Panelists: Rich Juzwiak (Fourfour / “I’m Not Here To Make
Friends”), Aaron Valdez (Wreck & Salvage), Duncan Robson (“Let’s Enhance”/“Tumbleweeds”), Andy Baio (mod – Waxy.org)
Baio: Supercuts are a labor of love because of how much work
they require finding all instances of an event, phrase, etc. in some set of
materials. (Sounds a wee bit like
vidding; interesting what kinds of claims to labor producing value get made.)
Aaron Valdez: Bill Clinton,
master auctioneer, saying numbers (I don’t know why this is funny, but it
surely is). Done on real video at
university. Nonlinear video editing
equipment was still very expensive, so he used 60mm found footage, e.g., a compilation of dissolves from
educational films. I’m
Bruce: Bruce Willis. Was able to
monetize a Sarah
Palin supercut and pay for hosting fees.
Rich Juzwiak: Primarily a writer, but the great thing about
the internet is that you can express yourself in the appropriate medium if you
figure it out. Again one of the things I
noticed about his description was the similarity to vidding, here in terms of serendipity/in-process
revisions: once he figured out he was making a supercut, he had to go back and
do a lot more work to reconstitute the thing he now figured out he was making. “I’m Not
Here to Make Friends” is not comprehensive, though people think it is—there
were a bunch of instances of the phrase left out! Not
in Kansas any more cliché: inherently a reference to something else, but no
one quotes the line as it was said in the film.
He discussed his struggle
for credit when mainstream media copied the cellphone service supercut; the
ombudsman thought he was just some random guy from the internet, and he thought
it was insulting that they couldn’t be bothered to click on his YouTube
username to see who he was. Based on
feedback, thinks his audience likes multiple sources instead of something just
from one show (or maybe they just hate Paris Hilton).
Duncan Robson: Visual
effects background, motion capture & crowd simulation. Got asked to make a supercut of tumbleweeds
for an art exhibition. Tumbleweeds: very
different audience than the internet audience.
Couldn’t actually find the “iconic” tumbleweed shot of a tumbleweed
rolling across the screen in an empty town; don’t see them in spaghetti
westerns. (I really would like to know
the “got asked” background—the creation of social/intellectual capital is very
interesting and fraught. I also love the
tumbleweed itself; the video looks like a single tumbleweed journeying through
a huge number of movies, a sort of travelling gnome.)
Baio: what makes a good supercut? (Note that I’m only about 80% confident of
attributions here, since my facial recognition skills are minimal.)
Juzwiak: a good supercut has to be comprehensively
researched, esp. if you’re making it for fans.
Aspect ratios and editing are very important.
Valdez: good to make a statement, instead of pointing out
something that people just say and aren’t cliches particular to cinema/TV. You
could cut together people saying “How are you?” but that doesn’t tell you
anything. Also doesn’t like montage
(best Hollywood kisses, best putdowns)—not even supercuts because there’s no
chance of being comprehensive and it’s so general; go on forever. (Compare his other statements about how you
just need to throw enough at people that they think it’s comprehensive.)
Robson: people are using their own limited DVD collections, and
what he enjoys is going over new movies/shows.
Uses TVTropes and IMDB to collect stuff, but you have to look for
alternative sources. (Ah, the politics
of collecting—and always underneath, the gendering of creativity.)
Baio: most are done by fans, Dr. Who, Star Trek, My Little
Pony (he says there are some amazing MLP ones; I presume by bronies?). Pointing out lazy screenwriting and
tropes. People may not even realize they’re
behaving the same way as everyone else when put in the same reality TV
situation. Showed a video of Obama cut to show every time
he said “spending”—interested in seeing if this starts getting used by
actual political teams. (I thought that already
happened?)
Valdez: Republicans are bad at remix. He gets comments suggesting that he should
make one for Republicans and he says “that’s not my politics, you do it!” but
no one does.
Baio: Clocks supercut lasts 24 hours; has to be seen in
person; not available online. Are
supercuts art?
Valdez: they can be.
More compilation/fan videos; being art was not necessarily the
goal. As experimental filmmaker, had
trouble injecting humor into work, and on the internet he could be himself/not
need to be serious and put total meaning behind all his work.
Juzwiak: thinks of his work as criticism.
Valdez: The boundaries are so limited: where can it go?
There was a supercut of Big Lebowski (basically all the
cursing), Valdez did a supercut
of the porn version of the Big Lebowski (also cursing, limited naughty bits).
Valdez: teens are remaking someone else’s supercut, aware
that it’s been done before but want to try themselves. Used as entry point to
get into remix.
Debut of Robson’s Three Point Landing, which shows a lot of
people landing on one knee with one hand on the ground.
Q: do you ever get a sense someone’s copying your style?
Valdez: no, the form is so specific. How would you steal the style? Some people have claimed that I stole their
style—George Bush without all the words.
There are dozens of these; there are natural responses, and limited
choices of what you can do with one video source. Sarah Palin: someone did a similar video. If you’re making remix, you can’t complain
about emulation.
Juzwiak: only has a problem when someone has taken his
statement/concept—or Jay Leno copying Taylor
Swift looking surprised when she won awards without attribution. He’d used YT source and they needed HD
quality sources, so they found them and edited them to match his. Leno says “we
put this thing together,” which was totally true and yet false at the same
time. The controversy was actually great
because it got a lot more exposure.
No comments:
Post a Comment