RedMarx

A Forum
It is currently Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:09 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]



Welcome


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 145 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:31 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:17 am
Posts: 883
Has thanked: 726 time
Have thanks: 844 time
Art only came into being in 1970, I'm not sure what you're on about.

_________________
"The thing [calculus] has taken such a hold of me that it not only goes round my head all day, but last week in a dream I gave a chap my shirt-buttons to differentiate, and he ran off with them."

- Friedrich Engels.

Vocatus atque non vocatus Deus aderit.

2x Security Reasons. DANGER DANGER.

Was an Admin when RM was important. Was since confused with Negative Creep for being active.
ZeroNowhere has been thanked by:


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:38 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 241
Has thanked: 136 time
Have thanks: 112 time
ZeroNowhere wrote:
Art only came into being in 1970, I'm not sure what you're on about.


I don't think art has yet to come into being, no.

_________________
the avant garde of ************ avant-garde anti-art poseur insanity radicalism


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:47 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:15 am
Posts: 564
Has thanked: 139 time
Have thanks: 447 time
Black Sabbath's debut album was released in 1970. That's what Zero is referring to.

_________________
"The death of the poor man is the worst eventuality for the creditor. It is the death of his capital together with the interest."
- Marx, Comments on James Mill -

"Citizen Weston illustrated his theory by telling you that a bowl contains a certain quantity of soup, to be eaten by a certain number of persons, an increase in the broadness of the spoons would produce no increase in the amount of soup. He must allow me to find this illustration rather spoony."
- Marx, Value, Price and profit -
Zanthorus has been thanked by:


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:23 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:52 pm
Posts: 464
Has thanked: 558 time
Have thanks: 504 time
thesadmafioso wrote:
Most of the technique and commentary is ripped off from Debord and the SI when it's half decent


I thought that Debord said that plagiarism was good anyway.

_________________
“When the conditions no longer permit an organization to act effectively, when it simply comes down to keeping the tie together that unites the association for the time being in order to re-utilize it at the occasion ; those people can always be found who are not able to accommodate themselves to this situation and who simply want to play busybody and demand ‘to do something’, whereas this something cannot be something else than a stupidity.”-Engels


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:57 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 241
Has thanked: 136 time
Have thanks: 112 time
[quote="Savage"][quote="thesadmafioso"]Most of the technique and commentary is ripped off from Debord and the SI when it's half decent


I thought that Debord said that plagiarism was good anyway.

Well, yes, but Godard's plagiarism is kind of ****, to a point where it hardly qualifies for the term. You just kind of get the impression that he was trying to rip off SI techniques.
_________________
the avant garde of ************ avant-garde anti-art poseur insanity radicalism


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:05 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
Savage wrote:
thesadmafioso wrote:
Most of the technique and commentary is ripped off from Debord and the SI when it's half decent


I thought that Debord said that plagiarism was good anyway.



That was Ducasse: "Plagiarism is necessary. It is implied in the idea of progress. It clasps the author's sentence tight, uses his expressions, eliminates a false idea, replaces it with the right idea."

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:16 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 6:30 pm
Posts: 21
Location: London, UK
Has thanked: 18 time
Have thanks: 11 time
[quote="thesadmafioso"][quote="wunderbar"]I don't know why I keep watching Jean Luc Godard movies when I've disliked all of them. I saw Band of Outsiders a few nights ago and I didn't like it.


Try some of his Dziga Vertov work (Weekend to Tout va Bien, 67-72). Most of the technique and commentary is ripped off from Debord and the SI when it's half decent, otherwise generally falling into standard trends of pseudo-Maoism predominant in the new left at the time, but it's somewhat more amusing to go through than his earlier ****.

I'd say it's more recuperative of revolutionary cinema than anything else, yes, but there is more to go through in the films of his Maoist phase. (Godard actually considered Breathless fascist in the Vertov period, going so far as to basically use Tout va Bien as a more or less 'revolutionary' re-write of it).

By any measure, art is dead and Godard can't change that, as a clever piece of graffiti written in or around 1968 put it.I don't post here much at all, but I was browsing this thread and felt the urge to intervene as Godard is filmmaker who's quite close to my heart. First thing I would say is I don't think that the Situationist International has a monopoly on "revolutionary" art, or revolutionary cinema more specifically. I think something like Cinema Novo could definitely be considered revolutionary, and it quite clear that Russian formalism around Eisenstein et al is quite indisputably a revolutionary cinema. Likewise, in other visual arts, surrealism is most definitely revolutionary, for example.

