Some Analog Lines.

My dear friend David Lowery wrote, directed, photographed and edited this very personal look at the issue of art versus technology; and more importantly, the issue of how the viewer interacts with, and reacts to, the film in front of him. Mr. Lowery takes an animated film he's created in traditional stop motion and compares it to a computer animated film produced by his brother, Benjamin. Is the visually inherent, concrete aspect of the media more important than the content of the picture? Are we as viewers more sutured into a film when we can witness it's production flaws (e.g., splicing, scratches, fingerprints, etc.)? Mr. Lowery suggests that "what is tactile will not be rendered pointless by technology, it will be given precedence and a precision it currently lacks."

I've always found the particular issue of how a work of art is created very intriguing. The minimalist period of film studied the actual film stock used in the production of a film. Take Michael Snow's 1966 film, Wavelength for example. There really is no plot--no substance--to the film. Only the film stock. And how the film stock can be manipulated. And let us not forget Empire, the 1964 film by Andy Warhol that consists of an eight hour focus on the Empire State Building. These films, and others, explore the actual material substance of film--not the movie being presented.

Mr. Lowery's film is currently one of three finalists categorized as Really Real Shorts, in The South by Southwest Film Festival's Click! 2006 competition.

Watch Some Analog Lines. And then: vote for it.