Omer Fast, Take a Deep Breath, 2008 – production still, two channel HD video, running time: 27:07 minutes. Image via: Postmasters
This week at The L Magazine I review the Omer Fast exhibition at Postmasters. This show, which closes tomorrow, runs concurrently with Nostalgia at The Whitney, on view through February 14th, 2010.
Among the endless art cliches circulating mainstream media, the one I most frequently subscribe to is this: Art should transcend its form. Very little of it achieves such results, and as Omer Fast’s films at Postmasters demonstrate, even when it does, the outcome may not be perfect. So many threads run through these works it’s nearly impossible to pin them down. Disguise, looking, making, memory, compassion, prejudice, violence—the list goes on—but Fast investigates each with more depth than is immediately apparent.
The films bring up another common issue, which is that privileging conceit over form doesn’t always end well. Probably the best example of this comes from Take a Deep Breath, a purposefully badly acted, two-channel projection in the main exhibition space that explores, among other themes, the importance of artifice. In the case of production, Fast proves it does indeed matter; the canned lines forced a few AFC colleagues out of the film, and to what end? These same points are made within the narrative.
To read the full piece click here.
{ 12 comments }
I liked your descriptions of the films, but what if Fast is questioning precisely those forms with claim to give us direct access to the “truth” (i.e. documentary, testimonials, news reportage, etc). And a bleak and polysemous take on reality does not, for me, equal meaninglessness.
http://www.cynephile.com/2010/01/omer-fast-is-the-next-steve-mcqueen/
I liked your descriptions of the films, but what if Fast is questioning precisely those forms with claim to give us direct access to the “truth” (i.e. documentary, testimonials, news reportage, etc). And a bleak and polysemous take on reality does not, for me, equal meaninglessness.
http://www.cynephile.com/2010/01/omer-fast-is-the-next-steve-mcqueen/
I liked your descriptions of the films, but what if Fast is questioning precisely those forms with claim to give us direct access to the “truth” (i.e. documentary, testimonials, news reportage, etc). And a bleak and polysemous take on reality does not, for me, equal meaninglessness.
http://www.cynephile.com/2010/01/omer-fast-is-the-next-steve-mcqueen/
I liked your descriptions of the films, but what if Fast is questioning precisely those forms with claim to give us direct access to the “truth” (i.e. documentary, testimonials, news reportage, etc). And a bleak and polysemous take on reality does not, for me, equal meaninglessness.
http://www.cynephile.com/2010/01/omer-fast-is-the-next-steve-mcqueen/
I liked your descriptions of the films, but what if Fast is questioning precisely those forms with claim to give us direct access to the “truth” (i.e. documentary, testimonials, news reportage, etc). And a bleak and polysemous take on reality does not, for me, equal meaninglessness.
http://www.cynephile.com/2010/01/omer-fast-is-the-next-steve-mcqueen/
We can forgive the emptiness and nihilism if it makes us laugh: Take a Deep Breath, at least, keeps the chuckles coming. In the midst of all the feints, false starts, gore, and revelations of artificiality Fast has cast himself as an over-intellectualizing bumbler a la Albert Brooks, agonizing about the script and acting choices while the per diem clock is running; trusting his cell phone to an actor he’s just fired; declaiming to the cops about the integrity of the film’s “tableaux vivants” (soon undercut by the revelation that he asked the actress to take her shirt off–supposedly to make the blast from the suicide bomber “more authentic”). Several of the crew members also have laugh lines in the form of a stream of inappropriate and politically incorrect comments. From the press release, which painted the project as another earnest investigation of contested, semiotic reality, I wasn’t prepared for it to be such a yockfest, goofing non-stop on its own premises. The other film at Postmasters was pretty much a downer, however, as you describe.
We can forgive the emptiness and nihilism if it makes us laugh: Take a Deep Breath, at least, keeps the chuckles coming. In the midst of all the feints, false starts, gore, and revelations of artificiality Fast has cast himself as an over-intellectualizing bumbler a la Albert Brooks, agonizing about the script and acting choices while the per diem clock is running; trusting his cell phone to an actor he’s just fired; declaiming to the cops about the integrity of the film’s “tableaux vivants” (soon undercut by the revelation that he asked the actress to take her shirt off–supposedly to make the blast from the suicide bomber “more authentic”). Several of the crew members also have laugh lines in the form of a stream of inappropriate and politically incorrect comments. From the press release, which painted the project as another earnest investigation of contested, semiotic reality, I wasn’t prepared for it to be such a yockfest, goofing non-stop on its own premises. The other film at Postmasters was pretty much a downer, however, as you describe.
We can forgive the emptiness and nihilism if it makes us laugh: Take a Deep Breath, at least, keeps the chuckles coming. In the midst of all the feints, false starts, gore, and revelations of artificiality Fast has cast himself as an over-intellectualizing bumbler a la Albert Brooks, agonizing about the script and acting choices while the per diem clock is running; trusting his cell phone to an actor he’s just fired; declaiming to the cops about the integrity of the film’s “tableaux vivants” (soon undercut by the revelation that he asked the actress to take her shirt off–supposedly to make the blast from the suicide bomber “more authentic”). Several of the crew members also have laugh lines in the form of a stream of inappropriate and politically incorrect comments. From the press release, which painted the project as another earnest investigation of contested, semiotic reality, I wasn’t prepared for it to be such a yockfest, goofing non-stop on its own premises. The other film at Postmasters was pretty much a downer, however, as you describe.
Cynthia: I think that’s one interpretation. There’s so many themes in the two films it’s hard to pin them all down.
Tom: You’re right, it does have humor to it. At some point a few of the jokes were mentioned, and somehow it got edited out in the writing process. One of the hazards of watching a film multiple times is you stop thinking the jokes are that funny.
Cynthia: I think that’s one interpretation. There’s so many themes in the two films it’s hard to pin them all down.
Tom: You’re right, it does have humor to it. At some point a few of the jokes were mentioned, and somehow it got edited out in the writing process. One of the hazards of watching a film multiple times is you stop thinking the jokes are that funny.
I saw it 1.5 times–as I said some of my mirth might have been because I was expecting the usual art world cod liver oil. I agree with your ultimate judgments about the Postmasters Omers: one had the sense he wanted to say something serious in both films but buried himself in “meta.” I would describe him as a “comer” but of course he’s already at the top.
I saw it 1.5 times–as I said some of my mirth might have been because I was expecting the usual art world cod liver oil. I agree with your ultimate judgments about the Postmasters Omers: one had the sense he wanted to say something serious in both films but buried himself in “meta.” I would describe him as a “comer” but of course he’s already at the top.
Comments on this entry are closed.