E.X.P.E.X.R. < 16m student film, plz comment

A

amarjeet

New member
a film student here.

E.X.P.E.X.R. <<< stands for Experimental Exercise

shot on 16mm on studio floor with no sets.

finished a few weeks back.
experimental filmmaking as i think it should be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylS_DcUm1hA

i would highly appreciate any suggestions, changes and discussions.

regards,
amarjeet
 
Last edited:
I didn't get it at all. What was the experiment?

A good "experimental" film will take a single concept or formal device, bring it to its logical extreme, and interrogate its functions in diferent contexts. I can't remember the names of every experimental or avante garde film I've seen, but one, for instance, was documentary footage punctuated by jump cuts. The placement of the cuts interrogated the function of jumpcuts in general. Soon after, jump cuts entered the New Wave and thereafter the mainstream.

"Empire" interrogates the long take. It's ridicuous, but it's interesting. And it makes a point. "Eye Myth" takes an opposite approach. It didn't do much for me, but I liked the idea. Brakhage is too inconcrete for my taste, but even his methods of just messing around experimented with film as a physical (or even organic) object and did some interesting stuff--and profoundly influenced Hollywood; I think someone copied his techniques for the opening credits of Superman. Kenneth Anger and a lot of others edited found footage together to interroate the power of constructive editing (the Kuleshov effect, discovered in some of the first and most important "experimental films" ever in 1920s Russia.)

You lit everything okay and have some nice compositions and edits, but I don't get what you're trying to say. To me it lacks the formal rigor of a true experimental film, and even the thematic continuity of say Maya Deren or someone. (And, with Lynch, Kubrick, and Gondry all finding much more compelling takes on dreams that Deren did, I think the modern "dream film" needs a bit more of a concrete framework rooted (perhaps unfortunately) in Freudian or Jungian ideas.)

Also, most of your effects looked digital, so I don't see how that was even experimenting with film on a physical level. You did a pretty good job, but I don't see any underlying concept, sorry.
 
Hey. What film stocks did you use? I like the photography. Any 7201 in there or something else?
 
I've seen some experimental films before from film students. Although I like adding some experimental ideas into my work, I'm not usually a fan of very many experimental films.

But I enjoyed yours. I loved the dark photography. I loved the images that just made you think more than "meh". Like the tomato under the foot, as it's being squashed, never would have guessed that it was upside down, because suddenly the juice is dripping upwards. Or the bellybutton shots (how did you do those?). I also loved the editing. Was this digitized then editing on a computer?

Some experinental films I've seen have just bored me... and went on for WAYYY too long. The worst had to be a 10 minute film, where they brought a dolly and crane into an empty theater. They film it from several different angles, they added some colors, and just slapped it all together... that was boring... I was sitting there just wanting them to show the next one...

Yours one was short enough and very interesting with dynamic editing and interestign cuts and shots. Did not bore me for a second.

Perhaps if more was added in, rather than just a man there, and then the man pours something over himself. But the other cuts were very original.

I'm just not a fan of experimental because I feel if it's experimental, it at least has to say something, even if no story. But then again, I suppose that's why they call it experimental.

Anywas, good job.
 
when i include EXPERIMENTAL in my post no one would reply or view it.
thanks all for taking time out and viewing my experimental work.

hi robert...its a 100t 7212 if i remember right.

yes john, i absolutely agree with you. i have seen many experimental films by some of the most prominent figures in this genre.

all the films are jus boring. i believe that although experimental films are supposed to be different they should not be boring. no matter what you make, at the end of the day the film has to affect you as a viewer. but many experimental films affect us only by boring us. such films have only given bad name to this genre.

experimental is a special kind of film-making. with no set rules you find it diffcult to set your own limits. what makes a film exprimental? many unset set of rules which should'nt be set since it is experimental. the only set of rules is it shouldnt follor any conventioanl methods of film making.

and i agree with you on the duration too john. what i made is good if not seen for more than a couple of minutes. a ten minute film of same or better quality content and visuals wouldnt be sustainable. in my next project i am trying to have a pefect blend of the surreal and commercial.

you were right about the tomato.

as for the milk - i asked the girl to pour the milk from her chest in a thin flow so as it should enter the belly button and flow out down. later in post production i pasted the top flowing-in part with a blank plate i took jus before she pored milk. now it looked like it was coming out of the belly button. when people talk about visual effects, they only see what hollywood is capable of churning out with millions of dollars and creative man power of thousands. people forget that a properly thought out and simple concept can be made to looks equally striking and effective in a different way.

lookin forward to hearing from more people.
 
Last edited:
I made a long and detailed post here, with mixed feedback, admittingly tending toward negative.

Why was it deleted? I wasn't being a jerk--just constructive. Has criticism of any kind been banned from these forums?
 
I made a long and detailed post here, with mixed feedback, admittingly tending toward negative.

Why was it deleted? I wasn't being a jerk--just constructive. Has criticism of any kind been banned from these forums?
Click to expand...

Yeah, where is that post.

Just expect it to be deleted next time, it's been happening a lot lately...I have no idea why. Sugar coat your post and maybe it'll slip by lol
 
Nice job on the belly button. Never would have thought of somethign so simple. I would have thought to have made a fake stomach+belly button and feed the liquid from behind... but simplest is always best.

amarjeet said:
and i agree with you on the duration too john. what i made is good if not seen for more than a couple of minutes. a ten minute film of same or better quality content and visuals wouldnt be sustainable. in my next project i am trying to have a pefect blend of the surreal and commercial.
Click to expand...

For sure. I don't know any experimental film that can go past the 3-5 minute mark without getting boring. And unfortunately I find many experimental films go past that mark, making it unproffesional (because they don't know when to stop) or just plain boring as hell.

I'd like to see an experimental film with a story. That's sort of what I like to do. Or at least experimental style editing. I like to try different things, add vivid images, strange and interesting editing, but I'd hate to do a film with no plot.
 
Amulet Man said:
I made a long and detailed post here, with mixed feedback, admittingly tending toward negative.

Why was it deleted? I wasn't being a jerk--just constructive. Has criticism of any kind been banned from these forums?
Click to expand...

thats sad. did u post anything that was outside the criteria of this post and offensive?

also it would be nice if the admin takes time to atleast mention the reason a post was deleted. until the poster has said something offensive or offended any rules there is no reason a post would be deleted.

as far as my work is concerned, anyone from anywhere is absolutely welcome to post good/bad criticism at any level.

amulet man - plz try posting again and save it on hdd too. if not then you can mail me and we can talk about it amarssadal@gmail.com- that is if you are interested and want to retype that post.

thanks all & regards
 
amarjeet said:
thats sad. did u post anything that was outside the criteria of this post and offensive?

also it would be nice if the admin takes time to atleast mention the reason a post was deleted. until the poster has said something offensive or offended any rules there is no reason a post would be deleted.

as far as my work is concerned, anyone from anywhere is absolutely welcome to post good/bad criticism at any level.

amulet man - plz try posting again and save it on hdd too. if not then you can mail me and we can talk about it amarssadal@gmail.com- that is if you are interested and want to retype that post.

thanks all & regards
Click to expand...

Yes, I spent a good deal of time on my response. I'm not going to waste time writing it again just to have it deleted, though. It wasn't offensive, although it wasn't necessarily positive, either. A difference of opinion, maybe.

What it boiled down to is that we have very different notions of what makes an experimental film an experimental film. The "boring" films you mentioned earlier are, in general, what I consider to be true experimental film and potentially very significant, whereas I feel your project was more just fooling around with camera tricks. Even "true" experimental filmmakers like Brakhage got boring (in my mind) when they were just fooling around with camera tricks.

I won't waste time reposting something that will just get deleted, particularly because it seems to me that you achieved your goals in this project, and I shouldn't be one to question your goals. But to me this doesn't serve the purpose of an experimental film at all and its pretentions to dream imagery are just rehashed Deren and Dali, without the rigorous Freudian basis, which is passé in the era of Lynch, Kubrick, and Gondry, anyhow. Your exposure and lighting, etc. are fine, though, and it seems you succeeded at your goal.
 
Amulet Man said:
Yes, I spent a good deal of time on my response. I'm not going to waste time writing it again just to have it deleted, though. It wasn't offensive, although it wasn't necessarily positive, either. A difference of opinion, maybe.

What it boiled down to is that we have very different notions of what makes an experimental film an experimental film. The "boring" films you mentioned earlier are, in general, what I consider to be true experimental film and potentially very significant, whereas I feel your project was more just fooling around with camera tricks. Even "true" experimental filmmakers like Brakhage got boring (in my mind) when they were just fooling around with camera tricks.

I won't waste time reposting something that will just get deleted, particularly because it seems to me that you achieved your goals in this project, and I shouldn't be one to question your goals. But to me this doesn't serve the purpose of an experimental film at all and its pretentions to dream imagery are just rehashed Deren and Dali, without the rigorous Freudian basis, which is passé in the era of Lynch, Kubrick, and Gondry, anyhow. Your exposure and lighting, etc. are fine, though, and it seems you succeeded at your goal.
Click to expand...

you have a right to your opinion. a lot of what u said stands true, and maybe over time when i venture into commercial film making, experience life and mature i would understand what you meant.

i think watching peoples butcracks while they walk IS experimental...but boring too. as i said earlier...experimental films have no set rules so you cant really have sub-classifications in this genre. but we shouldn't be disputing what experimental films mean.

nyways...if u think that my work was a foolish collection of a set of images...what do u think i can do to read in terms of ur dali's & deren's? ny books, sites, any literature whatsoever you recommend would be highly appreciated? your short theoretical critique was good...but any suggestions on howto improve would be a great plus.
 
I'm no expert in experimental films, but IMHO to define an experimental film isn't supposed to be cut and dry like that.

The way I look at it, there's no other way to categorize the film. It leans mostly toward experimental and nothing else. It's not narrative, it's not documentary, it's not sci-fi or fantasy.

Perhaps it's a more commercial and cliché experimental film that doesn't take risks, but it's still experimental.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top