Film Festivals as 'Performance' Art

by Amani Jordan

In the essay, "Film Festival Networks" Thomas Elsaesser stated that film festivals are a new form of "democracy."(103) How can this be true if film festivals  such Cannes, Venice, and Berlin continue to utilize elitist forms of press coverage to emphasize ritzy public performance. Indeed, aspects of 'high culture' seem to take precedence over the appreciation of the actual films themselves. At Cannes, an atmosphere of bourgeoisie art culture is found: "organizers insisted that evening screenings were to be attended in formal attire by guests and reporters alike"(72).  Although these highly organized and sponsored events provide a space for colloquial/professional discourse amongst those in the global industry, they still further classist distinctions. This is preposterous:  If film is truly the  "universal art" as Bazin believes it to be (Rhyne 11)  then why is there this insistence upon certain  film festivals(those following the Cannes model) to make cinema to be something elite and out of reach? 

Festivals themselves have been heralded as great luxurious business events. For instance, in Chapter 1 of  Lee's dissertation("Publics), a  most peculiar phenomenon occurred at the Thessaloniki film festival: "I realized...many of the people that had been frantically trying to get past the guards...had been motivated not by a desire to see the opening film, but rather by a desire to be a part of the opening night spectacle"(emphasis mine, 66). And still, the 'authentic' viewing audiences  made their way to the festivals' screenings. This "second wave audience" were knowledgeable and critical of   unnecessarily extravagant elements of the space; they were not present in the audience for the sake of their self-image or 'glamouria'(67). 

Evidently, there are spectators that come purposely for the screening  and for any  political/commercial/ reputable gain. Mostly,  I agree with the view of Lee: "the festival addresses multiple and even radically different publics"( 69);  those festivals organizers following the older Cannes traditions  utilize the space for a celebration of extra-cinematic elements whilst simultaneously inviting those folks that come to simply watch partake in major presentation of the next great independent filmmakers.  Of course, these cinematic events  must   be tied to the industry in order to continue their mission(s) of art continuation but perhaps there is more to film's reality than  commodified art product. 

The Various Methods of Film Festival Research

By Diana Ritter

After listening to Toby Lee speak about her experience with the Thessaloniki Film Festival, I was struck by the difference between her research and that of Vanessa Schwartz who wrote the essay, “The Cannes Film Festival and the Marketing of Cosmopolitan”.  Lee touched on this in class, stating that Schwartz’s research was primarily archival based, if not totally, and did not involve the “on-the-scene” type research that Lee did.  I got that sense while reading Schwartz’s essay, and Lee’s lecture proved it to be true.

The two words that came to mind after reading Schwartz’s essay were “puff piece.”  Don’t get me wrong, I really enjoyed it and thought the way she traced the paparazzi’s “unauthorized image” to the Cannes film festival was very interesting.  But in the end, her description of the South of France, the atmosphere at Cannes during the festival, and the movie star glamour acted as a marketing campaign for me, leaving me with a strong desire to go to the festival and partake in this “cosmopolitan” environment.  It felt like Schwartz was having a love affair with Cannes and after putting her article down, I wondered, “What was, and is, really going on beneath the surface of this festival, politically and socially, and where was that information?”

In contrast, Lee’s lecture brought those issues to the surface right away, and I think the only way it is possible to get that information is to be there, interviewing the people, observing the action, and partaking in the festival.  I was awed and impressed by how Lee left no stone unturned. She studied the background, interviewing people who had been there in the early days, she knew about the other festivals in the area, she uncovered the festival’s financial woes, and when the political environment changed, she went with it and altered her research to include that aspect.  For every question we asked, Lee had an informed answer.

Comparing the two research methods helps me see the different approach I can take in my research and what I like or dislike about each.  I find Lee’s method more credible because she was a first-hand witness and shared both the positive and negative aspects, but it obviously took her a lot of time and hard work to write her dissertation.  Unfortunately, I think Schwartz’s method is the one we typically go with because it takes less time, the resources are available to us “at home” versus having to travel to get them, and we don’t have enough time to spend researching “first-hand.”  Lee’s lecture really inspired me to find something that interests me that much and dig into it on the level she did because as she talked about, it seemed to still light a fire under her and excite her.  I am just grateful for all those who do and can dedicate themselves to topics, especially in the cinematic world, and share them with us who can not.

