[Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception

Sat Oct 10 11:25:36 UTC 2015

I think you have a parasite in your mind tim
On Oct 10, 2015 2:26 AM, "Tim Halloran" <televisual at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Lol.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Cari Machet <carimachet at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Its not meant as funny ... you must be american ... i am anti feminist
> because it divides us - i have had too many strange experiences with
> exclusionary females that are hierarichical which is patriarchal ... they
> have no idea they are replicating the oppressors model maybe but ignorance
> is an excuse that takes people only so far
>
> i am also anti-agist anti-speciesist anti-fascist
>
> More notes on distribution after deadman jarmusch refuses to ask american
> producers for funding and that had a lot to do with distribution problems -
> su freidricks said that she would rather have 10 people watch her films and
> underwtand them than millions of people that dont
>
> Distribution/production is even psychotic for the highest paid like
> speilberg and one flew over the coockoos nest took 10 years before getting
> funding its a super fucked up section of society
> On Oct 9, 2015 7:50 PM, "Tim Halloran" <televisual at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Anti-feminist." Lol.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Cari Machet <carimachet at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Even though she may have thought of herself on the level of wim and not
>> gotten proper vast distribution as was stated she was female and though i
>> am anti-feminist this glaring factor remains a wall
>>
>> I cant help thinking of chris marker and his distribution
>>
>> My beautiful friend has made a website others may have an interest in >
>> monoskop.org
>>
>> On there is a series made by chris marker entitled 'the owl's legacy'
>> which was not distributed
>>
>> Monoskop.org/Chris_Marker
>>
>> In honor of chantel maybe people can be more aware when they do get to
>> view an artists work (that moves away from the oppressors hand) that the
>> ease of distribution is maybe too rare and we can all maybe help to shift
>> that
>> On Oct 9, 2015 4:00 PM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just use a proxy server  - a VPN ... shop online for one you like
>>> On Oct 9, 2015 9:24 AM, "Jana Debus" <info at janadebus.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, the most wonderful thing would be for all of her films to be
>>>> projected and for all of us to gather for the occasion.
>>>> I guess Brussels would be the perfect place. (I am far away from
>>>> Brussels now…in San Francisco, and feel even further away during this sad
>>>> time.)
>>>>
>>>> I hope it will be done, and for everyone to make an effort to be there.
>>>>
>>>> Jana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 23:17, nicky.hamlyn at talktalk.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Same problem with the Hollis Frampton DVDs. Quiet annoying.
>>>>
>>>> Nicky.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Adam Hyman <adam at lafilmforum.org>
>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>> <frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>; JANA DEBUS <info at janadebus.com>
>>>> Sent: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 6:36
>>>> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>>
>>>> Criterion is a US company that mostly licenses films only for US home
>>>> video distribution, and internet streaming.  However, it is more likely
>>>> than not that they don’t have the rights to make it available for streaming
>>>> to people outside the United States.  Those rights would be held whatever
>>>> company distributes her films in each country in question.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/8/15 10:21 PM, "Jana Debus" <info at janadebus.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am sorry to hear that!
>>>> I wonder whether Criterion could do something about that…
>>>> maybe worth it contacting them tomorrow.
>>>> I’ll try.
>>>>
>>>> Jana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 22:18, Peter Mudie <peter.mudie at uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yep, they can only be viewed in the U.S. (which is a bit tough on
>>>> everyone in Belgium, or anywhere else for that matter).
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From:  FrameWorks <frameworks-bounces at jonasmekasfilms.com> on behalf
>>>> of Jana Debus <info at janadebus.com>
>>>> Reply-To:  Experimental Film Discussion List <
>>>> frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>> Date:  Friday, 9 October 2015 1:12 pm
>>>> To:  Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>,
>>>> "nicky.hamlyn at talktalk.net" <nicky.hamlyn at talktalk.net>
>>>> Subject:  Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>>
>>>> oh, shame, did you try the other link, I sent?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.hulu.com/search?q=chantal+akerman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 22:09, nicky.hamlyn at talktalk.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only if you live in the USA,
>>>>
>>>> Nicky.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jana Debus <info at janadebus.com>
>>>> To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
>>>> Sent: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 5:14
>>>> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Chantal Akerman died/reception
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Criterion has made Chantal Akerman’s films available online,
>>>> you can watch them for free at this time of mourning,
>>>> and be close to her, through her work.
>>>>
>>>> And, have you ever heard her reading “A family in brussels”?
>>>> it’s beautiful, she was such a gifted writer, too.
>>>> It’s on CD.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.criterion.com/explore/151-chantal-akerman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08.10.2015, at 20:20, Elizabeth McMahon <elizmcmahon at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I cannot speak for Film maker's Cooperative or Canyon, but The New York
>>>> Public Library has a 16mm print of "Jeanne Dielman" for those who are close
>>>> by, or otherwise interested in seeing it on film. It was distributed at the
>>>> time of acquisition by New Yorker, so it did indeed have a stateside
>>>> distributor, and one with quite a distinguished reputation. If you are
>>>> interested in screening it on site, please call ahead to arrange the time.
>>>>
>>>> Elizabeth McMahon
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Chuck Kleinhans <
>>>> chuckkle at northwestern.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate Gene Youngblood’s observations.  I would point out in
>>>> addition some of the decisions Akerman made which shaped the reception of
>>>> her work.
>>>>
>>>> First, and I think incredibly importantly, was her choice of Babette
>>>> Mongolte to be her cinematographer on Jeanne Dielman.  Mongolte had already
>>>> done the camerawork on Rainer’s Lives of Performers and Film About a Woman
>>>> Who.  Seeing those works as connected by visual sensibility gives the works
>>>> at least a second “authorship” in the cinematographer.
>>>>
>>>> Second, Jeanne Dielman arrived in 1975-6.  It was screened at some film
>>>> centers and then the print left the country.  Yeet during its brief
>>>> appearance it inspired almost all the emerging feminist film makers,
>>>> critics, scholars, teachers, and intellectuals to rave about it.  And the
>>>> writers wrote about it with a strong femiist analysis
>>>>
>>>> I think this was due to at least two factors, One was that feminist
>>>> film criticism was looking for new work that escaped the Hollywood
>>>> expectations.  Remember this is the exact moment when Laura Mulvey’s
>>>> landmark essay on "Visual  Pleasure and Narrative CInema" hit the scene.
>>>> Jeanne Dielman was the perfect film to see after or before reading
>>>> Mulvey..  This was also the time of emerging feminist film festivals,
>>>> feminist film courses in colleges and universities, feminist film
>>>> programming  being a regular part of film center programming, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Second, there was at that time a certain momentum in the women’s
>>>> movement for thinking anew about housework and domestic space.  In the UK
>>>> one high profile group of feminists led a campaign for “Wages for
>>>> Housework”—demanding recognition of women’s unpaid labor.  In N. America
>>>> there was an active discussion of the “double day” and women working
>>>> outside the home but also then being totally responsible for domestic
>>>> chores, cleaning, child-rearing, etc.  So within the political wing of the
>>>> women’s movement there was interest in this and Jeanne Dielman, although in
>>>> one sense one of the “least likely” films to appeal to feminist activists
>>>> unfamiliar with art film narrative in fact when they did get to see the
>>>> film found it often intriguing and made them rethink what feminist film
>>>> might be.
>>>>
>>>> But, as I said, that rare print disappeared from N. America and
>>>> Akermann essentially rejected the genuine enthusiastic audience for her
>>>> film and wasn’t interested in having it placed with some logical upstart
>>>> feminist film distributors nor was she willing to deposit a copy with the
>>>> NY Coop or Canyon, which would have at least kept it alive for those who
>>>> wanted to show it.  I never heard the story from her side of why she made
>>>> this decision.  The gossip I heard was that she had a very high opinion of
>>>> herself and wanted to be treated as a Major European Film  Artist like
>>>> Wenders or Fassbinder.  She was holding out for Big Time art film
>>>> distribution in N. America.  And that never happened.
>>>>
>>>> There’s an excellent (if kind of lopsided by her enthusiasms)
>>>> presentation of that Ackerman moment in Ruby Rich’s book Chick Flicks:
>>>> Theories and Memories of the Feminist Film Movement.
>>>>
>>>> The point being that artists have some role to play in their own
>>>> reputation/success and some decisions end up shaping their critical horizon
>>>> and artistic capital.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 1:26 PM, Gene Youngblood <atopia at COMCAST.NET> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Unless I’m mistaken, the American premiere of Jeanne Dielmann was at
>>>> Filmex in 1976. That’s the Los Angeles International Film Exposition, which
>>>> was the largest festival in the world at that time except for Cannes, which
>>>> we considered to be a market, not a festival. I saw it twice, first on the
>>>> selection committee, then at the festival, where it impressed me even more
>>>> the second time. I met Chantal for lunch immediately after, somewhat
>>>> disoriented that such a reserved, shy little person could have made this
>>>> work of monumental intelligence and power. She was with Lloyd Cohn, whose
>>>> fledgling company, World Artists (I think that’s the name), was the
>>>> American distributor of the film. I met Lloyd ten years earlier when he was
>>>> doing publicity for Monte Hellman’s remarkable westerns, The Shooting and
>>>> Ride In the Whirlwind, which I reviewed in the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner.
>>>> The review attracted a considerable audience for the films (Cameron
>>>> Mitchell took out a full page ad in Variety to thank me and Jack Nicholson,
>>>> who wrote, co-produced and starred in both), and because of that Lloyd was
>>>> “loyal” to me over the years, which is how I ended up having lunch with him
>>>> and Chantal Akerman. Lloyd was a small person too, about the same height as
>>>> Chantal, and I remember feeling conspicuous, being more than a foot taller
>>>> than them, as we entered the restaurant. I don’t remember much of the
>>>> conversation except about Godard and Michael Snow, and how perceptive
>>>> Chantal’s observations were. (As an aside, I prefer her “One Day Pina
>>>> Asked…” over Wim Wenders’ piece on Bausch). I’m not sure about this, but I
>>>> think Lloyd Cohn distributed some of Chantal’s experimental shorts for a
>>>> brief period of time, and maybe The Meetings of Anna, and then I lost track
>>>> of him. I showed Jeanne Dielmann, The Meetings of Anna, Hotel Monterey, Je
>>>> tu il elle, and I’m Hungry I’m Cold in various classes every year for about
>>>> 20 years, first at Calarts, then the College of Santa Fe. There were always
>>>> lively discussions, and a handful of students invariably wrote term papers
>>>> on Jeanne Dielmann or Meetings of Anna or both. Chantal affected me as
>>>> profoundly as she did many others, maybe even a few of my students. By the
>>>> way, if anyone knows what Lloyd Cohn is doing these days, please contact me
>>>> off list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chuck Kleinhans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing listFrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.comhttps://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FrameWorks mailing list
>>>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FrameWorks mailing list
>> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20151010/d3e8d8ad/attachment.html>