Week 5

In the case of the film "Tree" I would say the author or artist of the piece only had as much control over the work inasmuch as the breeze allowed them.  By this I mean to suggest the most significant aspect of the film being the camera's fluid swaying movement amidst a field of tall grass and trees.  The camera's physical attachment to the tree limb melded tree and lens into one and completely detached the author from the work.  This total isolation of work and author is what makes this film so unique from the others we watched in class Monday.  As Tony said during discussion, "Tree" is a very "abstract" and "organic film" in that it is completely void of any human touch.  This detachment not only allows the camera to take on the life of the tree but also incorporates it into its natural surroundings.  In a way the camera becomes one with the tree and every other organic subject in the swaying frame which is filled with nothing but tall waving grass and rustling leaves.  These organic and noiseless images almost do a better job of conveying the feeling of wind than would images accompanied by audio.  The author gives the camera free rein over the film and in doing so creates a truly natural work of art.              

Week 3

It is amazing to me how much thought and interpretation can spawn from minimalist works of art.  The connection between the white canvas and John Cage's 4"33" is a fascinating example of how the total absence of material within a work of art can alter the perspective of the viewer and, in the case of these two works, reverse the role the audience has in perceiving it.  

The Lemon was also an intriguing piece to me because it focuses all of its strength into one cinematic aspect: lighting.  The slow movement and variation of the light over the lemon created a morphing effect giving it much character.  To me what's most appealing about this film is the camera's back seat in its admirability.  I was entranced as the lemon transformed slowly by means of light only. 

The final film we viewed had the largest impact on me personally most likely since it incorporated emotion.  The artist's decision to film the introduction against a white wall and with no spoken dialogue was designed, I believe, to put emphasis on how he feels out of place and unable to speak in the world due to his race.  This is of course further emphasized when his work of art is shown to us placing him behind a white shield with nothing but two holes to look out of.  It was fascinating how he was able to convey an idea so simply and affectively simultaneously but I found his social predicament to be greatly unfortunate.        

201: Week 2

Out of the films we watched Monday what intrigued me the most was "At Land".  The trick cutting that was used to transition from beach to dinner table to forest seemed much like what you could find in particular sequences from films like "Being John Malkovich" and "Eternal Sunshine" which involve rather disorienting cuts between different scenes while the subject continues to carry out the same action.  It seems to me this film may have been a source of influence for those films. 

What interested me in Peterson's article was the definition of laughter as "the sneeze of the intellect".  I began thinking about this over the past few days and realized how true it really is.  I find that "experimental films" are rarely a source of humor for audiences because they cannot grasp or are repulsed by their often times surreal and disturbing nature.  If an audience member had not already left the theater they would most likely be too busy trying to decipher the film rather than appreciate the humor.