--Diana Ritter

"Discovering Form, Inferring Meaning"

by Rebecca Hernandez-Gerber

"’For us’ is the caveat that allows for a level of authenticity, to use that existential vocabulary, at the same moment as it guarantees a lack of finality. To what extent does the humanist framework encouraged by film festivals and the popular press not only steer our readings in selected directions but also obscure alternative readings or discourage their active pursuit?”

            Bill Nichols' "Discovering Form, Inferring Meaning" is focused on Iranian cinema, but many of the lessons taken from the piece apply equally to all forms of cinema foreign to us. Oftentimes, I have found it difficult to relate to the works of Western writers commenting on cinemas outside their own views. This is simply not my world, and the attitudes within it as as foreign to me as Iranian cinema is to Nichols. However, I was pleased and intrigued to find that Nichols’ worked posed a series of fascinating questions on how interpretation crosses borders, and I found myself attempting to answer these difficult questions.

            What first struck me was the question of a humanist framework. Can we say that all film festivals and the popular press steer the viewer in a particular direction? I’m unsure I agree with this framework. Within the press are a range of opinions and emotions that, while unified in their overall Western-viewpoint, remains fragmented in their own unique experiences. It is possible that this framework draws the viewer in a particular direction, but I would argue that they do not discourage active pursuit. Quite the contrary, when the viewer encounters a viewpoint contrary to their own, they are given pause and consider how their own viewpoints relates to this dominant theory. The dissonance creates the possibility of difference, one that all viewers may not choose to utilize but which nonetheless remains open to all.

            Looking at this question in a different light, I begin to wonder at what, exactly, we define as a level of authenticity. Interpretation of art never carries authenticity, no matter how certain critics or institutions may attempt to stamp their own opinion as such. It is fluid, transformative, influenced by culture and the moments that shape our artistic temperament. To be confronted by festivals and press that attempt to teach us what is or is not authentic, my response is never to take such authenticity at face value. It is, instead, to question, to wonder, and to search for a new truth that is only true for myself.

            Perhaps this is the purpose of divering form and inferring meaning from those cultural cinemas so foreign to us. It is not a question of interpreting differences but at discovering commonality, yet always reminding ourselves that this commonality holds only as much authenticity as our own opinions: that is, paradoxically, both everything and nothing at all.

Restoration

Marissa Hicks-Alcaraz
 

As I'm only for the first time encountering debates regarding film restoration, it wasn't until Wednesday's class that I began to really examine a film for the state of its conservation or its restoration and to weigh in on the debates surrounding the topic. Perhaps I've been so conditioned to expect a certain kind of quality from older films, since I've almost exclusively, until recently, been watching films that have apparently been restored to “pristine conditions” ( i.e. sharp images, vivid colors, etc.), that I hadn't thought to question a film's appearance. Even though restorations seeking to bring back a film to its original condition have the ability to give films a certain aura or a sense of immortality, as if announcing that as old as these films get they will forever be available to audiences like the day they were was released, I believe there is still value in showing the natural quality and aging of a film.

But then I feel like I cannot make any definitive stance because one stance always prompts further questioning. For instance, will failing to restore a film to its original condition contribute to the deterioration of the film? Does merely maintaining the current state of the work risk loosing larger audiences, and therefore risk having the film fade into obscurity? And if one prefers the restoration to a film's original state, can we ever achieve bringing a film back to its original condition? Or, can reproducing multiple digital copies satisfy those who seek to maintain a film's current state and those wanting to restore a film to its original condition, or even enhance it?

I compared the Youtube video of Shirley Clarke's Portrait of Jason to the clip featured on Milestone's website, and I noted the subtle differences. The most obvious difference is in the shadows. The lighting in Milestone's restoration is much softer, allowing us to see Jason better, while the video on Youtube is much harsher, many of the details in his clothing and face are lost. While I'm not very familiar with film, I would imagine that the Youtube copy would have been closest to the original because of the technical differences. So, in thinking about which of the two I prefer and find most valuable, I find the ability to compare the two the most valuable and preferable. This way we get an optimized version with the help of the latest technical advances, but we don't loose the originality of the film. We see both worlds.

 

On "The Artworks Formerly Known as Prints"

by Diana Ritter 

The most disturbing quote in chapter 8 of David Bordwell’s book, Pandora’s Digital Box: Films, Files, and the Future of Movies (2012) comes from Chris Horak, director of UCLA’s Film & Television Archive.  He says:

If I find a cache of Blu-rays and DCPs in 500 years, what do I have? Plastic waste. How do you reverse-engineer those media? Impossible. Without an understanding of the software and the hardware, you have zip. No way to look at it, no way to know even if it has any information on it. (p. 191)

Prior to reading this chapter, I knew nothing about conservation, preservation, or restoration of film prints and digital matter. Never did I think about what type of format I was watching a movie on at the theater, what happened to that object after it left the theater, or what was happening to films and digital platforms from movies of the far and recent past. It was not until I began working at the NYU Film Study Center's archive that I learned how much labor and skill goes into maintaining and caring for film reels.   

Reading this chapter opened my eyes to what Bordwell means by “the future of movies." What strikes me the most is the conservation, preservation, and restoration of digital platforms. Though Bordwell does share a disclaimer in his introduction that he’ll “make some errors of fact, inference, and judgment” because he is “working from early, sometimes contradictory information,” he provides some very hard-hitting facts that can not be ignored. The elevated cost of storing a digital master, the short lifespan of digital platforms, the ongoing changes to software and hardware for digital matter, and the amount of labor and time needed to maintain digital archives are just a few of the issues. I think Horak is being quite generous in giving the cache of Blu-rays and DCPs a 500-year lifespan.  With all those issues to consider, I fear that if someone were to find that cache in 50 years, much of it would be plastic waste if it has not been properly maintained.  

I took this class to learn about curating, thinking more so in terms of programming. However, after our initial meeting and reading this chapter, I am feeling a passion for cinema in a way I had not before -- a desire to be a part of the process of ensuring there is a future for film and digital matter.  A desire to preserve and conserve. This chapter really depresses me, but it also inspires and pleases me that Bordwell is drawing attention to this topic early on. At this point, I still have a lot to learn and am curious whether any “damage” already done to films or digital files in archives, can be reversed. The question I am left with now is, what can I do to help?

-- Diana Ritter

Learning from the film qua film: "informational arcana"

Among the presenters at the 9th Orphan Film Symposium will be Concordia University associate professor of communications studies Matt Soar, who will talk about and demonstrate his Lost Leaders project.

His media-rich website officially calls the project "Lost Leaders: Found Footage and the Metadata of Film (2011 - )." It's both scholarly research and artistic creation (and funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada). 

The site's précis makes it clear why this is an ideal thing for both the Orphan Film Project in general and the 2014 symposium, The Future of Obsolescence, in particular. 

Lost Leaders is an ongoing creative and critical exploration of commercial film leaders and found footage. It treats leaders as informational arcana; aesthetically rich 'paratextual' elements in/of the medium of film, akin in some ways to the metadata of digital photographs and moving images. Through various processes of recombination -- lightbox collages, microscopic stopmotion animation, microscopic video meanderings -- Matt Soar scrutinizes the various markings (logos, lab notes, handwriting, type, projection cues) that are doubly 'lost' due to their routine invisibility from the audience, and their impending obsolescence. [Emphasis added.]

Soar's integration of deep research and artistic production is as good an example as any of how the Canadian academy facilitates the blend of the two, recognizing that knowledge and research can be found in creative work (a documentary, a film, a website, a DVD) as well as traditional books. The term at Concordia is "research-creation." The great experimental documentarian (and longtime Orphan Film Symposiast) Caroline Martel, for example, is a "research-creation PhD candidate" in Soar's department. Et voilà -- one can get a PhD without writing a dissertation of the sort required by, say, NYU Cinema Studies. 

To see how this plays out beyond the Lost Leaders example, go to ARC: Adventures in Research/Creation, which Soar co-directs: www.A-R-C.ca. There you will notice another key collaborator is Phil Hoffman, long known within the  experimental film world for "Phil's Film Farm," a summer artists' retreat where filmmakers shoot and hand-process the films they make on-site. The late Carolinian-Canadian media artist Helen Hill made films there in 1999, 2000, and 2002, when she was emerging as a quietly influential filmmaker. Super 8 maestro John Porter has written about her time there. Worth noting here: the first Orphan Film Symposium in New York (Orphans 6, in 2008), began with an evening-long tribute to Helen, which included Porter's short Phil's Film Farm (2002, with an on-screen dedication to her). It also was the occasion for the awarding of the first Helen Hill Awards. 

Here's a look at Soar's Lost Leaders #1 (2011-12), which he said in his Orphans 9 proposal "began as an experiment in hand-weaving together strands of 16mm found footage."

There's a lot to be learned about the history of film by closely examining the hundreds of different components found on leaders.

"Orphans 9" --Programming the Future of Obsolescence

The penultimate draft of

the 9th Orphan Film Symposium
The Future of Obsolescence
March 30 - April 2, 2014
in Amsterdam
hosted by EYE with NYU

Sunday, 30 March  
7pm An EYE Opening Reception

8pm An Evening Film Concert of Newly Preserved Films

Greetings from Sandra den Hamer and Giovanna Fossati (EYE), Marijke de Valck (UvA), and Dan Streible (NYU)
Simona Monizza (EYE experimental film curator) introduces abstract animated films by Maarten Visser, accompanist Marcel Worms (with additional music by NYU Film Scoring students)
Elif Rongen-Kaynakçi (EYE silent film curator) introduces the world premiere of the newly restored feature film East Is West (1922) starring Constance Talmadge; accompanist Stephen Horne

Monday, 31 March
9:45am Orphans Orientation
Josephine Baker Visit Volendam (Fox Movietone, 1928)
About the Orphan Film Symposium: Dan Streible
About the Future of Obsolescence: Giovanna Fossati
+
Dan Streible A New Look at an Old Sneeze: Edison Kinetoscopic Record of a Sneeze (W. K. L. Dickson, 1894): 35mm restoration by the U.S. Library of Congress

10:45am Thomas Elsaesser (UvA) On Obsolescence

11:30 am Transmitting Archival Knowledge 
Giovanna Fossati (EYE / UvA) Restoring the Colors of Early Cinema
Julia Noordegraaf (UvA) & Simona Monizza (EYE) Hacking the Bart Vegter Collection
Eef Masson (UvA) moderates a roundtable with the speakers and Howard Besser and Bill Brand (NYU MIAP), Snowden Becker (UCLA MIAS) and Martin Koerber (DIF)

LUNCH provided for registered symposiasts

2pm  Media Archaeology  
Susan Aasman  (U of Groningen) Staging the Amateur Dispositif, a performance with Andreas Fickers (U of Luxembourg), Tom Slootweg (U of Groningen), Tim van der Heijden and Jo Wachelder (U of Maastricht)
Alexandra Schneider & Wanda Strauven  (UvA) Children as Media Archaeologists  30’
Monika Supruniuk (Academy of Fine Arts, Warsaw) Kazimierz Prószy?ski and OKO: The first Polish amateur movie camera (1914) 30’

4:15pm  Reassemblage
Matt Soar (Concordia U, Montreal) Lost Leaders Project
Benedict Salazar Olgado (National Film Archive of the Philippines) & Bill Brand (BB Optics) Restoring the Fragments of On My Way to India Consciousness, I Reached China (Henry Francia, 1968)
Walter Forsberg & John Klacsmann (Anthology Film Archives) Technicolor NG (1967)

DINNER provided

8:15pm  Helen Hill Award screening
Bill Morrison premieres his new work
Doug Goodwin (Cal Arts) On Illusion, Magic, and Ted Serios + a preview screening of Serios (Rebecca Baron, 2014)  
Helen Hill Award conferred by Becky Lewis (Columbia, South Carolina)
Start (Nekes, 1966) newly restored by Deutsche Kinemathek with EYE
Franziska Latell (Berlin U of the Arts) introduces Werner Nekes
Werner Nekes talk/presentation on his collection of optical devices

Tuesday, 1 April
9:45am introductory remarks & trailer

10am  New Research Networks for Obsolete Media
Mark G. Cooper (U of South Carolina) Metadata and the Future of the Humanities
Karen Cariani (WGBH Archive) Working with Scholars to Improve Access to Media Archives
Mark J. Williams (Dartmouth College) The Media Ecology Project: More and Better Scholarly Access to Historical Media
Scott Curtis (Northwestern U in Qatar) chair

11:45am  Digital Decay and Remobilization
Egyptian (Whirling Dervishes) Dancers (Fox Movietone News, 1928) 4’
Evan Meaney (U of South Carolina) de_ca/sia.py: Archival Encryption, Encoding, and Error as Narrative  30’
Heidi Rae Cooley (U of South Carolina) Finding Augusta in a Digital World: The App.
The Other Augustas (Scott Nixon, 195?) and [Augusta, Sicily] (19??)

LUNCH provided

2pm When Workers Leave the Factory: Amateur Films in the Eastern Bloc
Jiri Hornicek (Czech National Film Archive) Czech amateur auteurs
Chris Wahl (HFF Potsdam) work from Betriebsfilmstudio GDR
Ralf Forster (Filmmuseum Potsdam) East German amateur films
Maria Vinogradova (NYU) Cine Amateurs in the Soviet Union

4pm Transportation Technologies
May Haduong (Academy Film Archive) Aloha Wanderwell: Car and Camera Around the World, 1922-1950
Yvonne Zimmermann (Philipps-Universität Marburg) Hans Richter’s Die Eroberung des Himmels (Conquest of the Sky) (1938)
Reto Kromer (reto.ch) In-flight Entertainment: Kodak two-audio track film prints for airlines; and Apollo 11 test film for Kern lenses (1969)
Paul Spehr & Mark-Paul Meyer (EYE) Mutoscope and Biograph 68mm films (1897-1902)  

dinner on your own

8pm  Silent Night
Elif Rongen-Kaynakçi & Jeff Lambert (NFPF) with repatriation news
Ned Thanhouser introduces the newly preserved comedy Clarence Cheats at Croquet (Thanhouser, 1915)
Ron Magliozzi & Peter Williamson (Museum of Modern Art, New York) present rediscovered rushes from the unreleased Darktown Troubles (Biograph, ca. 1914)
Jacqueline Stewart (U of Chicago) segues to A Frontier Post (Fox, US, 1925) A never-released Fox Varieties documentary about the “buffalo soldiers” of the U.S. Army’s 10th Cavalry.


Wednesday, 2 April
9:45am  introductory remarks and short video TBA

10am Detritus
Antonia Lant (NYU) on Teclópolis (2009, Can Can Club, Argentina)
Charles Musser (Yale U) on Industry’s Disinherited (Unions Films, 1949)
Grover Crisp (Sony Pictures Entertainment) How Death of a Salesman (1951) Became an Orphan Work
+ 35mm screening of the never-released Career of a Salesman (Columbia Pictures, 1951)  

FORWARD: The EU Directive for a Registry of Audiovisual Orphan Works 
Nicola Mazzanti (Cinémathèque Royale de Belgique) introduction
Géraldine Vooren (EYE legal counsel)
Thomas Christensen (Danish Film Institute / European Association of Cinematheques)  
Howard Besser (NYU) moderator

12:00  Restorations
Rob Byrne (San Francisco Silent Film Festival) Not Gone but Definitely Forgotten: Resurrecting The Last Edition (1925)
Martin Koerber (Deutsche Kinemathek) & Andrea Krämer (Hochschule für Technik und Wirtschaft, Berlin) Digital Restoration of 1930s Gasparcolor Films

LUNCH

2:15pm Latin American Archives
Juana Suárez (Fundación Patrimonio Fílmico Colombiano) Outtakes from Gloria Triana’s  Yuruparí (FOCINE-Audiovisuales, 1983-86) documenting Colombia’s Afrodescendant and indigenous cultures
Andrés Levinson & Paula Félix-Didier (Museo del Cine, Buenos Aires)
Caperucita Roja (Little Red Riding Hood, Jorge Mendez Delfino, 1933)
Caperucita Roja Inesita (Inés Mendez Delfino, 1960)
Perros en paracaidas (1963)

4:45pm  Eastern European Archives
Elvira Diamanti, Eriona Vyshka, & Andi Lubonja (Albanian Film Archive) with Thomas Logoreci (Marubi Academy of Film) The Albanian Cinema Project
KF-16 [Albanian dances from the north and northwest regions] (Ramazan Bogdani, 1972) + excerpts from new restorations, including Nëntori i dytë (The Second November) (1982) and Tomka and His Friends (1977)
Elzbieta Wysocka (Filmoteka Narodowa) Man without a Movie Camera: Restoring the Cameraless Films of Julian Józef Antonisz
A Hard-Core Engaged Film. Non-Camera (1979)
A Light in the Tunnel (1985)
The Polish Non-Camera Newsreel no. 1 (1981)

CLOSING DINNER RECEPTION

8:30pm  American Independents 
Jeff Lambert (NFPF) introduces the launch of the DVD set Treasures 6: Next Wave Avant-garde, + a 35mm screening of Chicago Loop (James Benning, 1976) restoration by Academy Film Archive & Austrian Film Museum
Frank Scheffer & Paul Cohen introduce their new work Zoetrope People (1980/2014)
Dennis Doros (Milestone Films) & Mary Huelsbeck (Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research) ‘Lost’ Films of Shirley Clarke