Fun fact: No camera was used to make this short movie: legs, wings and other parts of butterflies were glued directly on the filmstrip, thus creating a shifting pattern of unsurpassed beauty. Purely experimental stuff here.
You're supposed to be hearing the film reel perforations going "tktktktktk, which emulates the flapping of moth wings at the same time as each frame. And seeing the film's light projected through the theater air... Thus, Mothlight. This TH-cam silent rendition loses half of the meaning. But it's still beautiful.
Not true. It's intended by Brakhage as a silent film, and btw it's poorly represented here visually. For a much better version, see th-cam.com/video/UfBdTsljCXk/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=StanBrakhage See also "Stan Brakhage's" replies there to viewer's questions for more information about this film.
This film is so beautiful it makes me cry... you can feel Brakhage's desperation to imitate something no human can imitate-- life. We cannot control anything in nature, no matter how hard we try. It is the human way to try to control everything we can, but with nature, it's a struggle to understand and accept that it is beyond our control. We can never replicate the delicacy of a moth's wing or the beauty of a flower petal, and even if we could, we could never control their death. This is the raw, pure despair of realization that everything around us will die, including us, and there is nothing we can do to change it. This is the scrambling fingers of Brakhage attempting to piece together the fragments of the remains of life, trying to let them soar one more time as they did so naturally while they were alive, beyond our control. This is the passion humans have in trying so hard to see ourselves around us and preserve beauty. And this is the frantic, pleading attempts to save what cannot be saved and that in itself is beautiful. I love this film.
Man, this is why I adore arthouse films. I'm not a huge film buff but these are the type of flicks that encourages you to formulate gibberish based on whatever emotion you think the film gives you. Frankly, I find this one a poignant, experimental garbage of moth pics.
so beautiful, it passes so fast between each frame that you don't have a chance to fully absorb the complexities you're seeing at every moment, like when you see an actual moth or other insect in person, it's fleeting beauty~~~
surprisingly, mothlight's awesomeness holds up somewhat, even on youtube. one of cinema's great moments. if you ever get the opportunity to see the film version projected on a screen, run for it.
Even though it's been a year since your comment I will just try to briefly explain this type of art for you. This type of art is actually all about experimenting( thus the name experimental art). Artists experiment with ideas, their medium of art and the concept of art as a whole. I will be talking really generally since most experimental artists have different visions, the thing they have in common is an instinct to find the boundaries of the art and break them. Doing something which hasn't been done is the philosophy. These pieces of art aren't really similar to other pieces of art becuase they are more about the philosophy of art rather than giving an aesthetical pleasure to the viewer. For example in this movie Stan Brakhage is expanding the answer of the question "What is a movie?". Does moth pieces glued to film and shown in a projector count as a movie or art? Or another possible questioning is about having a plot etc. In my opinion what makes experimental artists so important is the new doors they open. Dada movement is perhaps the most known experimental art movement and it changed the whole perception of art in the 20th century. Without Dada there wouldnt have been Andy Warhol for example. Even though at first they don't seem to be connected, all upcoming artists feed from the artists of the past and especially from the artists who are defining the art and the medium they are using for expressing their art. I know this is far from the best explanation possible but I hope it helps. And I would love to answer if you have more questions.
@@herobrineapril8451 I do wish that was the world we lived in but unfortunately it's the current cult of cash that dictates how films are made. While certain directors are still make passionate projects that push the medium most mainstream films are influenced by whatever success came before e.g. Marvel and Star Wars. Don't get me wrong I really like a lot of films made this way but I also think it leads to a lot of trash films. Anyway, it would cool if filmmakers could take more influence from art pieces like this one (even if I hate them) and make something fresh and interesting.
you can't watch this fucking movie on youtube. what a joke. i'm glad i was lucky enough to see it in school along with many other brakhage films. just sad.
