#Filmic Labels

[wellofdean]

I read your post about Supernatural being queer somehow from season 1 and I have two questions.

1. Don't you think it straight-appropriates the word "queer" to say it just means "not normal"? That argument seems disingenuous to me, and a lot of us want representation, and to see that word applied to explicit depiction of queer sexuality, and it's a cheat that they don't. Queer studies did start as the study of queer sexualities and the experience of queer people.

2. Are you saying that the makers of Supernatural intended for it to be "flesh on queer bones"? Do you think they intentionally sat down to tell a queer story?

Those are good questions my anonymous friend. Thank you for asking. Here are my thoughts:

To answer your first question: no, I don't think it appropriates anything. Here's why: firstly, if we're talking about sexuality and gender, it's queer 101 that no one owes anyone a justification of their queerness, and not everyone who is queer is interested in labeling it or making it legible to you, and they have no obligation to do so, and not doing so doesn't make them any less queer. Furthermore, some people who are queer are not interested in sex, so what about them?

All of that together is why, for me, the entire queer project is much more deeply about non-compliance with hegemony, and specifically with hegemony around gender roles, sexuality and to put it under a big umbrella, patriarchy, than it is about who you fuck. Those things extend into so many other aspects of life that I think you can easily talk about "queering" a very wide range of topics, and possibly? ANY TOPIC.

You are responding to this post, I think, and in it, I made a choice to talk about family and hunting, and our heroes roles and characterizations in that, and did not talk about gender shenanigans or sexuality, because my point was that even before we get to anything to do with it, Sam and Dean are immersed in a queered world in a fundamental, structural way. That said, I assure you that if you go back into season 1 of Supernatural, you will find LOADS that could be said about gender and sexuality, too. As well as other things, and a particularly important area, as @ironworked pointed out in the tags, is blue collar/white collar class issues.

As I said, the depth of queerness in Supernatural is actually dizzying just in terms of the story's BONES to say nothing of how they flesh it out. Queerness is about deviation from the norm. It's about rebellion and disobedience against hegemonic systems for the sake of personal authenticity and love.

Think about Cas for a minute. Cas's whole story is that he rejects his role in a hegemonic heaven. He rebels for love, and that is pretty explicit as early as season 4 when he tells Dean "We're making it up as we go". Fellas, that is THE QUEEREST SHIT EVER even if he didn't do it for Dean, and like... HE DID IT FOR DEAN. Cas did not have to tell Dean he loved him for me to know it, and for Cas to be a deeply queered character. When he DID say it, I wasn't the least bit surprised he was in love with Dean, because seriously, we been knew. I was only surprised I got to have the immense pleasure of hearing him say it and looking at Dean's face while he took it in. Jesus. I will NEVER RECOVER.

This is my perspective on representation in Supernatural: It's excellent, and I relate to, and feel seen by it as a queer person. Nobody needs to get fucked on the maps table for me to do the math that this is a queer story. It is very, very, very thoroughgoingly canonically queer in so many ways, and not all of them are to do with sex. I think some fans will only allow it to be called queer if dudes make out in it. I am not one of those fans.

As to your second question, I think there is a wealth of evidence in the filmic oeuvre of Eric Kripke to suggest that as an artist and a writer, he is concerned or maybe even preoccupied with masculinity issues and issues around family, and around the way patriarchy fucks men up. So, yes. I think he knew what he was doing and he knew that queerness was part of the mix. For fucks sake, it's a family of men who hunt monsters. That is very fucking on the nose. Do I think he kicked off Supernatural in 2005 planning a 15 year operatic queer romance between Cas and Dean? No. I don't think anyone planned for it to go as long as it did, and it's a matter of record that some things were influenced by fan response, actors' chemistry, different writers and showrunners' preferences and etc. What I will say is that when they had a choice to "straighten shit out" or lean into the queerness, they fucking leaned in, nearly EVERY TIME. Like, it's pretty amazing how consistently they lean the fuck in.

I'll admit -- I wasn't watching it with those eyes the first time, and I didn't give it much real estate in my mind when I watched it as it aired from 2006 to the end, but the last three episodes reshaped it for me and made me angry, and also made me need to watch it all again, this time with an explicitly queer lens, and BOY HOWDY let me tell you this: the Supernatch rewatch journey is a wild and wonderful trip to Queertown. It is legit more difficult to argue that Dean is straight than it is to argue that he is queer. There is a full on CORNUCOPIA of story evidence to support that read and relatively little that convincingly counters it on the straight side, and that starts right at the beginning, when they bend pretty baby Dean over a police car in episode one, and he smirks insouciantly in his lip gloss. Do I think everyone involved knew how that looked? Sexy, submissive and a bit gay?

YES I DO.

[bremser]

Matthew Barney’s Self-Lubricating Frames

A small, lingering question I’ve had for 20 years: what is a “self-lubricating frame”? At the Guggenheim "Cremaster" exhibit and later exhibits, I wondered about this phrase on the label cards of Barney’s film stills, with custom frames, they are described as “chromogenic print in self-lubricating frame.” Perhaps easily answered, but because I wasn’t holding a phone connected to the internet in the museum back then, never answered.

Recently I went to a screening of Matthew Barney’s “Cremaster 3” (2002), with a Q&A between Barney and Martine Syms. Nostalgia lured me to Santa Monica, as I haven’t seen the complete 3-hour film since seeing the entire cycle at San Francisco's Castro Theater in 2003.

While the earlier films retained a video look, "Cremaster 3" (the final film) must have been shot on one of the better HD DV formats of the era at 24P, because it looks very filmic, the degraded 35mm print we watched certainly contributed to that vibe.

If you are new to Barney’s work, his long-term projects like "Cremaster" have sculptural and architectural aspects. Some sculptures could be construed as props and parts of a set for performance. In a gallery setting they are firmly sculpture. A film of the performance becomes its own highly edited and crafted artifact, which is then used in the spaces that exhibit the objects. 

How do framed photographs fit into this system? As with the films, they are artifacts of the performance, a Barney exhibit might have the sculpture (often quite large) in the center of a gallery space, with the framed photographs on the walls, in the same way a video monitor might be on a wall with the dangling headphones.

Barney cites "Cremaster" as beginning in 1994, but this framed football magazine is from 1991, with what became the Cremaster logo applied in the center. This example suggests these framed photographs exist as collectables with some connection to how a sports or music fan collects still images of action, or a cinema fan would collect a production still.

Along with vaseline or beeswax, self-lubricating plastic as used in sculpture or framed photographs can be considered one of Barney's core materials. Was it selected due to the fact it resembles beeswax? Here's another 1991 example, with a black and white silver print.

The "Cremaster"-era prints themselves are exquisitely lit and printed, mostly color, many seem to be photographed by Michael James O’Brien, though I don't recall ever seeing his name on a museum or gallery label. The photographer is like the fabricator of the frame, a craftsperson Barney hires to execute the object. My recollection is they are printed luxuriously matte, which works well with the creamy frames. The "Cremaster 3" prints are of larger dimensions that became popular at the fin de siècle with Gursky, or more relevant to Barney as his own lead actor, the portraits of Rineke Dijkstra. These are titled film stills, the convention of the Cremaster stills seems to be “movie : subject.” (e.g. Cremaster I: Orchidella).

My memory of the framed Cremaster photographs is that they were of somewhat uniform size and look: a creamy beeswax plastic, in line with the other sculpture you might see in his exhibits, no sharp edges, but not particularly different from other plastics you might encounter in our modern wonderland of PFAS.  When I first read "self-lubricating frame," I assumed it was partially a joke, a reference to petroleum jelly/ vaseline, one of Barney’s other preferred materials. Or perhaps lubricated condoms.

Looking online at the auction houses, it appears my memory was way off, there were many variations in size, shape and even color. Ireland is a core part of the "Cremaster" mythology, and this "Cremaster 4" print is in delightful Shamrock Shake green.

After that screening of "Cremaster 3," I went on the typical bender of reading old blog posts and writings on the topic. There’s a 2004 doc streaming on Kanopy (the library video app, excellent for art documentaries), where the NYT art critic Michael Kimmelman walks through the Guggenheim Cremaster exhibit with Barney answering questions, explaining references, personal and mythical, cutting to scenes from the relevant films. About nine minutes into the doc, my question is answered. Barney explains about a sculpture they are looking at: “[it's] high density polyethylene, from the same family as Teflon is from, has a resistance to friction. And in that way it’s a self-lubricating plastic, in that it generates its own lubrication.” 

OK! So "self-lubricating" is a description for a class of industrial plastic products, which Barney has fabricated his frames of and adopted the phrase. "Self-lubricating plastic frame" is more accurate if more mundane sounding. There's no liquid aspect to it, but if we were able to rub at it, in a repetitive fashion, could we perhaps notice it was different? It's a specific material - not a condom joke, or even like using the word "giclée" to gussy up "ink jet" print.

This material is described as:

solid lubricants are embedded as microscopic particles in millions of tiny chambers in the fiber-reinforced material. From these chambers, the plastic bushings release tiny amounts of solid lubricant during movement.

Another description of how it works once molded into an industrial form:

The bearing achieves this by transferring microscopic amounts of material to the mating surface, creating a film that lubricates and reduces friction over the entire length of the rail or shaft. 

When you read this and see some of the examples of how it's used in actual products (Linear Bearing for 8mm rod pictured above), this wasn't selected by Barney just because it resembles beeswax, but because conceptually it's a classic Barney material. A plastic, honeycombed with microscopic bits of lubricant! There's an added tension looking at these objects, knowing the material is designed for friction, but will likely never experience it. After the organic forms are molded, the films are shot, the stills are taken, the photographs mounted in the frame, they will only ever be handled by people wearing white gloves.

 (Previously on the topic of artist's frames: Robert Mapplethorpe’s “Kitchen Sink", 2016)

[jessesthesis]

Tacita Dean, Ship of Death, 2001

SUMMARY

Ship of Death belongs to a portfolio of twenty black and white photogravures with etching collectively entitled The Russian Ending. The portfolio was printed by Niels Borch Jensen, Copenhagen and published by Peter Blum Editions, New York in an edition of thirty-five; Tate’s copy is the fifth of ten artist’s proofs. Each image in the portfolio is derived from a postcard collected by the artist in her visits to European flea markets. Most of the images depict accidents and disasters, both man-made and natural. Superimposed on each image are white handwritten notes in the style of film directions with instructions for lighting, sound and camera movements, suggesting that the each picture is the working note for a film. The title of the series is taken from a convention in the early years of the Danish film industry when each film was produced in two versions, one with a happy ending for the American market, the other with a tragic ending for Russian audiences. Dean’s interventions encourage viewers to formulate narratives leading up to the tragic denouements in the prints, engaging and implicating the audience in the creative process. Dean’s interest in narrative and the mechanisms of the film industry are also evident in her other work. Her installation Foley Artist, 1996 (Tate T07870) depicts cinematic sound engineers recording acoustic effects for a short soundtrack. The Roaring Forties: Seven Boards in Seven Days, 1997 (Tate T07613) is a series of chalkboard drawings that use the conventions of the filmic storyboard to suggest dramatic events taking place in tempestuous waters of the southern Atlantic Ocean. The Uncles, 2004 (collection of the artist) is a film about the artist’s own family connections to the first two Chief Executives of Ealing Studios, Basil Dean (1888-1978; Chief Executive 1931-37) and Michael Balcon (1896-1977; Chief Executive 1937-59). The grainy black and white source image for Ship of Death shows a waterlogged boat in a stormy sea. Water cascades over the sides of the vessel, and the violent pitch of the waves has rendered the mast a dark blur. In its impressionistic depiction of a tempestuous seascape the photograph recalls the work of Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775-1851; see A Disaster at Sea, circa 1835, Tate N00558). The image also relates to Dean’s own fascination with adventures and misadventures at sea (see Disappearance at Sea, 1996, Tate T07455). Dean’s notations superimposed on the found image emphasise the fiction that the picture is the still from a film. At the top left corner are the words ‘last scene’ and the work’s title. A shrouded figure is highlighted with the legend ‘ferryman’. ‘Slow movement’ suggests a long camera pan across the scene. The bottom right corner includes more allusive references to the image. The water is labeled ‘Styx’ and an arrow pointing off towards the right bearing the words ‘exit’ and ‘Hades’ suggests the ship’s descent to the underworld. The phrases ‘bye bye’, ‘it’s over’, ‘whence they say that no man ever returns’ and ‘end’ reinforce the finality of the ship’s fate.

[maharshipackaging]

The Rising Demand for Filmic Labels in Modern Packaging

In today’s competitive packaging landscape, the demand for premium, durable, and aesthetically appealing labeling solutions is higher than ever. Among the top contenders in this space are Filmic Labels, which are gaining traction across multiple industries for their superior performance, versatility, and visual appeal.

Unlike traditional paper labels, filmic labels are made from synthetic materials like polypropylene and polyethylene, offering greater durability and resistance to moisture, chemicals, and abrasion. This makes them an ideal choice for industries that require high-performance labels that not only look good but also last longer under challenging conditions.

One of the most prominent applications of filmic labels is in the alcoholic beverage sector. Labels for Liquor must withstand refrigeration, condensation, and rough handling during shipping and storage. Filmic labels offer the resilience needed to maintain their integrity and design throughout the product lifecycle, making them the preferred choice for premium liquor brands aiming to maintain brand image and readability.

Globally, there is a surge in demand for reliable Filmic Labels Manufacturers who can deliver customized, high-quality solutions at scale. These manufacturers are continuously innovating with finishes like gloss, matte, and soft-touch, as well as specialty options like Pearlized Filmic Labels, which add a luxurious shimmer perfect for high-end packaging.

Not only are manufacturers expanding, but Filmic Labels Exporters are also seeing growing opportunities as international brands seek consistent, regulation-compliant labeling options. Exporters play a vital role in bridging the gap between cutting-edge label production and global demand, especially in sectors such as pharmaceuticals, personal care, and beverages.

Another exciting innovation in this realm is the use of Polyethylene Labels, a type of filmic label that provides superior flexibility and resistance, making it excellent for products with curved surfaces or squeezable containers. These labels adhere well, resist scuffing, and stay intact even when subjected to stress or environmental factors.

The umbrella category of Film Labels also includes types like Metalized Labels, which are particularly popular in industries looking to create an eye-catching, reflective effect. These are commonly used as Labels for Beverages, adding premium appeal to water bottles, energy drinks, and sodas.

Besides mainstream uses, niche applications like Cassette Labels are also on the rise, especially in sectors such as healthcare, biotechnology, and audio/visual storage. Cassette labels require high clarity and print resistance—qualities filmic materials offer in abundance.

As packaging continues to evolve into a blend of functionality and brand storytelling, companies are increasingly partnering with Filmic Labels Suppliers who provide end-to-end solutions—from material selection and printing to finishing and logistics.

Ultimately, when it comes to choosing between traditional paper labels and high-performance filmic solutions, the question isn’t “why filmic?”—it’s “why not?”

Whether you're a brand looking to stand out on crowded shelves or a manufacturer aiming to meet diverse packaging challenges, filmic labels offer the modern solution your product deserves.

[chemlineglobal]

Adhesive Label Stocks | Industrial adhesive Manufacturer

TYPES OF PAPER Label Stock

UNCOATED (Maplitho, Vellum) : Gun Labels , Book Labels

MID GLOSS (Chromo Paper) : Product Labels

GLOSS COATED (Mirror coat , Cast coated , Cast Gloss) : Liquor Labels

COLORED PAPERS : Promotional Labels

THERMAL TRANSFER : Barcode

TYPES OF PAPER Label Stock

DIRECT THERMAL: Barcode THERMAL BOARD : Air Line Boarding Pass WET STRENGTH : Liquor Labels for Ice Bucket Application TAMPER EVIDENT : Excise Label on Liquor Bottle TYRE & ROUGH LABELLING : Tyre , Jute Bag, Army Uniform, Shoes

TYPES OF FILMIC Label Stock

PP White : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care PP Clear : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care PP Silver : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care

Press ure Sensitive Label Stock

Chemline provides superior quality Chromo Label Stock CGH 8226 to be used-

Home Care Personal Care Pharmaceuticals Automobile Wine & Spirit General Purpose > Label Application CGH -8226 provides the best adhesion on Glass & Plastic Surfaces

[psatalk]

UPM Raflatac's sustainable label stock solutions in India

UPM Raflatac offers high-quality self-adhesive paper and film products, helping brands, designers, and printers in selecting the optimal label to bring their packaging designs to life. Through its innovative solutions, the company aims to enhance the sustainability and circularity of the label material's value chain.

In India, UPM Raflatac – which opened a new slitting and distribution terminal in Mumbai in March 2024 – provides a range of products, including general category chromo label stock, filmic, and specialized application labels, catering to various industries such as food, pharma, logistics, FMCG, retail, textile, wines, spirits, beverages, durable and automotive segments, said Suresh Valecha, country manager – India, UPM Raflatac. 

“Alongside facilitating transactional exchanges with converters, we offer value-added services for label customization and developing tailored products to critical applications. Our sustainable approach aims to boost production efficiency while minimizing customer pain points and ensuring satisfaction,” Valecha added.

UPM Raflatac is supplying these products in the entire Indian subcontinent along with Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka with dedicated sales and marketing teams based in India, Valecha said, adding that all major converters and end users in India make up their customer base.

Sustainable label stock solutions for the Indian market

“Our commitment to sustainability allows our customers to provide the best sustainable options to consumers without compromising end-product performance. We are contributing to a critical mission – a future beyond fossils. Sustainability is at the core of how we operate,” he added.

UPM Raflatac is contributing to UPM's target to reduce carbon emissions by 30% by 2030 in its value chain, operations, and products, with the ultimate aim of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, he said. “In India, we offer 100% FSC-certified products, ensuring the highest standards of sustainability. Employing the principles of reduce, recycle, renew, and reuse, we empower brand owners and printers to make a positive impact with sustainable labels,” he added

UPM Raflatac actively reduces label stock thicknesses to alleviate the burden on our renewable resources and minimize paper/film consumption throughout the value chain. In addition, the company's focus extends to facilitating the reuse of packaging containers across various industries, including glass, PP, HDPE, LDPE, or PET types. UPM Raflatac has also introduced a wash-off adhesive product range for glass and PET containers, along with a specially designed adhesive (PURECYCLE) for HDPE/LDPE containers.

In India, the company has introduced 100% recycled-based chromo label stock, which incorporates 30%, 70% or 90% recycled content based on PP/PE/PET, tailored for different industries. UPM Raflatac's recycled portfolio holds certifications from RECYCLASS and APR, along with food-grade certification for future applications in food secondary packaging in India, Valecha shared.

UPM Raflatac's latest innovation, Forest Film, is produced using 100% non-renewable sources, offering a sustainable alternative that reduces dependency on renewable resources across packaging applications, he told Packaging South Asia.

New slitter terminal in India

UPM Raflatac opened a new slitting and distribution terminal in Mumbai, India in March 2024. The new facility is aimed at further improving service and quality to UPM Raflatac’s customers and strengthening the relationships in the region.

“Customers welcomed the step of the new world-class terminal, which will enhance production capacity, reduce turnaround time, leading to better service, shorter lead times, and most importantly happier customers,” Valecha said, adding converters and end-users are welcome to visit the new terminal and see for themselves what goes on behind the curtains of label-stock production, conversion, and deliveries.

“India is in a very good space now, whether it is concerning the economy, consumer spending or industry growth. We have a huge consumer base with very low packaging per capita consumption as compared to the rest of the world,” Valecha shared.

“Packaging and labels are an integral part of products, and consumers want exquisite and sustainable packaging. So, we want and will cater to end-users in all parts of South of Asia. We keep a tab on growth engines and on accelerating revenues to set up the base soon other than in central India,” he concluded.

[lstine919]

Analytical Application 6

Stereotype: 

“Stereotype” is the dominant perception of a group of people based on their historical and cultural representations in society. Shohat and Stam attribute the stereotype with Memmi’s “mark of the plural”, in that any negative behavior by any member of the oppressed community is instantly generalized as typical.”(1) Stereotypes are most commonly placed upon marginalized groups by groups in power. Shohat and Stam also outline the power that stereotypes hold, claiming that they contribute to the societal conversation by “revealing oppressive patterns of prejudice”, “highlighting the psychic devastation inflicted by systematically negative portrayals on those groups assaulted by them”, and “​​​signaling the social functionality of stereotypes.”(2) Through these examples, Shohat and Stam effectively suggest that stereotypes are embedded deep within human society and interaction. 

One particular way in which stereotypes are prevalent in everyday life is through the media.  In Peter Pan (1957), the “What Makes the Red Man Red?�� scene includes several stereotypes about Native Americans, painting them in a singular, misrepresentative light. The Native Americans are starkly visually contrasted with the white protagonists through the color of their skin. The characters literally have red skin, a drastic overdistinctivization over the differences in skin color between Native Americans and white Europeans. This unrealistic skin-coloring plays into historical stereotypes of Native Americans within twentieth-century culture (think the “Washington Redskins”). John mentions to Wendy that Peter Pan made the Chief “heap glad”, and Wendy replies that “he certainly doesn’t look ‘heap glad’.” This exchange reifies two more stereotypes of Native Americans: a lack of understanding regarding the English language, and an overexaggerated unemotional stoicness. As the scene progresses, the Chief smokes a pipe and passes it around. The “peace pipe” is another prevalent stereotype in society regarding the activities of Native Americans. John inhales and becomes green in the face, which weaponizes this stereotype into the notion that Native Americans partake in activities dangerous for children. This villainizes Native Americans within society and further alienates them from the cultural practices of the white children in this story. Furthermore, the presence of this scene in a children’s film is particularly dangerous, as children’s perceptions can be easily influenced by the media, causing them to view the marginalized group within society the same way as they view them within the text.

Eurocentrism:

Eurocentrism is the hegemonic domination of European practices and worldviews across the globe. Regarding media, Eurocentrism is expressed through many filmic elements, including the language of dialogue. Shohat and Stam write that “English, especially, has often served as the linguistic vehicle for the projection of Anglo- American power, technology, and finance.”(3) The use of English in films establishes a dominating cultural tradition over viewers. Inversely, “Eurocentrism of audiences can also inflect cinematic production,”(4) as the eurocentrism dominant within culture already can either consciously or subconsciously affect the media created by the culture.

Eurocentrism is incredibly prevalent in the “Everybody wants to be a Cat” scene from The Aristocats (1970), as it reinforces a European cultural superiority over the viewer and the characters within the scene. The title of the film comes from the term “Aristocrat”, which is a word used to describe upper-class bourgeois French culture. The very label placed on the cats themselves establishes them as luxurious Europeans, imposing their lavish lifestyle and joy upon the viewer. The song “Everybody wants to be a Cat” furthers this attempt to make the viewer envious of their lifestyle, as it reinforces a life of ease and playfulness that is seemingly only attainable in upper-class Paris. The specific breed of cats present in this film are very European (other than the horribly-racist representation of a Siamese cat), and there is an exclusion of cats that come from other parts of the world, which presents an exclusionary narrative of European feline superiority. The clothes the cats wear, bowties and bowler hats, are also directly derived from European culture, and so are the instruments played: the piano, trumpet, and harp are all primarily used for European classical music. The background of the scene is filled with European-style luxury goods such as candle wicks, mirrors, and picture frames. The white Cat is posited as a creature of beauty, and she has a French accent, contributing to the idealization of European-ness. This scene embodies Eurocentrism by placing European cultural products up on a pedestal, painting a picture of Parisian life as all play and no work, generating a self-imposed superiority of lifestyle upon the viewer.

Orientalist Theory: 

Orientalist theory is the emphasis of difference between the East and the West, constructed in order for the West to appear superior and dominant to the Orient. Said writes that “Orientalism is not an inert fact of nature,”(5) that it is not a tangible thing. It is simply perpetuated by the Occident for their own domination. He claims that “Orientalism is premised upon exteriority,”(6) meaning that Orientalism exists on the foundation that the East is thought of as a distant and exotic land compared to the West. 

Orientalist theory is exemplified in The Lady and the Tramp (1955) by the Siamese Cats, as their otherness within the environment of Western culture poses them as an orientalized subject. The scene takes place in Aunt Sarah’s apartment, which is located in the Occident, while the Siamese cats come from the region deemed the “Orient”. They are introduced through their sneaky pestering of Lady, as they remain unseen inside their basket. This provides the viewer with a mystery regarding the cats’ identity, parallel to the mysterious exoticization of the Orient in dominant western culture. The cats emerge from the basket slowly, similar to the stereotypical south Asian activity of snakes being charmed, that reinforces the mystique of these characters. The very polarization of dog and cat also reinforces orientalist values, as dogs are often thought of as more expressive, while cats more introspective and brooding. The cats are illustrated with slanted eyes and front teeth that jut out, recalling a longstanding stereotype regarding an exoticized appearance of people from east Asia. The cats are mischief-makers, which both serves and subverts an Orientalized perception. On one hand, the cats’ delinquency further alienates them from the obedience of Lady and the order of the rest of the Occidental-style home. On the other, these cats act in rebellion, which goes against the notion within Orientalist theory that Oriental subjects are controlled by Western strictures. While their rebellion claims an autonomy of sorts, the overall behavior and appearance of the Siamese cats contributes to an “otherness”, perpetuating Said’s Orientalist Theory.

Essentialism:

Essentialism is the simplification of the representation of a certain group, caused by a one-sided reception of the portrayal of those groups within popular culture. Shohat and Stam write that essentialism occurs when “less subtle critics reduce a complex variety of portrayals to a limited set of reified formulae,”(7) that the concept arises from an overly-narrow view of diverse representations, fitting one’s perception of a group of people into a previously-established outlook. Hall details the dangers of this essentialism, as “It sees difference as ‘their traditions versus ours,’”(8) using basic, one-sided stereotypes for division. 

Essentialism occurs in the “When I See An Elephant Fly” scene from Dumbo (1941) through the one-sided portrayal of the crows. The crows are portrayed as lazy, cigar-smoking jokesters who sit around and poke fun at Dumbo. This portrayal is eerily similar to the “Coon” stereotype outlined by Shohat and Stam, in which black people are portrayed as harmless nuisances that are present in the story for no purpose but the audience’s quick entertainment.(9) The very comparison of black people to crows that is made within this scene essentializes a public perception of black people, and regards them as loud-mouthed entertainers. Furthermore, on IMDb, the leading crow’s name is identified as “Jim Crow”, a stereotypical personification of the laws put in place to oppress black Americans during this time.(10) Hall writes that “The essentializing moment is weak because it naturalizes and de- historicizes difference, mistaking what is historical and cultural for what is natural, biological, and genetic.”(11) While this representation of difference is not historical or cultural but instead misrepresentative and inaccurate, the creators of Dumbo do use it in a way to portray black culture in a negative light. Dumbo’s creators emphasize this polarization by the difference in demeanor between the crows and Dumbo— the protagonist’s shy demeanor only brings out the over-the-top antagonism of the crows. Shohat and Stam write that “Such reductionist simplifications run the risk of reproducing the very racial essentialism they were designed to combat.”(12) By portraying black people in this generalized manner, Dumbo reifies certain historical negative perceptions and essentializes the crows and their characteristic opposition to Dumbo.

Cultural Dominant: 

The Cultural Dominant is a shift in the prevailing set of values and customs that are impressed upon the people of a specific place by the majority population. Hall defines the cultural dominant as the result of “the global postmodern,” which marks “an important shifting of the terrain of culture toward the popular.”(13) Hall believes that the cultural dominant represents popular belief, and that culture itself is welcoming popular belief more and more into the confines of its definition. He mentions that “This decentring or displacement opens up new spaces of contestation and affects a momentous shift in the high culture of popular culture relations,”(14) meaning that the cultural dominant has paved the way for popular culture’s ability to be placed at the forefront of society, rather than “high” culture that has historically been prioritized. 

The inner-workings of the Cultural Dominant are present in the “I Wanna Be Like You” scene from The Jungle Book (1967) through animals’ attempted assimilation of the practices and characteristics of another species. The main monkey, King Louie, begins the song with the lyric “I’m the king of the swingers/the jungle VIP”, establishing his position of cultural dominance within his space. The scene takes place in a ruined temple that has become the monkeys’ primary domain. Since the monkeys dominate the area, they are the ones with all the power. Mowgli is the only human present, which places him as an other, seeking the dominant traits needed in order to be a part of the area’s culture and ultimately gain social capital. One specific shot shows him emulating the trot of an elephant. In the story of The Jungle Book, elephants are thought to have great power and influence, as they were the ones who made the jungle landscape look how it does now. Mowgli’s desire to become one of them supports their cultural dominance. This hierarchy is toppled on its head by the fact that the song describes King Louie himself wanting to be more like Mowgli. Louie subverts the cultural dominant and allows for those on the societal periphery (Mowgli, in this case) to have influence, adopting Hall’s theory that as society moves toward the cultural dominant, “marginality, though it remains peripheral to the mainstream, has never been such a productive place as it is now.”(15) King Louie, made powerful through the popularity of his species, envies Mowgli, who is on the outskirts of popular culture, which marks a shift in the societal framework of the jungle towards that of the cultural dominant. 

Bibliography:

1 Ella Shohat and Robert Stam, “Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation” in Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the media” (London: Routledge, 1994), 183

2 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 198

3 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 191

4 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 186

5 Edward W. Said, Orientalism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978), 12

6 Said, Orientalism, 28

7 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 199

8 Stuart Hall, “What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture?” in Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies (London and New York: Routledge, 1996), 475

 9 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 195

10 “Dumbo: Quotes”, IMDb, 4/25/24, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033563/quotes/item=qt0424366&ref_=ext_shr_lnk

11 Hall, What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture?, 475

12 Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism and the Struggle Over Representation, 199

13 Hall, What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture?, 469

14 Hall, What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture?, 469

15 Hall, What is this ‘black’ in black popular culture?, 470

@theuncannyprofessoro

[letragraphix]

Lubricant Labels Printers in India -Letra Grpahix

Letra Graphix is an ideal place for superior lubricant label printing in India! With a focus on accuracy and originality, we create labels that effectively convey the quality of your goods. Improve the visibility of your brand with our custom printing options.

Call us today : +91-2764666602

[audiovisionacupuncture]

Surreal

The word “surreal” today mostly refers to experiences that are dreamlike and strange, but it can also refer specifically to work of artists that were part of the surrealist movement of the 20th century. I do not like the second definition, as strict artistic labels and definitions do not interest me creatively. I will be pulling on work from surrealist artists, but for the purposes of this post, I will instead focus on work that feels incongruous and dream like.

I think that the challenge with dreamlike experiences is that they’re often boring. Dreams have no stakes and there is often no relationship between what is occurring. Replicating that exactly can create work that feels pointless. Maintaing audience engagement without necessarily conforming to a traditional narrative structure, is a key goal in any surreal work that I do.

Corecore

It’s difficult to select one corecore video, because they are all so short and diverse, so I’m just going to link to the TikTok hashtag. They are TikToks that splice videos, usually with little regard to traditional composition and narrative flow. It is more about creating a mood like a digital impressionist collage. They often include some kind of reflection on the internet, society, or contemporary culture.

It is a common technique to use part of an actual TikTok, so when you are scrolling you think it’s a normal video, and then when the edit begins it gives you this feeling that’s very hard to describe. It’s like being pulled out of your body, seeing yourself from the outside. It makes me reflect on myself, and understand the unreality of that moment, scrolling absentmindedly on TikTok. Many corecore edits are meant to convey sadness, but I think my favourites are ones that try and portray a broader extent of human emotion, just filtered through the surreal nature of modern life.

Much of the surreal content I’ve researched is from the 20th century, like Dadaism. I think corecore responds to the surrealness of everyday, 21st century life and the speed at which we are exposed to new stimuli.

Pinkcore

Pinkcore is much like corecore, but instead of reflecting in disgust or sadness at the absurdity of digital existence, it revels in it. It is cute and self-indulgent and fun. It keeps a fast pace with clips of Counter Strike gameplay and cat clips, referencing an “old internet”, with ties to lolcatz, nightcore, and early 2000s nostalgia.

It is still, of course, surreal. The links between clips are strange and self-referential. I like how it doesn’t take itself seriously, like the early avant-garde.

Jack Stauber – will

This is a multimedia animation that utilizes claymation alongside live action footage to depict a bowl headed man freaking out in a giant machine. The use of whirring machine noises and electronic alarms all contribute to a sense of anxiety, and then it is all muffled out as he reaches into his head to calm himself down. This work feels like a stress dream, and highlights tension and resolution that is still surreal. Cause and effect is still there, it just is filtered through a world with unknown elements.

Bo Burnham: Inside

Inside is a Netflix musical comedy film made entirely by Bo Burnham in one room during Covid lockdowns. It depicts his experiences with suicidal thoughts, depression, and boredom during his time alone, as well as societal upheaval and the shift toward digital content.

Pandemic life was undeniably surreal, with all social interaction being mediated through a screen, and a complete shutdown of the “real world,” and Inside is the only work filmic work that captures this reality. The rapid and incongruous cuts, blurring of truth, and non linear story telling all contribute to this. Additionally, it has some truly amazing lighting design; especially considering it was all done by Burnham himself.

Tiger in a Tropical Storm (Surprised!) by Henri Rousseau

Tiger in a Tropical Storm (Surprised!) is a painting by French outsider artist Henri Rousseau. What makes this painting feel so surreal is minimal separation between background a foreground. Each painted element feels like it was cut out from a different painting and laid on with no regard for lighting. The tiger’s hind leg seems to be in front of the foliage that the rest of the tiger is behind. Additionally, the twilight setting aids the lighting in feeling dream like.

@alldaysquishyface - coffee 🫖

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Allday and Memphis (@alldaysquishyface)

This short vertical video represents a lot of surreal content on platforms like TikTok and Instagram reels. They are short an inexplicable, tied together seamlessly with an ambient soundtrack. A lot of them don’t have a plot per se, instead remaining engaging with a short run time.

JPEGMAFIA – Free The Frail

I think what JPEGMAFIA (or Peggy, as he is often known) special is his pop friendly sensibilities. Although the songs are off kilter, glitchy, Free The Frail is nothing but hooks. I think this is part of what allows Peggy to be so experimental, he never loses audience engagement because of the pure sonic bliss that comes from listening to his music. Nonetheless, his use of samples and vocal chops create a strange musical world that is surreal.

LAS VEGAS EYE ORB

The MSG Sphere at the Venetian Resort in Las Vegas is a spherical musical arena with an LED display on the outside. The orb can be lit up in the shape of an eye that looks around. I find this digital installation to reflect the absurdity and hubris of modern civilization. I’d compare it to the Tower of Babel, that caused God to create separate languages after humanity was growing too powerful. I think that if God struck us down after the construction of this orb, we would deserve it.

PilotRedSun – Not so fast

This multisensory experience is guided by an off kilter score that matches the morphing and swirling animation. It uses mixed media, combining collage with digital painting with minimal shading. Some of the shots feel like a video game, but the POV camera mostly makes the short feel like the retelling of a dream. The sound design contributes to this, as every voice is muffled and distorted with electronic hums in the background.

Samuel Beckett – Waiting for Godot

Waiting for Godot is an absurdist play that it intentionally incredibly stripped down. The whole play is two men waiting for “Godot” while by a tree. While I find this play intellectually interesting, the reality of watching it is much less so. Like many absurdist works, because there is no plot in the traditional sense, it just isn’t that interesting to watch.

[studentsofdecay]

Josh Mason - An Anxious Host

An Anxious Host by Josh Mason

Since the early 2010s, Josh Mason has slowly amassed an enchanting discography, publishing recordings on labels such as Florabelle, Dauw, Longform Editions, and his retired Sunshine Ltd. imprint. Whether focusing on electric guitar or modular synthesizer, Mason approaches his music with intentionality, tenderness, and a keen ear for detail, resulting in an exceptional and enduring oeuvre. His workmanlike approach to craft and monomaniacal interest in circuit design culminated in 2021’s “Utility Music,” a daunting book/CD project that documents and unpacks a yearlong exploration of a Doepfer A-100 Eurorack system. The irony of such a project is that it might lead listeners to believe that academic technique and synthesis technology are the animating principles of his practice, but the reality is that this is only part of the story. Listening to Mason’s music, one gets the sense that, like a good novelist, he truly cares about his characters, which take the forms of the textures and timbres of archaic wavetable oscillators, idiosyncratic filters, pulverized samples, and exotic noise sources. “An Anxious Host” feels like a pivotal release in Mason’s catalog. It’s his first vinyl outing since 2019’s astounding “Coquina Dose,” and it may be the most succinct and potent album he’s made. The track titles function like stage directions in a play, intimating a hazy, filmic narrative populated by schemers, dreamers, and lost souls. As ever with Mason’s work, place is paramount, and this record is thoroughly shot through with the humidity, warmth, and “end of the line”-ness of the state of Florida. Seasick swells and sunken melodies; swampy, sputtering loops; sonic flotsam pooling together and flowing out, beckoning the listener to come have a soak.

LP ships on or before 08/18/2023 Forced Exposure (US)ANOST (EU)

[a-silent-symphony]

We got Nightwish's Tuomas Holopainen to rank every single album by the band from worst to best

We asked Nightwish founder Tuomas Holopainen to rank the band's albums from worst to best - and some of his choices surprised us

From fantastical realms to elaborate filmic sagas and love-letters to Darwinism, the Nightwish discography is rich in intrigue – and low on dullmoments. As its central creator, Tuomas Holopainen is inextricably bound to the sounds, feelings and memories that saturate each of these nine albums.

His life is in this music. But if it came to it, in a castaway situation, which albums would he most (and least) want to be stuck with? It’s a tough call. “They are my children,” he pleads, “how would they feel if they saw the ranking? Wishmaster would be so sad!” Still, he did manage to settle on an order, and here it is...

9. Wishmaster (Spinefarm, 2000)

“It went to No.1 in Finland, but to me Wishmaster is one of those albums that was kind of ‘in-between’. It doesn’t stand out to me on a personal level. There was nothing revolutionary about it after [1998’s] Oceanborn.

It was made in a really good spirit – everybody in the band was happy after the success of Oceanborn – so this was just a natural continuation of that. But it didn’t really introduce anything spectacularly new for me personally. I think that’s my problem with it. If Ihad to pick a favourite song, I think I’d pick Dead Boy’s Poem; lyrically, it’s very much in the essence of Nightwish.”

8. Angels Fall First (Spinefarm, 1997)

“Our debut sounds so innocent because it was done as a demo. It was never supposed to be released, but we sent it to the record label and they said, ‘Let’s put this out!’ It still has my parents’ home address on the booklet.

“When I founded Nightwish in July 1996, I just wanted to do moody acoustic music. Since me and Emppu [Vuorinen, guitars] had a strong metal background, it was a natural transition to do something heavier, but that original acoustic band idea can be heard strongly. We couldn’t find anybody to sing, so I kind of dug a hole and fell into it myself.

"We played Elvenpath years later on the Decades tour, and I can’t understand how Floor was able to keep a straight face singing those lyrics – to her credit, she did! I just remember the kid that I was back then, writing those songs, and I kind of miss that kid, because it was all about Donald Duck and fantasy books and snowmen and things fantastical.

"Nymphomaniac Fantasia? Not my proudest moment. But it was done because there was a young kid who had some, I don’t know… issues, ha ha ha! Love-life gone wrong or something. It was a different time.”

7. Century Child (Spinefarm, 2002)

“After Wishmaster, I seriously considered quitting the band, especially thanks to the departure of the [original] bass player [Sami Vänskä] and my slight burnout. Then I went on a hiking trip in Lapland with Tony Kakko from Sonata Arctica, and he talked me over that.

"We needed a new bass player, and we needed management because until then it was me and Jukka [Nevalainen] the drummer taking care of the business side. So we got management, and we got Marko [Hietala, bassist/ singer until 2021], who was already a big name in Finnish metal – we were all big fans.

"There was a lot of bad stuff happening in the band as well – that’s reflected on the album. Slaying The Dreamer was a way to get rid of all that frustration. Artistically I found film music, Hans Zimmer above all, and that really can be heard on Century Child. But the album didn’t take us much on the next level. Artistically it did, but not commercially.”

6. Dark Passion Play (Nuclear Blast, 2007)

“It was a really easy album to write because all the emotions were there so strongly, after what happened with Tarja [Turunen, original vocalist who was dismissed from the band in 2005], and everything in my personal life. I was about to lose my mental health, and then doing the songs for this album saved it.

"I’m a very private person, but I write about some really personal things, and these people – Anette [Olzon], for this record – are singing it out for the whole world to hear. Ineeded to do a song like The Poet And The Pendulum, where I killed myself in the lyrics; I had to do it for my mental health, and it ended up being a wonderful piece of music.”

5. Imaginaerum (Nuclear Blast, 2011)

“Again, this was a pretty easy album to write – we all had a good time with it. When it comes to songwriting, I’m a morning person. I’ll wake up about six when I’m at home, then a litre of coffee and I’m off. Usually I’m done by two or three o’clock. I write songs upstairs in my little home studio – just a keyboard and a lakeside view. In the studio with the band, the other members and the engineers are more night owls. Also in the tour bus it’s always me up first, making coffee downstairs.

“It was clear from the start that this would end up being a film. We thought, ‘What haven’t we done yet? Let’s do a music video for every song on the album, and then somehow combine them to become this really weird film.’ It’s a very optimistic album. It just puts a big smile on your face.”

4. Once (Nuclear Blast, 2004)

“One of the best times that this band has ever had was 2003- 2004, making the Once album, and the first part of the tour after that. In late 2003 we flew to London to record the orchestras. I rang the studio doorbell and Rick Wakeman opened the door. I think I said, ‘Errr… [makes incoherent starstruck noise] Thanks!’

"We went to the studio, started playing Ghost Love Score and my face melted. Like, ‘I’m next to Wembley, listening to the orchestra playing a song that I wrote, this is really life at its best.’

