Jesse!

In regards to "well-deployed spoilers," I might look into Maurice
LeMaître's "Le film est déjà commencé?" from 1952. It was a Lettrist film
and supposed staged provocation. There's some accounts/ info on it in
Off-Screen Cinema by Kaira M Cabañas.

Might not be what you're looking for at all, but it's an interesting sort
of (delayed) response to those legendary "reactions."

Mia Ferm

-- 
*Cinema Project*
www.cinemaproject.org
971-266-0085
PO Box 5991
Portland, OR 97228


On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Fred Camper <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, that's right. Because it was positive film, a succession of black and
> white rectangles appeared inside each other as with each new pass the
> previous result was filmed. I believe it was around 40 minutes long. It was
> really interesting; I had never seen anything like it before, and have not
> since.
>
> Fred Camper
>
>
> On 1/13/2016 11:32 PM, Gene Youngblood wrote:
>
> I believe Tony Conrad did some kind of demonstration or performance of
> “film feedback” in which exposed 16mm film went immediately into a
> developing bath and was projected, and the projection was filmed and
> projected, and so on.  No doubt someone on this list remembers that and can
> describe it properly. Also, for scholars of early video, in the current
> issue of Afterimage Robyn Farrell has an in-depth history of Gerry Schum’s
> “TV Gallery” and “Video Gallery” projects in Germany in the late sixties,
> which I only alluded to in passing in Expanded Cinema.
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 3:17 PM, robert harris <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The “early cinema/early video” query is a good one, one that I’ve not seen
> explored with much rigor.
>
> Kleinhans’ question of “broadcast TV or portapak” is significant.
>
> Early TV might have more in common with radio than with early film.
>
> Early video (portapak) provoked, for some practitioners, sensibilities in
> keeping with those of the Lumieres.
>
> The Lumiere camera was more like video than any other camera (including
> the Edison version) as it was, like video, a capture and playback device
> (and lab).
>
> The promptness with which the Lumieres could playback their recordings (if
> my film mythology serves me) is almost video-like (time was a little slower
> in those days, so they say).
>
>  Both early film and early video were made without post-production edits,
> hence were finished in camera.
>
>  Video’s instant feedback loop is an unequivocal distinction from film.
>
> To give proper attention to all origin strains of video, you have to
> consider camera-less, raster based work (Nam June Paik, Wolf Vostell and
> others).
>
> The “early cinema” equivalent might be the first people to mark on clear
> leader, some Italian Futurists, Hans Richter, Man Ray etc.
>
>  As to cultural “outrage”, it wasn’t uncommon for the people throwing
> things at the artists and making big scenes to be the Surrealists
> themselves.
>
>
>
> Some worthy writing of early video (essays you should be able to easily
> find):
>
> Hollis Frampton, *The Withering Away of the State of the Art*
>
> David Antin, *Video: The Distinctive Features of the Medium*
>
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 2:46 AM, Chuck Kleinhans <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> An answer depends on how “early” you’re talking about film (1890s?
> later?), and about video (Broadcast TV or Portapak?).  Probably the most
> significant common feature is the fixed camera position.
>
> The most significant difference (beyond the obvious one of resolution) is
> shot duration.  Video (portpak on) allowed for remarkably long shots
> compared to almost all film.
>
> If you (or anyone) can find it, Noel Burch’s film “Correction Please, or
> How We Got Into Pictures” is a great explanation of the evolution of early
> films' means and style, concentrating on how the audience was shaped by the
> evolving formal elements of cinema.
>
> 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 
> [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