360 Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Two Takes by William Greaves

[DarkImbecile]

Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Two Takes by William Greaves



In his one-of-a-kind fiction/documentary hybrid Symbiopsychotaxiplasm Take One, the pioneering William Greaves presides over a beleaguered film crew in New York’s Central Park, leaving them to try to figure out what kind of movie they’re making. A couple enacts a breakup scenario over and over, a documentary crew films a crew filming the crew, locals wander casually into the frame: the project defies easy description. Yet this wildly innovative sixties counterculture landmark remains one of the most tightly focused and insightful movies ever made about making movies, expanded thirty-five years later by its unconventional follow-up, Symbiopsychotaxiplasm Take 2½. The “sequel” sees Take One actors Audrey Henningham and Shannon Baker reunited in a more personal, metatheatrical exploration of the effects of the passage of time on technology, the artistic process, and relationships—real and fabricated.

DIRECTOR-APPROVED SPECIAL EDITION FEATURES

• High-definition digital transfers of both films, with uncompressed monaural soundtracks on the Blu-ray
• SYMBIOPSYCHOTAXIPLASM TAKE ONE (1968 • 75 minutes • Color • Monaural • 1.33:1 aspect ratio)
• SYMBIOPSYCHOTAXIPLASM TAKE 2½ (2005 • 99 minutes • Color • Monaural • 1.78:1 aspect ratio)
• Discovering William Greaves, a 2006 documentary on Greaves’s career, featuring Greaves, his wife and coproducer Louise Archambault, actor Ruby Dee, filmmaker St. Clair Bourne, and film scholar Scott MacDonald
• Interview from 2006 with actor Steve Buscemi
• Trailer
• English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing

PLUS: An essay by critic Amy Taubin and production notes by Greaves for Take One

[TechNoir]

The article "What a Long, Strange Trip It's Been: William Greaves' Symbiopsychotaxiplasm Take One" on the Greaves site does a much better job than I could exploring some of the important sense in which it's an experimental film as well as why it's so substantial. Of course, there's no substitute for actually experiencing the film. Even after it showed at Sundance and all over the festival circuit 10 years ago, it still has only a small following. Still, I hope it will develop an audience gradually after it's released.

I love this film. Its a prime example of cinema verite. What is interesting is the premise. Greaves takes a group of people, tells them he is making a film, but in reality he is simply making a documentary on making a film that doesn't exsist. This is one i have been waiting for. I'm sure most of you will enjoy it very much.

[Tribe]

So, it's sort of like Watkins' La Commune? Of course, I haven't seen that one either...

Tribe

[Andre Jurieu]

So, it's sort of like Watkins' La Commune?

I though La Commune was a pseudo-documentary, as in it implies itself to be a documentary based on its style and subject, but then its setting is in the 1800s, so therefore it can't be a doc. I haven't watched it either, so I'm just going by what I've heard/read and generally talking out of my ass.

[Tribe]

Here's a review by Manohla Dargis (October 26, 2005, NY Times):

Film Within a Film in 60's Time Capsule? Groovy
By MANOHLA DARGIS

Made in 1968, when the moon was in the seventh house, and American troops were in Vietnam, "Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take 1" represents a fascinating and unfortunately forgotten blip on the American movie screen. Produced, directed and edited with finesse by William Greaves, this fiction-nonfiction hybrid is an experiment in form that playfully takes itself apart scene by scene, code by code, in a bid to reveal how cinematic illusions - including that of the auteur - are manufactured.

Set principally in the leafy green haven of Central Park, "Symbiopsychotaxiplasm" is, at its simplest level, a document of a screen test. For much of the time, we watch two actors (usually Patricia Ree Gilbert and Don Fellows) rehearse - and rehearse again - some borderline-humorous turgid dialogue, mostly having to do with the woman's suspicions about the man's sexual orientation. Again and again, his character chases her character in the park and pulls her aside, and the two talk, jest, attack and rage. All of this improvised messiness is further complicated because while one camera crew is shooting the screen test, a second camera crew is documenting it - going behind the scenes to record rehearsals and so forth - while yet a third camera crew is documenting the film and the film within the film. Got that?

If all this sounds a bit nuts, dangerously self-indulgent and very of its experimental moment, it is. But it's also highly entertaining and, at moments, revelatory about filmmaking as a site of creative tension between individual vision and collective endeavor. Mr. Greaves, who often appears front and center, wearing a groovy net shirt and a slightly amused expression, initially appears somewhat overwhelmed by all the different cameras and the often pushy cast and crew members who seem suspicious of his methods and, at times, downright mutinous. (The often funny, off-site scenes of the crew criticizing the film and its director are studies in why the group process is so often doomed to failure.) Gradually, it emerges that Mr. Greaves is less the dupe of this orchestrated madness than its ringmaster.

"Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take 1" was never released theatrically, which is too bad for Mr. Greaves and for the audience he never got a chance to cultivate. The film is being presented by the director Steven Soderbergh, whose occasional and comparatively restrained forays into experimental narrative suggest that he might have been influenced by Mr. Greaves's mischievous deconstruction. At the Sundance Film Festival last January, Mr. Greaves presented an equally diverting follow-up to his earlier film called, naturally, "Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take 2½." In this newest feature, the director returned to Central Park with two of the actors from the first film for another go-round. "Take 2½" is oddly moving because the film reveals not only how time has affected everyone in the intervening years but also how very straight filmmaking in this country has become.

It's a wonderful gift to us that "Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take 1" has finally made it into theaters. But how about its equally far-out sequel?

Tribe

[kaujot]

I'm excited about this one. It sounds incredibly interesting. I could give about a fourth of a shit about the Grey Gardens releases, though.

[Tribe]

This new, high-definition digital transfer was created on a Spirit Datacine from a 35mm print. At the behest of director William Greaves, thousands of instances of dirt, debris, and scratches were not removed using the MTI Digital restoration System.

Anyone have any insight into this director that might explain the above?

Tribe

[toiletduck!]

Anyone have any insight into this director that might explain the above?

Tribe

Unfortunately, I don't, but this keeps getting more and more fascinating. A blind buy for sure!

-Toilet Dcuk

[CSM126]

This new, high-definition digital transfer was created on a Spirit Datacine from a 35mm print. At the behest of director William Greaves, thousands of instances of dirt, debris, and scratches were not removed using the MTI Digital restoration System.

Anyone have any insight into this director that might explain the above?

Tribe

It adds to the authenticity, I suppose. The film seems like one that's all about getting to the most down-and-dirty level of film making. Might as well leave it looking dirty.

[TechNoir]

This is wonderful news. I have been waiting for this for years. My old VHS dub is so worn out from being played so much. This is cinema verite at its best. I only wish there was some sort of extra about Miles Davis great music.

[Cinesimilitude]

wait... Miles Davis does the music?

Sign me up.

[Nihonophile]

The next Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas for Criterion?

This seems like a really ballsy release for criterion, doubt we'll be seeing this in Best Buy. Regardless, this sounds up my alley if it gives me the rush of watching stuff like I am Curious: Yellow/Blue or a Peter Watkins film.

[godardslave]

doubt we'll be seeing this in Best Buy.

customer:

do you have Symbiopduh......um.....symbiosis...er..symbioofodosisi?

ah screw it, give me seven samurai.

[ellipsis7]

Rosenbaum...

Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One
Capsule by Jonathan Rosenbaum
From the Chicago Reader

Seeing this singular 1968 American experimental feature by William Greaves a second time (on video; the first time was in 1980, in its original 35-millimeter format) has led me to value it more, though arguably the fact that it loses relatively little impact on video constitutes one of its limitations. Greaves, a pioneering black actor whose career stretches back to postwar films made for black audiences as well as the underrated Hollywood feature Lost Boundaries, went on to direct over 200 documentaries, host and executive produce NET's Black Journal, and teach acting at the Lee Strasberg Theatre Institute. For this eccentric venture, he got two white actors to play a quarreling couple in Central Park and proceeded to film not only them (in both rehearsal and performance) but also himself and his camera crew and various other people in the vicinity, often juxtaposing two or three camera angles simultaneously in split screen in the final edit. The crew's own doubts and speculations about the film being made were also recorded later and edited into the mix. The couple's quarrel is vitriolic and singularly unpleasant, the acting variable, the collective insight into what Greaves is up to mainly uncertain. The title modifies a term coined by political scientist and philosopher Arthur Bentley that refers to the interactions between people and their environment, and the notion of a shifting center is what gives this experiment much of its interest and also limits it from going very far in any single direction.

And Time Out on the sequel...

Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take 2 1/2
Backed by Buscemi and Soderbergh, this far from straight sequel to ‘Take One' reunites the same actors with the same location for an amplified revisiting that considers three decades of social shift.

[The Fanciful Norwegian]

Anyone have any insight into this director that might explain the above?

Tribe

It adds to the authenticity, I suppose. The film seems like one that's all about getting to the most down-and-dirty level of film making. Might as well leave it looking dirty.

I just figured anyone who names their film "Symbiopsychotaxiplasm" has a weird sense of humor.

[ellipsis7]

About time, ageing, and things moving on... So all the artifacts, scratches and dirt should be retained rather than removed...

[Cinesimilitude]

I'm not sure If I want this.

experimental stuff like Schizopolis and I am curious just piss me off when i watch them.

I'll just rely on you guys to tell me how it is when its released.

[miless]

I'm not sure If I want this.

experimental stuff like Schizopolis and I am curious just piss me off when i watch them.

I'll just rely on you guys to tell me how it is when its released.

I'd hate to hear what you think of the Brakhage set

[godardslave]

I'm not sure If I want this.

experimental stuff like Schizopolis and I am curious just piss me off when i watch them.

I'll just rely on you guys to tell me how it is when its released.

I'd hate to hear what you think of the Brakhage set

He's only 20 years old. Go easy on the Kid.

[kalavin]

I saw this film a few years ago and it did not live up to the hype. "Hype" is, of course, relative here. There was a great deal of interest in this film a few years ago amongst film studies professors and students of the avant-garde. A great number (again, relatively speaking) of essays have been authored on this film, but it seems almost as if it is more discussed than seen, if that is possible. We screened this in a class on African-American representation in American cinema and both the students and professor were quite underwhelmed. The film seems to rehearse, yet again, the same now-stereotypical dramas of making a film (the unending repetition of action; the battle between art and commerce; what makes it into the film and what is left out; the arguments between actors and directors, or soundmen and directors for that matter). Although this film may have been an early example of this type of "behind the scenes" movie, we have now seen all of these conflicts many, many times. Of course it is not the movie's fault that it has been imitated; maybe it just hasn't aged well.

Rosenbaum mentions that the film never goes far in any single direction and he is absolutely correct. Some will find fault with this and others will be intrigued more by what the film leaves out, or leaves for us to assemble for ourselves. I certainly remember moments during the screening where I was almost motioning for Greaves to point his camera back to something he had just past. So, maybe that's a victory on his part.

Now, I have only seen the film once, so I reserve the right to change my opinion about the film when I re-screen it. Rosenbaum seems to have reached his conclusion after two screenings. The release of the DVD should give me a chance to re-evaluate the film. At the very least, after a second screening I should be able to amend and elaborate my rather vague description of how the film was disappointing.

Anyway, has anyone else seen this film? I see a lot of people are interested, but no one has mentioned having seen it. If I recall the film was making the rounds earlier this year; at the very least, it played at the Wexner Center.

And I like the cover art.

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

Ha! His name is Mr. Greaves! (Different spelling of course though.)

[CSM126]

There's a trailer here for those interested.

[Cinesimilitude]

I'm not sure If I want this.

experimental stuff like Schizopolis and I am curious just piss me off when i watch them.

I'll just rely on you guys to tell me how it is when its released.

I'd hate to hear what you think of the Brakhage set

He's only 20 years old. Go easy on the Kid.

Well. I guess "piss me off" is a little harsh. I am Curious bores me, and Schizopolis made me feel like I was losing brain cells. The Miles Davis music and the fact that this is about filmmaking ('I am curious' is too. Based on the trailer, this looks a lot more energetic) are the two interesting things to me.

As for Brakhage, I've no idea how I'd respond. having the attention span to sit through I am curious or Schizopolis is an entirely different beast. I think I could appreciate experimental film more in a short subject than a feature length film.

[Matt]

This new, high-definition digital transfer was created on a Spirit Datacine from a 35mm print. At the behest of director William Greaves, thousands of instances of dirt, debris, and scratches were not removed using the MTI Digital restoration System.

Anyone have any insight into this director that might explain the above?

At the risk of making a gross generalization, many indie/experimental filmmakers resist the temptations of digital cleanup, mainly because they want film to look like film (inclusive of all of its flaws) and because they don't want the digital image to replace or have the illusion of superiority to the original film image. Criterion generally does a very good job of keeping grain intact and of maintaining flaws that are inherent in the original elements, but Greaves probably wants the digital image to look only as good as the best available film image--not better.

[peerpee]

Reminds me of a joke someone told me last week about the Irish DVD authoring house who've been two years digitally restoring Bill Morrison's DECASIA, and they've only managed to restore ten minutes so far.

Sorry.