Gilles Deleuze's Cinema Books Part 3: The Frame

[@iju_art]

this is just incredible material - would love for the series to continue!

[@faseehahmadek]

waiting for the next part and still waiting !!

[@inbfu1513]

😁 Yes, unfortunately, he left the series unfinished.😔

[@necrozmite]

amazing explanation, presentation and editing - itd be amazing if this series was continued

[@lordanderson1293]

Eagerly waiting for the next part. Brilliant job 👍🏾

[@JamesBerrett]

amazing work - looking forward to the next one.

[@JamesBerrett]

have you done anything on the crystal-image? or are you able to recommend some other reading resources?

[@iwasapea90]

When is the next part on SHOT coming? Really enjoying these breakdowns.

[@idea0613]

this is amazing! our professor was explaining this and i did not understand a single word. i wonder if he understood what he was saying either. Thank you so much for these videos. You have a very unique way in teaching/explaining stuff. Thank you again!

[@filmandmediastudieschannel]

thanks! I'm very glad it was helpful.

[@lefeufollet63]

Really appreciate the very detailed analysis you’ve given to these two cinema books which have plagued me since film school.

[@filmandmediastudieschannel]

thanks! yes they are incredibly difficult and honestly I would only assign this stuff in a graduate level course.

[@aliceryne4152]

These videos are fantastic, I really hope you continue the series! It's been a tremendous help for me.

[@kaushikmukherjee9678]

Great! Where is the next part?

[@santiagogarrido3907]

These videos are great, it is all well explained

[@erdemhali]

Thanks for the first three Deleuze videos, but I'm looking forward to the rest...👀

[@bronwen965]

part 4 please!

[@user-kk9kw5fb4q]

Hello , Would love to hear your thoughts on 'Frame and shot' and 'Montage', will you do these 2 chapters?

[@ExOrbit1980]

Hello! Thank you! I had a great time. I was wondering if you ever made the videos about shot and montage? I can't seem to find them if they exist. Thanks again

[@waseemahad6731]

How can I find the lesson on Shot. I'm still waiting

[@zeothers]

and the video with the shot? merci!

[@Kalashnikovification]

More of these please!

[@AkhileshSingh-hy3nc]

please what finish you started.. i demand this out of my love for your videos and cinema in general

[@inbfu1513]

Can you please provide the excerpt from the book that supports your interpretation as "deleuze only says that the movement-image begins when filmmakers started to move the camera or stitch shots together" (6:05) ? I read it (perhaps wrongly) in this way: Early cinema also had movement-images, as movement was captured within the frame. However, these early movement-images were limited in expressing real duration because they lacked the dynamic interplay of montage and camera movement and tied to spatial change: "By producing in this way a mobile section of movements, the shot is not content to express the duration of a whole which changes, but constantly puts bodies, parts, aspects, dimensions, distances and the respective positions of the bodies which make up a set in the image into variation” (Cinema 1, p. 23) and "Take a fixed shot where the characters move: they modify their respective positions in a framed set; but this modification would be completely arbitrary if it did not also express something in the course of changing, a qualitative alteration, even a minute one, in the whole which passes through this set." (19) Thank you so much!

[@filmandmediastudieschannel]

@@inbfu1513 I’ll try to look back at the chapter for context, but off the top of my head I can definitely say I was influenced by Tom gunning’s reading of this chapter in this essay: www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/movingimage.14.1.0001

[@filmandmediastudieschannel]

I also talk about this reading in an article I wrote on deleuze called “very slight differences.” But I (and gunning) could be wrong!

[@inbfu1513]

@@filmandmediastudieschannel Thank you for your response! hope you come back soon!

[@floreamos]

Bravo, great presentation! but where is the part 4, the one on Shot or even part 5, that on Montage?

[@hectorf4610]

PLEASE DO MORE ABOUT DELUEZE'S CINEMA BOOKS, I IMPLORE

[@tubbsyclone]

Thanks for all of your content. Do you have any tips on teaching the crystal-image to film students?

[@perfect__clear]

Thank you! Need the shot!

[@ilovepavement1]

5: Benjamin's 'moment' - the Event which irrupts into the "what there is" (History, Time, Past) to occlude symbolic representation (trauma stage) in order to include the "what there is not". The symbolic order is thus rendered "what there is + what there is not": the dynamic-sublime any-time-whatever inscribing itself into the symbolic order. A film's reality is always "what there is + what there is not". Also relates to Lacans 'presence and absence' theory.

[@devsaraswat9909]

Great series!! will there be next parts of Deleuze ?

[@Kalashnikovification]

Also are these, your Terms or that of Deleuze? 9:05 A page number would be very helpful!

[@isaacwang3900]

Great content!

[@ilovepavement1]

Deleuze gets the terms "mathematical" and "dynamic" from Kant's typology of the sublime. Its interesting to note that Kant is all over 20th century film theory yet far less so in 20th century philosophy in general. Not sure what that says about film. Im dying for Jordan to essay The Zone Of Interest. Its a masterpiece of film theory, which contains a secret jumpcut that when you eventually see it will stay with you forever. I also have a theory that the title itself refers to The cinematic "Frame" and its unfaithful indexical power (the same power Shoah director Claude Lanzmann feared).

[@valja4902]

Great seriiiiies^^ !!! ♡

[@hamzamechri5774]

Thanks a lot 🎉

[@daniel-zh4qc]

Awesome stuff!!!! Do the entire book! (JK) - Research "mereology" - this comes from Husserl, and is the opposite of "Set" ....

[@filmandmediastudieschannel]

thanks for the heads up about mereology! super relevant and interesting.

[@Kalashnikovification]

@@filmandmediastudieschannel I would honestly watch if you did the entire book! Congratz!

[@rodguirre]

STILL WAITING 😭😭😭

[@ilovepavement1]

I'm almost certain Bergson, Barthes, and Derrida had said identical things of language way before Deleuze applied them to film. Baudrillard gets a bad rap for being derivative but at least he formulated a terminus to the above's vertiginous, "There is no outside text", infinity of over-existence. Albeit it an apocalyptic one.

[@aniruddhagowda8072]

Will you be continuing this series on KZbin? Or is there a separate website for these?

[@johnrainsman6650]

Do I have anyone who knows about boom operating? I have a question