[wrewsTear]

Imagine the Sound screens at the Vancity Theatre on March 20, 23, and 28.

Read more here.

I've got pairs of tickets for the first six people to reply to this post. Just tell me which night you want to go.

Bill Smith sent the following review by Peter Danson

Quote:

[Efonukmp]

I'll go Wednesday if the tickets are still there

j

[xqkAY7Lg]

Put me down, it's a classic (I'll call you) ... N

[ditpiler]

I love contests!

[DP5Ups8o]

I'd love to go to this if the tickets are still available. The 23rd would be best.

[esdfsdflast]

mark me down.. thanks -

[metrocartockasur]

One pair for the 28th would suit us two just fine, Brine.

Thanks

[wrewsTear]

One pair left, folks!

[Varbaiskkic]

Brian.
I'd like the last pair of tickets if they are still available.
Coat

[wrewsTear]

Quote:

[Amomiamup]

Quote:

[wrewsTear]

Quote:

[bertanu]

Thank you again. The movie should be a nice end to a long week here at school. And I already found a date!

[xqkAY7Lg]

Went to see the film last night, and although I've seen the film about 4 or 5 times since it first came out in the early 80s, I was again blown away by the quality, craft and content; this is a crucial document for anyone remotely interested in this music and these practitioners.

Although a first foray for Ron Mann who used this film as a springboard to construct a career as a film-maker who explores 'niche' artistic genres (like comic books and performance poetry), this film could not have been made without Bill Smith and his cadre around the Jazz and Blues Centre in Toronto of the time. Imagine the Sound is/was actually a series of Bill's artistic endeavours which included art shows, a book, photography and continues in his blog: http://vancouverjazz.com/bsmith/ .

more later ... N

[DP5Ups8o]

I really enjoyed the film. Thanks again to Brian for the tickets. Seeing Cecil on the big screen really blew me away.

[medio]

I'm not in Vancouver, so I can't see this again on the big screen, sadly. Just wanted to mention to those, who may not have seen it: GO TONIGHT!! There are two great films about jazz, that I've seen (I'm sure there are one or two others): "Straight No Chaser" & "Imagine The Sound". Great work, Bill!

[metrocartockasur]

Thanks for the tickets, Brian.
That was truly very interesting.

Peter Danson and I read Sociology at the the same joint in Canterbury where he was one of only two other jazz-aficionados amongst an ocean of indiscriminate popster juveniles more generally taken with Genesis and Elton John and the like. Peter and his family were extraordinarily generous and supportive when I first moved to Canada. So to catch odd glimpses of my old friend was very pleasurable and completely unexpected.

I must tell you first that, with the ‘60s UK experimental scene as her background, and an abiding fondness for Cecil and Archie, Patti absolutely loved the movie: But perhaps typically, however, 1 was far less enamoured.

There were some quite fine moments in there (predominantly rhythm-section moments, despite Bley’s articulate protestations) but there were many very very jive moments as well. Far too many for my taste and sensibilities. And even the good bits were marred by inexcusably bad sound - fancy getting sight of early Kenny Werner in the background and not being able to properly hear what the bastard is playing – and those totally unforgivably out of balance drums were almost enough for me to claw the fabric off of the seating.

Trumpeted as “One of the best and most important films to document one of the key movements of jazz history”, it is probably, as far as I know, the only film document of this particular musical by-road, but to describe it as “a key movement of jazz history” is highly questionable – in fact, to call the assertion tendentious would be overly charitable – however contextually significant those moments may have been, to label this eccentric outpost as a “key movement” demonstrates a most perverse view of jazz history.

I relish overblown hyperbole as much as the next person - maybe more - but a sense of proportion would oft-times not go amiss: this project is a brave but seriously pretentious failure which has to stand as one of the worst jazz movies ever.

Sorry chaps.

[xqkAY7Lg]

Quote:

[medio]

I'm glad Nou is the one to add some substance to this discussion. Not being as articulate or educated as he, I would simply have replied with a hot and bothered tirade about men in suits, the Lincoln Centre, Mr. Crunch etc... ...not conducive to a healthy discussion at any time. Nou is a lover and a fan of, afaik, the complete history & all movements in the music, so he's the best candidate to defend a beautifully and truthfully made flick about a movement that has kept jazz alive, imo. So, GO NOU!!

ps. Last June I went to New York for the Vision Festival. I got to hear Bill Dixon in a duo setting with *the great* George Lewis. Despite the shitty sound in the old synagogue, it was a stunning performance, Dixon's greatness has not waned & it showed! (Did I mention I got to hear Ornette at Carnegie Hall? ... aah, but I digress, as usual.)

[metrocartockasur]

Hey Nou.

Yowzer.

First you confirm that you relish overblown hyperbole and then go on to prove it!

Guilty.
Hands up.
Why would I deny it?

The sound … it's certainly not that bad.

As equally certainly, it’s not that great either. Far from it, in fact. OK for you maybe, but frankly I was disappointed. All excuses aside, it could have been better. And it should have been better.

You clearly don't like these performers or their music

Now, why would that have to be true? Can I not critically evaluate a document and the claims made for its status ostensively on their own merits ? Whether I like the performers and their music or not, my opinion is that they could have been served better.
.
It may well be the only film record we have of that slice of action. So it’s a historically important document. A matter of record. Does that make it a great movie automatically ?

You want to know whether I like the players or their music? Well sure I do. As far as it goes and on its own terms. Why not ? Cecil is Cecil. Gigs I’ve been to have all been wonderful, transcendent, levitating experience. It’s true. OK ? I respect and recognise his consistently uncompromising individualism. But I just might have a different set of illusions about what it all means, though. Sure would have loved being witness to the legendary occasion of his depping for Dave Frishberg as cabaret accompanist at the Page Three trannie-bar But I digress…

Archie Shepp has been ok for me, too. Admittedly my personal listening and exploring preferences have moved elsewhere since then and, the way I see it, his particular current doesn’t carry much influence on the art of saxophonei anyway, but Archie Shepp did what he did and does what he does. That’s perfectly alright by me.

And yes - Mama Rose is powerful and rivetting
But I still prefer being able to hear the whole band when they’re playing together.

Bill Dixon – heard him on a few odd old things a way back but never seen him before. Never made much impact in my life. And I was certainly unaware he played a founding role in the Jazz Composer’s Orchestra. More happily familiar with Art Davis and Freddie Waits, though.

Like you, I have always thought of Paul Bley separately from the rest.
Also like you, I found Bley's immediate handle on the blues so swiftly after his claim for an improviser's rules of avoiding the known (I recall he used the term ‘disdain’) quite sweet and profound.
.
Whether or not you think of this music as being one of the key movements in jazz likely depends on your view of what jazz is

Jazz is what it is completely irrespective of my point of view. Or yours. But I tend to see it as a river. Like it or not, the scene described is self-evidently not a key movement in the context of the river.

… - a museum music whose certified practioners play variations on a theme with rules devised by their forebears (giants who walked the earth) or a living breathing music …

Well, I think it’s already been unequivocally established that the document we’re talking about here is a museum piece. And that’s where it’s importance lies. Of course the music tradition we’re talking about is a living breathing thing. What sort of alternative are you suggesting ? I don’t quite get what you’re going on about.

The new thing or the October revolution as this music has variously been called was one of those abrupt turns

Never heard it called either of those things before until this, and can’t say I’ve ever thought of it as an abrupt turn either really Seems more like a ‘moment’ to me.

I would argue that this was a key movement in jazz history

Yeah, well that does seem to be the dominant established trend in this particular thread – my opinion is different and perhaps less narrow than you imply.

Can’t take that Rollins reference too seriously either, Nou. Sorry. Also well aware of the significance for European avant-garde players – though, again, my take and understanding might be qualitatively different from yours – but totally blindsided by this “incorporation in popular culture (the Byrds 8 Miles High to Sonic Youth to Einstürzende Neubauten)” idea. What’s going on there, then ?

Loose Tubes were well-informed of the Brotherhood of Breath

You think so ? Tell me about it.
Even i\to the extent it might be true – what does it have to do with this lot ?

didn't they send Dudu an open letter?

Dave DeFries wrote a piece for Dudu, yes.
What’s your point ?
That the Brotherhood Of Breath were ‘strongly influenced’ by Albert Ayler ?
Are you making this up as you go along ?

think their musical performances were the highpoint of the film

Me too.
Would have been even more uncomfortable if it were otherwise.
And surely even more reason for doing a basic decent job with the sound.

why do people find this music (or the idea of this music) so scary that they feel compelled not only to say they don't like it (a matter of taste, I don't say everybody has to like it) but to reject it forcefully as being anti-jazz or the worst ___ in the world?

What?
You think it’s scary ?
Who are you calling chicken ?
I think it’s scary to be expected to say everything is terrific all of the time.
My own choices would have been to have insisted on decent sound, to have dumped the jive-bits on the cutting room floor, and to have focussed on letting the music and performances speak for themselves. I’m always interested in hearing what people have to say about their own work and how they go about it. But I am less interested in pronouncements which are more part of the artist’s conscious posture towards their audience. Those conversations were profoundly unedifying for me in the most part. Couldn’t call them well-handled at all. So who needs them ? Just pull out the blade and cut to the chase. Those things that I see as aesthetic failings in the film narrative, the absence of fair pair of editorial scissors and better vision to guide them, the sad state of the sound…. they all add up to the music being poorly served, and they all unfortunately conspire to render it, put simply, honestly, objectively, and sincerely, as probably the worst jazz movie I’ve seen. There may actually be a few other contenders, but this one is certainly well-placed in the running.

For me, this is a film that succeeds on many levels and is more than important, it's a vital document of what (I and several like me) consider to be one of the key movements in jazz ... N

I am very happy that you are so happy with it.
But we obviously have completely different standards of judgement. The film is impaired on many levels. Flawed. People are, of course, free to carry on fooling themselves about it if they wish but, personally, I don’t see the point of pretending.

However many there may be of similar mind about the justice of calling it a ‘key movement’ – and there seem to be bunch here – I am entertained by my own questions about why those who are seriously mad for the stuff are so enthusiastically ready to exaggerate its importance. This kind of blind revisionism is neither robust nor credible. It has no legs.

When I enjoy the privilege of a cultural experience (thanks again, Brian, for the unexpected and welcome opportunity) I see no need to abandon all critical faculties, I like to take ‘em with me and give ‘em some exercise.

I understand that you do enjoy playing the provocative fellow

I am not playing at having an informed opinion.
I understand that is not necessarily a popular attribute.

****

Hi Çem,

Hope you're doing well. Glad you managed not to further confuse me with a hot and bothered tirade about men in suits. Evidently I am not in agreement with your opinion that the film is beautifully and truthfully made. And I would also have a lot of very reasonable questions about this idea of 'a movement that has kept jazz alive'. What's the big deal ? I never saw the movie before. But has been trumpetted as somethin other than what it is. From where I stand, being 'a lover and a fan of, afaik, the complete history & all movements in the music' myself, I think I'm qualified to make my own independent assessment of its success and effectiveness. I was disappointed. I found it lacking. Too bad. Why so upset ?