Author Archive

Comments Comments Off on My (Russell’s) Portfolio

Comments 18 Comments »

My First Reaction to all of this stuff by Vertov was “Wow, this guy is really interesting”. The first thing that stood out to me was in the paragraph where he talks about the literary skeleton of the film. I found this interesting because it makes sense to me. Without the genre of film, what is it? Nothing more than a bunch of images strung together in a line. ” A Literary Skeleton plus Film-Illustrations”. The words and  “images” that Vertov use grabbed hold of me, because there unusual. Vertov’s metaphors and similes held my attention because I’m used to these essays being boring, and drawn out, no colorful language or comparisons, but Vertov’s unusual writing style keeps it interesting.

The next thing that really peaked my interest was his analysis of film. He seems like he either tried really hard to gain something from the newer films of America and the West and the USSR, but no matter how hard he tries, he cannot grasp anything good in them. He states that “The main and essential thing is; The sensory exploration of the world through film”(14). This leads to his description of a perfect eye, more perfect than the human eye at least. An eye that can capture both time and space, and preserve it for all mankind to study. The most important thing about the camera is perception. Vertov talks about how people’s perception from the first person of what they’re doing, and the third person the camera brings us are entirely different, how the camera can capture more going on than the first person eye could ever wish to.

I love the end of this too, where Vertov (who seems to write poems throughout this, to help further his interesting writing) seems to write a whole poem about the camera. It gives the camera a personality, and a powerful one at that, almost God like. It makes you feel the cameras power, what it can do to trick you eye, and even create whats not there. Even mentioning through montage how it can build the perfect human.

Overall i really liked Vertovs writing. It didn’t bore me and overall kept me interested which alot of things seem unable to do.

Comments 1 Comment »

Comments 4 Comments »

As I read through Sherman’s Documenting Yourself, I noticed that she used many correct elements of the academic essay presented to us by. Many good examples of people and media were given in this essay, and it was clearly written. The essay not only started off with a quote from Jorge Preloran, which states “When you know the structure, then you can construct. The essay then follows the quote by stating that “Film is always a construction. Her essay follow this by breaking down documentaries and narration and  as how they are only edited together  pieces of information that can be nothing but objective.

Throughout the essay you don’t really feel a sensation of being lost. She uses clear examples from our culture, and our language.(Some of the other essays i read were confusing because you don’t know what someones talking about when they use a language that’s unfamiliar to you. But when you are given examples you’ve never heard of in a language you don’t understand, it just becomes confusing.) She uses examples of movies that we the reader can relate too. Such as a movie about how children play in one culture (whites). And how they are reacted to by two cultures (whites and blacks). We all know about the race riots and class struggles of the united states circa 1950, so by using an example like this she helps us understand with more ease where the documentarian is coming from. These important building blocks of an essay don’t work well, unless the reader can understand.

She also used alot of terms that were both informative to the reader, but weren’t confusing. Sometimes people use big words to spice up a paper or essay to make themselves look more intelligent than they really are. She uses language that is both descriptive and understandable to the reader while also helping them understand the media. This is important because i know personally if someone is using alot of terminology that I don’t understand I wouldn’t wanna read it.

Overall I think that this essay followed Harvey’s Academic Essay elements well. It was clear, concise, and helped the reader learn while engaging them.

Comments Comments Off on Sherman and Academic Essay Elements

Comments 3 Comments »

i cant figure out how to get it from windows movie maker to  to youtube can you please tell me how professor, or someone who knows how.

Comments 2 Comments »

When I first picked up and began to read Grierson on Documentary, due to its initial length I thought it would be boring. In fact it was quite the opposite. This article was well thought out and written, while being quite informative at the same time. Grierson uses well, clearly explained, and thought out examples of movies so the reader understands them better (as opposed to other articles where no description of the film is provided).

Grierson touches base with a very influential documentary maker named Flaherty, and explains his rules for making a correct documentary. How a documentary must master its material on the spot, and his film must follow “him in his distinction between description and drama”(Grierson p.103). To me this means that Flaherty puts himself into the shoes of the people he makes the documentary about. He lives their lives and customs to hep make his film closer to the real thing than ever before. I personally find this very awesome that one would possibly put himself through hell, to understand what its like to live in another mans shoes. Its one thing to see a film and to make a film and be like wow dose life suck for these people. Its an entirely different, and bolder concept to live the film you’re making.

Grierson then goes on to mention another set of principals you could use to create documentary. These I am not personally fond of. He talks about documentarian Basil Wright, and his use of movement to create a documentary. Grierson goes on to say that although Wright’s work is seemingly monotonous, he dose something special to it to make it original. Now to me using different camera angles doesn’t seem as interesting as a person living out their documentary, but at the same time only being shown written examples dose not permit me to play judge. I’ve never seen either Wright’s films or Flaherty’s films so I’m not going to go into a tirade about how one is better than the other and so on and so fourth.

Overall I think it was a good informative read, that made sense and got across its point to its readers with more ease than some of the other articles we have read.

Comments 6 Comments »

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar