Pixar compilation:
While browsing the video subreddit of Reddit.com I found this awesome compilation video dedicated to the 25 years of Pixar. I decided to use this as my remix because I think it is “calmer” then most remix videos. (I feel like people think remixes have to be some crazy techno/pop song with tons of editing) It’s an example of how remixing can be used, in a way, to actually promote the original product. People will watch this video and think of it as a trailer and remember how amazing their favorite Pixar animation was/is. (On a side note, it could almost be argued that a trailer to a movie is a remix. It takes part of the original movie, edits and mixes it down, and adds music that is usually not in the final movie. Sometimes it even creates this false idea of what the movie actually will be; thus creating new content.)
When the general public gets hold of videos similar to this, I don’t think many of them would even categorize it as a remix. They would think it was a well-made trailer to promote Pixar. The general public only knows remixes as music. When we think of a remix the first thing we think of is music, there is no denying that. Lessig points out to us at the beginning of chapter four that literature can be a remix. I believe film can also be a remix and the combination of film, music and literature can create the ultimate remix.
I think it is very interesting the laws that follow remixing. Obviously when writing and quoting it is less of a hassle and people understand the rules of citing. “We understand quoting is an essential part of that writing. It would be impossible to construct and support that practice if permission were required every time a quote was made.” (Lessig, 53) What I wonder is… Why can’t we just cite in the world of music and film? For the most part I think society does. The amateur music video remixes you see on YouTube usually say it is a remix, and this seems to work. When things start to get out of hand is when people start to make money off of other these remixes, or if already known artist are sampling and remixing. This bugs me! As long as the people cite what they used, then they deserve all the rewards that follow.
I like the quote you took from Lessig, since a lot of essays contain some sort of citing of other sources wouldn't it seem like a common thing in other arts such as music or video? It isn't accepted as much as "text sampling" is but remixing and sampling video and music may one day reach the time when just citing your source will be good enough to accommodate the use of the content.
ReplyDeleteInteresting point: "It’s an example of how remixing can be used, in a way, to actually promote the original product." I think more and more businesses are realizing this (maybe they read Lessig!) Your question about "why can't we just cite" is a good one, but as Lessig lays out early on, has much to do with $$ and media I do believe. Maybe...
ReplyDeleteBlog MAKEUP comment:
ReplyDeleteLove your point about movie trailers existing as remixes. It is interesting really, that a trailer is essentially a remix meant to sell another product, whereas a lot of the arguments against remixing say that a remix steals from the original work. Looking at the commercial prospects of remixes to sell the original content would be a cool assignment.
Okay so I wanted to say that the youtube video you picked is my new favorite! Nice choice in remix. I think that your connections to Lessig help bring it all together for a really good point (quoted above). Nice post and again great choice of remix.
ReplyDelete