MOV: www.partizan.com

YOUTUBE: www.youtube.com

Simple. Brilliant. Saam might have an interesting new project on his hands too... Say no more. Say no more.

         

Mr. Shatner, can you please explain to me why this is brilliant?

         

Oh, c'mon. What's the point in asking someone to explain why a good video is good if someone can't see it? I know that is just a creative way to say you weren't feeling it. Fair do's. That's your opinion.

For me, this video is about rhythm. Saam has connected with the tune and made a video that reflected the visceral nature of the song. It looks ace and the edit is fantastic.

         

Here's the quicktime. Saam's videoville page is pretty well updated.

         

I agree with finer-comb... this catches the rythmn really well. Hate to be the typical antville bitch, but I must also say it has similarities to Carpark North vid by Martin De Thurah youtube.com

Thats just a similarity... I'm not saying its a rip or anything though.

         

Track is really great. Edit is really great. I even dig Saam's scifi ness this time around but I think the video could've been more....

Track is so strong that without it, this video is just medium shots of sweaty people.

         

"Track is so strong that without it, this video is just medium shots of sweaty people"

I think that's what I like about it. It is just medium shots of sweaty people. And is awesome.

         

These recent instances of people calling out similarities between tiny, no budget videos is irking me. As long as there isn't a full scale rip off going on, I think we should all just stand back and marvel at the fact that these videos look fully realized and work with the track at all. I'm not looking for a fight, just pointing out that the logistics of some of these videos (Kid Sister and the recent Presets video come to mind) being well produced, engaging, AND fully 100% unlike anything you've ever seen in your whole life, is probably darn near impossible on these (barely) shoestring budgets.

I won't even get started on how much harder it becomes when you take into account that you have to please the artist and label as well...

         

hmm, but there are videos that are very original. Saam has made his share. As far as this video goes no direct references come to mind. I did however first watch this video with no sound as it didnt seem to work on the partizan site and it was just a bunch of mid and close ups of sweating young people with an air jet moving their skin a little. Listening to it with the song it made more sense and seemed to suit well... but it didnt mask the boring factor. I do however agree with everything spit says about music video industry restraints its just that nobody in the audience knows what particular restraints any one video has. I am just wondering then do you 'spit' like every video you see with the excuse that there must have been some logistical restraint that resulted in the finished product being ripped off, boring, badly shot, badly edited or simply conceptually lacking? I mean simply putting any image to a track by simple association can make it seem as though the two are well suited and making some well lit closeups and midshots of sweaty half naked kids with an airjet moving their skin seem fully realized isnt the worlds hardest task. I dont really have a problem with this particular video, its ok but it is boring budget or no budget. I have seen more interesting videos made for less then the $$$ that this and the presets video would have got.

         

damn i really dont know what everyones bitching about, this is a great video! is it because everyone's comparing it to saam's bigger budget adventures maybe? if this were by a brand new director he would be praised on here im sure. i think it captures the darker side of the music well and when you dont have much ££ then to capture something simply but impeccably like this is the way to go in my mind. and the edit kicks.

         

if this was by an unknown director nobody would have gave it a second glance.

         

it doesn't matter who shot it or how much it cost. it works perfectly with the music, conceptually and visually. And THAT is what Saam is good at. it's simplicity is accentuated with the very very good edit.

There are too many old ladies on this site sitting round bickering about stuff they know nothing about. Each video should be taken at face value. Because that is how they are supposed to be seen. Like I said, I don't care what it cost, I don't care if it bears similarities to other work, i don't care who made it. If it works it works. If it doesn't it doesn't. And we all have our own tastes after all...

         

A few nice bits... takes too long for anything to actually happen, and by then the payoff isn't enough. And I must admit the only reason I sat it through is because it was Saam... the average viewer would have walked away.

I really get sick of people taking pity for the budget and the age old "isn't-it-so-hard-to-make-a-music-video-these-days" spiel that some people are always smearing the forum walls with.

         

I was thinking the other day how some people on antville are so quick to point out references or at worst call work out rip offs. Truth told we've all seen rip offs however this certainly isn't one.

I think we often forget that many directors try to make dare I use the "A" word Art. despite lacking budgets and many other obstacles that clients bring. That said, isn't art meant to be dialogue. When we open one of those big cumbersome art history books, isn't this what we see throughout the ages; art talking to art or art influenced by art.

For example, when Kris Moyes made the Soft Lights video, of course he was looking at Stefan Sgmeister's work. In fact, I think he was talking back to it. And I'd guess Sagmeister would be tickled. I don't think everyone needs to pull a Mark Romanek and place a sign at the end of the video saying where the idea came from.

So In this case sure there are Cunningham Flex-like moments and some De Thurah too. Isn't that maybe a nice thing?????