"Something happened with that album – all the stars were aligned. I remember looking at the album charts and seeing ‘Nightwish, Michael Jackson, Anastasia’ and going ‘Really?!’ I don’t think any of us were quite prepared. You get sucked into this massive world of big tours and worship from the fans, then the money starts to flow in, and it’s easy to lose your perspective. Impulse purchases? I did a round the-world trip on my own, it was wonderful. But money has very little meaning to me."

3. Oceanborn (Spinefarm, 1998)

“Our ambition went through the roof after Angels Fall First, because we all realised that this is actually really fun. I was studying biology, Tarja was studying singing, I think in Germany, Jukka was studying to be a computer engineer, Emppu was working in a carpet factory.

"Music was just a hobby. And then we realised, ‘There’s something going on here, so let’s put all the focus in Nightwish for maybe a few years, and see what happens.’ It was eight hours every day in the rehearsal room, playing the songs and just really feeling it. It was the watershed album for us, it took us to the next level.

"All the guys, we had just gotten out of the army so we all had short hair, we had no idea about the metal scene at all. We were complete countryside hickeys who just happened to like metal music, and we were given this chance to show what we could do with a three-album deal. It shouldn’t have worked on paper, but somehow it did.”

2. Endless Forms Most Beautiful (Nuclear Blast, 2015)

“If Floor hadn’t come along, I think that would have been the end of the band. We got over an ugly divorce once [with Tarja], then again with Anette, then Floor comes along and everything shines bright again. She learned the setlist in 48 hours – when I called her, she was at her sister’s wedding. Even from the first show the fans embraced her. So we took a lot of that good feeling for Endless Forms Most Beautiful [named after a line from Charles Darwin’s On The Origin Of Species].

"We went to Röskö campsite in Finland to record. It’s a four-hectare area by a lake in the middle of nowhere, belonging to the Boy Scouts. We stayed for three months. Every morning we’d rehearse for a few hours, have lunch, go back, rehearse and then spend the evening with each other by a campfire, barbecuing, playing acoustic guitar, singing, going to the sauna and talking about the songs all the time. The Greatest Show On Earth, that’s the Nightwish desert island song. I’m sure we’ll play that at the end of the setlist until forever.

"We recorded Richard Dawkins’ part in Oxford. He’s quite the character. I’m a huge fan, so I was really starstruck. He did his parts beautifully, it was over in about 30 minutes and then he gave us a ride back to central Oxford in his Tesla. And halfway back he asks us, ‘So are you musicians or something?’ Ha ha! So his head’s somewhere… all the time! But he’s a wonderful guy.”

1. Human. :II: Nature. (Nuclear Blast, 2020)

“I immediately knew after Endless Forms Most Beautiful that ‘OK, we have to do more songs about this.’ And so the idea of Human. :II: Nature. was first to have songs about humankind, and then you play the other CD and relax and go into nature. My memories of making the album are of happy times, no conflicts. We returned to Röskö to make it.

"When the pandemic hit, it was like, ‘Should we postpone the release?’ But it was all printed and the advertisements had gone out to the papers. So the record label said, ‘Let’s go with it. Maybe people will have more time to concentrate on it…’

"Noise was a big single, but there’s also something about Shoemaker [named after famed geologist/astronomer Eugene Shoemaker]. It’s on the artsy side, but not in a pretentious way.

"Realising what evolution is… it’s about realising our mortality, at least for me. And it’s made all the difference. When I kind of realised that this is very likely the only life we’re gonna have – it’s only after that that I started hugging my dad. I never hugged my dad before that. I’ve just felt much more liberated and in the light ever since.”

[pseudobabble]

My Really Lukewarm Take on Damien Chazelle’s Babylon

Subtitled “Playing Jenga With The Devil: Or, The Price You Pay For Once Upon a Time In Hollywood AU Fix-It Fanfiction”. I touch upon Whiplash + Once Upon a Time in Hollywood at some length here too. Whatever

     At a certain period of time, in certain circles, there was a recurrent phenomenon of people who made a big deal out of liking “film” but seemingly had no real grasp of the medium or major contributions to it beyond the most recent (How are you going to have a release from within the last calendar year on your Letterboxd favorites?) or the least arcane of the canon (Citizen Kane, Scarface, Psycho—Film Appreciation community college level core. Not to knock community college). What these people had a preternatural grasp on, though, was what made a bad movie—and it wasn’t uncommon to come across people who professed a deep, significant, undying love for cinema and who could not name a movie they liked that wasn’t a significant part of recent pop culture, but who could at length describe everything wrong with movies like Troll 2, Manos: The Hands of Fate, Birdemic, The Room. It got to a point where it seemed like there were more people who defined their love of film by their capacity to recognize when things were bad. Pointing to the obvious faults and flaws in low-budget movies, frequently made by non-Americans, where there were obvious and glaring lilts in conversations, plot movements, and character motivations, somehow constituted a keen sense of film criticism, even though a lot of it felt more like when a child knows that the gifts Santa supposedly brought had the same wrapping paper that their mom used for her coworker’s Christmas gift. To sit with a movie and enjoy it is to buy into an illusion, to let a lie happen to you. Sometimes the lie works. Sometimes it doesn’t. It’s variable. Some lies are obvious to everyone. It doesn’t take a detective to figure out that Santa didn’t conveniently have that same roll of paper, and likewise it doesn’t take much sage wisdom to understand that a first time filmmaker working with a limited budget and minimal proficiency (and weighed down by overconfidence) will have a harder time pulling the wool over your eyes than people with filmic pockets deeper than most graves, understanding of what works due to years of immersion in the field, and a steady level of what they are and aren’t capable of. 

     I don’t know if this category of person still lingers in the dredges of YouTube and Letterboxd, living life through the lens of 2011 like girls who are still devoted to One Direction members. I also don’t necessarily lack understanding of their thought process: negatives always stick out more than positives, and there’s a sense of community and unification in all collectively laughing at the same elements of something. The problem ends up being that in that collective experience, it is at the expense of someone’s expression. Remember, a lot of these same people have huge aspirations of making it big as a filmmaker, possibly the next Snyder or Fincher or Aronofsky. I think John Krasinski actually said something really lame about this that Paul Thomas Anderson told him:

He recalled an incident that happened at his house where during a discussion about a film, Krasinski casually remarked, “It’s not a good movie.” Anderson quietly explained the actor as to why it is important not to label films as good or bad.

“He so sweetly took me aside and said very quietly, ‘Don’t say that. Don’t say that it’s not a good movie. If it wasn’t for you, that’s fine, but in our business, we’ve all got to support each other.’ The movie was very artsy, and he said, ‘You’ve got to support the big swing. If you put it out there that the movie’s not good, they won’t let us make more movies like that,'” Krasinski revealed.

Praising the Phantom Thread director, the actor said Anderson is “defending the value of the artistic experience.”

     Crazy how you can afford to not be cutthroat after several Oscar noms. What a nice guy!

     The thing about the bulk of these people is the most they’ll accomplish (if they ever do this) is filming an unmemorable short of worse quality before either dropping out to become a pothead, switching majors to something their parents are more approving of, or maybe persevering, making a few other shitty shorts, hacking it out through the bottom slums of the film school industry wherever is closest to them, writing Letterboxd reviews where they rate the movie out of five in the review despite the star rating being a native function. Maybe they will make YouTube videos reviewing the newest Netflix and Marvel releases. But I don’t think these people end up miserable about their fate. They acclimate. People stretch and shrink and contort to the box they find themselves in. Especially if they lack drive and discipline—if they’ve invested nothing more than time, shed no blood, sweat, or tears, then departure from one’s fantasy is really easy because they didn’t really do much to bring it forward. They imagined a glimpse of it, and that was enough. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s what a movie is at the end of day—you concoct a fantasy. Sometimes no one else gets let in to your dream and careers die before they’re even born and entire galaxies no one will ever know about go down with them. 

     Sometimes, though, other people will make movies about characters who are super motivated, totally slavishly devoted to their craft and the idea of being the best at it. Even if it’s something as banal as slamming sticks against a drum set, over and over again until your palms are torn open and blood is all over the drums, but it’ll come right off, and all over the drumsticks, and you’re not sure if there’s some kind of finish on them that prevents staining or if end of day they’re just plain old porous wood that will let your blood seep into its crevices, bright red right now but you can just see it turning brown, because that’s inevitable—as inevitable as your attempt towards greatness, and as futile, too. And because every movie about art is really supposed to be a movie about the filmmaker in relation to filmmaking, this is about how you will break your own bones, hurt your own body, ruin your relationship with the hot girl who works at the theater you go to with your daddy because film is just that important to you. 

