David,
I agree with you that some films definitely need to be seen in the
traditional cinematic context of dark theatre/auditorium and large
projection. (Though I don't think that 'big' is ALWAYS a necessary
cinematic experience. Some of my most profound aesthetic experiences
of films have taken place in a living room on a relatively small
screen.) I am also not endorsing gallery-type film installations for
all films, only for some films. And I am trying to advocate for it
being done well (which, as Myron's description of the Bruce Conner
show demonstrates, is possible). I agree that some film installations
(including Brakhage) have been awful. For me, this has been a
learning process as to what, exactly, I've had to spell out and ask
for. One can't assume anything, and it's a constant struggle. The
increased availability of film works on DVD that you support is also
something I'm fine with, just as long as we do have SOMEWHERE it will
still be possible for the films to be seen in their original form.
That is what I think (and what Erika Balsom was also suggesting, I
believe) may become the proper role of the museums, then -- with some
films shown in galleries (and they can sometimes be isolated in
sections of galleries, in quiet and darkened spaces) and some shown in
museum auditoria. The difficulty is in getting the museums and
galleries to approach this in a serious and respectful way, not just
presenting us with more of, as you describe it, "the available AV
distraction of everyday life."
Marilyn
On 5-Mar-12, at 3:54 PM, David Tetzlaff wrote:
IMHO, the real battle is not 'film vs. digital', but 'cinema vs.
iPod'. My personal experience is that the experimental films I value
most highly do not suffer much from slight image degradations, but
do suffer greatly when withdrawn from the context of cinema: i.e.
display on a large screen in a darkened room. You have to
concentrate to 'get' a lot of this stuff. It NEEDS a certain scale,
needs to trap you in your seat without the available AV distraction
of everyday life, to force you to deal with it's otherness.
As such, I find Marilyn's endorsement of gallery-type film
installations disturbing. I've seen a number of them (including
Brakhage) and I thought they all were awful, basically reducing the
work to 'TV': small screen, too much ambient light, people wandering
in and out distractedly... (The one exception being an Anthony
McCall piece where the constant influx of people in and out of the
room, figuring out the sculptural nature of the thing, then playing
with the beam seemed just right.) If anybody has the responsibility
to present the material in a way that maximizes it's integrity, it's
museums. But they don't value the work in that sense, because they
can't value it in the other sense, so maybe we'd get better
screenings under a regime of "purchasing and ownership." (???)
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
