Every time I learn about experimental film, I feel like a majority of the discussions are based on the question of what experimental film is. It's difficult to pin down because everyone has a different opinion on what it means to experiment with film.
I've taken notes on the six criteria presented in Camper's piece multiple times and they seem to make sense. The one that always feels most important to me is number four, the idea that experimental film is conscious of being film. This concept includes the process of physically changing the film with methods like bleaching it or scratching it or any other number of things in works like Brakhage's Mothlight. I feel like this part of the "definition" puts importance on the act of performing an actual experiment where film just happens to be part of the materials used.
I feel like experimental film should strive to add something new just like scientific experiments strive to prove theories or add new ideas to the world.
In the end, I appreciate that Camper acknowledges that the criteria he lays out are not necessary to define a work as "experimental" because the illusiveness of the definition is part of the medium itself by now.
No comments:
Post a Comment