Back when I had used the example of film adaptations as a form of remix, there was some discussion and hesitation about whether or not this was correct. I seemed to have recently stumbled upon a video (actually a four-part series) entitled ‘Everything is a Remix’, written and produced by Kirby Ferguson, a New York-based filmmaker. Of this four part series, I found part 2 to be the most interesting, as he actually discusses the remix techniques involved in producing Hollywood blockbuster films.
In fact, Ferguson claims that most box office hits rely heavily on existing material – using examples such as Pirates of the Carribean, Hairspray, Transformers, Julie and Julia and Kill Bill (which, if you keep watching after the credits, he reveals is the closest thing to a Hollywood mashup… didn’t know that!). Films from previous generations are continuously told, retold and referenced by other newer films, whether viewers are aware of it or not.
He goes onto argue that even films that claim to be original can also be considered remixes, as they borrow from traditional genres and subgenres. Elements of particular genres (that we have become so familiar with) are appropriated and transformed to make so-called “original” films. Ferguson uses Avatar to illustrate this point, claiming that the film borrows the ‘sorry about colonialism’ subgenre that we see in so many other films that precede it. This is a very interesting point of view and I definitely agree. Thinking back to films that I’ve watched, they all seem to borrow certain motifs and traditions of previous films. However this being said, claiming that no films are in fact original is a bold statement.
Although I’ve pretty much told you exactly what you are about to see, watch it and let me know your thoughts!
Everything is a Remix Part 2 from Kirby Ferguson on Vimeo.
Sorry everyone, I didn't realize that this video had already been posted on the blog! However rather than focusing on the idea of everything as a remix, I'm hoping you'll comment more on the idea of films as remix...
ReplyDeleteOops!
Well, when I was watching this video I was thinking about film in particular so I guess I can still post my comment! While watching this video I started to think about our discussions in class about the difference between a plagiarized work and a remix. While I don't think we ever came to a succinct conclusion, I think we did agree upon the idea that the intentions of the author mattered. Ferguson's discussion of Star Wars in particular made me think about the intentions of George Lucas when we wrote and directed the film. There are an abundant of references that he used in Star Wars, but the question is, did he copy them on purpose or were they simply part of his cultural knowledge which managed to work their way into the film? With some parts of the film, like using sequences from existing films as templates for special effects, the copy was visible and obvious, but that is not the case for all parts of the film. However, I would argue that because of the multitude of references that George Lucas pulled from to create Star Wars, the film could be considered a very successful remix, to the point that it is something new and original.
ReplyDelete