Wednesday, December 2, 2009

12/2 performance

Honestly, I can't believe the performance went as smoothly as it did. I felt that each part was played out very believably, especially the moment when Jill entered (watching the faces in the crowd at this point was really funny) I did feel guiltier than I expected to, I felt pretty bad for the people standing on the "if you drank" side. I'm glad that people talked about it as much as they did, people were coming up to me all day telling me how much they believed the situation. It's funny how much adrenaline people seemed to get from this, myself included. ha. I think it was a great break in the usual ways for presenting art, or having openings. I feel like it was much memorable than most art events are, simply because it involved the audience so much. I also think that our "advertisement" performance at the community dinner was a good, unusual way to promote the event.

okay, so the criticisms. we absolutely did not have our shit together in documenting the event. which is no good at all, because we need that footage. Also, we had some communication issues as to who should be doing what and it felt really rushed and scattered close to show time. all things considered though, I think we did a great job working together (with ourselves and the MCA faculty and administration) to pull this off. Next time though, I'm going to overestimate how stupid nervous I'll get right before showtime and make myself a dummy checklist.

outline revised presentation-we could probably talk while the film is running, because most people will have already seen the film.

discussion of concept/process-four different perspectives on the idea of "absurdity", we each wrote our own character and had a different person direct our scene.
dinner scene-questions of American "normality" how we should act a certain way in certain situations, even if this way is completely against how we would feel most comfortable acting.

2. stunt documentation
show documentation, discuss concept behind deliberately lying about "free wine"
why does it take a "reward" for people to view art?
what happens when this reward turns into a problem?
who do we let define reality? authority figures? (reference ideas of different perspectives present in our film)
what does it take to make us believe something is real?