This is a lot like what his films seem to aspired to be, and clearly
demonstrates Noren's sensitivity to these things.

P. Adams Sitney has described that Scott MacDonald interview with Noren
(which was conducted through mail I believe and subject to intense scrutiny
and amendment by Noren) as basically Noren's manifesto and seemed
astonished that, as a writer, Scott MacDonald would turn this over so
completely to Noren. To me that piece is indeed a very provocative piece
and, however it went down, it's really great that Scott was able to get all
that into print...

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Carl E Bogner <> wrote:

>  The concluding -- and personal favorite -- passage from that Andrew
> Noren / Scott MacDonald interview (in Critical Cinema 2) that Mr.
> Youngblood referred to earlier:
>  “The absolute best thing I’ve seen recently and certainly the most
> avant-garde was a lightning storm over southern New Jersey. It was so
> spectacular and sophisticated and surely one of the all-time great movies.
> It was incredibly powerful and intricate and intelligent and terrifying. It
> blasted us awake at two a.m. and we watched it through the black frame of
> the back door: vivid, intense, electric presentation of every last single
> detail of each bush, tree, leaf-of-grass. Vibrating out of absolute
> blackness in blinding, blue-white light, figure and ground switching places
> several times a second. Violent dimensional collisions, macroscopic
> magnification of the smallest things. Then everything vanishing into
> blackness so intense that the after-images were almost as strong as the
> original. And sound! Earth-shattering contrapuntal booms and blasts of such
> power I was sure the house would be blown away. I wish I could begin to
> describe it. It was wonderful, and as avant-garde is it gets. We were
> enchanted.”
>  Carl
> Milwaukee
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* FrameWorks <> on behalf of
> Steve Polta <>
> *Sent:* Monday, May 25, 2015 12:16 PM
> *To:* Experimental Film Discussion List
> *Subject:* Re: [Frameworks] Andrew Noren
>  Yes. Noren was an amazing filmmaker with an incredible body of work that
> threw done some serious aesthetic challenges and expressed, in purely
> visual terms, a very complex aesthetics-based philosophy that to me is
> incredibly deep and profound and still shakes me up to think about. I
> posted the following to facebook and paste it here too...
> Today I learned that the great filmmaker Andrew Noren died a few weeks ago
> from cancer, age 72 (I think). For those who don't know, Noren's films were
> among the most visually intense and overwhelming films ever created. Noren
> was a master 16mm photographer, a master of capturing motion and a master
> of 16mm black & white (I never had the opportunity to see his color films
> but I'm told they were amazing as well). Noren's films tended to be
> long-form (30+ minutes) and were (the ones I've seen) relentless barrages
> of imagery—very fast cutting, incredible single-framing and time lapse—that
> only would pause for the briefest of moments. Generally (the films I've
> seen) shot in cities during the course of daily life, the films emphasize
> the passing of time and—in their speed and Noren's uncanny way of rendering
> solid forms as fragile and ephemeral—seem to be constantly concerned with
> not only passing time but the brevity of life. By the time I came to film,
> Noren—a contemporary and filmmaker-in-dialog-with Brakhage, Dorsky, Gehr
> and all those guys—had largely withdrawn his films from distribution and
> had done the (probably deliberate, although I don't know) slow fade into
> relative obscurity. Each rare screening of Noren's aggressive (if
> overwhelming) films was an occasion for ones personal sense of visuality
> (as well as filmmaking and film history) to be altered permanently, and for
> the better, in that these films feel like wake-up call jolts to the senses
> and made you feel exhileratingly alive (albeit in intense ways—given that
> they stressed—to me—the brevity of life and the non-reality of the physical
> world, they also really shook me up in ways that few other films have). His
> earlier films (which I've not seen) were attempts to document all aspects
> of his life on film and were—this is documented—the direct inspiration for
> DAVID HOLZMAN'S DIARY. It's really too bad that his films didn't screen
> more often but in later years Noren—a classic, intensely opinionated
> curmudgeonly filmmaker—did not make it easy. I was really glad to have seen
> him in person (and meet him briefly) at Pacific Film Archive in 2005 and to
> have screened IMAGINARY LIGHT, via San Francisco Cinematheque
> <>, at SFMOMA in 2012...
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:42 AM, <> wrote:
>> I can understand that. There was a moment in the early 2000s when Susan
>> Oxtoby brought some of his films (and him) to Toronto over the course of a
>> few years. I likely saw about 4 or 5 of his films over that period and
>> still think of them often. A quick description --- rich high-contrast
>> imagery, long point-of-view shots down pathways and evocative time lapses
>> of domestic spaces -- doesn't do them justice; there was something
>> especially stunning about the experience.
>> Chris
>> > Those of us who were there at the time can recall the excitement when a
>> > new film by Andrew was released. We anticipated them almost like we did
>> > the next Brakhage or Godard.
>>  _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks mailing list

Reply via email to