"Anti-feminist." Lol.

Tim

Sent from my iPad

> On Oct 9, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Cari Machet <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Even though she may have thought of herself on the level of wim and not 
> gotten proper vast distribution as was stated she was female and though i am 
> anti-feminist this glaring factor remains a wall
> 
> I cant help thinking of chris marker and his distribution
> 
> My beautiful friend has made a website others may have an interest in > 
> monoskop.org
> 
> On there is a series made by chris marker entitled 'the owl's legacy' which 
> was not distributed
> 
> Monoskop.org/Chris_Marker
> 
> In honor of chantel maybe people can be more aware when they do get to view 
> an artists work (that moves away from the oppressors hand) that the ease of 
> distribution is maybe too rare and we can all maybe help to shift that
> 
>> On Oct 9, 2015 4:00 PM, "Cari Machet" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Just use a proxy server  - a VPN ... shop online for one you like
>> 
>>> On Oct 9, 2015 9:24 AM, "Jana Debus" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Well, the most wonderful thing would be for all of her films to be 
>>> projected and for all of us to gather for the occasion.
>>> I guess Brussels would be the perfect place. (I am far away from Brussels 
>>> now…in San Francisco, and feel even further away during this sad time.)
>>> 
>>> I hope it will be done, and for everyone to make an effort to be there.
>>> 
>>> Jana
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 23:17, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Same problem with the Hollis Frampton DVDs. Quiet annoying.
>>>> 
>>>> Nicky.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Adam Hyman <[email protected]>
>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <[email protected]> 
>>>> <[email protected]>; JANA DEBUS <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 6:36
>>>> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>> 
>>>> Criterion is a US company that mostly licenses films only for US home 
>>>> video distribution, and internet streaming.  However, it is more likely 
>>>> than not that they don’t have the rights to make it available for 
>>>> streaming to people outside the United States.  Those rights would be held 
>>>> whatever company distributes her films in each country in question.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/8/15 10:21 PM, "Jana Debus" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I am sorry to hear that!
>>>> I wonder whether Criterion could do something about that…
>>>> maybe worth it contacting them tomorrow.
>>>> I’ll try.
>>>> 
>>>> Jana
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 22:18, Peter Mudie <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Yep, they can only be viewed in the U.S. (which is a bit tough on everyone 
>>>> in Belgium, or anywhere else for that matter).
>>>> Peter
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From:  FrameWorks <[email protected]> on behalf of 
>>>> Jana Debus <[email protected]>
>>>> Reply-To:  Experimental Film Discussion List 
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:  Friday, 9 October 2015 1:12 pm
>>>> To:  Experimental Film Discussion List <[email protected]>, 
>>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>>> Subject:  Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>> 
>>>> oh, shame, did you try the other link, I sent?
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.hulu.com/search?q=chantal+akerman
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 22:09, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Only if you live in the USA,
>>>> 
>>>> Nicky.
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jana Debus <[email protected]>
>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 5:14
>>>> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Criterion has made Chantal Akerman’s films available online, 
>>>> you can watch them for free at this time of mourning,
>>>> and be close to her, through her work.
>>>> 
>>>> And, have you ever heard her reading “A family in brussels”?
>>>> it’s beautiful, she was such a gifted writer, too.
>>>> It’s on CD.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.criterion.com/explore/151-chantal-akerman
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Jana
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 20:20, Elizabeth McMahon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I cannot speak for Film maker's Cooperative or Canyon, but The New York 
>>>> Public Library has a 16mm print of "Jeanne Dielman" for those who are 
>>>> close by, or otherwise interested in seeing it on film. It was distributed 
>>>> at the time of acquisition by New Yorker, so it did indeed have a 
>>>> stateside distributor, and one with quite a distinguished reputation. If 
>>>> you are interested in screening it on site, please call ahead to arrange 
>>>> the time.  
>>>> 
>>>> Elizabeth McMahon
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Chuck Kleinhans 
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I appreciate Gene Youngblood’s observations.  I would point out in 
>>>> addition some of the decisions Akerman made which shaped the reception of 
>>>> her work.
>>>> 
>>>> First, and I think incredibly importantly, was her choice of Babette 
>>>> Mongolte to be her cinematographer on Jeanne Dielman.  Mongolte had 
>>>> already done the camerawork on Rainer’s Lives of Performers and Film About 
>>>> a Woman Who.  Seeing those works as connected by visual sensibility gives 
>>>> the works at least a second “authorship” in the cinematographer.
>>>> 
