See What David Lynch Can Do With a 100-Year-Old Camera and 52 Seconds of Film

In 1995, 41 respect­ed film­mak­ers got a shot at using the first motion pic­ture cam­era, the Lumière broth­ers’ ciné­matographe. Rather, they got more than a shot, but often not much more: each of these icons of world cin­e­ma had to make do with a sin­gle, 52-sec­ond roll of film. Whether you were Spike Lee, Cos­ta-Gavras, Wim Wen­ders, Mer­chant & Ivory, or Peter Green­away, the rules remained the same: no addi­tion­al film, no syn­chro­nized sound, and no more than three takes. This large, indi­rect col­lab­o­ra­tion pro­duced the film Lumière and Com­pa­ny, an anthol­o­gy of all these very short pieces, each of which show­cas­es the kind of cre­ativ­i­ty only strict lim­i­ta­tions can release. (Bri­an Eno would, I imag­ine, approve.) David Lynch’s fans, a ded­i­cat­ed aes­thet­ic fac­tion indeed, will sure­ly fast-for­ward to their man’s con­tri­bu­tion, Lumière, which you can watch on YouTube.

Even in these 52 sec­onds, Lynch enthu­si­asts can spot many of the direc­tor’s sig­na­ture aes­thet­ic and emo­tion­al pre­oc­cu­pa­tions. David Fos­ter Wal­lace elo­quent­ly defined the term “Lynchi­an” as refer­ring to “a par­tic­u­lar kind of irony where the very macabre and the very mun­dane com­bine in such a way as to reveal the for­mer’s per­pet­u­al con­tain­ment with­in the lat­ter,” and you might take Lumière as a bite of unadul­ter­at­ed Lynchi­an­ism. Tak­ing place in vague­ly but sin­is­ter­ly askew small-town mid­cen­tu­ry Amer­i­ca — a realm now more close­ly asso­ci­at­ed with Lynch than any­body — the film drops into and out of a brief fugue of pure bio­me­chan­i­cal grotes­querie. Some of the eerie dream-state qual­i­ty comes from the incon­gru­ous­ly ancient look and feel of ciné­matographe footage. Much more comes from the sound design, which lays the music of a warped clas­sic film score on top of the noise of aging machin­ery. Crit­ics note Lynch’s way with strik­ing images you could­n’t for­get if you want­ed to, but I sus­pect his use of sound does just as much to lodge his movies per­ma­nent­ly into our cin­e­mat­ic con­scious­ness.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed con­tent:

David Lynch’s New ‘Crazy Clown Time’ Video: Intense Psy­chot­ic Back­yard Crazi­ness (NSFW)

David Lynch’s Sur­re­al Com­mer­cials

David Lynch and Inter­pol Team Up on Short Film

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Watch the Animation of Maurice Sendak’s Surreal and Controversial Story, In the Night Kitchen

By now you’ve heard the sad news. The beloved chil­dren’s author Mau­rice Sendak died yes­ter­day at the age of 83. Of course, he’s best remem­bered for his clas­sic tale, Where the Wild Things Are (1963). But some read­ers may hold a spe­cial place in their hearts for his 1970 pic­ture book, In the Night Kitchen. It’s a sur­re­al sto­ry that was named one of the Out­stand­ing Chil­dren’s Books of 1970 by The New York Times. It’s also a sto­ry that stirred up some con­tro­ver­sy. At points in the illus­trat­ed book, the three year old pro­tag­o­nist appears naked, shock­ing some crit­ics and read­ers. These days, you’ll find the book rank­ing 25th on the Amer­i­can Library Asso­ci­a­tion’s list of the 100 Most Fre­quent­ly Chal­lenged Books of 1990–2000.

In 1980, illus­tra­tor Gene Deitch got beyond the con­tro­ver­sy and pro­duced a five minute, faith­ful adap­ta­tion of In the Night Kitchen. It appears above, and it’s now right­ful­ly added to the Ani­ma­tion sec­tion of our big col­lec­tion of 475 Free Movies Online.

Bonus Mate­r­i­al:

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Jacques Tati Film Festival: Four Rare Films, 1935–1967

Jacques Tati was the gen­tle poet of French cin­e­ma. His come­dies, includ­ing the clas­sics Mon Oncle and Mr. Hulot’s Hol­i­day, are less about hilar­i­ty than what Roger Ebert calls “an amused affec­tion for human nature.”

Tati’s six fea­ture films coin­cide with the peri­od of French his­to­ry known as the trente glo­rieuses, the thir­ty “glo­ri­ous” years of rapid­ly ris­ing pros­per­i­ty after World War II. As mod­ern France grows up all around, Tati’s pro­tag­o­nists bum­ble along at an agrar­i­an pace. Tati’s “out-of-synch­ness” is evi­dent not only in the con­tent, but in the form of his films. They are essen­tial­ly silent films in an age of talk­ing pic­tures. Sound and dia­logue are sec­ondary. Tati’s pro­tag­o­nists tend to mum­ble while com­mu­ni­cat­ing through mime.

Today we offer four rarely seen short films fea­tur­ing Tati as a per­former. Gai Dimanche (“Live­ly Sun­day”), above, is the sec­ond of Tati’s sur­viv­ing film per­for­mances. Direct­ed by Jacques Berr in 1935, it fea­tures Tati and his friend Enri­co Spro­cani, a cir­cus clown who went by the name of “Rhum,” as a pair of city tramps who hatch a scheme to spend an all-expens­es-paid day in the coun­try. The sto­ry was writ­ten by Tati and Spro­cani, and was inspired by their own straight­ened eco­nom­ic cir­cum­stances. It’s a rough film, with just a hint of what was to come. “Gai Dimanche,” writes David Bel­los in Jacques Tati: His Life and Art, “seems to have less to do with Tati’s méti­er as a mime, and more to do with the ear­ly devel­op­ment of the themes that he would lat­er elab­o­rate into films of real imag­i­na­tive qual­i­ty.”

Soigne ton Gauche (“Watch Your Left”), 1936:

Direct­ed by René Clé­ment, Soigne ton Gauche is a more pol­ished film than Gai Dimanche. Draw­ing on Tati’s ear­ly music-hall work as a “sport­ing impres­sion­ist,” it tells the sto­ry of a dull-wit­ted dream­er thrust into the role of a box­ing cham­pi­on’s spar­ring part­ner. “Though the mimed box­ing match is the cen­tre­piece of the movie’s plot,” writes Bel­los, “all the inter­est of the work is in what is added to the com­ic fight–the pic­to­r­i­al and nar­ra­tive sur­round, its fic­tion­al­ized con­text, and espe­cial­ly the make-believe of the chil­dren and of the char­ac­ter of the unin­ten­tion­al spar­ring part­ner.”

L’É­cole des Fac­teurs (“School for Post­men”), 1947:

Tati’s first film after World War II, L’É­cole des Fac­teurs is also his first as direc­tor. Although the film is often dat­ed 1947, the exact year of pro­duc­tion is uncer­tain. Accord­ing to Bel­los, film­ing may have begun as ear­ly as 1945. Filmed near the south­ern vil­lage of Aix-en-Provence, L’É­cole des Fac­teurs is in many ways a tri­al run for Tati’s first full-length fea­ture, Jour de Fête (“Fes­ti­val Day”). It tells the sto­ry of a rur­al post­man’s clum­sy efforts to join into the mod­ern spir­it of ever-increas­ing effi­cien­cy. “The vision we share through L’É­cole des Fac­teurs is a satir­i­cal one,” writes Bel­los: “through exag­ger­a­tion and ridicule, it prompts a neg­a­tive view of those things that Tati disliked–work, effi­cien­cy, hur­ry, organisation–and no less sure­ly sug­gests that men in peaked caps are arrant fools.” The film is Tati’s first mature work. As Bel­los writes:

There is not a visu­al­ly dull moment in L’É­cole des Fac­teurs, and its qual­i­ty derives in large part from its extreme econ­o­my of means. But with­out the pecu­liar effect of Tati’s size, of his anti­quat­ed half-mil­i­tary uni­form, and of his com­ic clum­sinss so well-honed that it acquires a kind of grace, the film would not be any­thing very much. It was intend­ed as a launch-vehi­cle for Tati as a new com­ic cin­e­ma per­son­al­i­ty. It is not a mas­ter­piece; but it is a very promis­ing start, far ahead of any­thing Tati had done before the war.

Cours du Soir (“Evening Class­es”), 1967:

Where the oth­er three short films we’ve pre­sent­ed make up a kind of pre­lude to Tati’s career, Cours du Soir seems more like a coda. The film was shot in 1966 by one of Tati’s assis­tants, Nico­las Ribows­ki, at “Tativille” the sprawl­ing set of Play­time. Although Bel­los calls it one of Tati’s “least excit­ing per­for­mances ever,” the film offers a rare glimpse of the mas­ter explain­ing the art of mime to a group of stu­dents. As always, Tati appears as a man out of step with his time.

The films men­tioned above will be added to our meta col­lec­tion of Free Movies Online.

 

David Byrne Plays Seven Characters & Interviews Himself in Funny Promo for Stop Making Sense

We’ve shown you the heady David Byrne lec­tur­ing some­times on how archi­tec­ture helped music evolve, and some­times on the con­nec­tions between music and cog­ni­tion. We’ve also giv­en you the breezi­er David Byrne extolling the virtues of urban bicy­cling. Now comes the light­heart­ed David Byrne inter­view­ing him­self in a pro­mo­tion­al video for the Talk­ing Heads 1984 con­cert movie, Stop Mak­ing Sense. In a mat­ter of min­utes, Byrne, play­ing the role of inter­view­er and inter­vie­wee, changes char­ac­ter, mov­ing from white woman to African Amer­i­can male, from used car sales­man to old geyser, all while explain­ing the gen­e­sis and phi­los­o­phy of the film. And some­how it all makes sense.…

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Live in Rome, 1980: The Talk­ing Heads Con­cert Film You Haven’t Seen

Talk­ing Heads’ “This Must Be the Place (Naive Melody)” Per­formed on Tra­di­tion­al Chi­nese Instru­ments

The Talk­ing Heads Play CBGB, the New York Club that Shaped Their Sound (1975)

 

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Fight For Your Right Revisited: Adam Yauch’s 2011 Film Commemorates the Beastie Boys’ Legendary Music Video

By now you’ve heard the news. Beast­ie Boys co-founder Adam Yauch has died at the age of 47. The cause, sali­vary can­cer. The Beast­ie Boys broke onto the nation­al scene in 1986, with the release of Licensed to Ill, which became the best-sell­ing rap album of the 1980s and the first hip hop LP to top the Bill­board chart. Either then or some time since, you’ve like­ly heard their best known song from the album — (You Got­ta) Fight for Your Right (To Par­ty!).

The orig­i­nal music video for the song (below) became some­thing of an MTV main­stay and played on themes from George A. Romero’s zom­bie movie Dawn of the Dead. 25 years lat­er, Adam Yauch pro­duced Fight For Your Right Revis­it­ed, a 30 minute sur­re­al film that picks up where the orig­i­nal video left off. It stars Eli­jah Wood, Dan­ny McBride and Seth Rogen. You can watch it above in full. It’s also added to our meta col­lec­tion, 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More.

via Mubi.com

Fol­low Open Cul­ture on Face­book and Twit­ter and share intel­li­gent media with your friends. Or bet­ter yet, sign up for our dai­ly email and get a dai­ly dose of Open Cul­ture in your inbox. And if you want to make sure that our posts def­i­nite­ly appear in your Face­book news­feed, just fol­low these sim­ple steps.

