In lecture today, we watched an experimental film. Having taken many film classes by now, I have seen my fair-share of experimental films. And while I am very interested in film as art, I couldn’t be less interested in experimental film. This film featured a voice-over describing pictures as they burned in an ashtray. It was called “nostalgia”. I can see how you can derive meaning out of the content, and I think I understand the symbolism that it is trying to portray. Even so, I don’t feel like it should be on film. I don’t feel like it needed to shown, now was it trying to entertain its viewers. Those, to me, are the two personal drives to make a film. The first being a message that needed to be shared. This message can be political, religious, or nearly anything one is passionate about. It should just share an ideal for the purpose of spreading its knowledge. This film did not need to be told, though. The message may imply what he is overcoming, but it is not presenting anything for its audience. I’ll explain my thoughts on the film’s meaning shortly. The other personal drive is to entertain; such as a comedy. Nostalgia didn’t even try to entertain. The shot never moved, and the voice over was dry. There is a lot of inaudible moments, leaving the audience to watch the remains of the picture continue to decay.
But the mechanics of the film are purposely this way. What I dislike about it is probably key features to the overall message. To me, the film was about remembering the past, and then letting it go. He recalled such vivid memories of these photographs, and then it went silent as they finished burning. While I may be wrong in my deduction, experimental film often asks the viewer to derive something out of seemingly nothing.