think since I’ve never experienced giving birth, being pregnant, or even wanting a baby, I don’t understand his reasons for repeating it.
2. Sitney argues that synecdoche and ellipsis both play a major role in The End. Synecdoche is a part of a whole. The End goes through the lives of people in immediate doom. The scenes of the film all connect with each other, but we are shown in parts the different characters of the film.
3. Both Conner and Maclaine share the ideas of apocalyptic despair, but Conner is not naïve about it.
4. The people who were against Brakhage and Anger’s films thought that Brakhage and Anger were disrespecting film as an artform. They thought that Brakhage and Anger were not being serious about film and were making film into a joke.
5. Film was really easy to be reproduced and distributed. It could be produced by the yard.
6. Slow included minimalist works- Nam June Paik, Peter Moore.
Fast- George Maciunas, Wolf Vostell, Eric Andersen.
7. Fluxus instead of making personal films instead made more institutional, functional, and minimalist films.
8. Zen for Film "liberated the viewer from manipulations of commercial and alternate cinema." It presented the physical support of the camera which was blank celluloid.
#1: In future responses try to be more specific about the relationship between style and effect/meanings. In this case, I don't need you to gross yourself out in the response, but it would be helpful to think about how the film is put together to create that effect. You may also want to look at Jane Brakhage's article about making the film, which Liza Palmer had assigned (it is in the Palmer Articles folder that I put on flash drives).
ReplyDelete#2 Synecdoche is when the part stands in for the whole. ("The crown" stands in for an entire kingdom, or "a dish" for an entire meal, for example.) With this in mind, take another try at that passage.
4. Look at this again...if anything it is the Fluxus people accusing Brakhage and Anger of being too serious.
It's not clear that you're getting the other ideas based upon the brevity of the remainder of your responses. Try to be more specific so that I understand that you're getting the point(s).