Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Filmmaking Today
Filmmaking today is the capturing of reality and the transformation of reality into a recognizable form from which a story can be told. Whether a film is considered documentary or science-fiction, it still requires a certain level of human input that makes the plotline more or less realist. As filmmaking becomes accessible by more and more people due to simplification of video and editing software, the filmgoer can now become a filmmaker, which only requires a camcorder, a computer, and editing software. With filmmaking becoming more democratic and accessible, the medium that is film is no longer reserved only for high-budget Hollywood studio's.
Emotional Attachment with Sound, and without it
After attending the Haggerty Art Musuem's current exhibition entitled stop.look.listen, I became aware of two work's contrasting uses of sound, and the emotion's that the convention's of sound stir for a viewer. In regard's to Glenn Bach's lecture on sound artist Aaron Ximm, the two video's entitled Cave Trilogy by Salla Tykka and Deeparture by Mircea Cantor both relate in different ways. Of course, Deeparture is silent, but through it's silence, it convey's quite a strong message.
First, Tykka's trilogy uses three conventional soundtrack's without any dialogue to convey messages about what music viewers relate to what types of films. The first film of the trilogy is entitled "Lasso," in which a young woman spies on a man performing lasso tricks, and the music is quite like a "Old Western" with abrupt horns and an epic feel to the music. The lasso trick's are performed in slow motion, adding to the epic tone of the work. The second piece, entitled "Thriller," would apply more to Aaron Ximm's work, in that it uses only a repetitive piano line and numerous atmospheric sounds to convey a horror story about three very odd characters, and the murder of a sheep. Although the characters interact, the lack of dialogue forces an assumed conversation that is individual for each viewer, although the music usually directs the assumed conversation to something disturbing or even evil. The final piece has a soundtrack that could almost be taken from Aaron Ximm's database of sound. The music uses atmospheric tones that invoke a scifi or futuristic plot line that contains electronic long-tones, heavy bass, and lack of acoustic instruments. Again, the lack of dialogue in combination with the soundtrack evokes a whole new emotion, as the protagonist stumbles upon three uniformed miners, forcing a feeling of not belonging to the group, therefore the uniformed antagonists are the enemy. Overall, the soundtrack is a combination of conventional music and natural sound captured and repurposed, which in relation to Ximm, inspires the same in the viewer or listener: that sound alone can not only evoke emotion, but also guide a narrative where one normally wouldn't exist.
However, narrative can also be derived by a lack of sound. In Cantor's piece, the viewer comes across a plain white room with only two character's, a wolf and a deer, setting up an obviously twisted plot line. Thankfully, after watching the video loop, the wolf wasn't very hungry, or had befriended the deer, because they both looked very alive as the video continued to play over again. At first I though the lack of sound was detrimental, and that Ximm could have swept into the room and placed microphones everywhere to capture intimate sounds of the deer's hooves on the cement floor, the heavy breathing of the deer as it watches the wolf. The wolf's sounds could have stirred a sense of impending violence, as he lick's his teeth and the viewer could hear the slobber of the wolf's long tongue, or the heavy panting not unlike a dog as the wolf circles its prey. Instead however, Cantor chose to leave out sound of inevitable violence, and instead gave us silence. This silence creates a paranoia, as if the deer has lost it's ability to hear as death comes closer. The loss of sound causes confusion, and I imagined that instead of a cement room, the deer and wolf were in a forest during a winter snowstorm, where the heavy breathing and click of a deer's hooves would be silent. In hindsight, the idea of a snowstorm paranoia seemed to drive the video forward, and as the video began a new loop, the awkward situation began again, would the wolf ever be hungry enough to kill the deer?
First, Tykka's trilogy uses three conventional soundtrack's without any dialogue to convey messages about what music viewers relate to what types of films. The first film of the trilogy is entitled "Lasso," in which a young woman spies on a man performing lasso tricks, and the music is quite like a "Old Western" with abrupt horns and an epic feel to the music. The lasso trick's are performed in slow motion, adding to the epic tone of the work. The second piece, entitled "Thriller," would apply more to Aaron Ximm's work, in that it uses only a repetitive piano line and numerous atmospheric sounds to convey a horror story about three very odd characters, and the murder of a sheep. Although the characters interact, the lack of dialogue forces an assumed conversation that is individual for each viewer, although the music usually directs the assumed conversation to something disturbing or even evil. The final piece has a soundtrack that could almost be taken from Aaron Ximm's database of sound. The music uses atmospheric tones that invoke a scifi or futuristic plot line that contains electronic long-tones, heavy bass, and lack of acoustic instruments. Again, the lack of dialogue in combination with the soundtrack evokes a whole new emotion, as the protagonist stumbles upon three uniformed miners, forcing a feeling of not belonging to the group, therefore the uniformed antagonists are the enemy. Overall, the soundtrack is a combination of conventional music and natural sound captured and repurposed, which in relation to Ximm, inspires the same in the viewer or listener: that sound alone can not only evoke emotion, but also guide a narrative where one normally wouldn't exist.
However, narrative can also be derived by a lack of sound. In Cantor's piece, the viewer comes across a plain white room with only two character's, a wolf and a deer, setting up an obviously twisted plot line. Thankfully, after watching the video loop, the wolf wasn't very hungry, or had befriended the deer, because they both looked very alive as the video continued to play over again. At first I though the lack of sound was detrimental, and that Ximm could have swept into the room and placed microphones everywhere to capture intimate sounds of the deer's hooves on the cement floor, the heavy breathing of the deer as it watches the wolf. The wolf's sounds could have stirred a sense of impending violence, as he lick's his teeth and the viewer could hear the slobber of the wolf's long tongue, or the heavy panting not unlike a dog as the wolf circles its prey. Instead however, Cantor chose to leave out sound of inevitable violence, and instead gave us silence. This silence creates a paranoia, as if the deer has lost it's ability to hear as death comes closer. The loss of sound causes confusion, and I imagined that instead of a cement room, the deer and wolf were in a forest during a winter snowstorm, where the heavy breathing and click of a deer's hooves would be silent. In hindsight, the idea of a snowstorm paranoia seemed to drive the video forward, and as the video began a new loop, the awkward situation began again, would the wolf ever be hungry enough to kill the deer?
Monday, December 1, 2008
The Shining & 2012
For the most part, reading The Auteur's Notebook has been interesting yet difficult to decipher as many of the film's discussed are either new and difficult to see in theatres, or old and hard to find copies of. However, a recent article posted link's for two film trailers. One for Stanley Kubrick's The Shining, and another for an upcoming film entitled 2012, which is a precursor to what some believe is the foreboding apoclypse.
Before discussing the trailers, one should watch each as to recognize the obvious point I wish to discuss. A point regarding originality and creativity, as well as paying tribute to past accomplishments.
First, the original article.
Also, alternate link's to the trailer's of The Shining and 2012's official site.
Although the original article had no actual text except for it's title "No Respect for the Dead," the comment's of other user's inspired dialogue on the obvious copycat trailer is theft of an idea, or an homage to a great Kubrick film, and also a mystifying trailer. Regardless, there is nowhere on the blog or the official 2012 website stating the actual intent of the filmmaker's. Although it's just a trailer, a trailer is the initial handshake an audience member has with a film. Regardless of any rumors or hearsay, this first impression set's the tone for the viewer's mood for when (and if) he or she sit's down in a theatre to see the film.
Regardless of the intent of the 2012 trailer, hearing the same moody music and seeing a massive amount of liquid encompass the camera's frame in a different context reveals what emotion's are stirred by the convention's of the trailer. The music from the original Kubrick trailer obviously gives the viewer a sense of fear and and inevitable violence. So when the music is transported to the new trailer, it becomes apparent that sound indeed control's the image, but also that sound is adaptable to new settings. The same music gives off a sense of exotic knowledge, when we see a monk running along a mountaintop, almost as if he knows something the viewer doesn't, and he has to warn someone.
This revealing use of similar music in different contexts forces me to offer an opinion on the value of originality. Why come up with something new if something proven to work is available? Both trailer's want to invite the viewer to something obviously violent, tragic, and daringly epic. Kubrick's The Shining was and still is a massive success of a film, and the creator's of 2012 are hoping to succeed in a similar way. However, if the creator's of the trailer only saw the original trailer as a business model for success, and not for it's ability to capture an emotion that would invite a filmgoer to take interest, then "No Respect for the Dead" is an appropriate expression to describe their theft. If, however, the new trailer is a tribute to a great Kubrick film, then maybe reusing and "remixing" old creation's is in itself, original.
Before discussing the trailers, one should watch each as to recognize the obvious point I wish to discuss. A point regarding originality and creativity, as well as paying tribute to past accomplishments.
First, the original article.
Also, alternate link's to the trailer's of The Shining and 2012's official site.
Although the original article had no actual text except for it's title "No Respect for the Dead," the comment's of other user's inspired dialogue on the obvious copycat trailer is theft of an idea, or an homage to a great Kubrick film, and also a mystifying trailer. Regardless, there is nowhere on the blog or the official 2012 website stating the actual intent of the filmmaker's. Although it's just a trailer, a trailer is the initial handshake an audience member has with a film. Regardless of any rumors or hearsay, this first impression set's the tone for the viewer's mood for when (and if) he or she sit's down in a theatre to see the film.
Regardless of the intent of the 2012 trailer, hearing the same moody music and seeing a massive amount of liquid encompass the camera's frame in a different context reveals what emotion's are stirred by the convention's of the trailer. The music from the original Kubrick trailer obviously gives the viewer a sense of fear and and inevitable violence. So when the music is transported to the new trailer, it becomes apparent that sound indeed control's the image, but also that sound is adaptable to new settings. The same music gives off a sense of exotic knowledge, when we see a monk running along a mountaintop, almost as if he knows something the viewer doesn't, and he has to warn someone.
This revealing use of similar music in different contexts forces me to offer an opinion on the value of originality. Why come up with something new if something proven to work is available? Both trailer's want to invite the viewer to something obviously violent, tragic, and daringly epic. Kubrick's The Shining was and still is a massive success of a film, and the creator's of 2012 are hoping to succeed in a similar way. However, if the creator's of the trailer only saw the original trailer as a business model for success, and not for it's ability to capture an emotion that would invite a filmgoer to take interest, then "No Respect for the Dead" is an appropriate expression to describe their theft. If, however, the new trailer is a tribute to a great Kubrick film, then maybe reusing and "remixing" old creation's is in itself, original.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)