Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son (1969) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
zoom in... zoom out...
Jst-nl29 January 2004
I don't know if this is the creme de la creme of the avant garde movie stuff, but using mirroring, speeding up and ssslllooowwwiiinnnggg dddooowwwnnn and zooming in to get "into the amoebic grain pattern itself" is nice for 30 minutes, but for the other 60 (90?) minutes it's too much of the same.

(no, it's different! each frame _seems_ to be the fame, but if you look at the details for about 10 minutes you'll see they're different)

Yawn. The 1905 version was quite a laugh though.
12 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
boring in mirrors is not even as worse as this
mrdonleone18 April 2009
this is some kind of experimental film I don't like. allow me to write why.

Jacobs uses DW Griffith's Tom Tom the Piper's Son in such a bad way we all want to get away after the first two minutes. why? because Jacobs uses every images several times, he rewinds them, cuts them, manipulates them and disfigures them completely.

sound interesting... not. Stan Brakhage is the only master in doing this kind of stuff, but even he never messed with an already existing kind of movie. instead, Jacobs uses the classic Griffith work to make his own. that's like taking Beethoven, cut the best parts of it away and call it your own. that's not only stupid, but theft.

but it must be cool, I guess, if you know nothing about masters like Brakhage. on the other hand, if you don't know anything about Griffith, this picture might bore you so much, you want to destroy the tape.
2 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A discourse on the very nature of film
bigmaq111 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This film must be understood in the context of Michaelangelo's famous comment on his "David". He said that the statue already existed in the marble, and that his role as sculptor was simply to bring it out. This is the key to understanding this work. The original film could not be more elementary. A single camera placed in front of a proscenium. Actors move back and forth on stage and on- and off-stage, recreating the nursery rhyme. The camera never moves. There is no editing at all. There are no filmic actions whatsoever. But after showing the original film, Jacobs subjects it to editing, close-ups, pans across the action, etc., and finally to abstraction of the image itself. His point, and he makes it brilliantly, is that all of the language of film-making was inherent in the medium itself. In this primitive work exists the entire language of film making, as by extension it exists in any and all films ever made. Its recognition by the Library of Congress was long overdue, Personally, I would be grateful if someone else could post something as to where this is available on DVD. I've checked the various "avant-garde" DVDs out there and can't find it. If it's not on DVD, will someone please bring it out?
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed