Film 202 Blog #3 One Sentence

In one sentence, based on your reading on this particular journal, describe

the state of media making (being an artist, being a filmmaker) today.

Online Journal: Sense of Cinema. Under the section, Great Directors.
Journal: Alex Cox.
Here is the sentence I have written.

"Today’s art world could be drastically changed if every film maker used their idealism to make and form their films."

By Matt Gonia.

Film 202 Blog #3 Journal Reading from Sense of Cinema

Blog Entry Three Journal Reading
In the journal, Alex Cox, written by Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis under the Great Directors section of the online film journal, Sense of Cinema, these two authors discuss the career and more importantly the ideological esthetics that Director Alex Cox uses and portrays in his film. This journal is not so much about his technique or the physical methods he uses for film making or editing. This journal is more about the politics of Alex Cox film making. This is a reflection of Alex Cox deep ideological commitments as both a film maker and activists. In the journal, Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis describe Alex Cox as a “…architect of his own form of punk surrealism.” The authors of this journal follow step by step Alex Cox’s career starting with a summery of his early life leading into the point when he made his first film.
Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis wrote this about Alex Cox in their journal on Senses of Cinema.” Cox was almost 30 when he released Repo Man in 1984. Born outside Liverpool, England, in 1954, he attended Oxford University, Bristol University and UCLA, where he wrote a smart thesis on Spaghetti Westerns and completed a student film called Edge City for under $10,000. In the early 1980s, he fell into the punk scene in Southern California, where bands like X, Circle Jerks and The Germs were gaining prominence. Cox saw a subculture movement that “encouraged anarchic tendencies because it had revolutionary expectations”. Repo Man would be his opportunity to bring punk energy and oppositional politics into cinema.” This would be the major beginning point in Alex Cox career as a film maker. The high energy of the new punk seen had the esthetic for Alex Cox to integrate into his film, Repo Man. This set of ideological thoughts of anarchy, politics, and revolutionary idealisms gave Alex Cox the unique and highly stylized form in which to make his films. Beliveau and Lewis then go into a lengthy discussion of specific camera and editing techniques he used throughout this film that truly highlighted his idealism of punk energy and oppositional politics in cinema.
This is done for each of the films listed above. Beliveau and Lewis overall analysis focuses more on Alex Cox unique style and idealism that he puts into his films. This journal displays elements of a biography, a filmography, and an in-depth look at the concepts and fundamental esthetics that Alex Cox makes his movies all about. The authors emphasize their point by presenting each of the films and there by showing the direct cause and effect of Alex Cox film making. It is interesting to me that director Alex Cox is able to not only implement his idealism into his films but that he is able to use that idealism as the vehicle to form his film in its entirety. Beliveau and Lewis must have analyzed his films frame by frame in order to extract such a detailed analysis of what Alex Cox films are really about. The fundamental ideologies that Alex Cox has used to create and stylize his films are a unique and innovative method. Instead of formulating his style of film making by copying the techniques of others, Alex Cox has built a method in which he uses the thrill and high energy of the punk culture in cinema. Instead of letting his film dictate the visual appeal and the overall message of his movie, Alex Cox uses his form of “punk surrealism” to dictate the look and message of his movie.
The topic for this journal was far more stimulating and interesting then just another biography or critique of Alex Cox films. Instead Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis went beyond the films or the film maker and discovered a far more important topic to bring to light. Discovering Alex Cox ideology and fundamentals from which he makes his films was something that should be brought to the attention of every film student. This is an exceptional and absorbing way of making film because it adds a more personal flare to the maker’s movies. It also pushes the film makers get in touch with personal ideologies and fundamental esthetics to which they could form their films into. This journal about Alex Cox is definitely an eye opener for me. It creates a desire within myself to develop my own way of creating a style of film making that is formulated through my own ideologies and fundamentals.

Film 202 Blog#3 Prt 2 Nathaniel Dorsky's “Three Songs”: “Song and Solitude”,“Winter, & Sarabande.”

Blog entry three, “Three Songs”: Recent Films by Nathaniel Dorsky

On Tuesday, November 25, 2008 the Union Theater at UW-Milwaukee displayed Nathaniel Dorsky’s new films “Song and Solitude” and “Winter, & Sarabande.” The following is a film comment by Paul Arthur found at http://canyoncinema.com/D/Dorsky.html “Song and Solitude" was conceived and photographed with the loving collaboration of Susan Vigil during the last year of her life. Its balance is more toward an expression of inner landscape, or what it feels like to be, rather than an exploration of the external visual world as such. Old School doesn't describe it. Dorsky has achieved such a subtle mastery over the most basic means of cinematic expression-composition, duration, juxtaposition-that he can squeeze a wealth of emotional vibrations out of the silent, seemingly banal interplay of foreground and background objects. A formalist with a brimming, elegiac soul, Dorsky will gently rock your attitude toward cinematic landscape. His world is a sublime mystery measured by patience and unmatched visual insight.” This film comment by Paul Arthur described Nathaniel Dorsky’s film, “Song and Solitude” with interesting facts and information that otherwise would have not been made known to me. The information about Dorsky’s mastery of visual landscapes rings true. When it comes to film, Dorsky is for the most part a purist in that he only focuses on the visual aspect of film and does not use sound. When I was in the theater watching these new films of Dorsky’s although it was visually stimulating at other moments the silence was deafening.

I have seen Nathaniel Dorsky’s work before and I am a fan of his brilliant films. I must admit that I would have liked to hear some of the sounds of San Francisco. I have never been there and I think it would have been enlightening to hear the sounds of the local environment where he was filming. When the viewer is seeing these films for the first time the silence in the film changes the experience of watching. Sometimes the mind will try and fill in the silence with sounds that seem familiar to what the viewer is seeing but ultimately the silence takes grasp of the viewers and it is that which focuses the attention of the viewer more so. The absents of sound in these films makes the viewing process unique in that it makes the viewer more reliant on what they are seeing do to the feeling of sudden loss of audio. Every frame in each of these films is a visual gem in a cinematic landscape.

Sound and film done together is an art in itself to master. However film done with no sound which is focused on visuals alone is a completely different and more complex art form to master. Nathaniel Dorsky is a true master when it comes to silent film making. It is his ability to craft and film visual gems that makes his movies a treat in themselves to watch.

Matt Gonia at Glenn Bach & Aaron Ximm Blog#3 Film 202

Blog entry three Glenn Bach & Aaron Ximm

I am at Glenn Bach’s Film 116 class held in the Mitchell Building at UW-Milwaukee and it’s three pm. The show is about to start. There is a three person set-up with their laptops, large speakers, and of course their work. Glenn Bach greets the class and other visitors and announces that today’s performance would be an improvised, unedited, unrehearsed experience. Nearly 75% of all the soundscap is improvised. The show opens and Glenn Bach, Aaron Ximm, and Seth Warren Crow begin to generate their field recordings. It is quite for a second and then the sounds start to fade in. There is rapid bubbling, talking in what seem to be Russian and lightly dripping water on wet leaves which is very subtle. The sounds of rain falling, church bells ring far away, a heavy bass hum, sounds of a tub of water being disturbed by movement or churning, a women speaking in French as wood floor boards rattle lightly under footsteps. All seem familiar but also seem foreign or alien to me. The performance is balanced as each of them play their recordings and form a steady rhythmic composition of sound.
The unique and interesting sounds continue to play and while a new and non-traditional musical piece is created. The three man performance continues to play for the next hour. The time fly’s by unnoticeably. As I listen to all of these sound recordings it makes me think back to a quote that Glenn Bach presented to my class in his guest lecture of November 17, 2008; a quote that was said by Aaron Ximm, “The world makes its own music, but we rarely listen with naive ears.” As I listen to all of these field recordings I feel as though I am a witness to something more. Glenn Bach said in his lecture that, “Field recordings in general are a sonic equivalent of a photograph, a snap shot of sound.” This assessment that Glenn Bach made seemed to be very true although I couldn’t see the sound waves or exact place and time these sounds were captured. However I could in vision my own images to accompany these great sounds. Glenn Bach had said in his lecture “Going out to get field recordings requires a commitment to the moment and practice; temperance of the environment and patients.” I experienced this practice when I was in Glenn Bach’s Film 116 class but considering the level of commitment, the extreme patients, and the appreciation for when those moments come to capture the perfect sounds.
At the end of the performance Aaron Ximm took the time to take questions form the audience. His closing comments to the viewers came across as ultimately valuable in that he said, “Always bring your gear, when ever your ear catches something you’ll be bale to catch it; take the time to get longer takes, 5 minutes or more doesn’t matter what you record with as long as you use it.”

