The blog of author Dennis Cooper

Category: Uncategorized (Page 200 of 1086)

Oscar B presents … Fucking Dumb: David Lynch’s Dumbland *

* (restored)

—-
Dumbland is a crude, stupid, violent, absurd series. If it is funny, it is funny because we see the absurdity of it all. David Lynch

Contents:

1. What is Dumbland?

2. Episodes

3. David Lynch’s take on animation

4. A positive review by David Shrigley

5. A negative review by Steve

6. Sisyphus and Suburbia: A Contextual Study of David Lynch’s Dumbland
Dadaist Animation by David Durnell

7. Further links

 

1. What is Dumbland?

Dumbland is a series of eight crudely animated shorts written, directed, and voiced by director David Lynch in 2002. The shorts were originally released on the Internet through Lynch’s website, and were released as a DVD in 2005. The total running time of all eight shorts combined is approximately a half hour.

The series details the daily routines of a dull-witted white trash man. The man lives in a house along with his frazzled wife and squeaky-voiced child, both of whom are nameless as is the man in the shows. Lynch’s website, however, identifies the male character by the name Randy and the child by the name Sparky. The wife is not named.

The style of the series is intentionally crude both in terms of presentation and content, with limited animation. (Wikipedia)

 

2. Episodes

 

Episode 1: The Neighbor

Randy makes small talk with a neighbor about the neighbor’s shed. After the neighbor mentions that he has a false arm, they are interrupted by a passing helicopter. Randy swears and screams at the helicopter until it leaves, then mentions that he has heard the neighbor has sex with ducks. A duck emerges from the shed, and the neighbor admits that he is a “one-armed duck-fucker”.

 

Episode 2: The Treadmill

While watching a football game on TV, Randy loses his temper when his wife disturbs him by running on a noisy treadmill. Randy attempts – with disastrous results – to destroy the treadmill. Meanwhile, an Abraham Lincoln-quoting door-to-door salesman finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time, while Randy’s son manages to present dead fowl for dinner.

 

Episode 3: The Doctor

After Randy shocks himself while trying to fix a broken lamp, a doctor arrives to test the dazed man’s pain threshold, using increasingly violent methods, until Randy finally regains his senses and decides to do some testing of his own.

 

Episode 4: A Friend Visits

Randy destroys his wife’s new clothesline and throws it over the fence, causing a catastrophic car wreck. Then Randy’s friend visits and the two talk about hunting and killing things, all the while drinking, burping, and farting.

 

Episode 5: Get the Stick!

A screaming man crashes through Randy’s fence with a wooden stick wedged in his mouth. Sparky cheers his dad on as he tries to get the stick out. Randy breaks the man’s neck and pokes out both of his eyes before finally pulling the stick through one of his eye sockets. The horribly mutilated man rolls out into the street and is run over by a truck. Randy notes, “The fucker never even said ‘thank you’.”

 

Episode 6: My Teeth are Bleeding

Sparky is bouncing on a trampoline in the front room yelling that his teeth are bleeding, while the wife yammers until blood starts pouring out of her head. Outside on the street violent traffic accidents and shootouts occur. A noisy and bloody wrestling match is playing on TV. All is well until a fly interrupts Randy’s serene existence.

 

Episode 7: Uncle Bob

Randy is given the charge from an intimidating figure (his mother-in-law), to stay home and watch after his “Uncle Bob” at peril of having his “nuts cut out” if he does not comply. Uncle Bob proceeds to tacitly engage in increasing types of self-abuse, coughing, and vomiting, and eventually punching Randy in the face from across the room. After several iterations of this behavior, Randy anticipates Uncle Bob’s actions and preemptively strikes out at him. Almost simultaneously, the mother-in-law storms back into the room and knocks Randy through a wall. Randy spends the rest of the night up a tree until his son informs him that Uncle Bob has been taken to the hospital and Randy is now safe to come down. Bob bit his own foot off.

 

Episode 8: Ants

Randy is plagued by an increasing stream of ants into his home. His frustrations rise to the point that he grabs a can of insect killer and attempts to eliminate his ant problem. In his haste and anger, he fails to realize that the nozzle on the bug killer is pointed not at the ants but at his own face. He is squirted in the face with the killer for several seconds. He then falls to the ground and experiences a vivid hallucination in which the ants are singing and dancing and offering gleeful taunts of “asshole”, “shithead”, and “dumb-turd”. Randy eventually snaps out of his predicament and charges at the ants slapping at them on the floor, wall, and ceiling. He is later shown falling off the ceiling and suffering substantial injuries that require a full body cast. The final scene shows ants crawling over his incapacitated body and into an opening in the cast at his feet. Randy then screams helpless in agony as hundreds of ants march into his body cast. The most complex of the episodes, “Ants” parodies Lynch’s attempts at being a music producer in the early 1990s by featuring a singer who resembles Julee Cruise and music similar to that of composer Angelo Badalamenti (both of whom Lynch worked with on the soundtrack to Twin Peaks as well as the concert film Industrial Symphony No. 1).

 

3. David Lynch’s Take on Animation

“Animation is a magical thing to me. I veered off pretty quickly into live action, but I like animation, and I like Flash.”

“I think every type of medium gives you different ideas. So when you see the Flash program, it just starts talking to you. So ideas start coming along. It reminds me of early film – there’s something about it that makes your imagination kick in.”

“There’s a funky quality. You have these still pictures and when you kick the ‘go’ button, they start making movement. And it’s kind of amazing how with line drawings – and even bad line drawings – characters come alive. Sound plays a big role in that, but even silently they still work.”

“It takes me forever to do these simple animations,” says Lynch noting that many filmmakers take advantage of the tweening abilities of Flash to avoid extra work. “It kills me! I wish I was doing something so simple. I have this guy getting up off the ground and it took me three hours just to get him to stand up. There are 21 different drawings there! Sometimes with the program you can use beautiful shortcuts, but sometimes you have to draw it frame by frame. So it’s a combo, and it takes me about 60 hours to do just three minutes of the drawings, and it takes two or three days to mix it.”

Lynch does all the voices for the animation himself as he’s working. “I have a little mirror,” he says, explaining that he uses it to get the right facial contortions for his characters as they speak. “And I have a box – it’s as big as this coffee cup and just about as expensive. There are little artifacts in the voice, so for some things this box is perfect. I’m interested in real time voice manipulation – I want to sing like John Lee Hooker and I want to do it in real time.”

 

4. A positive review by David Shrigley

The genius of David Lynch’s Dumbland
David Lynch’s internet cartoon is weird, violent and full of farting – and that’s exactly why I love it
David Shrigley
The Guardian, Friday 24 July 2009

For me, David Lynch is a humourist. The works that Lynch is most famous for – Eraserhead, The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks – have a distinct seam of comedy running through them: a dark one, but comedy nonetheless. Dumbland, a series of eight short animations originally broadcast on Lynch’s website, illustrates this aspect of Lynch’s art. Dumbland concerns the domestic travails of a three-toothed thug (who, according to davidlynch.com, is named Randy), and his distressed wife and son. Randy is a heavy-set and ill-groomed man with a foul mouth, a short fuse and a propensity for violence. His wife seems to be perpetually in the midst of a mental breakdown – she emits a constant quiet scream. The son is the least rendered of the three, appearing solely as an outline with eyes, nose and mouth. All Randy’s activities are weird, violent and profane, and there is a lot of very loud farting.