WWII Britain Revisited in 120 Short Films, Now Free on the Web

How do you fight pro­pa­gan­da? With pro­pa­gan­da, or so held the British wartime school of thought. “Over 120 films were pro­duced as ‘cul­tur­al pro­pa­gan­da’ to coun­ter­act any­thing the Nazis might throw out and to refute the idea that ours was a coun­try stuck in the past. These films were designed to show­case Britain to the rest of the world, at a time when Britain itself was under attack.” These words come from the about page of the British Coun­cil Film Col­lec­tion, a new­ly opened inter­net archive of over 120 such pieces of cul­tur­al pro­pa­gan­da, free for the view­ing. Above, you’ll find 1941’s City Bound, as direct an illus­tra­tion of the leg­endary stiff upper lip as you’ll find in this dig­i­tal vault. The reel trum­pets, in its sober man­ner, the unblink­ing effi­cien­cy of Lon­don Trans­port as it fer­ries work­ers into the city cen­ter each morn­ing and dis­gorges them back into the sub­urbs each night, even amid the falling bombs of the Blitz. And if you find these stern­ly proud shots of com­muter trains and bus­es rolling bang on time from their sta­tions a bit arti­fi­cial, remem­ber that the Coun­cil still had to pro­duce the film itself under the very real threat from above.

These pro­duc­tions “pro­vide us with a unique insight,” says the Coun­cil today, “not nec­es­sar­i­ly into how Britain actu­al­ly was, but more into how Britain once want­ed to be per­ceived by the rest of the world.” Any­one inter­est­ed in nation­al brand­ing, vin­tage boos­t­er­ism, and sub­jec­tive his­to­ry can have a field day indulging their fas­ci­na­tions in these meta-qual­i­ties, but many of these short doc­u­men­taries offer legit­i­mate­ly worth­while first-order infor­ma­tion as well. Con­sid­er the above, Archi­tects of Eng­land. Yes, it came into being to show­case the splen­did inge­nu­ity of Eng­lish build­ing from Stone­henge mon­u­men­tal to indus­tri­al mod­ernist, but for a spir­it­ed twelve-minute ground­ing in British archi­tec­tur­al tra­di­tions, you could do worse. If you remain uncon­vinced of the val­ue of any of this, bear in mind that you can eas­i­ly down­load any­thing in the British Coun­cil Film Col­lec­tion. If you need the mak­ings of, say, an iron­ic music video, look no fur­ther.

Relat­ed con­tent:

‘Keep Calm and Car­ry On’: The Sto­ry of the Icon­ic World War II Poster

Great Movie Direc­tors Dur­ing Wartime: Hitch­cock, Capra, Hus­ton & Their WWII Films

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Brian Eno on Creating Music and Art As Imaginary Landscapes (1989)

In Imag­i­nary Land­scapes, doc­u­men­tar­i­ans Dun­can Ward and Gabriel­la Car­daz­zo paint an impres­sion­is­tic video por­trait of Bri­an Eno: record pro­duc­er, visu­al artist, col­lab­o­ra­tor with the likes of U2 and David Bowie, ambi­ent music-invent­ing musi­cian, self-pro­claimed “syn­the­sist,” ear­ly mem­ber of Roxy Music, and co-cre­ator of the Oblique Strate­gies. Even if you’ve nev­er han­dled an actu­al deck of Oblique Strate­gies cards — and few have — you’ve sure­ly heard one or two of the Strate­gies them­selves in the air: “Hon­or thy error as a hid­den inten­tion.” “The most impor­tant thing is the most eas­i­ly for­got­ten.” “Do some­thing bor­ing.” The idea is to draw a card and fol­low its edict when­ev­er you hit a cre­ative block. This should, in the­o­ry, get you around the block, no mat­ter what you’re try­ing to cre­ate. Eno first pub­lished the Oblique Strate­gies with painter Peter Schmidt in 1975, and here in Imag­i­nary Land­scapes, four­teen years lat­er, you can hear him still excit­ed about the cards’ basic premise: if you fol­low arbi­trary rules and the­o­ret­i­cal posi­tions, they’ll lead you to cre­ative deci­sions you nev­er would have oth­er­wise made.

This short doc­u­men­tary com­bines inter­views of Eno with footage of him craft­ing sounds in his stu­dio, sim­u­lat­ing the echoes of a cave, say, then turn­ing that cave into a liq­uid. It weaves these seg­ments togeth­er with a trip through Amer­i­can cities like Los Ange­les, San Fran­cis­co, and New York, then back to the Wood­bridge, Suf­folk of Eno’s youth, then on to Venice, one of the world’s places that draws him irre­sistibly with its water­i­ness. Place itself emerges as one of Eno’s dri­ving con­cepts, not sim­ply as a source of inspi­ra­tion (though it seems to work that way for his video Mis­tak­en Mem­o­ries of Medieval Man­hat­tan), but as a form. When Eno talks about mak­ing albums, or images, or instal­la­tions, he talks about them as places for audi­ences to exist. In any phys­i­cal place, you’re pre­sent­ed with a cer­tain set of choic­es. You can’t always tell the delib­er­ate­ly designed ele­ments from the “nat­ur­al” ones, and hav­ing a rich expe­ri­ence demands that you active­ly use your own aware­ness. This, so Eno explains, guides how he builds “places” — imag­i­nary land­scapes, if you will — for lis­ten­ers, gallery­go­ers, record­ing artists, or him­self, try­ing to open up “the spaces between cat­e­gories” and “make use of the watcher’s brain as part of the process.” Look into his more recent projects, like his iPhone apps or his col­lab­o­ra­tions with bands like Cold­play or his tour­ing exhi­bi­tion 77 Mil­lion Paint­ings, and you’ll find him build­ing them still.

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Hitchcock on the Filmmaker’s Essential Tool: The Kuleshov Effect

Alfred Hitch­cock once said that all art is emo­tion, and that the task of the film­mak­er is to use the tools of his medi­um to manip­u­late the audi­ence’s emo­tion­al expe­ri­ence. In the scene above from the 1964 CBC doc­u­men­tary A Talk with Hitch­cock, the great direc­tor demon­strates one of the most fun­da­men­tal tools at a film­mak­er’s dis­pos­al: the Kuleshov effect.

In the ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry, Russ­ian film­mak­er and the­o­rist Lev Kuleshov dis­cov­ered that a sin­gle shot of an actor with an ambigu­ous expres­sion on his face could con­vey a mul­ti­tude of very dis­tinct mean­ings in the mind of the view­er, depend­ing on the nature of the shot imme­di­ate­ly pre­ced­ing it. In 1918 he con­duct­ed his famous exper­i­ment (below) using a sin­gle shot of the silent film actor Ivan Moz­zhukhin’s face look­ing at some­thing off-cam­era.

Kuleshov spliced it in with a series of quite dif­fer­ent images–a bowl of soup, a dead child, a scant­i­ly clad woman–and dis­cov­ered that the audi­ence would inter­pret Moz­zhukhin’s emo­tion (hunger, pity, lust) depend­ing on the jux­ta­po­si­tion.