Matt Gonia and "Senses of Cinema"

“Sense of Cinema” is an online journal based in Australia that is devoted to serious discussion of cinema. The writers and operators of “Senses of Cinema” believe that cinema is a true art from that can take many other forms. “Senses of Cinema” examines and talks about films from a verity of avenues from major Hollywood blockbusters to experimental video and media. “Senses of Cinema” tries to bring about an awareness of the histories of these different styles in film, video and experimental media work. “Senses of Cinema” attempts to cover nearly all films and videos that are made. Operators of this “Sense of Cinema” want to have journals, interviews, and articles about all of these films and more importantly the circumstances under which they were made, how they were made, and by whom. “Sense of Cinema” not only considers and records current film and video work but also goes to great lengths to consider the first works in film all the way back to the Lumiere Brothers film “Arrival at a Train Station” in 1865; the very start of the age of the camera. Considering “Sense of Cinema” is an Australian based web Journal it can be said that it not only looks at local films but considers international work as well.

This is apparent as they examine Hollywood Blockbusters. The work that is exhibited on the website is in journal and essay format, and carries links to other works of art, articles, journals, and publications. The work is circulated by links on the web site that lead the articles, journals, and other publications. The articles talk about everything that can be said about the film making process. They ask everything about technique, writing, lighting, sound, funding, to satisfy their readers. The two articles I have picked are Article 1 “Alex Cox” by Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis under Senses of Cinema’s Great Directors topic, and article 2 “Power and the Mythic Gaze in Fritz Lang’s Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler” by Arthur Rankin under Sense of Cinema’s Cinémathèque Annotations on Film.

These two articles are typical examples of the vast kinds of material that is on “Senses of Cinema.” Article one is a piece about the work of Director Alex Cox such as Repo Man (1984), Sid and Nancy (1986), Straight to Hell (1987), Walker (1987), Highway Patrolman (1991), Death and the Compass (1992 and 1996), The Winner (1996), Three Businessmen (1998), and Revengers Tragedy (2001). In this article by Ralph Beliveau and Randolph Lewis they present how Alex Cox made these films, the actors in them, and more. Over all an excellent article that really brings to lights how Cox made these films. While in Article 2, “Power and the Mythic Gaze in Fritz Lang’s Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler” by Arthur Rankin. This article brings to light more about Fritz Lang as a filmmaker and the creative choices he specifically made in, Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler (1922 Germany 270 mins), more importantly how the cinematic choices he made in this film would be a refection of the era. This article was also an excellent one to read unlike article one which was more a detailed filmography coupled with details of the inner workings of the film. Article two was more of an essay describing Fritz Lang’s methods and motives in the making of this film. As I researched this web journal I find it is an excellent source, not just for academic use, or as just a current dailies report of what’s going on in film and video, I see it as an excellent learning tool, an aid to film professors, film students, filmmakers both independent and mainstream. “Senses of Cinema” is defiantly a journal I will be looking at fore quite some time.