This is MY birthday party and we're watching MOTHLIGHT BY STAN BRAKHAGE
This is the best comment
bueno
lol
Happy birthday
Great
Fun fact: No camera was used to make this short movie: legs, wings and other parts of butterflies were glued directly on the filmstrip, thus creating a shifting pattern of unsurpassed beauty. Purely experimental stuff here.
Judging by the length of the movie the artist used about 50ft of film. Can't imagine gluing that many butterflies.
Never underestimate Avant-garde artists, my friend :).
it's supposed to be a silent film
@@Ziadibrahim1985There were musical scores that were supposed to accompany it.
You're supposed to be hearing the film reel perforations going "tktktktktk, which emulates the flapping of moth wings at the same time as each frame. And seeing the film's light projected through the theater air... Thus, Mothlight. This TH-cam silent rendition loses half of the meaning. But it's still beautiful.
Ah, thank you !
My computer is humming. Does that count for anything?
Now I know
Thank u :D
Not true. It's intended by Brakhage as a silent film, and btw it's poorly represented here visually. For a much better version, see
th-cam.com/video/UfBdTsljCXk/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=StanBrakhage
See also "Stan Brakhage's" replies there to viewer's questions for more information about this film.
This movie still slaps in 2022. Who’s still watching?
MEEEEEEEE
My 11th grade h.s. filmmaking teacher, Richard Olderman showed this film at 9am, (‘82). RiP, Richard & thanks 🙏 🖤
You had filmmaking as a subject in 11th grade? Which school is this 😮
@ New Trier HS
This film is so beautiful it makes me cry... you can feel Brakhage's desperation to imitate something no human can imitate-- life. We cannot control anything in nature, no matter how hard we try. It is the human way to try to control everything we can, but with nature, it's a struggle to understand and accept that it is beyond our control. We can never replicate the delicacy of a moth's wing or the beauty of a flower petal, and even if we could, we could never control their death. This is the raw, pure despair of realization that everything around us will die, including us, and there is nothing we can do to change it. This is the scrambling fingers of Brakhage attempting to piece together the fragments of the remains of life, trying to let them soar one more time as they did so naturally while they were alive, beyond our control. This is the passion humans have in trying so hard to see ourselves around us and preserve beauty. And this is the frantic, pleading attempts to save what cannot be saved and that in itself is beautiful. I love this film.
wonderful interpretation !!
i want whatever you're smoking
It’s a fucking moth
@@gameworldmaster5916 the cool thing about beauty is that we can have different opinions on it and both be right!
Man, this is why I adore arthouse films. I'm not a huge film buff but these are the type of flicks that encourages you to formulate gibberish based on whatever emotion you think the film gives you.
Frankly, I find this one a poignant, experimental garbage of moth pics.
Truly one of the videos of all time
so beautiful, it passes so fast between each frame that you don't have a chance to fully absorb the complexities you're seeing at every moment, like when you see an actual moth or other insect in person, it's fleeting beauty~~~
Thank you for posting this. I got to see it live several years ago with Stan Brakhage speaking. It is such an inspiration!
surprisingly, mothlight's awesomeness holds up somewhat, even on youtube. one of cinema's great moments. if you ever get the opportunity to see the film version projected on a screen, run for it.
Brilliant plot twist at the end.
The plot twist is that this is ultimately not art.
@@Winductlmao get a load of this smart fella who thinks hes the self-appointed arbiter of art
@@AdoraVivos 😄
well, someone sure put a lot of work into... something
I like the part with the moth wings.
this is actually mind-blowing!
just beautiful.....
Meh, characters were so one-dimensional
two-dimensional, actually
ROFLOL!!!
Yes, and the dialogue is no improvement.
oddly beautiful
I can't take my eyes off this... wow..
Oh.... now I get it.
Casey Reas’ studies of this film are amazing.
absolute kinography
watching this hurts my eyes...
Tip: Set the playback speed to 0.25 and watch again!
Thank you for recommending now I see
Yeah, you should see it in DVD quality too.
Watch this short while listening to "Nearly Lost You" by Screaming Trees. Now, THAT is trippy.
Sometimes i can see in this video people, their silhouettes and thier faces
Ok that's quite special work in 60's: beautiful frames with dead lives.
fucking amazing. that took my breath away.
Visionary
Has anyone seen this shown at half speed? It seems like a really good song playing at 78 instead of 33.
What's that star shaped thing at the 0:30 ? Fucking beautiful. Also the moths.
"How to make music without sound by using just a magnetic film."
Is Boom in the shot?
k so i think this guys' art is way too out there for me i legit cant understand what the hell hes trying to get at
i highly reccomend watching this 2 the song viva vida by daedelus
@fredgreentomatoes You got to see this on the big screen?? I assume you are a film student (or you just have access to amazing underground cinemas)
Heh heh! Good one. Did you use Final Cut Pro or something?
Anyone seen 'The Jacket' with Adrien Brody? The opening sequence is just like this.
definitive proof i dont have epilepsy
@MonsieurRondu once upon a time...but in 16mm
where is my commentary .
1:00
oh shoot there's colors
Soooo many continuity errors.
i dont get it
Bi ince yükseliyorum sana Ceren
Here because of The Duke of Burgundy
I can't understand it...
true kinography
Hello MMA12
I don’t get it
0:25
holy shit
sup /tv/
Too bad it's so crudely interpolated. But a beautiful film nonetheless
the book was better :'( 4.5/10. get gud scrubs
I don't understand this kind of art =0=
Even though it's been a year since your comment I will just try to briefly explain this type of art for you. This type of art is actually all about experimenting( thus the name experimental art). Artists experiment with ideas, their medium of art and the concept of art as a whole. I will be talking really generally since most experimental artists have different visions, the thing they have in common is an instinct to find the boundaries of the art and break them. Doing something which hasn't been done is the philosophy. These pieces of art aren't really similar to other pieces of art becuase they are more about the philosophy of art rather than giving an aesthetical pleasure to the viewer. For example in this movie Stan Brakhage is expanding the answer of the question "What is a movie?". Does moth pieces glued to film and shown in a projector count as a movie or art? Or another possible questioning is about having a plot etc.
In my opinion what makes experimental artists so important is the new doors they open. Dada movement is perhaps the most known experimental art movement and it changed the whole perception of art in the 20th century. Without Dada there wouldnt have been Andy Warhol for example. Even though at first they don't seem to be connected, all upcoming artists feed from the artists of the past and especially from the artists who are defining the art and the medium they are using for expressing their art.
I know this is far from the best explanation possible but I hope it helps. And I would love to answer if you have more questions.
kino
Trash 0/10 -Not enough fanservice
seizure warning…
whats up with these horribele interlaced crap copies of this wonderful film. daymn what a disgrase.
i bims 1 trololololo
ill shit
Ugh, watching this and seeing Charlie Sheen in the related videos with 3,000,000+ views disgusts me.
This makes me angry as it is pointless. I disagree with this as a valid film.
Paris Ferguson ‘Avant Garde’
the point of avant garde was to break away and rebel from the societal norms of art making
@@marissajoly7029 I agree completely. I hate it
@@parisferguson2430 its the experimental stuff like that, that influence new mainstream film types.
@@herobrineapril8451 I do wish that was the world we lived in but unfortunately it's the current cult of cash that dictates how films are made. While certain directors are still make passionate projects that push the medium most mainstream films are influenced by whatever success came before e.g. Marvel and Star Wars.
Don't get me wrong I really like a lot of films made this way but I also think it leads to a lot of trash films.
Anyway, it would cool if filmmakers could take more influence from art pieces like this one (even if I hate them) and make something fresh and interesting.
I lost the plot.
you can't watch this fucking movie on youtube. what a joke. i'm glad i was lucky enough to see it in school along with many other brakhage films.
just sad.
Nonsense and everything wrong with pretension
even for 1963, this was cheaply unoriginal and dull at its core
profound. charot