     But also, sometimes the idea of that and the presentation of it is a lot more romantic and grand and big than the follow up, and sometimes you make a movie about that because the caring is what you know people care about, and not what happens after to people who care too much about the wrong things, because nobody really thinks they care about the wrong things and if you say afterwards in an interview “I think there's a certain amount of damage that will always have been done. Fletcher will always think he won and Andrew will be a sad, empty shell of a person and will die in his 30s of a drug overdose. I have a very dark view of where it goes” no one really thinks twice about how the movie is kind of weird and in bad faith then. 

     Because really then the entire movie is build-up to a moment, and everything before is preordained because the characters are just your puppets to get a specific moment out of them. Everything is carefully, perfectly arranged, like a tea party, but you want bad things to happen. You want your stuffed animals to be horrible to each other, and you want a hint of gruesomeness—think of bloody hands being submerged into an iced pitcher, the diluted blood when he takes his hands out being evocative of Andrew being rendered into submission by his want. Think of a 19 year old boy, bruised and bleeding after running from a car accident, getting blood all over a drum set for the second time in the movie. Think of the tableau Chazelle paints in his description of what happens after the movie: for some reason, he wants someone to suffer. Not really because of something they wanted at a point; remember: he decided they wanted that, because it made it easier to justify their suffering. And that suffering culminates in a shared glance across a stage, and that’s the point of the movie: disrupting a live jazz show for a look of vague approval, and eventually you die after. Every moment of this is a blip on the radar for everyone else. 

     A lot of specific sequences and events that have been documented to history are, to us, preordained because we know how they go. A lot of stories share the same arc, the same premises, the same kind of order. Sharon Tate will have never not been murdered on Cielo Drive; for whatever reason, in Once Upon a Time In Hollywood, Tarantino offers her a reprieve, along with the rest of her housemates. Why? Tarantino obviously doesn’t have any particular fondness towards women. But he makes sure to show her off, safe and sound, not even necessarily rescued but glossed over by her would-be assailants at the very end of the movie, after the forces coming after her have been vanquished, after the brute who vanquished them has been safely carried off to the hospital for minor wounds, with the promise of bagels in the morning and a command to his only friend—and thus his best friend—to go to bed, enjoy his night with his spooked wife. But instead Rick’s invited to have a drink with Tate, and Jay Sebring, and everyone else. Tarantino didn’t need to make a statement on the fate of the characters after the movie—waning careers, marriage troubles, or hospitalizations aside, everyone’s alive and fine when the credits roll. But for some reason he decided to describe Rick Dalton’s revitalized career after the movie ends. Tarantino’s not a director known for empathy or being kind to his characters or giving characters in his movies space to live—but Once Upon a Time is an exercise in all of those things. Even the bloodbath towards the end could be far more gruesome or unwarranted, and it’s easy to sneer at just how excessive it does feel until you remember that those are fictional representations of the people who actually did kill Sharon Tate, and while the movie is in part about the possibility of preserving a life, it’s also about comeuppance. Cliff’s comeuppance is in his history of brutality making him the perfect candidate to fight off three unruly teens; Rick’s comeuppance is his career finally taking off after participating in the spaghetti westerns he so harshly slandered. Tate’s comeuppance is getting to live, and getting to see herself in a movie. You get the idea: Tarantino’s only being harsh in his just deserts as is requisite. 

     I want you to imagine, as I have frequently since seeing Babylon, Damien Chazelle sitting in a dark room with Once Upon a Time In Hollywood playing, and seething thinking about what a waste so much of it is—why is it so slow? Why isn’t Brad Pitt the lead? Why isn’t Margot Robbie in more of this? I want to see Margot Robbie naked, she’s so hot in Wolf of Wall Street. Why hasn’t the Manson family actually shown up yet? Who’s that blonde girl with the big tits? Why isn’t this movie more 60s? Why isn’t Charles Manson in this that much? Why isn’t he celebrating the beauty and magic of cinema? Where are the drugs? Where are the hippies? Why isn’t there more jazz music? 

     Whiplash is a good movie. This seems to be a fluke attributable to the performances in it and the simplicity of the plot in comparison to La La Land—which isn’t at all complex, it just isn’t about a 19 year old college student who wants to be the best little drummer boy in the world. First Man is the first ever AI generated movie, featuring a goodie bag of small roles from a lot of C, D, E, and F list actors. Clint Eastwood was originally supposed to direct it. It probably would have been better if he had. None of these three films, nor the one film that preceded them, could have prepared anyone for Babylon, a movie about a day laborer (?) a rising starlet (?) an italian larper (?) Jeff Garlin as Harvey Weinstein (?). There’s a lot, it’s a lot. 

     The components of the movie are overbearing and earnestly not worth dissecting. What’s more compelling to me is Damien Chazelle eviscerating Robbie and Pitt because he doesn’t really get to see them get eviscerated in Hollywood. The actual propulsion and process of the movie and the landscape and trajectory it takes you through really doesn’t matter because it’s less a film and more of a woodchipper. There’s an input and an output. Input: Actors. Output: their demise, all caught on film. 

     What also sticks out to me significantly, too, is the “so bad it’s good” movie seems to be a relic now—everything mediocre now always has a slick sheen to it, a polish, a once-over and special attention that the previously mentioned laughingstocks would never have gotten. Babylon is something of a drain to watch because of its utter humorlessness—what happens when the fuck-up isn’t even that fun to gaze at anymore? What happens when there’s nothing to jeer at? 

     I don’t think Chazelle played well with others as a kid. He isn’t very nice when he sees someone else playing with a toy he wants, to the point of taking it and breaking it. Now no one has the toy, but Chazelle has the satisfaction of knowing he made something bad happen. 

     Film is illusory and you can make the same car crash happen a thousand times but it’s a simulation and synthetic and even if it feels real or doesn’t feel real, no matter the staging or the framing, it’s not a real thing that’s happened. It only goes so far as you buy into it. Who’s buying into Babylon? Letterboxd contrarians desperate to formulate a hot take? Chazelle, because he’s decided to? 

     The problem with Chazelle is the same problem with most other 3rd generation/Millennial era filmmakers: what’s left when everything is homage? What’s left when everything is pastiche? You take acknowledgement of the canon and break it down like Legos because end of the day, who cares about creating a new canon? People obsessed with it won’t even let their own stuff in—which is why Tarantino worships Pauline Kael instead of Welles or Truffaut. The 2nd generation of filmmakers never anticipated the 3rd taking their work as seriously as they had once taken the previous masters. No one can indict them for that, but what happens when the guy looking up to you isn’t all that younger than you? Tarantino himself is already just playing with the toolset left to him. Chazelle’s just doing the same. The only difference being they’re both playing with it at the same time and one has clear comprehension and mastery and the other is just really really interested in fucking around with what the other one built. 

     Do you think Leonardo DiCaprio feels left out because he wasn’t in Babylon? Or do you think he’s more worried about global warming? Or dating another 25 year old? Do you think Miles Teller is relieved Damien Chazelle abandoned him for Ryan Gosling, or do you think he’s too busy enjoying being the new face to the military propaganda film complex? I think he’s probably grooming his mustache. Who cares 

[eucanthos]

Medea: The Magical Woman Since Antiquity

_

Photo: Maria Callas (US-GR, 1923-1977) in Medea (1969) by Pier Paolo Pasolini (IT, 1922-1975)

Medea in the Greek mind is not human but a grandchild of the god Helios and daughter of King Aeëtes and his nymph-wife Eidyia: Hesiod in his Theogony (956-7) writes that Aeëtes and his sister Circe were born to Helios by the ocean nymph Pereis and that Eidyia is the child of the ‘god Ocean’. Additionally, Medea is a witch, a female practitioner of magic, who could not only turn old men young but also cunningly dispatch her enemies.

Medea will always be the horrific Medea. However, it must be remembered that all of the texts and artwork, ancient and modern, are the creation of men. It is men who craft the character of Medea and it is men that then set the model that is used when working with the myth...

Pindar (Pythian 4.211-9) attributes the love of Medea for Jason to Aphrodite, who teaches the hero spells and incantations that he then uses to bewitch Medea into turning herself against her father and homeland, and to showing Jason how to get the Golden Fleece. Glimpses into the character of Medea appear in the Kolchides, in which scholars speculate Medea killed her brother Apsyrtus. We also read of this fratricide in the literary work that probably has had the greatest Nachleben, Euripides’ Medea, where we hear Jason say:

A great curse / you were even then, betrayer of your father and of the land that / nourished you. But the gods have visited on me the avenging spirit / meant for you. For you killed your / own brother at the hearth and then stepped aboard the fair-prowed Argo. It was with acts like these that you began. (1334-6)

It seems that Medea had a reputation for killing small children even before she committed that act of killing her own children. This act labelled her as a terrible being, whom one would not cross without suffering dire consequences. From accounts such as these come the “accepted” characterisation of Medea as a child-destroyer and the modern, filmic representations of Medea.

