Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Scratch Film Junkies: St. Louise

When we watched St. Louise by the Scratch Film Junkies in class on Thursday night, I was once again impressed by what they brough to the table. I think that they have a lot of talent, and they bring a whole new perspective to what can be done with experimental film. More importantly, judging by their work, they seem to be enjoying the fact that they are doing it, which is a rare trait to find in and around many of those who work and play in the world of filmmaking.

Within this recent work, I noticed some techniques that I most certainly was not familiar with when we watched their first film. To begin with, there was obvious painting and drawing directly on the film; a technique we have become quite familiar with ourselves in class. Also noticeable within the film was some kind of newspaper/ magazine/ or print type transfer. They also seemed to use an optical printer and potentially some type of stamps, though I am not positive about that, and their use of music was extremely effective. I remember the band Soul Coughing quite well, but that's because I'm old.

So far, the Scratch Film Junkies seem to be adding to my overall interest in the realm of experimental film. My interest was quite low to begin with, but I must say that it has, at least, doubled since the 6x1 class began, especially after completing my rhythmic editing project. I really enjoyed that project, and a lot of the work we have seen in class has had an influence, including the Scratch Film Junkies and some of the very interesting films we have seen from prior semesters. I think I learned from them and brought some of that over into the work I accomplished on the rhythmic editing project. It, and the films we saw, have made me realize that just because a film is not telling a "traditional" story, does not mean that it is not saying something. In fact, it may be saying something in a lot stronger fashion, being as it is no longer hindered by terrible acting, an atrocious script, and jerky camera movements to substitute for style.

As for the Scratch Film Junkies, I definitely have to look up more of their work and learn more about the group themselves. Who, where and their personal reasons for why they do what they do would be quite interesting to me. I haven't found much by way of their work online, so hopefully I can track down some of their films on DVD, and find out more of what they have to offer.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Wells: Notes Towards a Theory of Animation

Animation is an interesting subject. I have always assumed that I will do little work within the field of animation, being that my drawing and sketching ability is extremely limited, to say the least. However, that is because I, like so many others, only used to think of one thing when I heard the word animation; cartoons of the like that have permeated and integrated their way into our culture. As the article mentioned, the works of Disney and Warner Bros. are so predominate in our society that they are first and foremost what comes to the mind of the average person when animation is uttered. Of course, as the article points out, there is so much more in the world of animation.

I realized that animation could mean so much more when I first experienced the work of Ray Harryhausen. To see his work in full action is nothing short of astonishing and (Yes, I'll say it) can even rival a lot of digital animation today. One of the main reasons that this is true is because it has become entirely too common for some putz to get a computer and some CG software and call himself (with puter in hand) a digital effects company. This accounts for some of that abysmal CGI work that shows up in those masterpieces that air on the SyFy (né SciFi) network. In fact, some of Harryhausen's greatest work could probably hold its own aside some of the best CG that the business has to offer. And that is why anyone making a film who has half an inkling on how to pull off believability will utilize many effects combined in order to create a truly awe inspiring experience.

I then came to realize that I had been watching the animation form of stop-motion for many years as a child. The classic and untouchable King Kong flickered in front of my eyes numerous times as I watched Kong battle with real-life dinosaurs who were living and breathing on screen. Willis O'Brien was responsible for making dinosaurs walk long before 1993's Jurassic Park and was an influence on many stop-motion animators following him, including Harryhausen, whom he would mentor and later work with.

It's an amazing feet what these men have accomplished. After having done stop-motion frame by frame animation on Thursday is to truly appreciate the job that these trailblazers have done. To move an object such a minute amount and then again and again until you have twenty-four frames just to have one second of a movement on screen (eighteen frames for super-8) is a painstaking task. It can become quite frustrating fast. I do not know how our film will turn out. I believe that we did a pretty good job, but I doubt it will end up resembling anything like O'Brien or Harryhausen's work. Nevertheless, the experience has taught me that I am open to trying more animation. Just because I can't draw does not mean that I can't do animation. And I hope to try to incorporate it into other works eventually. I have only really covered two here, but animation has many different facets to it. With animation, as with much of experimental film, it is only limited by the creator's imagination. If you can somehow learn to think outside of the bars that society has placed upon us (though so few can), then you can pretty much do anything, and your possibilities are limitless.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Chion: Projections of Sound on Image

The article "Projections of Sound on Image" provided many insights on the effect that sound has on a film image. Often times, sound is neglected over the image as every director searches far and wide for the ever-elusive "perfect shot." I, too, have often found my time overly consumed over whether or not an image was conveying exactly what I wanted and needed it to at that precise moment in the film. During those many stressing moments, I spent little to no time thinking of the sound that would either be captured or later added to accompany my image and further its overall success.

Sound is such s powerful thing in the world of film. As the article mentioned, sound can even replace an image and be the difference between what the audience has truly seen, and what they believe they have seen, as evidenced by Irvin Kershner in The Empire Strikes Back. Instead of actually seeing the space door open and close, Kershner, in certain scenes, was able to simply use a jump cut accompanied with the sound that the audience had come to expect with that particulaly type of door closing, as established in the original Star Wars. The fact that the audience was aware of something made it that much easier for Kershner, by use of a sound effect, to show them something that they never actually saw.

Though I consider myself a big fan of any and all films, I find horror films to be a personal favorite. The same type of effect with sounds that Kershner employed in Empire has been used to great effect by some of the masters of the genre. As the article also mentioned, Hitchcock was a master at this and never was it more evident than in his use of sound in Psycho. To look at the famous "shower scene" is to truly witness greatness. To show it to the average film-goer today would probably still elicit a disturbed and visceral reaction as they watch it. However, sometimes the very technique that Kershner used in Empire can bring about a negative reaction to what the viewer later believes that they saw in a film.
 
Take another look at the scene from Psycho. In all its beautiful glory, it is nothing short of pure genius. Though, if one were so inclined to analyze the scene frame by frame, and mute the relentless sound effects and pulsating Bernard Herrmann score, they would find that they are seeing nothing more than the edge of a knife, a woman's stomach and mouth, and thick liquid falling to her feet, into the tub, and down the drain. The scene actually does not work at all without sound. Though I'm making no attempt to discredit Hitchcock. On the contrary, he knew all along the effect and techniques required to utilize sound to its fullest, and this scene, as well as numerous others within the film, serves as a perfect testament to that.
 
Other classic horror films have actually suffered the same type of mis-remembering from those who have seen them. Looking back, viewers actually believe that they saw something with their eyes that was never present on screen. A film like Tobe Hooper's original The Texas Chainsaw Massacre immediately strikes up images of gore based on the title alone. Even more so, some who have experienced the film remember nothing about it but the fact that is was disturbing and gory. In fact, very little blood is even present in the film. Most of the gore lies not in the physical act that the fiends commit, but in the bludgeoning sound effects that go hand-in-hand with them. John Carpenter's classic Halloween is another one of the many films that unjustly suffer the same fate. Carpenter's film relies heavily on sound effects and an ominous score to scare the audience. In fact, when Carpenter first showed the film at 20th Century Fox prior to putting a score to the film, it was rejected and he was told that the film "isn't scary at all." It is amazing the effect that the simple, but effective, score had on that film. Today, it is a theme recognized by film fans the world over, even if they've never actually seen the film. However, due to that famous score and some meticulously placed sound effects, that film if often dubbed the "first slasher film." This is a perplexing label considering that two of the three on-screen victims are actually strangled, and the film is almost completely devoid of blood. Nonetheless, despite some misgivings that I have with the uninitiated who often mistake what they have seen on-screen with what they have instead heard, sound in films continues to triumph, sometimes breaking, but often making a film into a truly memorable cinematic experience.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Cameraless Filmmaking: My Experience So far

So far, I am quite impressed by what we have done with cameraless filmmaking. I honestly never would have thought that half of what we have done so far could have ever been accomplished without the use of a camera. Like many narrative filmmakers, I had a hard time wrapping my mind around experimental cinema when I first encountered it. I never realized (or maybe I just refused to believe) that a viable, tangible film could be made out of such extreme methods. I also never knew the extent to what could be accomplished through simply altering a film without going anywhere near a camera.

Originally, I thought the extent of what could be done with a strip of film was limited to merely scratching or grating the film (something that definitely interested me as I love the aged look of worn out prints). Then, I became a bit amazed by the possibilities when we began to do things like draw and paint on the film, utilize the magazine transfer, punch holes in the film, and flash exposing certain parts of the film. It makes the mind wander with possibilities as to what one may attempt to try next.

One thing that I really like about cameraless filmmaking so far is the fact that it is open to any and all attempts and, therefore, open to any and all interpretations. It is hard to make a mistake doing this. Within many other art forms, especially that of narrative filmmaking, a mistake is just that. Nothing more, nothing less, and it must be redone. With cameraless filmmaking, there really is no mistake. Anything that may not have been anticipated and at first appears to be a mistake may lead into something better than one might have imagined. In fact, some apparent mistakes may actually lead the creator to end up with something far better than first planned. So far, some things did not end up how I had first planned them, but I was able to finagle them into something that I actually liked so much more.

Which brings me to the notion that no planning goes into experimental filmmaking and, more specifically, cameraless filmmaking. Nothing could be further from the truth. Cameraless filmmaking can require intense amount of planning and developing before actually committing something to film. So many people seem to think that experimental filmmaking is just the culmination of careless attempts at random obscurity that people place special emphasis and meaning on. However, like any art form, the meaning is either there, or it is not.

I look forward to the many new things that are to come with the 6 x 1 class. Looking at the schedule, it seems that we have a lot more new things ahead for both experimental film as a whole, as well as cameraless filmmaking and our first of the six films that will complete this semester. At any rate, I can pretty much assume that it will be just as informative and unorthodox as everything in the class thus far.

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Synesthesia

The idea behind synesthesia is an interesting and intriguing notion. As far as I know, I'm not a synesthete, but I do associate certain senses with others. In fact, I think that we all associate certain senses with others, like warm colors and cold or sights and smells with tastes. But to know that people can smell or hear a picture, or see a sound or taste is fascinating. I think that this is something that has been somewhat explored in the realm of film, but could be explored so much more, in various ways. However, I do feel that many narrative filmmakers may have been exploring it subconsciously. Often times certain film sets or costume colors, as well as gels and filters, have been used to evoke particular emotions concerning scenes or characters which, in turn, would effect the audience as well. Also, sound has always been used to provoke the audience to associate a piece of music or sound effect with a certain character and the mood they represent. But since little thought has went into making a conscious choice to link one sense to another through the technique of filmmaking, it's uncertain the lengths of what can be achieved through it. Obviously, experimental filmmaking is at the forefront of the potential for trials in synesthesia. Directors like Brakhage and Deren were known for attempting to link two or more senses together. When watching Meshes of the Afternoon for the first time, I actually found myself annoyed at the effect that it was having on me. It bothered me by overloading my senses. Of course, upon repeated viewings, I realized that Deren was intending on that feeling all along. Hopefully, I can try to experiment with this throughout the course of the semester and eventually learn how to work the effects of synesthesia into my own films as well.