From: Myron Ort (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Jun 30 2009 - 15:30:04 PDT
Good, I would like to know more about all that myself.
mo
On Jun 30, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Steve Polta wrote:
> Someone more knowledgable than I can (and hopefully will) clarify
> the process by which Cornell assembled ROSE HOBART but there is
> much more to this than a simple deletion of the non-Rose scenes
> from EAST OF BORNEO. There is definitely a reassembly of material,
> not to mention the addition of sound and———get this———the inclusion
> of material **NOT FOUND** in the original film. For example, I
> believe the shot in ROSE of the white cap thing floating in water
> is from some science film.
>
> But hopefully someone (Ms. Liotta??) can clarify this for us all.
>
> Steve Polta
>
>
>>
>> My understanding of "Rose Hobart" is that it was a
>> found film with all the shots without Rose removed.
>> The resulting "form" being the chance operation resulting
>> from this simple conceptual device. Understanding this then
>> leads me to a useful tool perhaps for another similar film.
>> Simply calling it a collage doesn't get me to the core of
>> this understanding, but I do see why people generally want
>> to have these sweeping categories for general conversation,
>> however misleading.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.