Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Cari Machet]

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 anywhe

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Tim Halloran]

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
>>>>>>>> 
>

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Tim Halloran]

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
>>>>>> 
>&

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Jana Debus]

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 
> <mailto: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 
> <mailto: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 
> <mailto:frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com>> on behalf of Jana Debus 
> <i...@janadebus.com <mailto:i...@janadebus.com>>
> Reply-To:  Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com 
> <mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>
> Date:  Friday, 9 October 2015 1:12 pm
> To:  Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com 
> <mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>, "nicky.ham...@talktalk.net 
> <mailto:nicky.ham...@talktalk.net>" <nicky.ham...@talktalk.net 
> <mailto: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 
> <http://www.hulu.com/search?q=chantal+akerman>
> 
> 
> 
> On 08.10.2015, at 22:09, nicky.ham...@talktalk.net 
> <mailto:nicky.ham...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> 
> Only if you live in the USA,
> 
> Nicky.
>  
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: Jana Debus <i...@janadebus.com <mailto:i...@janadebus.com>>
> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com 
> <mailto: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 
> <https://www.criterion.com/explore/151-chantal-akerman>
> 
> 
> 
> Jana
> 
> 
> On 08.10.2015, at 20:20, Elizabeth McMahon <elizmcma...@gmail.com 
> <mailto: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 
> <mailto: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

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[nicky . hamlyn]

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 mov

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Cari Machet]

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 

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Tim Halloran]

"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
>>>> 
>>

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Cari Machet]

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

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Jana Debus]

PS sorry, you have to use this link to watch the films:

http://www.hulu.com/search?q=chantal+akerman



> On 08.10.2015, at 20:51, Jana Debus  wrote:
> 
> 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 > > 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 > > 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 > > wrote:
>> 
>>> Unless I’m mistaken, the American premiere of 

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Elizabeth McMahon]

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 
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  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 

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Chuck Kleinhans]

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 
> 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 

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Beverly O'Neill]

Jeanne Dielman 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 8, 2015, at 6:41 PM, Chuck Kleinhans  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  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 

Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

[Adam Hyman]

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 don¹t 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 thatŠ
> maybe worth it contacting them tomorrow.
> I¹ll 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 Akerman¹s 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 ³A family in brussels²?
>>> it¹s beautiful, she was such a gifted writer, too.
>>> It¹s 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 Youngblood¹s 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 Rainer¹s Lives of Performers and Film About
>>>>> a Woman Who.  Seeing those works as connected by visual sensibility gives
>>>>> the works at least a second ³authorship² 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 Mulvey¹s
>&