>>>> Second, Jeanne Dielman arrived in 1975-6.  It was screened at some film 
>>>> centers and then the print left the country.  Yeet during its brief 
>>>> appearance it inspired almost all the emerging feminist film makers, 
>>>> critics, scholars, teachers, and intellectuals to rave about it.  And the 
>>>> writers wrote about it with a strong femiist analysis  
>>>> 
>>>> I think this was due to at least two factors, One was that feminist film 
>>>> criticism was looking for new work that escaped the Hollywood 
>>>> expectations.  Remember this is the exact moment when Laura Mulvey’s 
>>>> landmark essay on "Visual  Pleasure and Narrative CInema" hit the scene. 
>>>> Jeanne Dielman was the perfect film to see after or before reading 
>>>> Mulvey..  This was also the time of emerging feminist film festivals, 
>>>> feminist film courses in colleges and universities, feminist film 
>>>> programming  being a regular part of film center programming, etc.
>>>> 
>>>> Second, there was at that time a certain momentum in the women’s movement 
>>>> for thinking anew about housework and domestic space.  In the UK one high 
>>>> profile group of feminists led a campaign for “Wages for 
>>>> Housework”—demanding recognition of women’s unpaid labor.  In N. America 
>>>> there was an active discussion of the “double day” and women working 
>>>> outside the home but also then being totally responsible for domestic 
>>>> chores, cleaning, child-rearing, etc.  So within the political wing of the 
>>>> women’s movement there was interest in this and Jeanne Dielman, although 
>>>> in one sense one of the “least likely” films to appeal to feminist 
>>>> activists unfamiliar with art film narrative in fact when they did get to 
>>>> see the film found it often intriguing and made them rethink what feminist 
>>>> film might be.
>>>> 
>>>> But, as I said, that rare print disappeared from N. America and Akermann 
>>>> essentially rejected the genuine enthusiastic audience for her film and 
>>>> wasn’t interested in having it placed with some logical upstart feminist 
>>>> film distributors nor was she willing to deposit a copy with the NY Coop 
>>>> or Canyon, which would have at least kept it alive for those who wanted to 
>>>> show it.  I never heard the story from her side of why she made this 
>>>> decision.  The gossip I heard was that she had a very high opinion of 
>>>> herself and wanted to be treated as a Major European Film  Artist like 
>>>> Wenders or Fassbinder.  She was holding out for Big Time art film 
>>>> distribution in N. America.  And that never happened.
>>>> 
>>>> There’s an excellent (if kind of lopsided by her enthusiasms) presentation 
>>>> of that Ackerman moment in Ruby Rich’s book Chick Flicks: Theories and 
>>>> Memories of the Feminist Film Movement.
>>>> 
>>>> The point being that artists have some role to play in their own 
>>>> reputation/success and some decisions end up shaping their critical 
>>>> horizon and artistic capital.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Gene Youngblood <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Unless I’m mistaken, the American premiere of Jeanne Dielmann was at 
>>>> Filmex in 1976. That’s the Los Angeles International Film Exposition, 
>>>> which was the largest festival in the world at that time except for 
>>>> Cannes, which we considered to be a market, not a festival. I saw it 
>>>> twice, first on the selection committee, then at the festival, where it 
>>>> impressed me even more the second time. I met Chantal for lunch 
>>>> immediately after, somewhat disoriented that such a reserved, shy little 
>>>> person could have made this work of monumental intelligence and power. She 
>>>> was with Lloyd Cohn, whose fledgling company, World Artists (I think 
>>>> that’s the name), was the American distributor of the film. I met Lloyd 
>>>> ten years earlier when he was doing publicity for Monte Hellman’s 
>>>> remarkable westerns, The Shooting and Ride In the Whirlwind, which I 
>>>> reviewed in the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner. The review attracted a 
>>>> considerable audience for the films (Cameron Mitchell took out a full page 
>>>> ad in Variety to thank me and Jack Nicholson, who wrote, co-produced and 
>>>> starred in both), and because of that Lloyd was “loyal” to me over the 
>>>> years, which is how I ended up having lunch with him and Chantal Akerman. 
>>>> Lloyd was a small person too, about the same height as Chantal, and I 
>>>> remember feeling conspicuous, being more than a foot taller than them, as 
>>>> we entered the restaurant. I don’t remember much of the conversation 
>>>> except about Godard and Michael Snow, and how perceptive Chantal’s 
>>>> observations were. (As an aside, I prefer her “One Day Pina Asked…” over 
>>>> Wim Wenders’ piece on Bausch). I’m not sure about this, but I think Lloyd 
>>>> Cohn distributed some of Chantal’s experimental shorts for a brief period 
>>>> of time, and maybe The Meetings of Anna, and then I lost track of him. I 
>>>> showed Jeanne Dielmann, The Meetings of Anna, Hotel Monterey, Je tu il 
>>>> elle, and I’m Hungry I’m Cold in various classes every year for about 20 
>>>> years, first at Calarts, then the College of Santa Fe. There were always 
>>>> lively discussions, and a handful of students invariably wrote term papers 
>>>> on Jeanne Dielmann or Meetings of Anna or both. Chantal affected me as 
>>>> profoundly as she did many others, maybe even a few of my students. By the 
>>>> way, if anyone knows what Lloyd Cohn is doing these days, please contact 
>>>> me off list. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Chuck Kleinhans
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Reply via email to