“After viewing Brendan Lee’s work I’m sure you’ll agree the question isn’t if he’ll go on a shooting rampage, the question is when. I mean what sort of person cuts together subliminal snippets of angry movie characters screaming fuck and hitting each other, then puts it all on loop? Talk about a cry for help. Isn’t this the sort of thing those kids from Columbine did in their basement? I mean where are the parents in all this? I’m sure if we went to Brendan’s house we’d find Ozzy Osbourne albums, Judas Priest albums, a copy of the Unabomber Manifesto and possibly a Swastika flag. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s got a gun at the gallery right now. The cross hair, this moment, locked on the back of your head."
Anger occupies an unusual space in the cinematic medium. It is virtually never the real thing. Cinematic anger exists in moments of intangibility. Most objects retain their object ness on screen i.e., a car is a car and a tree is a tree, but anger in film is indeterminate and indistinguishable from its origins in the physical world. The moment of anger is emulated on film, stricken from the original a doppelganger devoid of real emotion. By retaining only the outbursts of anger from film, ANGER brings to the forefront the cinematic device itself.
In ANGER we are not given the time or space to develop a relationship with the characters. Time is only given to the device of emotional release. The cause of this build up is non-existent, only the effect is presented.
Film trailers present to the viewer a summary of effects to be witnessed during the film. We cannot experience the cause of these effects only the spectacular moment produced to draw us into the film’s grasp. Trailers have the allusion of showing us all the highlights from the film, but what they are really presenting is a compaction of the cinematic devices. These devices leave the viewer to wonder what events unfold in order to reach these pivotal moments in the film.
In the cinematic experience, we generally associate and identify with the hero figure through a build up of events and a developed language. The cinema of the spectacle employs different tactics in securing our attention. With the compaction of cinematic devices, I have attempted to construct identification with the device itself.
ANGER presents a miscellany of violent scenes from cinema. The turbulent spectacle that unfolds is strangely devoid of cause leaving only effect to immerse the viewer. Time therefore is superfluous yet engaging and time consuming, as it draws on the spectators’ knowledge of cinema. A series of everyday (filmic) moments is amassed and transformed into new meanings - hovering somewhere between embodiment and disembodiment. \\