The Resurrection of THINGS W/ AMIR MOTLAGH

A long while back, I tried my hand at creating an ongoing Youtube series that I titled, "Things w/ Amir Motlagh'. At the time, I was so excited about the start of a new journey into a world that had been closed off to me, as I was driven by a singular, inflexible focus for many years prior. It seems so completely innocent looking back, but it was shaped by some heavy things.

My life was in transformation, largely from a new desire to learn, non-fiction literature, some meditative practice and a general flexibility and openness that I had shut out completely. So, with unbridled enthusiasm, I started a Youtube series (on my main Youtube Page that was primarily for film/art) that lasted a few episodes and disappeared. At the time, I decided to turn my focus inward and started subtracting and an ill-conceived YT show was an easy, superfluous thing to scratch out.

Since that time, platforms have changed drastically. While I prefer Twitter as the purest broadcast channel, I'm going to test out YT again, in a similar capacity, though with more headroom of course. As I talk about on the video, I'm not quite certain if I can actually add any value, but at the least, it affords another opportunity to speak out, instead of leave in. It's selfish. We all need a nice mix of both.

I, like many other filmmakers of my generation never pursued YT, as the platform is personality-driven, and demands consistency. With self-contained film, you make one or two (if very productive) works a year, and that is no way to build on platforms that demand consistency. Plus, I came from the school of arts that championed mystery, not transparency. Though at the same time, I like the idea of a community, and a bottom-up approach is the new wave towards prosperity & understanding.

Click the image, go to the video. As they say, please "like & subscribe"!

Anza-Borrego and the desert soul (soil)

i enjoy desert hikes in the night. the landscape & fauna take on a completely different character. the quiet, the darkness, and the enormity of the space swallow you up. we humans often feel like aliens, as if we were put on this earth, a separate from, forced to survive the inhospitable. the desert represents that essence well. it is a faulty, modern feeling of course. we are as much part of the earth, as the earth is part of us. 30k years ago, a human walked on this very part of the earth, not feeling as distant to the soil (aridisols) as we do know. of course, this is a presumption, but, it's a bet i'd be willing to make.

below is the night study (anza-borrego 03.05.18 - 10:30pm)

what do you know of water’s worth while standing on the banks of the euphrates

(if inclined, please watch the work first...it runs 15min.)

Tomorrow marks the online premiere of my latest work (today for you) which I have conveniently embedded the link in this post. (if you prefer, on vimeo here)

This project functions as both a standalone film and also, a visual single for "Moonlighting MIssion Man", the latest release from my music project MIRS.

Two birds, one stone on the shallow end, a postmodernist twist on a Rene Magritte expression on the pretentious end. Both, equally as valid.

This is the working synopsis or thesis put through a press release blender:  "The film captures an intimate sliver into an Iranian American Sufi Muslim poet (Mahsa Hosseini) as she goes about finding meaning in her life. The visual narrative, shot in a classic cinéma vérité style, provides a strong counterpoint to the hidden, synth-driven, processed vocals in "Moonlighting Mission Man". The video eludes to a dual narrative between the film & the music, though kept hidden from plain sight."

Ultimately, this project started with this question, "Is this a short film or a music video?". And for me, ended with identity. (an ephemeral thing, with real-world consequences). 

But back to Magritte, and equally, Jean Baudrillard. Why is the opening question important to me? Media (and its contents) by in large is an open-ended question nowadays, and while I'm personally working through the details of this new paradigm, doing so with a dichotomous media might be my best way of processing it. What is a film? What is a tweet? How are they different? These are important questions in hyperreality when words have less direct meaning, and content rules all. 

"what do you know of water's worth while standing on the banks of the euphrates" premiere

We are premiering new work online,  Nov 28th, 2017.  Produced in-house at ANIMALS, in conjunction with MIRS. 

New Short Film (visual single) Premiering Soon - Collab with MIRS

Dropping a new project late Nov, or early next month titled, "what do you know of waters worth while standing on the banks of the euphrates".

And so I Wrote Something to be Read

Not only do you get a 2D cartoon representation of me, you also get some quotable gems I've probably (wisely) moved away from.

Cartoon Amir.

In all honestly, this is a cool film series published by FOCAL PRESS with some interesting, and talented(this word is meaningless in many ways, but not always) filmmakers.

I however, did not reread this after it was sent 6 months ago to be published, because, what is the point of revising archived opinion?

With that said, can it possible be the best thing I've ever written? Not sure. 

Enjoy, share and let me know your thoughts.

BIG BRAINS - SMALL BUDGETS: DIY FILMMAKING ADVICE

of YOUTUBE episodes and other expletives for the month of JAN....

Ok, so, here we are nearing the end of the first month of 2015, a wild month politically, and certainly, personally.

One thing that I promised myself, and I've made that socially clear as well is that I am going to commit to consistent communication. And Youtube is one of those streams I want to cultivate.

The only challenge now, is that while we at ANIMALS have been developing super material for the web, we have not figured out how to engage on a more simplistic, communicative level on channels like YOUTUBE. 

So, here and now, I keep to my word, while at the same time searching for ways to build the puzzle. Bear with me for awhile, since its not going to be pretty, but, soon enough we'll get into a flow .

For now, if you haven't, please subscribe. Do it. SUBSCRIBE NOW, not later. See, I'm not putting it off, and neither should you.

Enjoy this train wreck of a first attempt while it lasts.

the rebirth of audio storytelling.....

Who would have guest that in 2015, audio storytelling would be one of the hottest things in media. Of course, the popularity of PODCAST'ING has been growing for awhile now.

But, there was a substantial lull as well for a few years. It seems like an archaic medium if you compare it to terrestrial radio, but of course, it bares very little resemblance to traditional radio.

Podcast is about technology, and the viral effects of distribution. The platform was created by these advancements, and talented "entrepreneurs" took the leap to venture where others would not. And of course, the leaders take the cake.

That doesn't mean there isn't any room left. So, maybe its time for you to take that leap as well?

It's exciting to be alive at a time where some forms of distribution are essentially free. The gift of communicating is an option and not just reserved for a tiny select few. That's something remarkable and not to be taken for granted.

Been revisiting architecture (googie edition)....

I recently read an article in CURBED about the possible demolishing of a NORMS restaurant on LA CINEGA and Rosewood. First, i've probably been to NORMS under 5 times in my life, and every single time it was after a night of drinking, when other options did not exist. Needless to say, I don't really have an opinion on the food they serve, and in all honesty, I don't remember too much. It probably wasn't that great, but that's just assuming shit.

But, the article was not about NORMS itself, but the building that housed it. The architecture of the GOOGIE STYLE, (50's-60's) and one of the real identity markers of Southern California. The style is so fantastic and timeless, by the shear dated quality of it. Yes, it's a contradiction, but the wholly unique attributes make it a style that stands apart. It also was a staple of some of our favorite cartoon designs.

And it's being erased from the landscape as more and more of these cafe's, bowling alleys and motels get demolished. So, maybe it's a good thing to save this little NORMS, but maybe not for the coffee.

Take a second of your day and enjoy our creative human endeavors with a little click of the mouse.

look at how remarkable this is.

a lesson from Peter Thiel....

In Peter Thiels wonderful book, ZERO TO ONE, he describes a counterintuitive point about entrepreneurship and economics, one that vastly differentiates itself from the mainstream point of view.

In it, he makes the case for monopolies. Although, a caveat is in place to describe a certain type of monopoly different than the industrial age style of say, STANDARD OIL. The good types of monopolies he describes are ones like GOOGLE, or PAYPAL. Companies that created a whole new category, and are the best at what they do.

His point is that competition is bad, or more apply, misunderstood. Google hasn't had any competition in what it's best at, "search" for many years. 

This point can be applied to other endeavors aside from business. On a personal level, competition often works against our goals. It places us in a situation where we cannot think creatively because we are striving for incremental advantages of doing things that are already visible.

But when you stop looking at your work as competition, new ideas can appear because those borders are loosened. You create new categories, when you go from 0 to 1.

It's an interesting idea to contemplate.

In Peter Thiel world, technology and innovation is our savior, with an emphasis on financial rewards. A possible counterpoint to some of his idea's is Jaron Lanier, the father of virtual reality, who describes the tech monopolies as the possible end of the middle class in his book, WHO OWNS THE FUTURE. 

Both have interesting books to look into.

the curious case of the James Francos.....

Whether you like it or not, JAMES FRANCO is the character of the future. He is constant, consistent & working in PRESENT TENSE. Franco is the stream. And that stream is not going away because the stream demands stuff now.

Gone are the days where you could sit and toil on a concept for years, or turn a MALICK and show up 15 years later. Gone are the days where you could do or be ONE THING (however, if you  love that one thing, more power too you).  Because the world is turning so fast, if you don't pivot when you are required too, the media you are on top of will turn into OPERA, and then you'll be bitter. And pivoting becomes increasingly difficult as time goes by. It's as skill you must learn to survive. 

Franco and his cohorts are also the few characters around who are almost completely immune to criticism. This is not unprecedented. Woody Allan has already mastered that art, by the only effective method. By not giving a shit and immediately moving to something else. The new school just does it faster.

In a world where media is completely ubiquitous and a million paths of communication exist, dealing with a bad review is akin to wiping your mouth after eating a bowl of spaghetti. Who gives a shit. And if you do, well, you're fucked.

the shiny new, and the rugged old....

How many times do you hear the phrase, "they don't make em like they used too"? We like what we become accustomed too.

Back in prehistoric times (everything before 1999), our cultural cycles tended to move a bit slower and our economy was largely top down. Everything sat around a bit longer on the shelf. And the farther back you go, the longer these movements sat around.

A musical movement like GRUNGE had time to birth itself, and kill itself within a relatively stable time frame. People on the fringes sowed the seeds, and as it grew larger, the corps swooped in and made it readily available to all. And in those top down days, ALL really meant ALL.

These days, cycles don't work the same way. They have two distinct patterns. One is the giant explosion (VIRAL) and the other is the STATIC but constant feed. Things tend to move extremely quickly, or, they stay extremely stable as long as the feed is consistently updated.

Viral is like a big bang moment. Out of nothing, everything.  A huge burning moment of glory, but just as quickly, fading away, burdened by its inability to scale. Novelty is incredibly difficult to manufacture to a fickle audience always wanting something new. But some people learn to turn this situation into the second situation.

The STATIC feed is the other cultural movement. This one is based on confirmation bias and preferences built over time. Much of these where probably built many years ago. And sometimes, with consistency, you can turn viral into this.

The STATIC feed doesn't have to worry about capturing the entire market share. If you got a podcast, and people listen, you can keep a good portion of your audience for the long term, as long as you never neglect it. However, if you step off the throttle, the audience lost will probably never return. 

STATIC is all about comfort. STATIC is the same reason people get stuck into the "they don't make em like they used too" motif.  Most people just grown out of cultural items unfortunately, and are stuck with what they know. 

The interesting thing is that these days, STATIC can be beneficial for a creative. If your an aging rockstar, or a TV actor long behind your sticom glory, you can actually reconnect with that same group that loved you then.. People are looking back, just as much as they are enthralled with the shiny new toy.

The "BEST OF" lie....

A NEW YEAR comes, and with that a faux clean plate. But just before the dial switch, we were all inundated by a seemingly never ending orgy of "best of" lists.

Chalked with hyperbole and irreverence; blogs, twitter, magazines and online media outlets who endow themselves with "tastemaker" monikers espoused the loves of the year. 

Most of these lists where "best of" lists, and not the more truthful, "favorites" list. A big difference in meaning. 

Now, a best of list of athletes is probably measurable. And so is a host of other things in which quantifying makes sense. But in the arts, the only true purpose these lists  holds is consumerism or elitism.

Because, "best" is nonsensical in arts. Unless you specify it, and in that specification, it is quantifiable it is meaningless.

If best meant theatrical sales, than you have a measure. If best is "rotten tomatoes" ratings, then you have a measure.

If best is personal, than its favorite. And that's what it all comes down to. Of course, none of us has the time to view 30,000 productions, so, we watch the most accessible or ones that have been picked out. 

Best in the arts does serve a purpose. Award shows, to bring in more business. Or, helping individual careers to obtain more opportunities because of a certain popularity that comes with providing more value than the average. That's it. Nothing more. You cannot quantify the ephemeral, until you actually can.