From: Myron Ort (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Jun 30 2009 - 15:42:03 PDT
Thanks, glad to know this and it does change how I understand the
film and the term "collage" which I am still trying to get a handle
on regarding film.
Now that I think of it, Picasso/Braque painting "with" collage in
it, is somehow a different sense than something which is entirely
collage, like the engraving collages of Max Ernst which I always
enjoyed. (
My film from the mid 60s "He's Here Now" contains a variety of
footage some original and some recycled, and I would be reluctant to
call the whole film a "collage" just because I cut in some recycled
classic movie shots from the "film inspector's wastebasket".
The film is not "pure" in that sense, not sure how to describe it.
My other film from that same period "Awakener" contains many
sequences with multiple exposures of classic movies over newly shot
material.
I never felt the need for a term, they are just films made using a
variety of image making devices. Maybe "pastiche" in part describes
the effect.
mo
On Jun 30, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Jeanne LIOTTA wrote:
> oops, sorry I mixed up the Williams!
>
> btw Myron, we can't really say that 'Rose Hobart' is 'East of
> Borneo' minus any Rose shots--though people have described it like
> that, maybe as a shorthand of sorts. There are scenes in which she
> does not appear at all, and there are even a couple shots from
> another movie altogether. It is probably true that Cornell's
> impulse moved from this subtractive method but his process wasn't
> that systematic.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> www.jeanneliotta.net
> www.youtube.com/zerojeanli
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.