         

I noticed the similarity to De Thurah's Human, but to me that isn't a bad thing. I love De Thurah and I think Saam is awesome. The fact that Saam made a whole video that expands on and explores a technique that was only used very briefly in Human, is noticable, but doesn't seem like like a big deal or a total rip-off to me.

A ton of video have been made by reversing the film, and they use the same technique to slightly different effects. Is no one supposed to do a super slow motion video because it's been done?

It's always really exciting to see someone create a new technique or use film in a way that hasn't been seen before, but I think we can agree that technical invention isn't the only thing that makes a great video. There can be two photosonics videos that use the same technique, and one is incredibly moving and effective, and the other is boring.

         

i dont care about any of this.... referencing, similarities, money...blah blah. This video is boring and it doesnt matter if i had seen it here or on tv or in an art gallery, it doesnt matter if he had 5 grand or 50, it doesnt matter if it copies, references or expands on somebody elses work, it doesnt even matter if saam directed it or not, i still find it boring. I am actually a fan of saams work even his low budget ones like 'hustler', 'good shoes' and 'gravities rainbow'. This just doesnt do it for me. As for quixoticync, i wonder how you would feel if someone copied or ripped off your work? I doubt you would be tickled.

         

Quiz, as you point out if I were ripped off I'd be hurt. There is certainly a fine line between dialogue and rip off though it is a destincly huge difference. As I mentioned, Mark Romanek explains his influence by Erwin Wurm for his RHCP video within the video itself. I may be wrong but I am guessing that is in response in some way to the fact that Joel Peter Witkin was not tickled by Romanek's attempt at dialogue. Yet I still believe the NIN "closer" video was not only dialogue but a brlliant piece of art. So Witkin's hurt aside it is still fantastic.

I bring up Sagmeister as being tickled because from what I know of his work, he is quite into the idea of how we influence each other. I know that he is an instructor at SVA and also know that he has even seen students of his win awards with work that talks back to his (meaning very much in his style). So I am in no way saying that everyone "should" feel tickled, I just presume he might feel that way.

Basically, what I am trying to say is that when we make imagery and put it out there, its open for people to give and take from. So sure we all have an innate part of us that would be crushed if we felt ripped off. It just seems to me Quiz that this video doesn' t do it for you.

Also as Clairesquare points out, is it fair to claim a technique as an idea? Coming back to Romanek and Closer one more time, I think he may have done the air compressor thing before De Thurah though I never connected that til about 5 secs ago. To me "Human" and "Closer" are still both RARE gems.

Now all that said, If Romanek were to deny his interest in Francis Bacon & Witkin, or if Moyes were to deny his influence of Sagmeister, well that would in my humble opinion not only be BS but it would also illegitmize the work.

BTW I enjoyed this video o SAAM's. Simple and nice to look at (enough for me).

         

Is Sagmeister really a current professor at SVA?

         

Just to chime in on the "rip-off" debate...

Firstly, quixoticnyc, I see no evidence of "dialogue" between Moyes and Sagmeister.

Unlike Romanek, Moyes does not build on the idea and technique that Sagmeister crafted, nor does he credit or acknowledge him in any way, nor do the average viewer of such a music video have any clue about where the idea originated from. He simply makes a carbon copy to video. Simple as that.

I can't believe you just said "Simple and nice to look at is good enough for me"..... It worries me that you are a director yourself and hold this view.

         

I agree with parmazan the idea of "Simple and nice to look at is good enough for me" is what generally irks me about the music video industry.

         

I guess thats why as they say there is chocolate and vanilla. I most certainly believe simple and pretty may be enough. These are simply music videos and can be a platform for experimentation. And ofcourse intent and honestyare most important. I dont think in any way shape or form I have suggested stealing or lackluster is good or ok. But much of this is quite subjective isn't it?

Just posing a question here. Is it perhaps more acceptable when imagery/inspiration is taken from a dead artist vs a living one? Is this more palettable. Certainly, if there was no Edward Gorey there would be no Tim Burton. Yet if Gorey were alive today I think there would be many participants on this site that would be calling Burton a thief.

Yeah lusk, Sagmesister has been a professor at SVA for quite some time. There are some other amazing fantastic designers who teach at SVA as well including: Steven Heller, Milton Glaser etc.

         

i think though by saying on one hand that there is some sort of equal dialogue between artists and music video directors and then that music videos can simply look pretty is a contradiction. I really didnt have any problem with the references on this video and as i said on the presets video, referencing, recontextualizing and even copying ideas is just a part of post modernism. In the case of some of moyes videos and the reputation he has garnered as an artist/music video director pathing new ground with original and whacky ideas i think some people were a little less impressed and even felt a little ripped off when they discovered how close some of moye's references were. That said he is definately among a few young directors in australia that are atleast trying to do something interesting in the music video scene. P.S Taking from the dead does seem for some reason more palatable although grave robbing is probably more frowned upon then stealing from someones house.