Kuleshov’s dis­cov­ery was the out­come of a very delib­er­ate process. In 1916 he and sev­er­al col­leagues made a sys­tem­at­ic study of audi­ence reac­tions at movie the­aters across Moscow. They quick­ly found that the bour­geoisie were too reserved, so they spent most of their time at the­aters in work­ing class neigh­bor­hoods, where the emo­tions flowed freely. They noticed that audi­ences react­ed dif­fer­ent­ly depend­ing upon where the film was pro­duced. As Kuleshov writes in his essay, “The Prin­ci­ples of Mon­tage”:

When we began to com­pare the typ­i­cal­ly Amer­i­can, typ­i­cal­ly Euro­pean, and typ­i­cal­ly Russ­ian films, we noticed that they were dis­tinct­ly dif­fer­ent from one anoth­er in their con­struc­tion. We noticed that in a par­tic­u­lar sequence of a Russ­ian film there were, say, ten to fif­teen splices, ten to fif­teen dif­fer­ent set-ups. In the Euro­pean film there might be twen­ty to thir­ty such set-ups (one must not for­get that this descrip­tion per­tains to the year 1916), while in the Amer­i­can film there would be from eighty, some­times upward to a hun­dred, sep­a­rate shots. The Amer­i­can films took first place in elic­it­ing reac­tions from the audi­ence; Euro­pean films took sec­ond; and the Russ­ian films, third. We became par­tic­u­lar­ly intrigued by this, but in the begin­ning we did not under­stand it.

Kuleshov even­tu­al­ly con­clud­ed that the essence of cin­e­ma is mon­tage, that a film sto­ry is best told by cut­ting between dis­crete pieces of film. His stu­dent Sergei Eisen­stein saw the basic struc­ture as a col­li­sion between shot A (“the­sis”) and shot B (“antithe­sis”) to cre­ate a com­plete­ly new idea (“syn­the­sis”) in the mind of the view­er.

The noto­ri­ety of Kuleshov’s exper­i­ment with Moz­zhukhin tends to focus atten­tion on the human face (it has even inspired sci­en­tif­ic research on the con­tex­tu­al fram­ing of emo­tion­al attri­bu­tions), but the effect is far more gen­er­al. “We are accus­tomed,” writes Eisen­stein in Film Sense, “to make, almost auto­mat­i­cal­ly, a def­i­nite and obvi­ous deduc­tive gen­er­al­iza­tion when any sep­a­rate objects are placed before us side by side.”

Kuleshov showed this in sev­er­al oth­er exper­i­ments. In one, he depict­ed a sin­gle woman through a series of shots show­ing the body parts of mul­ti­ple women. In anoth­er he cre­at­ed an “arti­fi­cial land­scape” by splic­ing an image of the White House into a sequence of images of Moscow. The will­ing­ness of audi­ences to make mean­ing­ful con­nec­tions between unre­lat­ed images gives a film­mak­er con­sid­er­able expres­sive pow­er.  In his book On Direct­ing Film, David Mamet writes:

Doc­u­men­taries take basi­cal­ly unre­lat­ed footage and jux­ta­pose it in order to give the view­er the idea the film­mak­er wants to con­vey. They take footage of birds snap­ping a twig. They take footage of a fawn rais­ing his head. The two shots have noth­ing to do with each oth­er. They were shot days or years, and miles, apart. And the film­mak­er jux­ta­pos­es the images to give the view­er the idea of great alert­ness. The shots have noth­ing to do with each oth­er. They are not a record of what the pro­tag­o­nist did. They are not a record of how the deer react­ed to the bird. They’re basi­cal­ly unin­flect­ed images. But they give the view­er the idea of alert­ness to dan­ger when they are jux­ta­posed. That’s good film­mak­ing.

There is an old say­ing that a work of art is only com­plet­ed in the mind of the behold­er. Kuleshov showed that it’s true.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Alfred Hitch­cock Reveals The Secret Sauce for Cre­at­ing Sus­pense

Alfred Hitch­cock Explains the Plot Device He Called the ‘MacGuf­fin’

The Eyes of Hitch­cock: A Mes­mer­iz­ing Video Essay on the Expres­sive Pow­er of Eyes in Hitchcock’s Films

Alfred Hitchcock’s 7‑Minute Mas­ter Class on Film Edit­ing

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast