The Apoplectic Walrus2015

I adore the collages by Ernst... Was just reading some early critical essays by Godard though and one statement which resonated with me seems suitable in expressing my complaint with "The Apoplectic Walrus": "However, it was necessary that in the sign - in other words, that which indicates something in whose place it appears; in this case, a conflict of wills - the mise en scène should respect the arabesque which underlines its effect, and like Dreyer or Gance, should use it with delicate virtuosity; for it cannot shock through mere empty exaggeration." - [Godard, on Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train] Of course the problem here isn't shock. Surrealism is a tough one, and I'm sure many might react each in their own different way to such a film. My problem with it though is that this relationship between content and mise en scene Godard is speaking of, and which I agree is so essential, does not seem to be in harmony here. Even if what is *signified* is not reachable in such a work at the very least it has to *ring true*, to use a colloquialism. And the text does not do that for me, or indeed, seem to fit with these images.

When Lawrence Jordan made his first experimental film, Eisenhower was president, Elvis Presley was cutting his first songs at Sun Records, the price of gasoline was 22 cents a gallon, and a computer was a 29,000 lb. monstrosity that look up the space of the entire floor of a building. And here we are is Jordan over 60 years later with Jordan's most recent contribution to his amazing filmmaking odyssey. Those who create can only hope to have careers that are so long and prolific

Curious.