Re: why we shoot film/contrast ratios and sensitivity

From: owen (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Mar 05 2006 - 16:30:38 PST

I think there will always be condescending blowhards on every side of
an opinion.

On Mar 5, 2006, at 6:30 PM, Jon Jost wrote:

> This discussion, which it is hard for me to believe rages on after
> all these years, is an irrational one, kind of like talking
> religion. The irony of FRAMEWORKS is that it purports to be about
> "avant garde" cinema, and is mostly conducted by hard-core
> conservatives, not only in their resistance to technical change,
> but - from my not very frequent exposure to so-called "avant-garde"
> cinema shown at festivals, etc. - also aesthetically. Most of what
> passes for "avant-garde" in the academies, and in the festivals, is
> anything but. Rather for the most part it is stale re-runs of
> things done far better 30 or 50 or even 100 years ago.
> Mitsu is correct in ascribing most of this "feel it, smell it" etc.
> attitude to "nostalgia". Nostalgia is the trump card of
> conservatives of all kinds. Taken to extremes, as it is in general
> on this board, it converts into something else - fetishism. This
> has nothing to do with art, aesthetics, "avant-garde" but rather a
> kind of pathological attachment which becomes obsessive, closed-
> minded, and most often is terribly destructive of creativity. Not
> that I would expect any consent for this from here.
> from Jon Jost
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.

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