archived-videos Mr Fox, a short film

[Swintex]

Hi, my names Max and I'm new here. This is a short film that I recently completed and I think that experimental is the right catagory for it. It is mostly live action, with a little bit of stop motion animation. Here is the link to it on youtube, watch it in HD if you can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RJOpSMvFfE&feature=channel_page

And please let me know what you think.
Thanks very much,
Max

 

[insert_cliche_here]

Oooh. So we're not talking about me? Why the hell am I even having this conversation then?

 

[Camera Obscura]

i thought the imagery was great but it really through me on what it was trying to accomplish , plus all i could think about was wes anderson and how awesome serious house on a serious earth was ... which further through me off on any meaning

i feel like it would fit inside another movie kinda like the wall like or again something anderson would do ... idk lol

 

[kgasser2]

Not just you. I think this is the best-produced video that makes not a lick of sense. In my opinion, when symbolism and metaphor are so fucking obscure that everyone will have their own unique interpretation, the filmmaker isn't really saying anything at all.

You wanna say something? Don't hide behind vague symbology. Just say what you wanna say, for Christ's sake.

david lynch never explains anything in his movies because he wants everyone to have their own interpretation. He started as a painter before he was a filmmaker, so he has an artistic philosophy on film. he let's the movie exist for itself, and not necessarily mean one thing, but is abstract enough, and pieces together in a way that many people can have many interpretations.

THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES IT ART

what's so fun about having a message preached to you? wouldn't you rather be put in the situation to make your own ideas? That's also much more challenging for a filmmaker, and personally i have more respect for someone who can do that rather than make a movie like furn gully.

but i understand not everyone here is interested in art. but it would be a great thing for modern film if everyone was.
we could have more 'trash humpers' and less 'transformers 2 3D'

 

[Alcove Audio]

I personally didn't get it either.

It's all very good to say that many people have many interpretations, but the artists job is to, at the least, point his audience in a specific direction from which to make that interpretation. Lynch is most definitely a surrealist, but he always provides a context from which to view his work. I didn't find a context from which to view "Mr Fox" so consequently didn't find any meaning in it.

If you got something out of it that's fine for you, but it didn't do anything for me. I didn't even find the imagery especially intriguing for more than one viewing. I've seen plenty of weird experimental pieces; some bored me to tears, others captivated me - different strokes and all that. But the ones that captivated me seemed to capture the rest of the audience as well.

Nothing annoys me more than an artist who complains "you just don't understand"; it is the artists job to communicate with me, not intentionally create something in a secret code and then sneer at me for not being able to break the code. 99% of the time there isn't even a code anyway, it's the supposed artist throwing feces at a blanket and seeing what sticks. These artists are mostly technicians; they know all about and can reproduce the form but have none of the substance of a true artist.

 

[dehorse]

trippy man, nice bloody job