This view of Medea has a deep and far-ranging influence. For example, Nina Billone has written on the work of Rhodessa Jones and Sean Reynolds, who have directed since 2009 the “Medea Project: Theater for Incarcerated Women.” The goal of the project is to guide the:

Incarcerated and formerly incarcerated women to turn stories on their heads, and in so doing to place themselves at the centre of cultural and political narratives… By staging mythical journeys through multiple underworlds, the group works to transform such concepts as death, descent, violence, and loss into life, love, power, and hope. The company’s work is founded on the belief that when women tell their stories on the public stage, they are empowered to change – even to save – their lives.

This noble initiative – that is meant to rehabilitate and restore lives broken by crime – turns the “ideology of the prison on its head” and also reinterprets Medea as a source of a possible change to a better life. This is something that was denied to Medea by her own actions, which she may or may not have been forced to perform.

Full text by Dr. Edmund Cueva:

https://framescinemajournal.com/article/medea-the-magical-woman-since-antiquity/

[libbysartstudiotwo]

The Manic Pixie Dream Girl

https://revistaprismasocial.es/article/view/1599/1754

Bubbly, shallow creature use for the sole purpose of aiding the male protagonist

In his own self discovery/journey 

They teach them how to have fun and be adventurous and happy

Vulnerable, sexually free

‘Hipster/ alternative’ look 

Unusual -

Film examples - garden state, eternal sunshine, almost famous and most iconically 500 days of summer

They are characterized as 

free-spirited, spontaneous and full of life, and their sole dramatic and narrative purpose in 

the films is to inspire the creativity and passion of the fragile, insecure male protagonists, thus  perpetuating  the  myth  of  women  as  muses  and  caregivers  rather  than  independent  entities with a life, dreams and ambitions of their own. In order for the male protagonist to regain a sense of masculinity and reassert their ego, they must also be imperfect and messed up enough to need saving, so the powerless guy can do something heroic in the third act» (Matteson, 2013)

From an iconographic perspective, the MPDG tends to dye her hair on eccentric colours, wear vintage dresses, listen to indie music and engage on spontaneous carpe diem behaviour that can range from socially inappropriate – such as jumping into a swimming pool n the midst of a formal party (Ruby Sparks) – to outright dangerous (Clementine’s casual alcoholism in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind). 

It seems that for a lot of my young adult life I have played into this character role, partly because i think that is who I am/was, and mostly because that is the role I thought that I ought to play

I let men choke me during sex, i have mental health issues, I got addicted to weed, I dyed my hair pink and purple and I still bleach and tone it to this day.

But am I playing into this role, or have I found a category I vaguely fit into and embraced it further? 

Would I be like this at all if it weren’t for the media I watched at such a formative age?

it is also important to acknowledge the fact that the MPDG label has become an easy catch-all for unusual, quirky women in film, reducing very different female characters down to a type and homogenising any notion of difference

tangent - in a world online filled with niches and 100000 different “aesthetics” no one can really just be them anymore, perhaps you can in daily life, when more disconnected from echo chambers online. 

I used to be constantly online. tumblr, instagram, then tiktok. places like these are cesspits of labels and categories.  are you ‘cottagecore’  or an ‘egirl’? a ‘hey mamas lesbian’ or a ‘femme’?

this tends to be more of an issue online than in real life. but this obsession with looking a certain way and ‘fitting into an aesthetic’ pushes people into obsessive consumption of clothing (often fast fashion) just to fit into the latest trend 

Nathan  Rabin  coined  the  term  Manic Pixie  Dream  Girl  in  order  to  describe  a  nascent  filmic   female   trope

Rabin himself (2014), who almost ten years after coining the term MPDG apologised for it, contending that the trope «is a fundamentally sexist one, since  it  makes  women  seem  less  like  autonomous,  independent  entities  than  appealing  props to help mopey, sad white men self-actualise

However, the importance of analysing the MPDG can hardly be contested, for there is indeed an underlying common pattern in the  construction  of  the  female  protagonist  of  many  indie  rom-coms  produced  during  the  2000s insofar as their quirky liveliness is only exploited in order to help develop their male counterparts.

characterizing  them  as  "manic"  seems  to  imply a certain level of mental illness, an association which recalls historical connections between femininity and mental illnesses like that of hysteria.

manic pixie dream girl =  unstable fairy-like ideal young woman (oh god that is me (minus the carpe diem crap)) 

a rendition of the nurturing woman and/or the muse

Because films are bearers of ideology, the way they construct gender and produce role models will have straight consequences on how young women negotiate their place in society and perform their femininity, directly influencing the ways they dress, speak, behave and even dye their hair – after all, it is not in vain that polka dot  dresses  and  blue  hair  became  popular  at  the  same  time  these  films  were  released. 

creating stereotypes that  excite  the  imagination  of  the  male  spectator  while  limiting  the  social  aspirations  of  women and sanctioning particular forms of behaviour, not necessarily encouraging independence, intelligence or ambition.

do things because you want to, not to impress/invigorate some random dude

Indie films are particularly tailored for a certain portion of the audience, a growing subcul-ture that has come to be known as the hipsters (Zeynep & Thompson, 2011, p. 795), who-se fashion style, music taste and ethos largely determine the iconographic attributes of the MPDG (and viceversa).

[themarvelousmrswilder]

Bloodline

It wasn’t until Depeche Mode finally allowed themselves an extended break after the enormously successful ‘World Violation’ tour that Alan could return to Recoil. However, after starting work on a 3rd album, he agreed to produce another for label mates Nitzer Ebb, who had supported the Mode on their previous two tours and had become good friends.

‘Ebbhead’ was recorded at Konk Studios and Alan enlisted the help of Flood who had worked on ‘Violator’. It was during this time he cemented both a good personal and working relationship with lead singer Douglas McCarthy who would return the favour by singing on Recoil’s next album, ‘Bloodline’.

For this LP, released in 1991, Wilder recruited guest vocalists for the first time with further contributions (as well as Douglas) from Moby and Toni Halliday helping to produce an album that was a significant move forward for Recoil. It also marked the first Recoil single, a cover of an Alex Harvey track, ‘Faith Healer’.

Although under no pressure to make the album more conventional, 'Bloodline' was a much more commercial effort which came closer to having complete songs, albeit songs which split and divided with alarming regularity.arvey track, 'Faith Healer'.

“‘Bloodline’ indicates that Alan Wilder has been a key figure in Depeche Mode’s development, from their early pop nursery rhymes to the darker, heavily textured style they adopted in the mid-80’s. Wilder concocts the filmic soundscapes, slow burning things that slip into melodramatic grandeur through a side door.

Douglas McCarthy blisters Alex Harvey’s ‘Faith Healer’, Curve’s Toni Halliday drenches ‘Edge To Life’ and ‘Bloodline’ in drowsy paranoia. ‘Electro Blues For Bukka White’ has long-gone disembodied bluesman White, muttering and wailing underneath an eastern drone that both eulogises and ignores him. Like the rest of ‘Bloodline’, the effect is disconcerting but ultimately very moving.” Vox

[chemlineglobal]

Self Adhesive Label Stocks | Industrial adhesive Manufacturer

Self Adhesive Label Stocks

UNCOATED (Maplitho, Vellum) : Gun Labels , Book Labels

MID GLOSS (Chromo Paper) : Product Labels

GLOSS COATED (Mirror coat , Cast coated , Cast Gloss) : Liquor > Labels

COLORED PAPERS : Promotional Labels

THERMAL TRANSFER : Barcode

TYPES OF PAPER Label Stock

> HOLOGRAPHY : Medicines, Books > VOID : Mobile Boxes > DIGITAL: Less Quantity & Premium Quality

TYPES OF PAPER Label Stock

> DIRECT THERMAL: Barcode > THERMAL BOARD : Air Line Boarding Pass > WET STRENGTH : Liquor Labels for Ice Bucket Application > TAMPER EVIDENT : Excise Label on Liquor Bottle > TYRE & ROUGH LABELLING : Tyre , Jute Bag, Army Uniform, Shoes

TYPES OF FILMIC Label Stock

> PP White : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care > PP Clear : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care > PP Silver : Rigid Plastic Container — Home & Personal Care

Read more Link:- Industrial adhesive manufacturers