Projections of Sound on Image…

When reading this selection, the section titled, “Conditions Necessary for Sound to Temporalize Images” brought a specific film to mind that truly made the descriptions ring true. The article writes about the way in which sound is sustained and “a smooth and continuous sound is less animating than an uneven or fluttering one.” There was a film that I was asked to watch in Writing About Film called, Henry Fool.


Around about 3:35 in this clip, the notorious character Henry Fool comes into town, or into the main character’s life, or even the story. But, the main character is leaning against his fence and we begin to hear these pouncing of notes slowly come in along with the image. Nothing is happening in the image at all, but the music makes it seem as if something is about to. But, nothing in the actual image (at this point) even points to this mysterious presence that the music is creating. As the viewer, we know something that the character doesn’t know yet. Then there is a rumble of thunder, to which the character looks up and acknowledges with a delayed reaction. Up until this point the film is presenting, as the article writes, an image that “has no temporal animation or vectorization in itself. The sound brings this feeling about all on its own, without the help of the image. But, after the thunder, the image and sound begin to work together. And the intensity begins to build. What I find so fascinating about the music in this film is the simplicity of it. It is such simple notes being played, but they create such as intensified effect that I think would not really exist without, especially in this entrance. There are even points in the film in which there are merely a few keys being played on the piano, or the dripping of water that creates an eerie feeling about the film. I find sound to be truly fascinating, and how it works to intensify a film. When I was asked to write about this film, there was no specific guideline to what we needed to write about. Laudadio told us to write about the thing that we were drawn to the most when watching it. Without a doubt, I was drawn to the peculiar and magnificent use of sound. It may not be the best film, but I think there is something quite wonderful about its use of sound. Up until that point, I had written nothing about sound. But, after writing an entire theory paper about its use in film, I found myself discovering things that I had never noticed about film in general. I think that this article kind of hones in on these aspects. There was a truly gritty and creepy feeling in many aspects of this film, but I began to notice that much of that had to do with the way that sound was used in accordance with the images.
I also found it a bit amazing that it is our ears that hear quicker than our eyes see and process images. I have actually never seen any of the Star Wars movies, so I was a bit surprised to hear that there is a cut in which the door is not really opened, but there is a cut and the sound makes it seem as if the door is slid open. That is amazing!!! I would actually like to experiment more with this in my editing tactics. I do know from my own experience with editing, that sound can be an extremely useful tool in the coherence of a film. When things aren’t working, it is sometimes helpful to overlap sound and mess with things….cheat, I guess you could say. That is the magic of film I guess. I am curious to know if someone that is deaf catches on to this quick jump in Star Wars with the doors. The article mentions that deaf people are strengthened more on the visual side. I am curious to know if these sort of editing tactics fall short in the eyes of someone that cannot hear those sound bridges and such?

Wells Response

I feel as if the article that Wells writes about animation is not specific enough to separate the Avant-Garde animation from experimental animation. There was a section in the reading that was covered by a post-it that I went and found online. It lightly discussed the Avant-Garde animation as a form that is not strictly held to animation techniques…but also, other forms of film experimentation that strays aways from conventional forms of filmmaking. The way that he describes experimental animation, it would almost seem that it is only stuck within the realm of the abstract. Now, although I am by far no expert on any sort of animation (although I would say I have seen my fair share of Disney films, Sword and the Stone being my favorite!), there is an enormous spectrum out there between the conventional animation/orthodox animation realm and the experimental/Avant Garde animation realm. One of my favorite animations that I have seen thus far is Don Hertzfeldt’s Everything Will Be OK. Would this film be considered in the experimental realm, because it uses ‘the body’ “as an illustrative image,” as Wells writes? Because, clearly, the CHARACTER Bill is definitely being used in this manner. This film definitely has continuity and a narrative form, but by no means is it visually set up in a conventional format, as other conventional animation films. And Hertzfeldt definitely using, not only animation, but also film and other techniques, which draws upon the Avant Garde end of the spectrum.




But, on the other hand, I went online and googled Avant-Garde animators and the name Fischinger came up. I went and looked at a couple of his films, including his excerpt from Fantasia. In many ways, his excerpt in Fantasia reminded me of the Stan Brakhage film that we watched in class. The way in which the lines and dots jump about the screen, sometimes on beat and sometimes moving apart from the music. It was strange how the animation and film scratching and manipulation look so much alike. His films tend to fall on the Avant Garde end, they follow the guidelines that Wells explains such as, “various shapes and forms are often used rather than figures.” His animations consist mainly of shapes and abstract forms, much like a Brakhage film or such.



So, I think it is a bit difficult to directly categorize these types of animations that play with the conventional formats of animation in either Orthodox, Experimental, or Avant-Garde. Rather, these days I would think that filmmakers are beginning to experiment a lot more with those guidelines, and the line between them is quite blurred in some cases. I am a bit embarrassed to give this example, but…the cartoon Spongebob Squarepants dabbles a bit in the mixing of media. They not only use animation, but they also use film/video footage as part of the cartoon itself, such as when they go on land. So, even the conventional cel animations like this are dabbling a bit in the experimentation in animation. I feel like there is more and more of this sort of stuff as time goes on. But, I can’t say that I don’t love the simplicity of old cartoons, like the ones I watched as a child. I loved getting up on Saturday mornings and catching the Bugs Bunny Show. They seem a bit outdated for today’s kids because they are not as high tech as what is out right now, but there is something about that simplistic animation that I love. Like I said before, The Sword and the Stone is one of my favorite Disney films.



I personally don’t enjoy the new Disney films that come out, this could be in part because the humor has become cheap and now circles around passing gas…and other bodily functions. But, it could also be that I am a bit nostalgic about that simplistic form that is so little seen in mainstream animation anymore. I’m not sure where I was going with that.

Cameraless filmmaking thus far...
I haven't exactly been enjoying the scratching, painting, and such so far. But, I think that it is because I haven't been able to see the final product. So, I just feel like I am a bit lost about what I am actually doing. I don't know what will look neat or interesting, so I just don’t know what to do with that. But, I truly enjoyed the magazine transfer exercise that we did in class. It was helpful to see how it turned out, the final product. I found that to be fascinating! I never knew that people did that sort of thing on film. I wasn’t aware that the magazine would stick to the strip like that. I have worked a lot with magazine clippings and other sources throughout the years on projects, but I had no clue that it could look so cool on film. And it was such a simple process. I am still a little nervous about what we are doing for the elements project. I am a bit scared about how it is going to turn out.
Although I mentioned that I wasn’t enjoying that aspect, I think that I will definitely enjoy it more when I get to see how it all turns out. Then I can go back and experiment more with that knowledge. I guess my mind just works that way. I need to see what I am actually doing. But, I haven’t gotten a chance to get into the dark room yet. But I’m excited for that exercise. Cameraless filmmaking is a bit of a mystery and an intrigue for me. The Stan Brakhage film that we watched during the second class truly drew my attention. I was fascinated by the way that the film and the music flowed so well together. It was a bit hypnotizing. I feel like that last time I watched a Brakhage film I was a bit bored. This might be due to the fact that before this class, I knew very little about this sort of filmmaking. Knowing more about the creative processes that create these films helps me appreciate them on a different level. I was unaware of the extensive amount of techniques that are out there in the cameraless filmmaking world. I am intrigued and definitely want to learn more. I am pretty excited about this class, but also, a bit intimidated because I feel like, in many of the cases with the projects, you don’t exactly know what you are making until the very end. That is a bit scary, and a bit exciting I suppose. I feel like these projects will be very helpful in opening up my mind for my future projects outside of this class. This sort of experimenting helps open up the mind to alternative and unique filmmaking, and I like that. In the past, most of my projects have begun as more standard films, yet they always end as totally experimental films. So, I guess this new knowledge will definitely round out that aspect of my work. I wonder where it will take my work? I’m not even sure what has driven me towards the experimental realm when I’m editing or shooting a film. But, something does. My senior seminar project was originally an experimental documentary, and now it has turned into a completely experimental film. A film dealing with death and life and impermanence and cemeteries. But, I wonder if Shannon would be up for us using some of these techniques. Because we are going for a sort of dreamlike/nightmarish effect. Hmmm....

Synesthesia

So, I am positive that I am not a synesthete, which is disappointing now that I am aware of this "gift." This sounds like a fascinating ability to possess, yet it seems that the percentages of people that have this is low. This makes me wonder what artists that we cherish today may have possessed this ability, but they kept it to themselves. I guess this might not have been seen as an ability in the past, but maybe as some sort of mental issue if someone were to tell anyone about what they felt or saw. I would be interested in seeing one of those organs that emits light with each music note (mentioned in the article). I would really like to feel or see what this kind of experience is like. But, at the same time, I guess these would all be a false sense of this ability, because I would assume that every experience is extremely different for every person and the same sorts of things trigger it for one person and something completely different does it for another person. So, even though these artists try to recreate these experiences for others in their art, it is probably not as exciting to us as it was to them, because everyone's perception and stimulation triggers are different. Therefore a person who is not a synesthete will probably never get a TRUE taste of what these people are able to experience. This is disappointing for sure. This is not to say that their works of art are not worth anything, because they still may have the ability to stir emotions and feelings in people. I am just saying that it would be a stretch to believe that these artists have truly shown us what it is like to have one of those episodes. We are only getting an insight into their individual perceptions of those moments. I wonder if there are some people that have this ability, but they are too afraid to tell others because they think that there is something wrong with themselves. Because, truly, before I read about this, I had never known anything about it. So, I could easily see why some people might keep it to themselves. But, I think that it is a gift that should be utilized, just as the article explains some people use synesthesia.
I am curious to know why it is more likely for people that have had a stroke or who experience temporal lobe epilepsy to have one of these experiences. Yet, I think I can grasp how a person on psychedelic drugs can have these moments. The article briefly explains that synesthesia has been linked to chromosome 2, but that isn't too specific. It seems that the stroke, along with deafness and blindness, are all things that take away certain senses from a person. I wonder if there is something about a lacking in certain sensory areas that heightens the others. Just like people that are blind have the tendency to have a heightened sense of hearing and such. Thus, the people that don't lack any of the 5 senses truly have a sort of sixth sense in a matter of speaking.
I found it extremely interesting that Kandinsky is a known synesthete. I wonder if all people that have this synesthesia become artists and musicians and such? Do some just take on regular careers and try and keep those experiences personal. I wonder what my work and films would be like if I was a synesthete? It would just be interesting to even think in this sort of manner of relating things to other unrelated things in the way that this ability works to make a film. This thought process is kind of how you do have to think when are making or even watching an experimental film, although I understand that TRUE synesthesia is something that is not thought about, but something that comes naturally. But, it could be a helpful mindset to stand on the outside and and look at your film in a retrospective manner. I'm not sure if this makes sense in the words that I have written, but in my head it does. I feel like merely knowing how you are bringing about certain feelings and senses from other completely unrelated images and sound could be helpful in an experimental filmmaker's filmmaking process. Although, just like synesthesia, I think that in many cases films can trigger all sorts of unintended senses and feelings involuntarily. Things that the filmmaker may not have ever meant to portray.