Definitely. 

Tim

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 10, 2015, at 8:42 PM, Cari Machet <carimac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think you have a parasite in your mind tim
> 
>> On Oct 10, 2015 2:26 AM, "Tim Halloran" <televis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Lol.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Cari Machet <carimac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Its not meant as funny ... you must be american ... i am anti feminist 
>>> because it divides us - i have had too many strange experiences with 
>>> exclusionary females that are hierarichical which is patriarchal ... they 
>>> have no idea they are replicating the oppressors model maybe but ignorance 
>>> is an excuse that takes people only so far
>>> 
>>> i am also anti-agist anti-speciesist anti-fascist
>>> 
>>> More notes on distribution after deadman jarmusch refuses to ask american 
>>> producers for funding and that had a lot to do with distribution problems - 
>>> su freidricks said that she would rather have 10 people watch her films and 
>>> underwtand them than millions of people that dont
>>> 
>>> Distribution/production is even psychotic for the highest paid like 
>>> speilberg and one flew over the coockoos nest took 10 years before getting 
>>> funding its a super fucked up section of society
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 9, 2015 7:50 PM, "Tim Halloran" <televis...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> "Anti-feminist." Lol.
>>>> 
>>>> Tim
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>> 
>>>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Cari Machet <carimac...@gmail.com> 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" <carimac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Just use a proxy server  - a VPN ... shop online for one you like
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2015 9:24 AM, "Jana Debus" <i...@janadebus.com> 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, nicky.ham...@talktalk.net wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Same problem with the Hollis Frampton DVDs. Quiet annoying.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nicky.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Adam Hyman <a...@lafilmforum.org>
>>>>>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com> 
>>>>>>>> <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>; JANA DEBUS <i...@janadebus.com>
>>>>>>>> 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" <i...@janadebus.com> 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 <peter.mu...@uwa.edu.au> 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 <frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com> on behalf 
>>>>>>>> of Jana Debus <i...@janadebus.com>
>>>>>>>> Reply-To:  Experimental Film Discussion List 
>>>>>>>> <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>>>>>> Date:  Friday, 9 October 2015 1:12 pm
>>>>>>>> To:  Experimental Film Discussion List 
>>>>>>>> <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>, "nicky.ham...@talktalk.net" 
>>>>>>>> <nicky.ham...@talktalk.net>
>>>>>>>> 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, nicky.ham...@talktalk.net wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Only if you live in the USA,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nicky.
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Jana Debus <i...@janadebus.com>
>>>>>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>>>>>> 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 <elizmcma...@gmail.com> 
>>>>>>>> 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 
>>>>>>>> <chuck...@northwestern.edu> 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 <ato...@comcast.net> 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
>>>>>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>>>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>>>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>>>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>>>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>>>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

Reply via email to