While the animations are as crude as can be (all are drawn on screen with a mouse) and a lot of the action seemingly juvenile, the films still bear unmistakable Lynch hallmarks: sparse dialogue, heavy ambient sound, a general sense of surreal disquiet, characters with ambiguous motives. Even if Dumbland’s visual appearace suggests comedy, the events portrayed are genuinely disturbing. For example, episode five tells the story of a man who falls through the fence in Randy’s yard and gets a stick caught in his mouth. In trying to placate his son, who is pleading for him to “Get the stick! Get the stick!”, Randy breaks the man’s neck, gouges out both of his eyes and partially cripples him before watching him get run over a truck. Randy then delivers the punchline: “The fucker never even said thank you.”

Lynch created Dumbland entirely alone: animating, voicing the characters and creating the soundtrack at home in front of his computer. Apparently each three-minute episode took him some 10 days to create, making the whole piece quite an undertaking for such an apparently modest project. As with most internet animation, Dumbland uses Flash, and Lynch says that the intuitive, DIY nature of this software recaptured the spirit of his initial forays into animation as a film student. You can even suppose that Lynch has recreated the style of his early animations by treating the film with what people are familiar with such things call a “boil”: each image is drawn several times and overlaid so that static images appear to move, or boil. This effect mimics old-fashioned hand-drawn animation – the opposite of what Dumbland actually is.

For the record, I don’t do any of my own animation; I tell myself that this task is better delegated to a professional animator who works from my original drawings. But in truth I find the fact that Lynch actually put in this amount of graft slightly intimidating. Added to that is the fact that he actually knows how to use the software, whereas I don’t have a clue. Apart from Lynch having made every aspect of the entire series himself, the thing that is really appealing about Dumbland is that it is evidence of a great artist amusing himself, a project that he just sat down and did for the fun of it without worrying about how it would be received. It is unselfconsciously daft. Perhaps a good thing if you’ve just struggled through Inland Empire.

 

5. A Negative Review by Steve Anderson

“Dumbland” DVD Review
By Steve Anderson
zero stars

David Lynch isn’t exactly famous for making sense.

This is, after all, the guy who stuck Robocop into a series of baffling events involving hallucinogenic bug killer, typewriters built from insect carcasses, and massive governmental conspiracies engineered by enormous bugs in the midst of Islamic ports.

Based on the novel written by a former heroin addict.

So naturally, it should not come as even a lick of surprise that David Lynch’s overall body of work is just mind-boggling. And the mind continues to be boggled in “Dumbland.”

Though for a totally different set of reasons.

“Dumbland” is the excruciating story of a violent, abusive troglodyte of a man living in suburbia and the events that comprise his thoroughly pointless God-I-wish-they’d-all-just-get-hit-by-a-meteor-to-preserve-the-gene-pool life.

And when I say thoroughly pointless, I damn well MEAN thoroughly pointless. This movie’s alleged plot revolves around farting, child abuse, spousal abuse, farting, screaming obscenities at poorly rendered helicopters, weird sexual appetites involving ducks, and farting.

There is a LOT of farting going on in “Dumbland.” I don’t recall this much farting in “Beavis and Butthead Do America”, and that movie treated farting like a minor religious experience (remember the desert?).

“Dumbland” is the single longest half-hour I’ve spent watching a movie in some time. Every minute felt like three, and every minute felt like a hook in my skin. I found myself agreeing with Lynch’s own perception of the film: “‘Dumbland’ is a crude, stupid, violent and absurd series. If it is funny, it is funny because we see the absurdity of it all.” I agree totally. The sad part is, despite the absurdity, it’s STILL not that funny.

If there is television in hell, then “Dumbland” is what’s on. This is Thursdays at nine, right after “Richard Nixon’s Laugh-In,” but before “Cooking the Cajun Way! with Judas Iscariot.”

I don’t walk into a David Lynch movie expecting things to make sense, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask to expect a plot more coherent than “some guy too stupid to live does a lot of stuff and eventually gets his in the end.” And he does, too.

The ending gives us a lovely comeuppance for this pig-stupid throwback as he’s both beaten by relatives and a line of ants crawls into his full body cast.

All in all, avoid this monstrousity. Avoid it at all costs. “Dumbland” is exactly as advertised, and unless you’re in a mood to waste half an hour on some of the worst drivel put on DVD plastic, you will regret putting this one in your player.

I did.

 

6. Sisyphus and Suburbia: A Contextual Study of David Lynch’s Dumbland
Dadaist Animation by David Durnell

An Introduction to David Lynch and his animated series Dumbland

The last thing most would expect from any three-decade auteur would be the sudden, inexplicable release of a crude, vulgar, and satirical flash-animated comedy series focused unflinchingly upon the obscure goings on of a frighteningly bizarre über-dysfunctional family –but of course, David Lynch is not the average auteur. Staying well-grounded in his self-reflexive themes and motifs –though giddy in his surreal, playful and crass romp through the stereotypes of Americana dynamic– Lynch has released an eight episode animated series appositely and bluntly entitled Dumbland. The series is certainly a work of absurdity, chronicling with zeal the hyper-violent banality of a Neanderthalian alpha-male named Randy, who terrorizes his family, neighbors, and himself, all remaining perpetually enveloped in the meaninglessness and repetition of the suburban everyday and framed within Lynch’s blackly absurd comic lens. Though the series remains rooted in Lynch’s characteristic surrealism, it plunges vastly beyond most Lynch films in its puerile humor and crudeness of medium –all of which deceptively mask the real grit of Lynch’s message: a skewering of the rotted and dysfunctional nature of the American nuclear family– a family immersed in banality, and drowning in absurdity –left only to violently self-destruct. Similar to themes explored in his short film The Grandmother, and in his films Eraserhead, Blue Velvet, and Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me –all of which containing intense and nightmarish studies of the family dynamic– Lynch wishes yet again to examine the nature of absurdity, violence, and primitivism in the human condition, as well as in the family structure, using his characteristic flawless sound design, nightmarish slapstick violence, and esoteric Dadaist character behavior, with an episodic pacing and a very enjoyable disregard for any sort of polite restraint.

