Underground Film: A Critical History

Underground Film: A Critical History Popular Book, Underground Film A Critical History Author Parker Tyler This Is Very Good And Becomes The Main Topic To Read, The Readers Are Very Takjup And Always Take Inspiration From The Contents Of The Book Underground Film A Critical History, Essay By Parker Tyler Is Now On Our Website And You Can Download It By Register What Are You Waiting For Please Read And Make A Refission For You

Is a well-known author, some of his books are a fascination for readers like in the Underground Film: A Critical History book, this is one of the most wanted Parker Tyler author readers around the world.

➫ [Ebook] ➦ Underground Film: A Critical History By Parker Tyler ➶ – Hookupgoldmilf.info
  • hardback
  • 249 pages
  • Underground Film: A Critical History
  • Parker Tyler
  • 16 February 2017

10 thoughts on “Underground Film: A Critical History

  1. says:

    I much prefer Tyler s Screening the Sexes, which has a much uh colorful tone, but this is a classic, although an occasionally pretentious one I still have no clue what Tyler s definition of surplot means He calls it a pattern of action which approximates but does not reproduce human events as they take place in reality, which is fine and all, but it approximates how and does not reproduce in what ways Then there s this highfalutin Heideggerian crap with Tyler s own italics In filmic space the void itself is a ground, which is only a fancy way of saying that in film negative space is still a surface Mind blown No, not really But still there s plenty good stuff, especially the criticism of Stan Brakhage and this bit on avant garde psychedelica This insidious attitude the Drug Attitude, as I call it does not depend upon actual narcotics but is a psychological idea with a moral force I believe it a great continuing error and trust that somehow the Underground will work out of it by growing up and realizing the responsibilities of art The artistic history of the avant garde has very real models to offer the Underground filmmaker, if he will only understand both their do s and don t s As it is, the New American Cinema notwithstanding, he has to overcome much infantile self indulgence and fashionable camp hauteur A thing may well be groovy and yet far from great Or take this excellent point about artistic progress The point is not that every change must introduce the new that was a dream of the old avant garde The point now is what is usually signified by the term change off Maybe there is nothing new under the sun not even colonizing the moon with human beings for eventually time will probably bring existing science fiction around to actual fact, and that s that Today, not novelty but change off is the avant garde filmmaker s own thing.

  2. says:

    The key word in the title is Critical, and thank god for that Too often, reviews and histories of underground or avant garde arts are little than exercises in boosterism, friends championing friends This seemed to be the case even so in 1969 when the book was first published In this book, Tyler himself says underground criticism of the time amounted to little than blurbing But despite friendships and alliances with many of the filmmakers he discusses here, he manages to cast a demanding and skeptical eye on the underground film scene He was especially harsh on self indulgent, narcissistic pad films a now almost humorously dated term and the lack of any real thought out aesthetic sensibility behind them Most heartening for me was the ambivalence he seemed to have for Stan Brakhage s films, and the honesty with which Tyler was able to write about this, despite an apparently fairly close relationship with the filmmaker I recently rewatched Criterion s first Brakhage collection, and was put off by the essay included with it, as it amounted to little than hagiography by a Brakhage friend and scholar, who took Brakhage s genius as a collective given, without offering sufficient context or explication Tyler s obvious lengthy and serious engagement with the same material yielded much different and complex thinking I enjoy so much underground avant garde whathaveyou art, music and film, but frequently feel conflicted about or just flat out don t care for much of it It s rare to find a similar attitude in art or film historians, understandably, so it was nice to read a book by someone so fully engaged and knowledgeable about film who wasn t afraid to challenge prevailing attitudes and fashions of the time and for the most part, now for the sake of honest criticism and love of the medium Having reread the above, I make it sound like the book is something of a take down of underground film It s far from that There s plenty of praise and encouragement to go with the tsking Tyler s just wise enough to know and brave enough to say not all artists are created equal Like he says, A thing way well be groovy but far from great.

  3. says:

    On the back of my 2nd edition of Sitney s Visionary Film one of the reviewers claims that it s the first serious book that I know of to be devoted to the subject Well. Parker Tyler s bk was earlier it s the 1st one I read It s probably not as in depth as the bks that followed but it still gets across the feeling of there being something important happening out there that s off the mainstream map something hedonistic, critical, inspired, daring. It definitely got me curious about all the movies I had little or no idea how to go about seeing In the back, there s a list of films organized by yrs Throughout the decades since I read this, I ve periodically checked off the films that I ve seen There are still maybe a half to a third that I ve missed As w all Grove Press bks of the time, of wch I ve read many, reading this left me w a feeling a feeling of uncensored access to free thinking, a feeling that s still important to me to this day.

  4. says:

    Quite a meandering, uneven tome At times, it delves quite deeply into ideas that eventually tie back in, but are a little too defuse for a so called critical history of underground film The author definitely has theories ideas and mostly knows how to back them up illustrate them There is no doubt that they are knowledgeable about the subject matter The latter part of the text is infuriating, though Why It is literally this author telling these directors artists what they should have done instead in their films That has no place in film criticism It was just plain weird These are the choices the directors made if you wish they had made different ones, you go ahead make your own I have no special love for the mentioned directors it was all just so jarring Two extreme sticking points Claiming Michael Snow is American for someone so knowledgable, this is incredibly annoying and repeatedly slagging Norman McLaren how do you talk so glowingly about surreal avant garden film while slagging him.

  5. says:

    Tyler is, of course, articulate, erudite, unsentimental and nothing if not critical At his best, he is a juggernaut crashing through the self congratulatory vein of the Underground He wrote the book in 1969 without the privilege of historical hindsight and his scope of vision here is pretty remarkable But the taxonomy he proposes in this book are, for me at least, are very narrowly specific as to have a wide use, not to mention, quite dated I would need to know how his work influences contemporary writing about the Underground to assess it better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *