Hutton films
Last night, we viewed three Hudson River Valley films by Peter Hutton. I was nervous when Scott MacDonald told us that the first two films, “Landscape for Manon” and “Study of a River,” were fifteen minutes each, in black and white, completely silent, and very slow. I did not expect to enjoy them, and so I was surprised when I did. I was enchanted by the changes in light and movement in each carefully framed shot of the films.
Seeing these two films changed how I viewed and experienced the third film we watched, “Time and Tide.” This film is probably much slower than what I am used to seeing on the screen, but with the first two films still in my mind, I felt that we were moving at an almost overwhelming speed. I also appreciated the colors in “Time and Tide” more than I would normally have. I found myself both enjoying the intense and vibrant colors and missing the lack of color which allowed me to just focus on the light and how it changed the landscape. During the third film, I still thought of light and movement, but I also though of point of view. There were, for example, many shots of different ships on the Hudson. Hutton, the camera, and the viewer were at different times on, above, directly next to, far away and higher than, or far away and at the level of these ships. Each shot was a new experience.
posted by Jenny @ 8:07 AM
2 Comments:
I agree, I thought the films by Peter Hutton were very interesting and they made me more open-minded. When Scott MacDonald described the first two films, “Landscape for Manon” and “Study of a River”, as the slowest and quietest movies we will ever see I was less than thrilled. I'm glad I gave the movies a chance, it only took me a few scenes to start enjoying myself and to appreciate Hutton's unique work. In one of the first scenes a large tree is shown and the lighting Hutton used and the way the leaves were blowing in the wind made it look, in my eyes, like there was a woman in the tree. I'm sure you have all spotted shapes in leaves or clouds and said that looks like an elephant, only to have someone say no it doesn’t it looks like a child sleeping. Hutton obviously didn’t make these leaves blow to and fro so that to my eye it looked like a woman standing there made of leaves. But I never would have noticed something like that in a regular movie. These movies that moved so slow, in black and white with no sound allowed me to really study the little things and I noticed a lot of beautiful things that I would have missed in a typical faster modern day movie. I also enjoyed the third film we watched “Time and Tide”. My favorite scene was the opening one. The camera took us down the river and made it seem like you were flying quickly past all the landscape. Many of the scenes were shot from strange camera angles, and it took a minute to realize exactly what you were looking at. I was pleasantly surprised with Hutton’s films and thought they were thought provoking and interesting.
Like Jenny and Jimmy I had a pre conceived notion that I was going to hate the films. Fortunately, as I watched them my reaction was not so negative. The first movie opened with a series of shots which seemed to be still like an oil painting. Slowly as the light changed or a cloud moved slightly across the screen I realized I was watching a film of live landscapes. Throughout the films I had trouble identifying objects that I was looking at. I never realized how much color and sound influenced perception.
The best example I have of this was a shot that began looking down at a section of river. I could see a shiny object floating across the water from left to right. As I glanced at this object skimming the surface I determined that it was a windsurfer. Only as the shot progressed I realized that what I was looking at was a part of something bigger. What I originally had perceived as the sun shining off the sail of a wind surfing board was actually sun reflecting off the side of the hull of a barge cutting through the Hudson.
Two things stuck out to me about this shot. How could I be so wrong? To me wind surfing is a quiet, peaceful, elegant sport where a person and their board move in unison on the water. At first, the hull of the boat resembled a wind surfer. It was a quiet shiny triangular shaped object gracing across the water. With my tools of perception impaired, missing the ability to see color and hear sound, it was clear to me how the two objects could be confused. If I had color and sound I could have see what I thought to be the sail more clearly and I could have heard the roar of the barge’s engine. With these additional senses I would have been able to realize what I was looking at was not a windsurfer.
After I acknowledged that I was looking at a barge float across the screen another question developed in my head. Is this barge I see on film beautiful? Every other time I see a barge in real life, they are an ugly brown, they crawl loudly along, they dirty the beauty of large bodies of water, and worst of all they are loud! The engines churn as they move their bulky masses towards whatever destination they pursue. Barges are aesthetically horrid objects. How does the barge seem serene in the film?
Without color and sound I was able to momentarily ignore certain notions which construct my negative perception of barges and enjoy the experience. I viewed them, for the time being in a completely different light. Although I enjoyed this experience temporarily I do not believe my opinion of barges will change permanently. Next time I am on the water looking into the horizon in a state of relaxation and my beautiful panorama is interrupted by an ugly brown, noisy barge I will undoubtedly be upset.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home