It is of course, however, no surprise that most critics –ranging from Lynch cult fans to structuralist cinephiles– totally miss the point of the series’ much necessary raison d’être. While structuralists attack the “crudeness” and alleged “pointlessness” of the series, using the infamous accusation of “weirdness for weirdness’ sake,” supposed Lynch fans simply relish in that alleged “reasonless weirdness,” without care or respect to any sort of real artistry or social commentary. Both camps of critical reception seem to be oblivious to the true brilliance and intensity at work here, and even more oblivious to the message, as well as Lynch’s origins: the Camus-inspired Theatre of the Absurd, the movements of Dada and Anti-Art, and the overall surrealism Lynch is perfecting, following of course in the footsteps of Buñuel and Dali. There is a lot of progression, sincerity, satire, and stark beauty in Lynch’s work –all of which impatiently ignored by critics, under the pretense of “incomprehensibility.” Lynch, however, is strikingly personal when it comes to his work –work that is more often than not extremely self-reflexive– and refuses to let any critic own his interpretation, challenging them to find their own: a radical post-structuralism and audience-trust that should be greatly appreciated, though, unfortunately, results in frustration from those who want immediate answers and understanding to everything they see –a rather languid characteristic very frustrating to the responsible cinephile. Notoriously cagey and hesitant in press conferences, Lynch remains resistant to the culture’s demand to have an easy explanation for everything, opting always to work with intuitional narratives versus logical –a rather eastern and patient approach that reflects his admiration for transcendental meditation– and refusing to fill up those beautiful pockets of vacuous ambiguity with “language” and stilted words. For to Lynch, words can never be film –and they shouldn’t try.

But Lynch’s work is by no means as esoteric as enervated audiences would have one believe. If an individual would just feel Lynch’s work versus trying to deconstruct it, new possibilities would abound, because Lynch likes to roam the hidden, layered lusts and evils of the subconscious, and certainly the meta-conscious, not simply explain them away with turgidity. Often, these pockets of ambiguous horror remain –linger– even after being filmed, which is a beautiful and stunning experience to take part in.

Read more here

http://www.offscreen.com/biblio/pages/essays/sisyphus_and_suburbia/

 

7. Further Links

http://thecityofabsurdity.com/digitalmedia/dumbland.html

http://dvd.ign.com/articles/726/726590p1.html


http://www.lynchnet.com/dumbland/

—-

 

*

p.s. Hey. ** malcolm, Hey. Cool, John’s the best. In addition to his great work, he’s also the greatest person. I love Godard, but, yeah, it’s all about films or things that have you want and need, subjectivity central. For instance, if you’d asked for my all-time least favorite film, I could easily have said ‘Dancer in the Dark’. Von Trier is one of my bugaboos. Whatever that means. C’est la. I like all your others. ‘Fat Girl’ is excellent. Maybe her best? But ‘best’ is bullshit, I guess. I don’t think an ability to act is John’s top priority when casting. I just hope he gets to make ‘Liarmouth’. Last time he talked about it, he didn’t feel too positive. Happy day! ** _Black_Acrylic, Yeah that teens videos is terrific, right? I’ve only watched Shudder when I was in States — I don’t … think they have it here? — but, yeah, it seemed full of charming entertainment, assuming you like the horror angle. I don’t know if you know the site Soap2Day, but there’s a shitload of movies there, new and old, that you can’t watch for free otherwise. You have to deal with a fair amount of pop-ups, but it’s worth it. I’ve gotten wind of the ‘When Evil Lurks’ buzz. Let me know it is. ** Darbs 🐜❄🐜, Hey, D. Your enthusiasms greatly outweigh any ominous effect. A Walkman, wow, nice. I think mine is covered with cobwebs somewhere. Very nice pierce. I really like that pierce on people. Very cool. How are your lips? No worries, some of the most intellectual people I know are all pierced and tatted up. It’ll be like a star turn. Oh, shit, you need your mom’s permission to get a driver’s license? Surely she’ll come around on such a basic right. Sorry you have to circumvent that power structure, bleh. I’ve heard about the bedbug thing too in the news, but I haven’t heard of any evidence that it’s actually happening. Maybe to tourists or something? I’m fine here, just a couple of pesky little mice in my pad. ** Tosh Berman, Wow, that’s wild about LC stuff being in Tom Verlaine’s library. I saw him across a gallery opening once, and I wanted to go pay my respects, but I assumed he’d have no idea about my stuff or me, so shyness won out. Damn. And he has LC#11, the best all time LC issue. And, jeez, they’re pricey. I really, really should have held onto more copies of the LC stuff. Maybe I wouldn’t have the funding problems I do. Thanks a lot, Tosh. ** Dominik, Hi!!! I’m game on the teaming up. We can start a whole ‘Oliver Twist’-like gang or something. You picked the world’s smallest Target, nice, ha ha. I think you’re right about handkerchiefs making a comeback for that very reason. We should start a handkerchief company ASAP, no? I hope love cured your (?) butter fingers. Love making me stop worrying that playing Mario Wonder will eat up my valuable time and just ordering me to play it, G. ** Caesar, Hi, Caesar! Oh, shit, I somehow missed your comment? I’m so sorry, I don’t know why that happened. My eyes must have been in a weird rush or something? Anyway, it’s great to see you! I’m good, just finishing Zac’s and my film and not much else, but that’s good. Thanks about the ‘Closer’ thing in the UK. Yeah, it’s nice. Unfortunately I have no power in my books getting reprinted. If I didn’t have such a lazy, checked-out agent, that would be her job, but she couldn’t give a shit, alas. Yes, I read about that extreme right guy running for the top job there. And most people support him? That is very scary, and I would say hard to believe if I wasn’t from a country where Trump is a beloved superstar. God, I hope he loses. That’s really scary. I’ll see if I can find Blanca Varela’s work in English. I love ‘Scotch Atlas’. Black Butler is fantastic. And I loved the B.R. Yeager book too. Great reads. And I’ll hunt the Lina Meruane book too. Thank you! No, I never watch TV series, so I don’t know that or any series basically. Avoiding TV is one of my ways of getting all the stuff I need to get done. Or trying to. TV is very absorbent. Well, actually, my novel ‘The Marbled Swarm’ is about a cannibal. So there you go. Again, wonderful to get to talk with you. I hope to get to do that again ASAP. Take care. ** Audrey, Hi, Audrey. Me too, about the dead attractions and their charisma. The Museum of Jurassic Technology is incredible! It’s small, so it wouldn’t take too long to go through it. Maybe in an hour or two at most, depending on how long you spend in each area. Great if you can go. There’s nothing else like it. On the VFX, we need some erasing of things (camera person visible in a window pane, and things like that), and slight enhancements of some sort on two violent scenes where someone gets punched and someone gets killed, and some haunted house enhancements, and the ghost in our film passes through people and walls and things, and we need to make that look a little more convincing. Not sure about seeing the Miyazaki, hopefully this weekend. Thanks for the ‘Bottom’ share! I’ll get it and get to it as soon as I can. Thank you!! I haven’t seen ‘Somewhere’. Cool, I’ll watch that ASAP too. Have an absolutely lovely time in LA if I don’t see you before you leave, and give my hometown a big hug somehow from me. Love, Dennis. ** Steve Erickson, Hi. For me, ‘Strange Codes’ is his greatest. Really haunting, for the reasons you state. I don’t know ‘Once More’. I’ll look for it. Luck finding that sample pack. ** Charalampos, Oh, cool, thank you so much about the pix. Uh, yeah, I guess you can email them to me. Really, thanks! I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Vecchiali film, which I obviously need to do. From what I remember, ‘Pieces’ is pretty shitty. But maybe its shittiness looks good now. I hope the long night paid off. Resonance from here. ** Dee Kilroy, Thank you, Dee. I owe you an email, and I’ll write you soon. Hope all’s great in your part of the woods. ** l@rst, Hi. Lucky you to see the Harry Smith show. I can’t imagine it’ll get over here, but weirder things have crossed the pond than it. Well, I mean, finish that novel or story, man, no brainer. ** Mark, I’d sell my grandma’s left leg to an old leg collector to time-machine myself back into P.O.P. Sigh. Do cockroaches eat paper? If so, they’ll at least love what you and I leave to their posterity. ** Sarah, Hi. Yeah, my goals for my days are all to make incremental progress on goals that’ll take longer to achieve. But I think that’s a good goal? But maybe we’ll both find loaded bank vaults hidden in our walls today. It’s not impossible, pretty close to impossible, but … I do have an end of year goal: finish our film. We kind of have to. Semesters are nice. That time organisation is kind of the only thing I miss about being in school. I do like The Three Stooges. Well, I haven’t watched them in a while, but I thought they were a riot as kid. I got their autographs. But it was the post-Curly Stooges, which wasn’t as exciting. Yeah, I think Larry had a sad life too. I had a short period of being obsessed with Roller Derby back when they televised the matches, and he was always there in the audience, very elderly, sitting by himself. Didn’t seem like a happy guy. ** Nick., Pleasure. Joints make me really paranoid, but the cigarettes option is a keeper. I’ll need a lot more than 2 of them though. French chocolate rules, but Japanese chocolate rules the most. Deal, yes! ** Okay. I thought it would provide you with fun if I restored the above post made long ago by d.l. Oscar B, now best known in and to the world as the awesome artist/filmmaker O.B. De Alessi. So have said fun with it if that’s at all possible. See you tomorrow.

Arthur Lipsett’s Day

 

‘Arthur Lipsett is cinema’s lost prophet. Outside of Canada, his unique legacy of work has long been forgotten. But the Montreal-born filmmaker’s masterpiece, 21-87 (1964), inspired an idea that is probably worth the GDP of a small country these days. “When George saw 21-87, a light bulb went off,” says George Lucas collaborator Walter Murch. That spark formed Lucas’s ideas for “the force” and the rest is Star Wars history. Lucas himself acknowledged the influence in a hidden code Lipsett might have appreciated – Princess Leia’s cell number on the Death Star was 2187, while the action in his dystopian sci-fi THX 1138 (1971) took place in the year 2187.

‘Growing up in suburban Montreal in the 40s, the son of Russian Jewish parents, Lipsett’s childhood was traumatic. As a young boy, he had watched his mother walk out into the snow and drink rat poison, dying days later. By the mid-50s, Lipsett was studying art at Montreal’s Musée des beaux-arts, under the wing of expressionist painter Arthur Lismer, a member of the influential “Group of Seven” art movement. On graduating, a recommendation from his mentor led to work as an editor at the National Film Board, based in Montreal’s Ville St-Laurent.

‘As the evening crept in and his co-workers began to leave, he would embark on bizarre experiments until dawn – chain-smoking and raiding the garbage, he would dig out scraps of sound and visuals, and recycle them into collages that used the cinema screen as their canvas. In 1961, the results of Lipsett’s frenzied late-night scavenging surfaced in the short film Very Nice, Very Nice (1961). In the film, Lipsett turned apparently ordinary stock images into a horror story of modern life. As washing machines, Bakelite TVs and Ford Thunderbirds rolled off conveyor belts into suburban homes, and American and Soviet relations cooled into nuclear dread, Lipsett distilled the Cold War climate into six minutes of controlled hysteria. Like some finely-tuned antenna, it portrayed Lipsett’s perception of the universe in all its absurdity, laced, as it was, with pitch-black humour. Influenced by the Beats and the cut-up technique that William Burroughs pioneered, his images of cityscapes, crowds, circus acts and hydrogen bombs jostled for space alongside a soundtrack of random conversation, heavy breathing, chanting and car horns.

‘While some critics found Lipsett’s machine-gunned images baffling, the younger generation felt he was talking their language. So did Stanley Kubrick, who sent him a letter describing Very Nice, Very Nice (1961) as “one of the most imaginative and brilliant uses of the movie screen and soundtrack that I have ever seen”. It’s rumoured that Kubrick even asked Lipsett to create the trailer for his cold-war satire Dr Strangelove (1964) and was turned down by the 25-year-old. Pablo Ferro stepped in with the now famous opening, featuring a couple of B-52s in a mile-high metallic love scene. Meanwhile, Lipsett was nominated for an Oscar in 1962, and he became something of an outsider celebrity in Montreal’s avant-garde circles. He was operating in the right place. The city may be hyped these days for its music scene (Arcade Fire’s Win Butler claims it took just two days to put a band together on arriving), but Montreal’s film scene has long been a hot-bed of homegrown talent. In keeping with its liberal attitude, the Film Board gave Lipsett free reign to conjure up his next creation, 21-87 (1964). This time, the filmmaker used his own footage as well, captured around Montreal on his Stellavox Candid Tape Recorder. For the soundtrack, field recordings, gospel music, church hymns and conversation were instinctively cut together like some wired jazz improvisation. Opening on a skull, cutting to a woman suspended from a trapeze, a corpse being sawn in half, funhouse mirrors, circus elephants and monkey astronauts, it was Lipsett’s breathtaking indictment of mass-consumerism. The film wasn’t just a portal into Lipsett’s own brain – he had plugged into, as he put it, “the collective consciousness and unconsciousness of a civilisation”. Featuring conversations with Warren S McCulloch, pioneer of artificial intelligence, and Roman Kroitor, a director who helped develop IMAX, he questioned what it is to be human in the age of technology.

‘Montreal filmmaker Eric Gaucher, who recently completed a beautifully shot documentary on Lipsett, describes him as an accidental filmmaker. “He always approached film from an artist’s perspective. He challenged mathematicians to re-edit and re-structure his films just to see what could happen,” he explains. “He was very liberal in that sense.”

‘Lipsett followed up with Free Fall (1964), inspired by a Dylan Thomas poem and intended as a collaboration with avant-garde composer John Cage, employing his use of “chance music”. With its rapidly edited flashes of disconnected faces on city streets and sunlight streaming through trees, Lipsett talked about his film as an attempt to “hold time together” and described his intentions in typically apocalyptic language – “An attempt to express in filmic terms an intensive flow of life – a vision of a world in the throes of creativity… a visual bubbling of picture and sound operating to create a new continuity of experience… it is as if all clocks ceased to tick – summoned by a big close-up or fragment of a diffuse nature – strange shapes shine forth from the abyss of timelessness.”

‘Next came the time-capsule A Trip Down Memory Lane (1965), followed by Fluxes (1969) and N-Zone (1970), each film becoming progressively darker. Fluxes (1969) featured newsreel footage of the architect of the Final Solution, Adolf Eichmann, recorded over a soundtrack of 50s science-fiction dialogue. By the time Lipsett completed N-Zone (1970), with its repeated chant “In ten years, Margery has not slept once” playing over pictures of dead animals and injured dogs, the NFB was beginning to find his vision of life impossibly bleak. At the same time, Lipsett’s mental health was rapidly deteriorating. He resigned from the Film Board in 1978, and began to grow increasingly paranoid with the onset of chronic schizophrenia.

‘After his move to a house overlooking an enormous cemetery, Lipsett’s life story grows hazy. He found himself in and out of hospitals and on and off medication. He briefly returned to cinema once, with an idea for a film on “the occupation of corners”, but it never materialised. After a series of failed attempts at suicide (what he called his “little experiments”), he took his own life in 1986, just before his 50th birthday.

‘Over two decades later, his films remain available only at the expansive National Film Board archive. While the likes of experimental filmmakers Bruce Conner or Maya Deren find ever-expanding audiences, Lipsett has fallen through the cracks. Gaucher’s vital documentary (some of which was shot with Lipsett’s own Bolex) is only the second attempt to analyse his life on film. Record company Honest Jon’s valued Lipsett’s soundtracks highly enough to release a limited-edition compilation on vinyl, but outside of a small filmmaking community, the man once described as the William Blake of cinema remains an enigmatic figure. “His films generate a severe emotional reaction to humanity,” says Gaucher. “That’s what I get out of most people who watch them.” For all his contemplation of spiritual disillusionment, Lipsett found the human warmth in what he described as “the super-machine age” and it still resonates today.’ — Hannah Lack, Dazed Digital

 

____
Stills









































 

_____
Further

Arthur Lipsett Great Director profile • Senses of Cinema
Arthur Lipsett @ NFB
Arthur Lipsett @ IMDb
The Spiritual Disenchantment of the Super Machine Age
A Clown Outside the Circus
Reflections From the Social Dystopia: Films by Arthur Lipsett
The End
HOW ARTHUR LIPSETT INFLUENCED GEORGE LUCAS’S CAREER
Arthur Lipsett @ Light Cone
ARTHUR LIPSETT, SOUNDTRACKS
Making meaning with images: tools, resources and inspiration for visual communication
The Subtle Reference in The Force Awakens to the Art Film That Inspired Star Wars
Do Not Look Away: The Life of Arthur Lipsett
Transcending the Documentary: The Films of Arthur Lipsett
On Arthur Lipsett
Experimental Film Through the Eyes of Arthur Lipsett
From Compilation to Collage: The Found-Footage Films of Arthur Lipsett
Remembering Arthur Lipsett: The Collage Makes the Man
The Arthur Lipsett Project: A Dot on the Histomap.

 

______________
The Arthur Lipsett Project: A Dot on the Histomap

‘This full-length documentary introduces us to Arthur Lipsett, a man who defined experimental filmmaking at the NFB in the 1960s. His second film, Very Nice, Very Nice, was nominated for an Academy Award. George Lucas claimed him as an important influence. A decade later, Lipsett’s last attempt at filmmaking ended in failure. He chained his Steenbeck and film racks to prevent theft and vanished into paranoia.’ — nfb.ca

Watch the film here

 

____
Extras


Trailer for “Remembering Arthur”, a documentary film


Teenagers discuss experimental Arthur Lipsett films they have just watched
(watch it here)


Les Journaux de Lipsett

 

________________
Bruce Conner interviewed about Arthur Lipsett
from INCITE!

 

Amelia Does: I was wondering if you could talk about Arthur Lipsett and compare some of the films. Do you remember seeing Very Nice, Very Nice (1961)?

Bruce Conner: Yes, I remember seeing Very Nice, Very Nice, and some of Lipsett’s films in 1964-65 in Montreal. I met him only briefly–for no more than about ten minutes–and I thought he was a rather intense person and very much in a critical frame of mind. He seemed to have bitterness as well at times. But otherwise he seemed a nice person to me.

AD: Did he tell you that he had seen your works?

BC: I’m sure he had seen my films. He was headed in the same sort of direction that I was. Looking over his films in general, I see a number of things that could be derivative from my films. A Movie and Cosmic Ray, which I completed in 1961, were totally unique films and nobody had made anything quite like them before. So when I saw more films like mine following that period, that use some of the same techniques, I could recognize the films as being like my films.

Many times I felt it difficult to recognize if somebody might be making films like mine, whereas another person might think so. But there were certain technical aspects in the way the films were made that became noteworthy: [using material] shot by other people, movies that are part of the [everyday] environment–documentaries, feature films, travelogues, sports films, all sorts of material–and assembling them sort of like a collage, not in a perfectly logical manner, dissertation, story form, etc, but using them in a number of different ways–for instance, a poetic manner–creating relations that might have to do with form, images, and perhaps a general context.

AD: Do you remember seeing Very Nice, Very Nice and being struck by the fact that it was made up of a lot of photos?

BC: Well, I’ve seen people using photographs before. He [Lipsett] used a lot of various filming techniques like dissolves, where one image merges with another image, sort of like that kind of thing people do on computers now with different images, merging them together. You can see that sort of transformation. I thought we had some kind of commonality in terms of themes: anti-war, anti-Bomb.

Prior to A Movie in 1958, I don’t think people used black leader as a film element except to fade-out; if the screen went black it was to indicate an accident. So to use that for a purpose in A Movie was very unique at that time, as well as making the film out of disparate elements. Also, utilizing the character of film itself, the structure and form of it, its scratches and flares, and differences from one print to another–usually these were considered to be defects, but I was using these as tools, as effects! I don’t know if this was entirely all my invention; people were becoming more and more concerned with film and using characteristics of film that were not considered professional.

Arthur used a little bit of that but not much, due to the fact that he was using film footage or clips that were in much better condition than mine. He had access to more pristine material at the National Film Board. Of course myself and other filmmakers were using 16mm and 8mm, and as filmmakers in the United States we were quite envious of a government-sponsored organization like the Film Board that would sponsor and encourage the kind of films that Arthur and others were making at that time. In a way there is a little bit of contrast between my films and Arthur’s because of his access to technology and expertise and funding. I had to pay for everything that I did. I paid for everything I made and the items personally. So you’ll see splice marks, and the material that I spliced was not copied into work prints, and every time I would make a splice, I would lose a picture, and running it through the projector would produce scratches. But I decided that this was inevitable, like antiquing furniture, or antiquing collected patinas, or a Chinese bronze–as I discovered, it’s the character of the film–it varies from perfect even when it’s a brand new print, projected for the first time. The presentation is always variable.

I also tried to conform my images to music. In a couple of cases there were words, like in my film Report, about the assassination of President Kennedy, but my films were more like visual mimes or performances that used music to hold them together, creating a visual and oral dance.

The unique thing about Arthur’s work, and what is interesting to me, because I was getting involved with using “concrete” electronic or experimental music at that time (in San Francisco and Massachusetts in 1965), and I had myself purposely taken my money from the Ford Foundation grant for filmmaking–a windfall from 1964­–and decided to spend all the money on doing sound recordings, editing, and that type of work. Arthur was doing more sound editing and creating new relationships between sound and picture.

AD: So you liked his films?

BC: Well, I was interested, since that is where I was going at the time. However, I abandoned that direction after my Ford Foundation grant. I decided that I’d ruin my reputation as a filmmaker if I used one of these sound collages in a film that I hoped would do that–a notorious film that would create riots and possibly destroy it.

Now, one point where I think Arthur’s films [diverge] with mine, is of course the sound editing, and also his predilections toward using a lot of Oriental imagery, Asian imagery, Asian religion, Asian politics, Asian performance. I don’t think I use as much. Another point is that Arthur would make much longer films than I would. My films were ten seconds, three minutes–the longest film I ever made by 1976 was thirteen minutes. Most of them were around three or four minutes long.

AD: Is there a reason that you return to collage filmmaking periodically in your career?

BC: Well, economically. I can’t afford to make films very often. And I do all the work myself, so I have to put everything else on the sidelines [when I’m making films]. There’s no way of making any money in this, though, so if I’m making a living, I have to do that [filmmaking] some other way. I’m also into exhibiting other artists.

When I make films, it’s because it’s an appropriate medium for me at that moment, or there’s an interest that I feel I have to work at through film. I don’t just make them for myself–I figure I have to if I am going to be producer, writer, director, cameraperson, editor, and distributor of these films, for my entire life. I usually haven’t made films that I don’t expect to see again and again. It’s not like doing a drawing or painting: you exhibit it and that’s it. They [films] do have a longer life.

AD: I feel that Arthur Lipsett could have improved some of his work, but also accessed something great in a perfect form of his own expression. Do you feel that artists do that sort of… when they access their truest form of expression?

BC: Well, I think that people do something great depending on your definition of “great.” [Laughs.]

AD: I feel that some people are lucky that they find what is true to their own lives to freshen up their will or spirit.

BC: If that’s what people value and consider great then–I can’t get into discussions about what is great. Material that was considered absolutely great in the past is now so obscure and uninteresting that nobody will have anything to do with it. We are always involved with our contemporary judgment. You know, it’s nice to have certain constant principles in making various objects and talking about them but it’s deceptive if you start presupposing that they are universal principles.

AD: I was speaking more from a personal view about an artist. Does a true expression happen all the time?

BC: Well, hopefully it happens all the time.

AD: Are you surprised that Arthur’s work is getting more recognition?

BC: Well, I am surprised that anyone is paying attention. [Laughs.] There are so many works and films from the past that have disappeared so quickly, and there are so many that go through the time or period without receiving much attention. I’ve run into people who have refused to listen to old music recordings, people who have refused to watch old black and white movies, because they’re old, and they’re not stereo sound and widescreen and have all the things that are considered very important now. I channel my views–my stance is being outside what is in fashion at the time, all the time. And I would like to feel that a rationale for preserving material and still showing it over a period of time–I make an assumption that time is on my side.

AD: Did you ever make any plans for your film projects?

BC: Very, very, very seldom. The only time I did was when I applied for the Ford Foundation grant and did nothing but fantasize about films that I had no intention of making. And the only one that came close to it was: I did a whole bunch of homework to try to find footage of the first Atomic Bomb tests in Bikini Atoll in 1946. I tracked it all down and found where it was and then made a proposal for a grant, in which I described the film that ended up being Crossroads (1976). There would be no narration; it would use the same event over and over to music or sound effects. I expected it was going to be a very short film with lots of fast cutting but when I actually looked at the footage–I found shots at the National Archives of [Motion Picture Film] that would start running and the bomb would go off and it would run for eight or nine minutes. So [Crossroads] ended up being 37 minutes long, with very long takes of the same event, and music and sound–you see nobody on screen at all, there’s no text predisposing you one way or another. I think [that film] was probably the only one that was going to be close to what it was [on paper]. But I still felt that what I proposed left me plenty of leeway with sound effects and music and how I would organize them in the film and in the context that I wanted to.

AD: Is there anything else that you want to add?

BC: Well, I had heard about Arthur going through the streets with a camera with no film in it, and that he was very eccentric. You know, what he was doing has now become almost an academic cliché.

AD: What do you mean?

BC: The type of thing called performance art. It’s got to the point where, if you really want some money to do something, to get grants to do environments, performance pieces, etc, etc–hopefully with a lot of television sets around–that seems to be what funding organizations put out money for. It’s almost like a hobby-craft activity, where somebody says, Oh, I want to do this thing where I am wearing a heavy overcoat and filming with a camera that has no film in it, and maybe they would explain why they would want to do this, and why people would react to this on the street.

It’s hard to verbalize this sort of thing when you don’t have the language to be able to do so. What I’m talking about now is something that I wouldn’t have been able to talk about in the 1960s. For one thing, I was doing work before there were names for it: conceptual, environmental, assemblage performance pieces, etc, etc. We didn’t have any terms for these. So instead, people related to it as crazy. And people who were doing it didn’t necessarily have a way to explain what it was either, and I wouldn’t be able to!

I think the difference between socially unacceptable behavior and socially acceptable behavior is whatever kind of insanity that the current society and culture considers to be worthwhile, and as long as you fit in there you can continue [to act] absolutely out-of-your-mind, which seems to be the case too many times. [Slight laughter.] I got to go.

 

_________
8 of Arthur Lipsett’s 13 films

________
Strange Codes (1974)
Strange Codes, Lipsett’s final completed film wherein he films himself alone within the confines of his apartment, will come two years later, but he was already preparing for his early death in N-Zone. Through his films (especially his late films), I get the impression that I’m seeing secrets and private abstractions that are never completely revealed, but are definitely felt, sometimes overwhelmingly so. Perhaps a source of this worldview is the fact that Lipsett witnessed the suicide of his mother at the age of ten? In any case, he was diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia in 1982, and (reportedly after several attempts) committed suicide in 1986, making this the twentieth year since his death.’ — Mubarak Ali




the entire film

 

________
N-Zone (1970)
‘Arthur Lipsett’s N-Zone is the longest, loosest and last of the collage films he produced at Canada’s National Film Board (NFB). It marks the end-point of his trajectory from feted young genius to discarded problem child/eccentric within the NFB. Lipsett’s N-Zone begs comparison as poor cousin to Chris Marker’s Zone in Sans Soleil (1982) and Tarkovsky’s in Stalker (1979). So let’s try to get to the question of what the film means; the idea of fleeing from one’s self clearly fits in with an erasure or refusal that is communicated to me by N-Zone. We are witness to Lipsett’s psyche hitting the wall. This is a not a celebratory experience. The N-Zone is a landscape of fumbling denials. A sense of “non-being” is communicated, a state often situated within the colonial experience: It is The Seekers singing “Island of Dreams” without the dreams. There is no magical inner chamber called “The Room” within the “Zone” as in Tarkovsky’s Stalker, where your innermost wishes are granted. Here your dreams don’t come true. Towards the end of the film, some footage is repeated of two men in white coats passing through a gate marked with a nuclear danger sign. They methodically inspect and record details of the plants in this fenced-off zone. Is this what is left of the asylum? In the end we are left hanging with the thought that Lipsett became what he collected: a discarded reflection suspended in a landscape of denial.’ — Senses of Cinema


the entire film

 

___________
Fluxes (1969)
‘This experimental short conveys avant-garde filmmaker Arthur Lipsett’s view of the human condition and the chaotic planet on which we live. As in his other films (Very Nice, Very Nice; 21-87), the flow of images in Fluxes seems somewhat disjointed and erratic — yet it all builds up to a devastating indictment of the modern world. The film’s only commentary consists of unrelated snatches of words and sounds.’ — NFB


the entire film

 

____________
A Trip Down Memory Lane (1965)
‘A surrealist time capsule combining fifty years of newsreel footage, A Trip Down Memory Lane was Lipsett’s first pure collage film, composed exclusively from stock image and sound from the NFB bins. Continuing his process of excavation, mediation and transformation, the film constitutes a brief audiovisual tour of the post-war technocracy. “Another incisive look at human might, majesty, and mayhem,” reads the NFB catalogue description. “The filmmaker calls this a time capsule, but his arrangement of pictures makes it almost explosive. There are hundreds of items, once front-page stuff, but all wryly grotesque when seen in this reshuffle of the past.”’ — no.w.here


the entire film

 

__________
21-87 (1964)
‘It would be easy to perform a logical and technical analysis of Canadian artist Arthur Lipsett’s 1964 film 21-87. One could describe the different issues that he confronted in his film and their importance within the social-political context of the late 50s and early 60s. Many interesting articles could be written on his incredible sound montage and strong film editing skills of recovered images. However, each of these approaches would merely be surface analyses of the images and sounds that compose the film. They would address the facts and flat truths of the fragmented images, but would entirely miss the film’s deeper meaning, its powerful psychological effects and its artistic inspiration. In fairness, Lipsett’s film illustrates a technical and artistic capacity for creating ‘collage’ films. 21-87 is entirely composed of found footage and cuts of film that were discarded in the editing process. Lipsett then interwove and juxtaposed these fragments of film with an original patchwork soundtrack. The structure of the films is integral in communicating the potent connections between the images and ideas. Within the convention of 60s avant-garde collage films, his work reacted against the dominant ideologies of the time. Like Bruce Conner, another collage-style avant-garde filmmaker, Lipsett exploited images that typified the concerns, creations and insecurities of contemporary society; images of science and technology, images of war and destruction and images and sounds of religion. Lipsett was especially interested in representing industrial dehumanization, the decline of religion, non-American religious traditions, consumerism, apocolyptic thinking and man’s senseless pursuit of self-annihilation. However, to limit the discussion of 21-87 to the context of a typical collage film would be superficial. Some collage films, such as Conner’s, are certainly more visually interesting and technically precise. However, they fail to make a strong psychological connection with the viewer. In contrast, Lipsett’s films possess the ability to psychologically and emotionally affect the viewer. This powerful effect in accomplished because his films are an emotional reaction, not simply to the historical and institutional context of their creation, but to the condition of his mind. In this way, 21-87, transcends the category of avant-garde collage statement films to become an unconventional psychodrama. The film 21-87 does not adopt a trance or dream structure like Maya Deren’s or Stan Brakhage’s films. Lipsett does not need the conventional special effects or photographic illusions because the editing structure of 21-87 is sufficient to create a convincing portrait of his depression and despair. His film is an intensely personal portrayal of the mind of a hyper aware individual. It was not Lipsett’s intention to depict the world as an inherently terrible place for everyone, but simply a terrible place for himself, through his interpretation. He shares his interpretation by combining the images and sounds that saturate everyday contemporary life into an overwhelming statement guided by personal insight. Though his insights became increasingly illogical and paranoid, the clairvoyance of his vision and his talent for self expression are demonstrated by his remarkable ability to create a personal narrative experience from banal and impersonal fragments.’ — cs.ccgill


the entire film

 

______________
Free Fall (1964)
‘Arthur Lipsett’s nine-minute experimental film Free Fall (1964) is exemplary of what might be considered both an artistic and a spiritual project. Although he may not have fully realised it, Lipsett was using media as a ritual or gateway, acting as medium and prophet, and reaching into the subconscious of humanity. With his films, he created a trance-like experience for the viewer. Lipsett’s signature collages of images and sounds shift focus from the predominantly storytelling dimensions of film to something entirely different, a multi-sensory experience in which the viewer is purposely confronted with material that provokes thought, insight, emotion, contemplation, etc. He was concerned with spiritual, philosophical, ethical, moral, historical, epistemological, and political questions, without assuming the answers. Like a shaman, Lipsett entered into the unknown thematically and technically, exploring new territories in the medium with a focus on indeterminacy and dissonance. Collage is a form that emphasises the work carried out by the viewer; you are expected to derive your own interpretation from the materials the artist presents to you.’ — Senses of Cinema


the entire film

 

_____________
Very Nice, Very Nice (1961)
‘Like all of his films, Very Nice, Very Nice disrupts the representational value of documentary image and sound, moving beyond the genre’s aesthetic codes of truth and reliability. The result is a sardonic re-reading of 1950s consumerism, mass media and popular culture. For example, over an anonymous claim that, “People always seem unwilling to become involved in anything… I mean really involved”, Lipsett shows the burnt corpse of a probable war casualty followed by two shots of different women looking down and away. We then hear another voice saying, “Almost everyone has a washing machine, a drying machine.” Seconds later we see a man holding a placard reading, “The End is at Hand”. Over a comic image of U.S. Air Force jets stacked up to the sky we hear mocking laughter at the suggestion that “the situation is getting worse”. And against a clip of McLuhan’s statement that, “People who have made no attempt to educate themselves live in a kind of dissolving phantasmagoria of a world”, Lipsett dissolves several blurry, disinterested faces into one another. These examples of “vertical montage”, as Sergei Eisenstein described the moment-to-moment juxtaposition of a film’s audio and visual tracks, indicate how sound influences a shot’s signification. William Wees observes that in found footage films such as those of Lipsett and Abigail Child, “the incongruity of sound and image expose, satirise, and produce new readings of the banalities, cliches and conventional modes of discourse – verbal and visual – that are endemic to the mass media.” The critique of mass media is an important aspect of Lipsett’s work, although such a critique is easily undermined in our age of self-conscious advertising campaigns and political spin. I wonder if similar films could be made using today’s images – or is the media itself now too saturated in postmodern irony? The images of the repulsive and often overlooked damage left by both war and technological progress which punctuate Very Nice, Very Nice give the film its lasting punch. History has had the final word on the atom bomb, the space race, Richard Nixon, Nelson Rockefeller and John F. Kennedy, and it is not flattering. But as Lipsett’s narrator asserts at film’s end, “The more determined of us are doing something about it. Warmth and brightness will return, a renewal of the hopes of men.” Although they cut against the film’s grain, these concluding remarks suggest the possibility of an optimistic worldview while underlining the importance of active, political engagement. Throughout Very Nice, Very Nice Lipsett’s resolute cynicism is offset by tender, affirmative moments of humour and humanity: images of children at play and the upbeat sounds of jazz music (complemented by shots of – is that the tenor saxophonist, John Coltrane?). It is not incongruous, then, that two of the film’s working titles were “Strangely Elated” and “Revelation”. Most importantly, these sequences place a clear value on individual expression as an act of creative resistance.’ — Senses of Cinema


the entire film

 

___________
Hors-d’oeuvre (1960)
‘A collection of short cartoons produced by NFB animators. One-minute clips for government sponsors provide an amusing, fast-paced sampling of animation techniques. Among them are reminders about television programs, traffic safety rules, and the Department of Labour’s admonition, “Why wait for spring? Do it now.”‘ — Light Cone


the entire film

 

 

*

p.s. Hey. AnOther Magazine interviewed me mostly about the UK reprint of my first novel CLOSER if you’re interested. It’s here ** scunnard, It’s definitely not just you, but whether it’s more than just you and me is a question, I suppose. ** Mitch, Hi, Mitch! Oh, yeah, that song rules. Welcome to enlightenment of a sort. What else, if anything, do you think is genius? ** Charalampos, Pleasure. That’s really exciting that your father did Scale Modeling or Plastimodellismo. I’m obsessed with those things, as you probably have gathered. Take pix of his works someday and share them please. I certainly think buying a kit is a great idea, and I should do that myself. Ideally the audio novel will have some formal principles of the radio play but not be a radio play because we want it to be something unique. And the idea is that it would be only sound, no text to read. The project started because Zac and I spent about five years writing a TV series project for the TV channel ARTE that was going to be directed by Gisele Vienne, but it ended up being cancelled by ARTE because we wouldn’t compromise enough. Then, briefly, it was going to be film Gisele directed, but she changed her mind. Then Zac and I got the idea to turn it into an audio novel, and we reworked it to suit that purpose. Vibes of a positive bent from Paris. ** Dominik, Hi!! I think I’d be a bad pickpocket. I’m not very stealthy. Otherwise, wow, the possibilities, it’s true. Maybe the displeased looks on the shop keepers faces is just the French way of expressing enormous gratitude? Oh, hm, I think it would be hard to turn down the charred ruins of the Haunted Monster Museum. You want any of them? Love trying to imagine the days when people carried handkerchiefs around with them and blew their noses in them and then just put the snotty handkerchiefs back their pockets without thinking that was impractical and kind of gross, G. ** Mark, Hi. I know Neutra’s houses, but not the diorama. Oh, man, that’s sad. I think my favorite, or, wait, least favorite demolished attraction is Pacific Ocean Park aka P.O.P., this amazing amusement park that was on a pier in Venice, CA that burned down when I was in my late teens. That place completely invented my brain when I was young. There’s a great book about it. Nice: John + your zine! You guys are fucking queer zine kingpins. You’re like the queer zine Orson Welles meets PT Barnum or something. Proud to know you. Everyone, Mark is, as you probably know, one of half of the genius queer zine collective/ publishers Mattazine Society, and you can/should follow them on instagram here. xoxo. ** _Black_Acrylic, Hi. Dahmer’s pad could have one hell of a Halloween haunted house attraction. That’s a very nice shirt right there. Yep, the world that matters is going to be your oyster starting at your birthday’s dawn. ** Corey Heiferman, Hi. I too wonder about the necessity of destructing the Lego House given the circumstances you discuss. I love wandering about in those Worlds Fair ruins and can not understand why they haven’t been refilled. Actually, I’m jonesing to start work on a new film, but Zac and I need to figure out what it’ll be about first. Sorry that the BDSM club surrendered to the conventions. Alas. Dude, obviously, aim your writing’s ship at that Hebrew chapbook contest post haste. My synapses reckon you’re a shoe-in even. ** malcolm, Hi. November’s ok so far. Oh, wait, John Waters wrote back to me about your makeover. He wrote: ‘I’ll cast him in the sequel that I will never make’. Yeah, movie theatres here get all the big movies and a lot of little, weird ones too. Paris is nothing if not a cinema adherer’s paradise, really. Almost always French subtitled. My French is pathetically bad, I’m horrified to say. But I can watch foreign movies with French subtitles and mostly understand what I’m seeing. I have to say, I think ‘Crybaby’ is John’s least good film. Not that it’s bad or anything, but it’s also the least necessary, I guess? My favorite all-time film? At the moment I think it’s a tie between Bresson’s ‘The Devil Probably’, Hollis Frampton’s ‘Straits of Magellan’, Orson Welles’ ‘The Magnificent Ambersons’, and Godard’s ‘Adieu au Language (3D version)’. What’s yours? ** Bzzt, Hey. Yeah, I like to have the future of a busy bee. Furthering your writing is obviously a most excellent goal. Hm, maybe find a new idea and proceed while the dormant one takes its nap? I’m all about positive energy. You’re no bum, man. Not with that brain of yours. Happy to be of help however I can be. xo. ** Steve Erickson, Hi. Whether there’s a soundtrack will be up to Puce Mary. She retains all the non-film-enclosed rights. It would be an odd record, that’s for sure. I guess I should start thinking up my year end lists. But I think I’ll give it another few weeks since the blog’s deadline is a lot more spontaneous than yours. Just a usual new mouse or a stylin’ one? ** Sarah, Yay for your feeling good! Me too, basically. It’s weird, but I do think every year is better than the last one. Even if it’s not technically true or wouldn’t seem true to an outside observer. Do you have things you want to do or have accomplished by the year’s end? ** Nick., It was fun, that game. It involved a lot of fantasising, which is always good. I assume Magic is almost nothing but fantasising from what I can tell. Dungeons & Dragons too, I assume? The cards are just like the joint you’re smoking or something? The good thing about pasta is it is a brief guest. I’m normal again. Crazy, good crazy. Part of me wants to tell you to film everything with the guy and make a documentary about it, but that would ruin everything, which is why I’m not actually suggesting that. Favorite commercial? Hm, nothing springs to mind. Wait, there was this horror movie back in the early 80s called ‘Pieces’, and the commercial for it just had the word ‘Pieces’ in a scary font on a black background and then a chainsaw noise and then the words ‘It’s exactly what you think it is’ on a black background. I thought that was pretty genius. I still have some chocolates from the Salon du Chocolat that I would happily share with you if I could. ** tomk, Hi, t. Yeah, sure, my honor. I’ll write to you today or at worst tomorrow if the film editing ends up eating everything today. Love, me. ** Right. I’m guessing most of you don’t know the films of Arthur Lipsett, and that’s why I decided to put him and his films in front of you and give you the chance to know them. See you tomorrow.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2025 DC's

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