Friday Afternoon Videos

One of my projects for spring semester is my paper for MIT’s Media in Transition conference in April where I’ll be talking about “Movies 2.0,” which will allow me to revisit my interests in DIY media making. One relatively recent project that caught my attention(via Howard Rheingold on the DIY Media Weblog) is what is being billed as the world’s first “open movie.” The makers of Elephants Dream describe their project as “made entirely with open source graphics software such as Blender, and with all production files freely available to use however you please, under a Creative Commons license.”

The short movie appears to be several months old, but right now, I’m more interested in collecting examples of different kinds of DIY movie productions. There are also some remixes of Elephants Dream available online, and in keeping with the open source nature of the movie, the movie makers actively encourage such remakes.

In other news, Aaron Burr is (was?) into Wu-Tang. Who knew? Thanks to Karina for the link.


  1. michael newman Said,

    February 16, 2007 @ 9:09 pm

    Since you seem to be collecting this sort of thing, here is another example of movies 2.0 (if I’m using that term appropriately): Stray Cinema, which calls itself an “open source film.” Some filmmakers uploaded footage for anyone to edit into a “film,” which can be viewed on the website. (Apologies if you have blogged this before/knew all about it.)

  2. Chuck Said,

    February 16, 2007 @ 9:30 pm

    I wasn’t familiar with it, but it looks like an interesting case study. Some of the videos were vaguely interesting, but others seemed to be trying too hard to be artsy. I think both examples indicate the problem of any textual artifact billing itself as the first object of its kind, in this case, both artifacts claim to be “open source films.” Stray Cinema seems closer to what I would define as an “open source” movie. But if it was truly open source, couldn’t you contribute your own footage? And what kind of “movie” would that be?

    I’m still adjusting to the “Movies 2.0” term, which I didn’t actually coin (David Silver suggested it when we were putting a panel together for MIT 5). But I like the label better than “Film 2.0,” both because online video isn’t film exactly and because of the potential to link up to concepts such as “home movies.”

    Thanks for the tip.

RSS feed for comments on this post

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting