I cannot find this film title in the syllabus so I'm hoping that title is somewhat correct. I found this film to be very entertaining. Mostly this is because I love dogs, but also because I couldn't tear my eyes away from it (I was almost as concentrated as the dogs). It was so simple, but in a different way that, say, My Parents Read Dreams I have Had About Them was. Like so many other works Carl shows us, I felt that My Parents Read Dreams I have Had About Them is simplified with a bit of sarcasm. I feel like the artist is making it to bend the boundaries of what is considered art (kind of like the urinal-turned sculpture sculpture). Perhaps I am wrong, but I didn't get that vibe from Two Dogs and a Ball. I got more of a "Haha, watch this" feeling.
As far as authorship goes, I felt Two Dogs and a Ball was very distinct. If the film was a story, the man with the ball would clearly be the author, the dogs would be his characters and the ball would be the pen that decided their every move. He has complete control over the dogs, mostly because they are ignorant to the fact that he is teasing them (with the good intention of making the film, of course).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Devin,
Good post. You mention an interesting perspective when you say the filmmaker holding the ball is the author because the dogs are being teased. I'd like to hear more about authorship under this notion. How does their unawareness of them being filmed relate to this?
Post a Comment