Secondly, Godard's Dziga Vertov work is most of post-'68 work until 1972; the last Dziga Vertov film is indeed Tout Va Bien, which is at once dealing with the perceived failures of the filmmaking strategies of Godard's post-'68 work, as well as with the failures of the French left in the wake of the événements more broadly. Le Week-end is not of the Dziga Vertov group, which is properly defined as all the films that Godard made anonymously with Jean-Pierre Gorin in the wake of 1968's events, along with similar film collectives such as Chris Marker's SLON (Société pour le lancement des oeuvres nouvelles). To be sure, Le Week-end is a harbinger to those events (what is a more evocative symbol of '68 than the burnt-out car which features almost incessantly throughout the film?), but I would say it's too incoherent ideologically to align itself with the radical anti-narrative didacticism of Le vent d'est (1969), for example. Two other films which aren't part of the Dziga Vertov group are La Chinoise and One Plus One (or Sympathy for the Devil, the film with the Rolling Stones), which was made before May in 1968, but released in November of that year.

I think that it's far too simplistic to say Godard simply "ripped off" the SI and Debord. For a start, there's a strong argument to be made that in fact all art, cinema included, is composed of intertextual allusion, and moreover, an argument that applies very strongly to Godard. His use of quotation and pastiche becomes a kind of polyphony, where it is almost impossible to properly "understand" whole sequences of his films without prior knowledge of those that he is referencing. And also, I refute that Godard stole his techniques (I assume you mean filmic techniques?) from the SI. Godard was a highly accomplished filmmaker formally right from the beginning.

Lastly, his approach to "revolutionary" filmmaker is explainable through recourse to Brechtian aesthetics, which informs and is informed by his work, from the mid-'60s right up until 1972. Self-reflexivity and distanciation (a film acknowledging its position as a constructed artifice) eschews emotional identification in favour of intellectual engagement. The dominant bourgeois cinema ("Hollywood-mosfilm" as Godard called it) functions ideologically through a variety of formal properties. Identification with a central (male) protagonist; linear, causal and transitive narrativity; the creation of a closed consistently-logical diegetic world are some of the chief ways in which dominant cinema effaces its constructedness. There is sense here in which realism (predominantly the "classical" realism a la Hollywood) is equated to illusionism, to mystification. This is all on the fundamental assumption (with which I assume most of us here agree) that art, cinema of course included, is a form of ideology whose principle function is to make the capitalist social formation seem natural. A naturalisation, and kind of inconspicuousness or invisibility (we even talk about continuity editing in terms of its "invisibility") is the crux of the issue here. It's why I would argue that Godard's cinema post-'68 is indeed revolutionary, inasmuch as it very much deliberately and vagrantly does as much as possible to avoid this inconspicuousness (perhaps the precursor to which is the jump-cuts so famous in Breathless) through foregrounding of film form, through the breaking down of a singular, unified and coherent narrative world.

I'd be interested in hearing your response, and I appreciate you taking the time to read my reply, as aesthetics and cinema generally is definitely something of a fascination of mine. And I don't know as much about situationist theory as you obviously do, so I am interested in how you think Godard was actively trying to imitate ("rip-off") the techniques and strategies of Debord and the International. (Also, a big point of reference for how I conceive of Godard's radical cinema is Peter Wollen's essay, "Godard & Counter Cinema: Vent d'Est", which is fairly solid point of departure, and I'm fairly certain the essay in available online as a pdf.)

Edit: if anyone wants to check out JLG, would definitely recommend Vivre Sa Vie (1962), with Anna Karina, it's a stunningly beautiful film, and definitely one of my favourites of his.
Lyev has been thanked by:


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:23 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:03 am
Posts: 65
Has thanked: 69 time
Have thanks: 22 time
I second the Vivre sa Vie recommendation. I think Une Femme est Une Femme is also quite underrated.

_________________
"Alright, I'm ignorant, but I like to fuck, I like to drink, I like to suck cock. Who gives a fuck. "
-G.G. Allin


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:35 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
thesadmafioso wrote:
ZeroNowhere wrote:
Art only came into being in 1970, I'm not sure what you're on about.


I don't think art has yet to come into being, no.



Really? Ever see Monet's Nympheas? Changing the subject, I know, no need to answer.

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Movie Thread
PostPosted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:12 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 241
Has thanked: 136 time
Have thanks: 112 time
[quote="S.Artesian"][quote="thesadmafioso"][quote="ZeroNowhere"]Art only came into being in 1970, I'm not sure what you're on about.


I don't think art has yet to come into being, no.


Really? Ever see Monet's Nympheas? Changing the subject, I know, no need to answer.

Probably, but I don't recall the name. Either way, it's not of any importance.

We have the black square already, shows over.

Image

****, look at it. What more do you want out of this painting nonsense really?
_________________
the avant garde of ************ avant-garde anti-art poseur insanity radicalism


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 145 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Donate Now
Donate Now



Hosted by © 2017 FreeForums.org | Create a free forum | Powered by phpBB
About FreeForums | Legal | Advertise Here | Investors | Contact FreeForums.org
Report Violation

Design By Poker Bandits  

suspicion-preferred