eXperimental Film
Posted by: kmikeym | From: April 17, 2006
The PDX Film Fest is almost upon us. The full name is The Portland Documentary and eXperimental Film Festival, and while we all know what a documentary is, I find that I don't really have an expectation of experimental film. It would appear that I am not the only one, as even the Wikipedia article on experimental film is currently in dispute.
The image that defines experimental and avant-garde film to me is from Un Chien Andalou, in which a woman's eye is slit with a razor. Possibly the most disturbing image ever recorded on film (it makes my eye hurt just thinking about it). The Dadaists and Surrealists were the first to take to film as art in the 1920's, and their non-sequitur style seems to linger in my mind when think of experimental film.
I just feel so pre-conditioned to expect a narrative "good movie" when I enter a movie theater that I am worried I won't "get it". And then to think I'm going to be blogging the shit out of what I see (and possibly don't understand) makes me a little uneasy and a little excited.
Wikipedia mentions that experimental film is often made to test an audience's reaction. I feel like it's a test I am unprepared for (a little uneasy) in a class I like (a little excited).
Thanks Piu Piu, that's a solid link! I like the definition of experimental that explains the outcome is unknown, hence the "experiment" aspect...
Posted by: Mikey at April 18, 2006 10:28 AM
hey mikey,
don’t worry, you are not alone in the confusion surrounding experimental cinema. I am known as an ‘experimental filmmaker’ yet I can’t an exact definition. I think it comes down as being one of those things you can’t define, but you know it when you see it (didn’t some supreme court justice say that about porn?). so yeah, experimental film is a lot like porn. well, not really. it is actually a lot like punk, in my opinion. like punk, the definition has changed a lot, but there is an underlying meaning that people who ‘get it’ understand. historically, experimental cinema tends to refer to artists like Maya Deren, Stan Brakhage, and Kevin Anger. Stan Brakhage might be the Bob Dylan of film (after seeing ‘Don’t Look Back’ I’m convinced Dylan was a punk, he just didn’t have an amp). But either way, those filmmakers were radicals who where bent on shaking up the notion of what film was and what it was supposed to be. Stan Brakhage scratching on film was probably a lot like Pete Townsend rocking feedback and distortion. (remember that in those days, scratches on film or feedback squelching from amps where officially ‘mistakes’)
but I guess what it really comes down to is that experimental cinema is a simple rejection of the filmmaking formula that Hollywood has developed. I mean think about it- there have been so many (Hollywood) films made, some really good, some absolutely terrible, but think about how similar they all are: they’re always about an hour and a half long, have a cast of characters, and have a narrative structure similar to that found in literature (beginning, middle, end, with an arcing climax and resolution, etc.). experimental film, however, starts with a blank slate. there are all sorts of experimental films (again- some good, some absolutely terrible) but the one thing they have in common is that they do not follow that predictable Hollywood formula. experimental film tends to have more in common with the art world than it does with anything showing down at the Lloyd Center metroplex. i think that experimental film is sort of like high-tech folk art. experimental filmmakers don’t make much money (if any) from their films, and in that sense, experimental film may be the most honest of all the high-profile contemporary arts. there are no high-rolling executive producers, no greedy agents or big-time dealers. so in that way, maybe experimental film is actually the Urban Honking of cinema! (note to self: write about how experimental film and blogging might be different versions of the same thing (note to self2: start a blog to write such a thing)).
so really, all it takes to appreciate experimental film is an open mind. having some context helps a lot too, just like art or music or anything else, experimental film definitely has a community and a history of it’s own. trends emerge, artists reference each other, and some things are just plain challenging. but ultimately, experimental film is a pretty rad thing, and I think that anyone who is creative and willing to give something a fair shot can handle it.
so blog on!
- matt m.
Posted by: matt mc at April 18, 2006 2:08 PM
Yeah, it was a calf eye I think... but still, the effect is... Yikes...
Posted by: Mikey at April 18, 2006 5:26 PM
most importantly i think....just have fun and don't worry about the critical side of things. your opinion is as valid as anyone elses and u don't need a degree in fine art to blog a film fest. u just need a camera, some patience and some cheek! don't forget- people like me cant get there so we want the fun stories....who fell over in front of an audience, who got drunk and puked everywhere......ok maybe thats a bit too far....but i loved willows story from last yr it was hilatious! ok i'm off. but i'll link u! have fun!
Posted by: piu piu at April 19, 2006 1:14 AM
Post a comment:
heres a good link
http://www.hi-beam.net/fl-defs.html
looking forward to hearing about it (and seeing i hope!)
Posted by: piu piu at April 18, 2006 10:10 AM