Untitled

When I watched these films for the first time I really had no idea what was going on conceptually. I found myself getting lost in the amount of sensory information being given to me and I think a lot of modern film is like that, for the purpose of being art at least. They just seemed as though they were a dream, like distant memories coming back in short bits without a logical connection. Even though I didn't really understand the film the first time through I really appreciated the work and thought that went into making them, because I find it refreshing when people care about what they're doing and these directors obviously do.

After watching both movies a second time through I still really don't understand what's going on, or what the whole "point" was supposed to be. That being said they still moved me, both directors did a phenomenal job of using the right sounds, frame changes, and subjects their using in the videos to really bring out emotions. In all honesty I believe that as long as the artist is able to make you feel something from their work that feeling it gives is you is always much more important than the message they're trying to communicate in the end anyways. However the one thing in particular that I noticed the second time through was the text in both films. I found it odd that they played it so fast at times you couldn't read it and even over layed text so it was literally impossible to read, but I might just not be sophisticated enough to understand why'd they'd do that anyways!

Personally both of these films made me feel extremely anxious and I think that's in part due to the fact that there is no "classical" plot that I could grasp. There really isn't a beginning or an end, because they just start with some random clip. I also noticed that as both films progressed they both became more and more complex. Sounds were added, effects were added, and in some parts of the movie the scenes jumped rather quickly. This made me feel very uncomfortable, like something wasn't quite right and I think that was the goal of the directors. 

All three of the readings dealt with the subject of copyright infringement which for this class is extremely relevant considering many, if not all, our images come from secondary sources. Each article talked about different aspects pertaining to copyright infringement including the Shepard Fairey and Associated Press case concerning the Hope image, how Janine Gordon sued Ryan McGinley for having similar compositions in his works, as well as the issues concerning sampling in the music industry.  All three articles paint the picture that, so long as there is money to be made, these licensing agencies will come down hard on artists that use their material without their permission.

In the first reading Shepard Fairey used an image of Barrack Obama taken by an Associated Press photographer to create the very well-known Hope image. At first no one knew where Fairey had found the original image, up until two years ago when an investigatory journalist dug up the original. When the Associated Press found out it was their image they weren’t too happy, so in retaliation Fairey sued them on the grounds that he altered the image enough to consider it his own work. They eventually reached a financial settlement and now both parties have rights to use the image.

The second reading tells the story of Janine Gordon and Ryan McGinley, both professional photographers. Janine sued Gordon claiming that Ryan directly referenced her work in 150 of his photographs, some of which were used in a Levi’s ad campaign in 2010. Despite the slight resemblance the images have to one another they are so different in composition that you’d never know if he “copied” her idea. I really think this was a waste of time for Janine, because there are honestly only so many different ways to take a picture and nothing is truly original anymore.

The final reading talked about the mash-up DJ Girl Talk and his use of sampling within his songs. All of the songs he produces infringe on copyrights and the label he releases his music on is called “Illegal Art”, which is a direct jab at the licensing agencies. Even though he’s taunting these record labels to come after him they aren’t willing to, because many copyright lawyers would be willing to take the case for free to change the laws pertaining to sampling in the music industry. If these labels did sue him, Girl Talk is so well known that he would become the poster boy for copyright reform.

Recently I have become really fascinated with the power structure of societies and their use of the media to "persuade" people to think in a certain way. I like to think of it as manipulation though. They flood the news and TV channels with unimportant filler shows, commercials telling us what to buy, and idols to compare ourselves to all the while distracting you from what's really important...AKA living your life. 

In the image you can see a monkey in a dark cage wearing a headset while watching a propaganda ad. The monkey represents how easily a society as a whole can be manipulated to think a certain way. The headset represents how we only hear what the media wants you to hear. The flag in the propaganda ad is made up of magazine covers which represent the idols we have in our society as well as dollar bills which represent how everything regarding TV comes back to power and money. The three figures with smiley faces and the man with the tv head represent how hypnotic the information we receive can be and you can never really know what information is true or not. Lastly the cage is meant to show how we more or less are trapped in this situation.