Matt Gonia at Act-React Film 202 UWM

The two interactive art installations that I liked the most at The Milwaukee Art Museum were Healing #1by Brian Knep & Snow Mirror by Daniel Rozin. When I went to the Milwaukee Art Museum to experience all the exhibits at Act-React; the two that I enjoyed the most out of all the installations were Healing #1 and Snow Mirror.
In the exhibit Healing #1: this is an interactive art piece that included a large paneled floor with 4 projectors above it. On this large floor panel was projected a network of organic cell structures that were colored green and orange. And would dissolve once walked on by the participants who walked on this floor panel. Any direction or design one made could be made with the dissolving of the cells membranes. But what I thought that was really great to see was that the cells would start growing back slowly, instantly, and the cells that grew back would come back in a different pattern every time.
In Snow Mirror: this interactive art piece involved a screen projecting a ghostly image of the person who would be in front of the projectors in the room. The image of the person standing in front of the projectors is reflected back in the snow mirror and shows the person’s image stuck in a snow storm. When ever a person would stand still the programmed snow would collect on the person’s shoulders, head, face cloths, and one could literally brush off this snow. What was really interesting about this piece was that once the snow was brushed off, it would not just dissolve but instead flutter away in the snow mirrors breeze. I know I enjoyed this exhibit when I caught my self trying to make an effective looking snow angel in the fake snow in snow mirror.
When comparing these two art installations there are very similar in that they are both interactive pieces that the viewer can manipulate by doing almost anything within the pieces restaurants. In Both Healing #1 & Snow Mirror the viewers own body and what they do with it is what makes the piece even more interesting. When I went to go experience these exhibits in The Milwaukee art Museum with my friend we both interacted with these exhibits by are selves and then as a team. On Healing #1 the both of us were successful in completely clearing the floor paneling of the cells. We watched as the cells grew back slowly and form a new pattern just because of our efforts in this piece. In Snow Mirror we would both played with the snow trying to make snow men or just even see what we could make in this installation. These two pieces can be compared further in that the exhibits programming was made by scratch by both the artists.
However it is important to examine how uniquely different these pieces are as well. The first main difference between these two installations is that Healing #1 is displayed as floor paneling projecting cell structures on it. Snow Mirror displays a large screen on the wall with projectors capturing the person’s actions and placing them in the Snow Mirror. The cell structures in Healing #1 react to how people walk on the floor paneling; while Snow Mirror reacts more to the people’s upper body actions. The cell structures in Healing #1 reform in different patterns every time after being transformed. While the digital snow in Snow Mirror would gather and collect on the persons involved and react just like real snow.
My Involvement in changing, complete, and impacting the work is only a narrow event considering how many people interact with both of these pieces. Did I complete both Snow Mirror and Healing #1? I felt that I contributed to its evolution as a piece of art but I do not think that I completed the work and certainly not by my self. I have a feeling that these pieces of work can never be completed but can only evolve from all the changes they encounter and the people who interact with these installations in space. I defiantly feel that I changed these art works. Because it is quite possible that the designs or changes I made have never been made in these two pieces by anyone else. I think that these art installations respond well to how many people interact with them.
I do not think it is possible compare any of these pieces of art to anything else, only because these pieces of art unique and stand on there own. I don’t think that with how much they change and all that they can do can be compared to any other great piece of art work only because, there are only so many art works that can be manipulated and changed so much and non of them could compare to each other. Only because these installations have gone under a vast number of different experiences by so many participants I don’t think they could ever be fairly compared. The two exhibits I have chosen are so incredibly different and yet they share certain similarities that link them to the title interactive art work, the creators of these pieces should be proud of the work they have accomplished. The Act-React event at the Milwaukee Art Museum was a great experience for me I was glad to have been apart of it as an active participant, viewer, and artist.

Traces of the Wild: The Films of Robert Schaller.

On September 25, 2008 Robert Schaller came to UWM to display some of his films. When I first heard about this I admit I did not know who he was or that I had never seen any of his work. Also I didn’t know I would be able to go and see his work because I had class during the showing. However my night took a different turn when I found out that I would be able to attend the showing with my classmates. When we got to the UWM Theater we took our seats and waited for the show to begin.

A little bit after seven o’clock, Carl Bogner, who is one of my instructors and had organized for Robert Schaller to come to UWM went on the microphone and introduced our guest filmmaker. Right away Robert Schaller said how great it was for him to be at UWM and how happy he was to display some of his work for us. He also talked a little bit about his work and what kind of films we would be seeing that night. When Robert Schaller makes a film he truly goes all out. Such as using his own hand made emulsion on his film. This is defiantly a unique way of making a film because he never really knows how the images will come out or how the light was captured. This as I saw during the showings of Robert Schaller’s work, can make a very interesting piece and excellent movie.

During the showing’s I was unable to catch or record any of the titles of the movies he showed. But I do remember the pieces them selves and so I will talk about what I observed. In one of the pieces we watched in the UWM theater featured the camera zooming–in and out on the bark of a tree, the limbs, or foliage. While at the same time there were overlays of other tree limbs, bark, and foliage at different angels which seemed to rotate and change while the camera zoomed-in and out and moved from one tree to the next. This silent film was not a long piece but it was very captivating. The motion of the camera and the slick manual editing that Robert Schaller used for this piece displays the elegance of his technique’s and the truly unique way Robert Schaller perceives the world around him.

The next piece I want to talk about is his dance movie; this film was the only one with a soundtrack to it. He displayed the film on three projectors at the same time; I think this really made the experience worthwhile. The image of the women dancing on the film was very clear, sharp, and extravagant to see as well as hear. In the film Robert Schaller didn’t just set up a static camera, recording a women dance. He used close-ups and extreme close-ups on her feet, hands, face, and torso as she danced. It almost felt as if the camera was slightly rotating with the women as she danced. This was only emphasized by the three projectors that were lined up in a row showing the film. For me this made the effect of watching the women dance as three cameras followed her and that I got to see her movements on three different monitors linked together, almost as if I were viewing a live performance from a secret room. All of this action was split up as the women moved from one projection to the next, meanwhile on the other projections we would see passages from an unknown text. These texts seem to be very ambiguous and yet specific about this event of the women dancing. Visually this film was great the color and lighting of this piece was a wonder on my eyes. The Soundtrack was soft and fit perfectly to the images of the women dancing in Robert Schaller’s film. However if I could change something about this film I would cut about 15-20 minutes off the end. The film was captivating and excellent to watch but I felt it ran a little too long in the end. But that is the only the only thing I would change if given the option.

While I was watching these films by Schaller they also made me think back on the first works I saw in the beginning of class; specifically “5:10 to Dreamland” by Bruce Conner. What really tied these films together for me were the displays of nature and people. While Robert Schaller and Bruce Conner have noticeably different styles of filmmaking; I couldn’t help but to examine the look of the woman dancer in Schaller’s film as compared to the look of the women in the mirror in 5:10 to Dreamland. Both of these women though in different times, settings, and circumstances feel to me as though they could be interchanged without notice. Even though the nature scenes in both films are shot completely different I still feel that Schaller’s idea of capturing the point of view of the mountain side and the flora within. Fit perfectly into the imagery of Bruce Conner’s own unique shots in the beginning of 5:10 to Dreamland.

My experiences of seeing Robert Schaller’s work at the UWM Theater were great. I was sorry I was not able to stay to the end of the showings or ask the filmmaker some questions in hopes of gaining some more insight as a filmmaker myself. But the work of Robert Schaller’s I did get to see really did inspire me and gave me more insight and experience to develop my own eye and how I will make my own films. Before the showings at the UWM Theater I was asking some of my peers at PECK about Robert Schaller, they all told me the man was a great, a real nice guy and an excellent filmmaker. All I can say about this is that he lived up to the hip of what every one told me and even more so when Carl was introducing Robert Schaller as a legend, from what Schaller can do with a camera I don’t think Carl was to far off from that description.

For Field report number two the publication I will be following is Senses of Cinema; http://www.sensesofcinema.com/

picture provided by www.expressmilwaukee.com

By Matt Gonia