Week 2

1. I thought this film was really cool and it will probably be the film I do my Brakhage paper on. I found it interesting the way he manipulated the way I saw things. I figured out they were trees but the way it was red and dark at first and then the camera would zoom in and the flash of the true colors would come out was awesome. However, towards the end I got confused on what I was seeing, it looked like the trees were bleeding and through listening to other classmates I figured he had painted the trees. No matter my confusion it was still awesome to see and I really liked it. I think I like more abstract avant garde films because I don't look for a narrative structure I just look for patterns and color repetitions which is fun. Like you said the fun of these films is that its like a puzzle and you have to figure it out so I liked it.

2. I don't think I will be anywhere close to the answer you want for this but I will try anyway. Synecdoche is like saying one thing to describe another. So if I were to say there are 20 students in a film class I could also say their are 20 young adults. Maybe that wasn't good enough to describe it let me try again. You could say she works for a pharmacy or say she works at CVS. I think that is what it means. But relating it to the film I think it is trying to say that the film shows us different ways actions took place and displaces them throughout making it like a puzzle film where we have to take each scene and map out the story. I guess it is mythopoeic because it is showing or trying to convey what it would be like at the end of the world and has all these characters doing different things so they could be seen as gods. (I have no clue if that is right). So Brakhage comes into the picture because he was trying to get beyond trance films. His film Dog Star Man must represent the mythopoeic film because each part has to do with a different motif which could also be seen as a gods path or journey. That was a hard question for me I'm sorry if it is all wrong.

3. Some similarities between the two film could be that they are both about the apocalypse. While MacLaine's film was planned out and shot scene for scene, Connor took pieces from different film to create each scene. I think this is right. Differences would be that Connor took found footage to create his film while Conner went out and shot most of his scenes. (I think). Conner also uses the element of comedy in his film which is absent from MacLaine's.

4. I think the Flux Filmmakers were trying to make fun of Brakhage and the like. Instead of taking a subject and trying to be serious with it they took it more lightly. Anger made his films with a message or meaning behind them. These Flux Films would take "mundane" subjects and make a light film out of it, but with some of the same aspects as Anger or Brakhage. One example given is No. 24 which is a color test film. So the Flux Film took an element of the Anger type films and made their own. Another one directly aimed at Brakhage is called Invocation of Canyons and Boulders for Stan Brakhage and the film is a close up of a man chewing. The article said it was attacking Brakhage's highly personal and autobiographical films, so they shot some one chewing. That is personal and autobiographical because its someone chewing and it did happen. I don't know if that's right, but its what I got.

5. I think he is trying to say that through the Tree film people became aware that anyone can make a movie. This guy simply got a camera, film and found a tree and made a film. So what is stopping other people who want to make movies. I think it was saying that Avant Garde filmmakers would start to make it a practice to have low budgets. I think it was also trying to say that if you have a set idea about something you can turn anything into art.

6. Slow: Andy Warhol, Nam Jun Paik, George Brecht, Peter Moore, Yoko Ono, Pieter Vanderbeek, Joe Jones.

Slow Film: Zen for Film, Disappearing Music for Face.

Fast: George Maciunas, Wolf Vostell, Eric Andersen, Paul Sharits.

Fast Film: Dots 1 and 2, Opus 74 Version 2

7. Godard was trying to open up new ideas to the cinema such as political analysis the idea of a cinephillia and the idea of being self reflexive through films. Brakhage was trying to show a more personal form of the cinema such as birth and death. Fluxfilms are suppose to be childlike and innovative. So I guess the difference between all of these are the people and ideas behind each movement or person. Godard had one idea, Brakhage another and Fluxfilm another. Godard and Brakhage planned out and had serious ideas about the films they were making while Flux Films I guess are suppose to be fun or interesting. Nothing like The 400 Blows or Window Water Moving Baby.

8. I think he is saying that it was made cheaply and quickly. The film used a camera, lights, film stock, editing and sound. So I guess thats what you mean or what he means. The experience makes people get out of their shell and see film in a new way. The film is suppose to be the celluloids journey through the projector so I guess it is trying to show people what they are really watching when the watch a film. It is also capturing the truth, nothing was done to it and it was not manipulated in anyway like other Avant Garde filmmakers.

Hope that is right.