• Before you can add your own film to the site you will need to be a contributing member of our filmmaking community.

    Join the site to remove ads and read more about How to Submit Film.

Does anyone else despise abstract films?

F

funkbomb

Active Member
Please don't consider me a troll, I'm not looking for a heated argument, but I want to put my opinion out there because I've always wanted to know what others thought about this.


--My Sole Opinion--
Over the years I've done filmmaking, I've grown to absolutely abhor the presence of abstract/experimental films. Aside from their blatent attempt (and failure) at hidden meaning and symbolism, they showcase the unattractive side of student filmmaking--visual nonsense.

Every time I watch one, I feel like the writer's brain got nauseous and decided to barf itself out onto the script (Which will probably be made into an abstract film someday anyway). Every 'experimental' video I watch is exactly like a dream, something the nighttime coginitive processes would cook up in deep REM sleep. Do you know what dreams are? They're random splurts of brain activity considered by scientists to be completely devoid of meaning. Sound familiar? Say hello to abstract films!

Ralph Ellison (thanks) was a master at symbolism. "Invisible Man" is considered a masterpiece of black racial segregation carefully sewn into a captivating story. Things didn't have to make sense on the story level; you could always find the meaning inside every detail. What he did in that book is exactly what's lacking in every abstract video I see. Although the writers of those abstracts would like you to think otherwise, there's not a drop of meaning buried in any of them.

I entered my movie one time in a local film festival a few months ago. Although it won, it tied first place with--you guessed--an abstract. Following a series of mysterious and meaningless shots(in true abstract style) the movie ended with "Molly, Jade, Katrina: I will miss you forever." The audience walked away from that movie thinking the girl's friends had died in a tragic car accident. Turns out, the girl had to move from Kentucky to Maryland and missed seeing her friends. The "accident" was just jagged shots of her traveling in the car. She shot herself in a white tiled room with a big white shirt on with her arms crossed so it looked like she was in a straightjacket. While I was watching it I wanted to curl up into a ball and dissappear. It was one of those videos that you want to cringe in empathy for the person because it was so embarrassing to watch.

Why do abstract filmmakers create films and them expect the audience to pry meaning out of them when there is none?

I implore you all; before you decide to make an abstract, consider the option of actually putting real thought into an idea and then press the record button.
 
Firstly, please dont get abstract and experimental confused. They are different, what your talking about is abstract.

Personally i dont really like abstract films as well, for the same reasons. However in saying that, i have seen some abstract films that i really enjoyed, and have watched over and over and over. All im really trying to say, is not to cast a judgement over all abstract pieces, shrowded in a mist of crap is some very finely produced films.
 
WOW! that was SOOO enlightening!! wait- no.. no it was just stupid. realllllly stupid. what- weren't there any reality shows about midgets dating supermodels for you to watch so you decided tocome post? thats a bummer
 
(Tyler disagreeing with someone is fine, but you don't need to be rude)

Anyway, I thoroughly agree, and I'm really glad you brought this up. Here's an example. Last year I applied to Mass College of Art (which is a really funky art school in Massachusetts,) it's apparently really good, but not for film. A professor there told me "If you make films at Mass Art you WILL die penniless." I was shocked. Then I saw their demo reels online. Totally abstract, random, and really, really bad. I was accepted under the condition that I take summer courses to improve my "artiness."

I think I'll pass!
icon_biggrin.gif
 
you're right... my apologies. you clearly were looking for an argument however when you compare somebody's work to >as it was so eloquently stated< barf. so abstract isn't for you... that doesn't mean its devoid of meaning.. more often then not the viewer doesn't pick up on things.. or the filmmaker is to vauge. of course there are horrible films of this genre. of course there are horrible films of every genre... but check out some of the well-reviewd experimentals on this site. if you don't get anything from a film like 'the liars' than i'm saying the fault is with you
 
Invisible Man was not that subtle; most of the symbolism was explicit and heavy-handed. A guy gets his balls chopped off? What could that possibly mean?

And Ralph Emerson didn't write it; Ellison did.
 
Wow... Even if funkbomb WAS looking for an argument (and who the crap knows if (s)he was...) you didn't need to respond in such an inflammitory way. Calling someone and their ideas stupid... Come on man, you're more mature than that... aren't you?
 
Shh...you're right, Ellison was that guy. Shame on me. I knew I got that wrong a few times on my English final. Though I'm pretty sure no one got their extremities removed in that novel.

Ellison is widely known as the best novelist to include symbolism. Even if Ellison's methaphorical use is obvious, this just makes it clearer that blatent symbolism is more appealing to a wider variety of people. That's where I'm saying these abstract films often include shots and scenes that purely dawdle around nothing, and other than being able to say "that made me want to think" the audience can't say much about it because the meaning just isn't there.

Its just that whenever I watch an abstract film, it says to me that the writers wanted to create a movie that would make the audience draw lines and make connections where there are none, and be able to say "wow, that means something, the writers must be real intellectuals" when that clearly isn't the case. And to me, that comes across as laziness and arrogance.

I'm not looking for an argument, honestly. I just wanted to hear other's opinions, even if they were to disagree with what I thought.

I respect the fact that video is a medium for expressing thoughts and opinions and this is what is being done; however I don't think it's right to have it lose meaning and then ask the audience to go look for it.

The Liars is indeed thought-provoking; however I think it's one of those videos that has a different meaning for everyone. Reading the reviews, you find that some thought it was "beautiful", and while some cried, others said "this film made me feel wonderful!" It was creative, in the sense that I would have never thought to have feathers come out of a microwave, but generally seemed random and devoid of symbolism.

