The Eclair rules!
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Dick Enersen wrote:
> attached
>
> ___
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
__
La Coquille et le Clergyman (The Seashell and the Clergyman) by Germaine Dulac
was banned in England in 1929. The film was declared "apparently meaningless,
but if it has any meaning it is doubtless objectionable." I programmed it with
others in the "Oppositional and Stigmatized" series of
James Broughton's work was banned in St. Louis in the
80s. He was set to have a show at the St. Louis Art Museum and when the
director of the
museum discovered that James' films had been selected by the curator he
yanked the whole show! I remember a quote or something very like
"art is one thing
https://archive.org/details/DkaAntiFilmNoise
https://archive.org/details/NightmaresAntiFilmNoise
https://archive.org/details/SDSWHowDoIsShutUpANTIFILMByFrankHooligan
Thank you/Arigatou/Cam on___
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
ht
One of which would've been Man Ray's "Les Mystères du Château de Dé"...
On Sunday, 30 March 2014, 11:24, Ingo Petzke wrote:
As far as I know, this patron was the Viscomte de Noailles. And he was not
scandalized but put under tutelage by his family as he was regurlarly wasting
big family mon
As far as I know, this patron was the Viscomte de Noailles. And he was not
scandalized but put under tutelage by his family as he was regurlarly wasting
big family money on these very strange films/film makers (cf other French
avant-garde films of the 20s). But I could confuse matters here so don't
On Mar 29, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Andy Ditzler wrote:
> My understanding is that L'Age D'Or was unavailable for decades because
> Bunuel's patron was scandalized by it, more than from any "ban." (The effect,
> of course, is the same.)
I don't know who this patron was, but in the 60s-70s there was a
