This is the hardest blog post I’ve ever written in any Silva class ever. Picking your favorite 6x1 project is like picking your favorite child. This kind of filmmaking is so personal that it’s difficult to think of one project being inferior to another. When I finally put this list together I realized that the favoritism lies with the assignments or their guidelines; my favoritism resides more in my ultimate pride in the final outcome of the piece.
I loved working on every single project. I wish that I would’ve given myself more time with all of them, and that this was the only thing that I had to do all semester. I think it would’ve been interesting to see how much better I could have been with a little more time and more attention to detail. That being said, I plan to rework many of these films—if for no other reason than so I could feel less uneasy while watching them.
So, here it goes. Drum Roll Please…
6. Recycled Footage
I got spend hours deciphering the crazy, manic, coked out madness that is Charlie Sheen, and give the president the power to call him a jackass. Who else gets to do that for a homework assignment!
I approached this project wanting to do something more fun than I usually do. I don’t consider myself to be a terribly serious person in real life, but my films always tend to be more serious side of things. Unfortunately, it didn’t really accomplish what I hoped it would stylistically. I like the style of the film from about 42 seconds until the end, but the first 41 seconds didn’t really work without music underneath. I tried to manufacture a beat from frames of Sheen’s dialogue, but it wasn’t suitable for the rhythm of the edit. I really wish there was a culture jam class/unit where we could discuss a methodology. How much would it cost to bring Aaron Valdez in for a workshop?
5. Cameraless Filmmaking
Ok, this was a really cool assignment. I would’ve never thought about coloring on film or scratching making an entire film! It was so cool. I loved working on this. The only thing that sucked is that I missed some of the group meeting times because of a death in my family. I really plan on exploring this technique further.
4. Multi-Plane Animation
The pictures up on facebook say it all. I came into class, played with food, squished a tomato, and shot on film. It was super cool, but I wish that it would’ve come out better. I did enjoy playing up the cheesy aesthetic in post, but I wish that we would’ve framed things better and made better use of our 3 planes.
3. Rhythmic Edit
This was a really cool project. My immediate instinct was to give this assignment a documentary feel, but I decided to just shoot Cassandra in her natural habitat instead. I really enjoyed the visual music feel given to this style. Also, this is probably the coolest soundtrack I’ve ever built.
2. Long Take
Lord of the Flies Weekend was awesome. I love hand processing. It’s my favorite thing, and the fact that I got to shoot and process on the same day made it even cooler. Also, since I had more experience than most I sort of got to do a bit of leading, which was really cool experience since I want to teach.
1. 48-Hour Video Race
This is one of the coolest films I’ve ever made. I played with the idea of making a more traditional self-portrait style film, but I really enjoyed the aesthetic that I managed to create using household items, my face, rubber ducks, and photoshop. I wasn’t in love with how abstract the film was at first until Andre and Cassandra both told me that I managed to make them feel like they were drowning. Mission accomplished.
Showing posts with label Aaron Valdez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Aaron Valdez. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
You Don't Own Me
What is artistic ownership really?
Do we really own anything that we make? Are we even responsible for the things that we consider to be products of our own imagination; other works of art, stories other people tell us, and even the experiences of others, influences those things. Does ownership depend on whether or not we are standing behind a lens or holding the pen/brush? Or does it simply depend on how much we alter existing artwork.
Does Aaron Valdez own his work? He is simply compiling news footage and editing in such a way that it that it suits his agenda, which in counterintuitive to the agenda in the original media. Does that mean that he owns the art simply because he owns the agenda? Is it even really his agenda? Surely, he isn’t the only artist or filmmaker to believe that we are oversaturated with media—particularly the right wing hate mongering of Fox News.
Where can we draw the line? Is my documentary really mine? I don’t own my subject—although I do have her consent. I am not the first person to document an artist’s work or struggle. Does that mean that my work is unoriginal and up for pillaging by other artists? How would I feel if someone incorporated my work into their work to say that people with disease should not be able to make art? I may not agree with that notion, but it is certainly the right of the acquiring artist.
I suppose it comes down to our ideology about art. What’s our society’s view on art? Is it created as a means for capital gains or simply a way to comment and assess the way the world works? Obviously, monetary gain is a perk to making art for a living, but is that the only reason?
If making art carries all the weight of standing behind a check out counter or answering phones or scrubbing floors, then, yes, ownership is vital, and we should fight tooth and nail for every penny and every ounce of recognition; people like Joy Garnett and Aaron Valdez are glorified thieves, who should come up with their own ideas for which they can profit or they should pay us for the rights to incorporate our original work.
I, personally, cannot subscribe to that idea. Sure, it would be nice if I can make some money making art, but I don’t count on it. I plan to have a day job and apply for grants that would afford me the luxury of making the films that I want to make.
The Molotov Man belongs to Joy Garnett. Susan Meiselas may think that Garnett’s use of her photography diminishes the importance of her subject, but Garnett saw the potential in the photograph to comment on the universal need of man to make noise and express extreme emotion. Her agenda was not to embody the horrific struggle for freedom in Nicaragua; that agenda was Meiselas’s and it deserves equal respect. These works are separate, and they should be treated as such.
Do we really own anything that we make? Are we even responsible for the things that we consider to be products of our own imagination; other works of art, stories other people tell us, and even the experiences of others, influences those things. Does ownership depend on whether or not we are standing behind a lens or holding the pen/brush? Or does it simply depend on how much we alter existing artwork.
Does Aaron Valdez own his work? He is simply compiling news footage and editing in such a way that it that it suits his agenda, which in counterintuitive to the agenda in the original media. Does that mean that he owns the art simply because he owns the agenda? Is it even really his agenda? Surely, he isn’t the only artist or filmmaker to believe that we are oversaturated with media—particularly the right wing hate mongering of Fox News.
Where can we draw the line? Is my documentary really mine? I don’t own my subject—although I do have her consent. I am not the first person to document an artist’s work or struggle. Does that mean that my work is unoriginal and up for pillaging by other artists? How would I feel if someone incorporated my work into their work to say that people with disease should not be able to make art? I may not agree with that notion, but it is certainly the right of the acquiring artist.
I suppose it comes down to our ideology about art. What’s our society’s view on art? Is it created as a means for capital gains or simply a way to comment and assess the way the world works? Obviously, monetary gain is a perk to making art for a living, but is that the only reason?
If making art carries all the weight of standing behind a check out counter or answering phones or scrubbing floors, then, yes, ownership is vital, and we should fight tooth and nail for every penny and every ounce of recognition; people like Joy Garnett and Aaron Valdez are glorified thieves, who should come up with their own ideas for which they can profit or they should pay us for the rights to incorporate our original work.
I, personally, cannot subscribe to that idea. Sure, it would be nice if I can make some money making art, but I don’t count on it. I plan to have a day job and apply for grants that would afford me the luxury of making the films that I want to make.
The Molotov Man belongs to Joy Garnett. Susan Meiselas may think that Garnett’s use of her photography diminishes the importance of her subject, but Garnett saw the potential in the photograph to comment on the universal need of man to make noise and express extreme emotion. Her agenda was not to embody the horrific struggle for freedom in Nicaragua; that agenda was Meiselas’s and it deserves equal respect. These works are separate, and they should be treated as such.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)