Re: "a critique..." + ken jacobs

From: Cari Machet (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Oct 27 2005 - 17:20:12 PDT


--- Marilyn BrakhagemsvamsW.CA> wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 03:17 PM, Cari
> Machet:
>
> > although it is really great that they are
> restoring
> > stan's films
> > i worry that they will screw them up
> >

--- Marilyn BrakBrakhagemsvamsW.CA> wrote:
 
> It was Mark who
> first approached me about the possibility of sending
> Stan's originals
> to the Academy (in late 2003).

it is far beyond my scope to comment
(and my initial post was way overzealous)
but i am amazed by mark

--- Marilyn BrakBrakhagemsvamsW.CA> wrote:

>
> PS I also think that Stan would have been very
> pleased by the
> acknowledgment given to him at the Academy Awards
> ceremony. He was not
> really "against" Hollywood (though maybe sometimes
> against some
> people's excessive valorization of it). He usually
> used the analogy of
> his work to Hollywood being like poetry is to the
> novel. (He wasn't
> "against" novels, either -- though he did have a
> special love for
> poetry.)

i am super happy for stan and happy that he would have
been pleased - my point is that
he would have been more pleased to be saying
"i got a huge chunk of change to paint on 35mm"

yes i remember him speaking of narrative in this way
- he was a very generous speaker
as i posted to adam
i am not against the ART of hollywood
more the politics and hierarchical adherence
(lack of knowledge of the importants of marxist
theory?)
as far as adherence with stans' metaphor
i think that the marriage of poetry and the novel
is successful in terrence mallick and few others

c

__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.