"but the secound time around i think i got the message about the fallacies of modern day living!"


"So who were the liars, the stars or the couple? Of course I could be reading it wrong."

I feel like there's a lot of "The Emperor's New Clothes" going on with interpreting abstract films. If you want to get a point across, be sure to make it clear or you're eliminating a lot of your potential audience.
 
in any genre of film you're gonna have good films and bad. I think you shouldn't limit yourself by not seeing anymore out there work. I would recommend seeing NAked Lunch (its a weird movie, but easily comprehensible)
 
Although Naked Lunch is great, I would hardly consider it abstract. The closest hollywood film to abstract would probably be 2001, but even that has a storyline. I honestly could care less for "abstract brilliance". Its not so much about the quality, as Im sure there are some really good ones. But triangles changing colours, or a square turning into a circle is not my cup of tea.
 
Abstract movies force you to think about what you've just seen, but there are other, more cohesive movies that do the same too. A few come to mind, like "The Exorcist", or even Zwigoff's "Ghost World," neither of which are particularily abstract. You're left with lingering emotions even after the movie is done, unlike Another Teen Movie Hi-Jinx where after it's done, you forget about it.

I understand where the author is coming from. Having taken several film theory courses, however, I'm hestitant to say that film has no room for abstract thinking. Film is still a relatively new medium (only about 100 years old!) and it has only been since the 1970s that people began to accept it as having the potential as an art. We shouldn't restrict it to only one form. Just as when sound appeared, many bemoaned at the "ruining" of film - same as color and wide screen. I can't remember who said this, I'll have to look it up, someone very famous, though...but he said that film will go its own course and become what it has always meant to be, and we cannot stop it.

Edit: A-ha, I knew it. It was Andre Bazin's theory of the "Myth of total cinema."
 
most of the abstract films we see in pop culture come in music videos. Some of Gondry's and Cunningham's videos are purely abstract. a lot of techno videos as well.
 
Originally posted by RFranco:
most of the abstract films we see in pop culture come in music videos. Some of Gondry's and Cunningham's videos are purely abstract. a lot of techno videos as well.
Click to expand...

Very true! I forgot about music videos.

It makes sense to use that kind of filmmaking with music, though, because music itself is an abstract form. Like poetry.
 
But don't you think theres two ways to look at it?

Some people come up with things in their mind and than translate it to film. They know their piece but don't want to explain it as that's the concept of "abstract." They imply their vision.

Some people come up with something abstract in their mind, translate it to film, and ask the audience to do the math for them.
 
Funk you should be very careful when you decide to place a rating on an entire genre. You haven't seen every "absrtact" film out there so you can't say that they're all crap. Personally I'm not a big fan of "abstract" films because they just aren't my style. However I'm not going to say that they're all barf because there are lots of "absrtact" films that have great things about them. I was involved in a discussion in this forum not too long ago that was somewhat similar to this. What bothers me is when someone declares their film "absrtact" and then expects people to forgive weak points about their film. Too often it seems that people label their filmi "absract" and then say that the audience sympathizing with the characters is ok or something like that. A film is a film so watch it like a film. But I'm not going to judge an entire film genre because of some bad apples. In fact some of my favorite films I would consider "absract." I consider Lost Highway and Mulholland Dr. to be "abstract." I don't think anyone can really disagree with that and I personally like both films a lot. But then I watched Pi (the movie's title is actually the mathematical symol for Pi; 3.14whatever) and absolutely hated it. I urge you to not hold a grudge against "abstract" films because you've seen some bad ones. We've all seen bad films in every genre but that shouldn't have to ruin the entire genre.
 
Funk it's a reasonable opinion, well aside from the original post stemming from a personal incident tainting your view. (Because you had to share 1st place, god forbid)

Abstract work usually has some really good visual elements that really inspire me as a filmmaker. I understand it takes a bit more effort and all films can't be Indiana Jones, but if your going to be a filmmaker it's more usefull looking for worth in other peoples work even in between failures, as opposed to just lumping them into categories and dismissing them all.

It's a really lazy statement and ignores the idea of an active viewer. And it works both ways, I could picture an art school snob looking at an action picture and dismissing it just because there's a car chase or violence. This would be equally unjust and small-minded.
 
What BLK was talking about, I do with drawing. Its not that I'm purposefully trying to come up with somehting wierd, its just the fact that some brainwave in the subconcious kicked into the concious and I see some wierdo thing.

And dreams are not pointless. Dreams are problem solvers. When your concious state is asleep the subconcious will take all the information and shove it around, and sometimes, pieces click into place, then the new information is created into a dream where the answer is all played out. Then its up to the concious mind to figure it out. Sometimes drawing it out helps me figure it out.
 
Even if Ellison's methaphorical use is obvious, this just makes it clearer that blatent symbolism is more appealing to a wider variety of people.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's true. I guess that was the crux of your argument as to why abstract films are generally bad. I should read more carefully.

Though I'm pretty sure no one got their extremities removed in that novel.
Click to expand...

No, it happened, though I seem to now remember it being an imaginary sequence or something.

But then I watched Pi... and absolutely hated it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Pi sucks. And the math is terrible, too. Incredibly overrated film.

Just as when sound appeared, many bemoaned at the "ruining" of film - same as color and wide screen. I can't remember who said this, I'll have to look it up, someone very famous, though...
Click to expand...

Jerry Bruckheimer said that.

Dam Dirty Apes!
 

Latest posts

Best Reviewed Films

View more items
Back
Top