copyright 2014, Jump Cut: A Review of Contemporary Media
Jump Cut
, No. 56, winter 2014-2015

“Factory of New Film Expressions:”
Alternative Film/Video Festival, Belgrade

Academic Film Centre, 10-14 December 2013

by Kamila Kuc

Now in its thirty-first year, the Alternative Film/Video Festival began life in Belgrade in 1982 with the aim of recording and theoretically defining “authentic values and new creative possibilities in the field of alternative film.”[1][open endnotes in new window] According to Peter Wollen, a jury member in 1984, “the basic achievement of the authors of alternative film in Yugoslavia” was “the exploration of the ontology of the medium,” as well as a consideration of film “as a part of the modernist movement.”[2] This can also be said of Yugoslav video art, which was at its peak in the 1980s when the Alternative Film/Video Festival was created.[3]

But the avant-garde scene in Yugoslavia has always been vigorous. Since the early 1920s, movements such as Zenithism, Cosmism and Hypnism, which fused Expressionism, Futurism, Constructivism and Surrealism, all betrayed a fascination with film.[4] After Tito’s 1948 breakaway from Stalin and the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia enjoyed greater artistic freedom than many other Eastern European countries at the time.[5] In this climate, alternative film culture burgeoned as cine-clubs were established in almost every city of Yugoslavia, introducing their members to various trends in international cinema.

The Alternative Film/Video Festival is one outcome of this cinephile tradition. It is the oldest active festival of avant-garde film and video in Europe. It follows in the tradition of another significant alternative event in Socialist Yugoslavia, the Genre Experimental Film Festival in Zagreb (1963-1967).[6] The Alternative Film/Video Festival ceased to function during the Yugoslav Wars (1991-2002) but was successfully reinstated in 2003, and in 2006 it became an international venture. Every year this non-profit event is accompanied by a bilingual publication (in Serbian and English) based around a key theme from the previous year’s Festival. To name but a few of the themes: found footage film (2009), cine-clubs (2010) and the archiving and digitizing of film (2011).[7]

The Alternative Film/Video Festival is held in the Student City Cultural Centre in New Belgrade (Novi Beograd), which was founded in 1958 as the Academic Film Club and educated such key figures of the Yugoslav alternative film scene as Kokan Rakonjac, Tomislav Gotovac, Nikola Duric, Bojan Jovanovic and Miodrag Milosevic. Nowadays, it produces over 500 films and videos annually and holds a vast archive of Yugoslav alternative film and video. The Centre also offers a month-long residency award that provides a film/videomaker with a studio and full production support for a new film, which premiers at the Festival the following year. The most recent outcome of this residency is Nadine Poulain’s geometric abstract piece Sky Lines, also selected for this year’s Berlinale Shorts competition.

Lasting five days, Alternative Film/Video has numerous international experimental film/video programs and specially commissioned exhibitions and workshops. In its its attempt to reduce the gap between film theory and practice, the Festival also brings together filmmakers, academics, programmers and curators in an Academic Forum to debate experimental film in relation to particular themes. The 2013 Forum's discussions centred on the theme of fragmentation, explored in presentations given by a wide range of international scholars.

  • Professor Nevena Dakovic (Department of Theory and History, University of Belgrade) talked about "disassemblation" (Dakovic's own neologism, meaning fragmentation) as an organized artistic strategy of the Yugoslav avant-gardes.
  • Branka Bencic, a Croatian independent curator, discussed the challenges of curating works of art from the former Yugoslav republics due to the republics’ final disintegration in the early 2000s.[8]
  • Professor Bryan Konefsky (Department of Cinematic Arts, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque) offered an engaging philosophical reflection on the contemporary deconstruction of found footage films, as practiced by numerous artists centred around Basement Films in Albuqurque, New Mexico, which I will return to at a later stage.
  • Miriam de Rosa (Adjunct, Catholic University of Milan, Communications and Performing Arts Department) presented a dynamically entitled paper, "Frammenti elettrici" ("Electric fragments"), that analyzed the work of Angela Ricci Lucchi and Yervant Gianikian and, like Dakovic’s paper, proposed fragmentation as an avant-garde tactic.

Many aspects of Dakovic’s paper also corresponded with my presentation, "Cinema without Film: A Fragmented History of Polish Avant-Garde Film, 1916-1937." In the example of Feliks Kuczkowski’s 1916 now lost animations, I argued that fragmentation is the key factor that ought to be taken into account when writing a history of Polish avant-garde film prior to the 1930s. When attempting to establish Kuczkowski’s status within the history of Polish avant-garde film, one relies only on fragmentary evidence—in particular, his memoirs (written in retrospect, thus not entirely accurate), frames from his films and statements from his contemporaries. The Forum concluded with U.S. film restorer Bruce Posner’s remarks on the complex process of restoring Manhatta (Charles Sheeler and Paul Strand, 1921, USA) for the Unseen Cinema: Early American Avant-Garde Film 1893-1941 DVD collection (2001). What emerged as a connecting thread between most of these presentations was understanding fragmentation as both a geopolitical consequence of war (including the recent disintegration of Yugoslavia, the changing borders of pre-war Poland) and a conscious artistic strategy employed by particular avant-garde filmmakers, many of whom have been represented at the Alternative Film/Video Festival over the years.

The diverse body of work at this year’s Alternative Film/Video Festival ranged from contemporary Croatian artists, through Australian avant-garde (1962-2012) and Austrian structuralism, to early U.S. avant-garde (1894-1941). There was also a sneak midnight preview: Bruce Posner’s most recent restoration of Bruce Conner’s Cosmic Ray (1962). Without a doubt, however, the most important event of this year’s Festival was the "Antifilm and Structural Film in Belgrade" retrospective. This program was important for a number of reasons, which I will explore in some detail below. In the first instance, it demonstrated how little of the Yugoslav structural film is known to foreign audiences in comparison U.S., British and Austrian structural films (also included in this year’s program). This festival viewing of a neglected national tendency in itself calls for a historical reassessment of the whole complex tendency in avant-garde film. Secondly, it wasn’t hard to notice that only one female filmmaker featured in these projections and I shall return to this issue at a later stage.

Introduced by leading theorists and filmmakers Slobodan Sijan and Miodrag Milosevic, many rarely seen films were shown, including Kruznica (Circle, Tomislav Gotovac, 1964), Holiday (Praznik, Bojan Jovanovic, 1983) and Sijan’s The garden with paths that bifurcate (Vrt sa stazamasto se racvaju, 1971). A critic and filmmaker, Sijan has devoted much of his career to popularizing alternative film from the region. His latest publication, Kino Tom (2011), is devoted to the work of a multimedia artist and filmmaker Tomislav Gotovac, and is currently being translated into English by the Festival’s programmer, Greg De Cuir, Jr.[9] Filmed on top of a building, in Gotovac’s Kruznica, the camera is placed on a tripod and pans 360 degrees. Parts of Belgrade are being shown as the camera zooms from long shots to close-ups – a technique which causes a feeling of dizziness in the viewer. The program was accompanied by an exhibition of supporting material, including Sijan’s manifesto "Diagram of Antifilm: Us & Them," originally published in 1976 in Filmograf.[10] According to Sijan’s chart, the Yugoslav films made in 1963, such as The Morning of a Faun (Gotovac), The Yard, Scusa signiorina and K3 or the Clear Sky Without Clouds (Mihovil Pansini) and in 1964, such as Toilet (Pansini), Direction and Circle (Gotovac), together with the films of Andy Warhol and the Fluxus Group, represented one specific current of world avant-garde film.

[Sijan's chart reproduced on page 2]

This trend of what Sijan calls "Antifilm" was praised by the U.S. critic P. Adams Sitney in 1969 as "Structuralist Film," which Sitney said marked “a movement toward increased cinematic complexity” with films of predetermined and predefined shape.”[11] According to Sitney’s definition, the structural film “insists on its shape, and what content it has is minimal and subsidiary to the outline.”[12] In 1976 a British experimental filmmaker Peter Gidal expanded on this definition distinguishing it from his own, "Structuralist/Materialist Film," as seen in his influential book, Structural Film Anthology.[13] For Gidal the most important aspect of Structural/Materialist film is that it “attempts to be non-illusionist” and aims at demystifying the film process.[14] Above all, such film “does not represent, or document anything”; instead it “produces certain relations between segments, between what the camera is aimed at and the way that ‘image’ is presented.”[15] For Gidal specific filmic devices such as “repetition within duration” are employed to decode both the film’s material and the film’s construct, and “to decipher the precise transformations that each co/incide/nce of cinematic techniques produces.”[16] The discovery of shape thus may become the theme and the narrative of the film. For Gidal, this constitutes “a crucial distinction for a (dialectically) materialist definition of structural film.”[17] “That is why,” he argues, “Structural/Materialist film […] demands an orientation of definition completely in opposition to the generally used vague notions concerning ‘Structural Film.’”[18] Other functioning definitions of structuralist film include David Curtis’ category of conceptual "Minimal Movies" in Britain[19] and George Maciunas’ "Monomorphic Structural Film" in the United States that has “a single simple form” and which exhibits “one structural pattern.”[20]  

The less known but certainly not less fascinating Yugoslav contribution to this tendency includes Sijan’s definition of structuralist film as "antifilm," with its main characteristic being “a basic reduction of the means of expression and observation of subjects and things in front of the camera.”[21] As Sijan points out, another Serbian film theorist, Dusan Stojanovic, most accurately defined these films by singling out “fixation as common principle of antifilm.”[22]

What unites all structuralist filmmakers in Britain, the United States, and Yugoslavia is their wish to attack the mechanisms of representation of reality based on identification, which prevailed mainstream cinema and which required mostly passive audience.[23] Structuralist filmmakers achieved this by turning the medium of film into a conceptual, self-reflexive exercise. Structuralist films draw attention to the very form of film rather than offer the viewer a straightforward experience of devouring what he/she sees on the screen. Thus, they question the politics and aesthetics of representation.

The sheer range of films presented in the structuralist program at this year’s Alternative Film/Video Festival, as well as the complexity of the debates surrounding structural film, call for a revision of what we include in this important international avant-garde trend.

This reassessment is also required where the contribution of female filmmakers to the avant-garde film tradition is concerned: the (non)incorporation of women throughout the Alternative Film/Video Festival requires further attention. The role women have played within the avant-garde film scene in Yugoslavia remains under-acknowledged, and this program featured only one female filmmaker: Bojana Vujanovic, with her 16mm short film, The Journey (Putovanje, 1972). A member of the Belgrade cine-club since 1968, Vujanovic encountered some of her influences there. The Journey partly reflects her fascination with the work of the cinematographer Petar Blagojevic, who shot Gotovac’s Kruznica. At the time of shooting The Journey, Vujanovic had only heard of Blagojevic’s and Gotovac’s film. Limited by her film equipment, “which could only film several minutes of tape in one go,” after which the roll in the camera needed to be stopped, rewound or changed, Vujanovic decided on the technique she heard was used by the two male filmmakers in Kruznica.[24] Vujanovic’s film depicts a woman (Bogumila Milla, who also acted in Vujanovic’s other films) going up a stylish modernist lift. As the lift ascends, the camera pans through 360 degrees in a spiral movement, resulting in a feeling of dizziness. The film was made from a single continuous shot. Developed partially in black and white and partially in color, the piece was initially to be a part of Vujanovic’s project, "Vanishing Belgrade" (1968), which included filming old streets, buildings and parks.

Her next film, Tree of Life (1977-78) was shot in The Hague, and begins with a half-naked woman putting red lipstick on her face.[25] The red color is matched with that of an apple rolling on the floor, and the film consists of effective graphic matches and a highly experimental use of sound, slowed down and manipulated, which gives an eerie, disturbing effect. The Tree of Life is now being digitally re-edited at the Academic Film Center under the title New Life of the Tree of Life. Rarely shown, Vujanovic’s films are no less engaging and technically arresting than those of her male colleagues, suggesting that the question of women in relation to avant-garde film in Yugoslavia needs further investigation.

As Diana Nenadic from Academic Film Centre in Zagreb explained to me, until the emergence of video art in the 1970s the position of female filmmakers within the alternative film scene was generally weak.[26] There were, however, exceptions. One was the prolific Divna Jovanovic, now considered the pioneer of Serbian avant-garde animation, who emerged from the Belgrade cine-club in the 1960s and was renowned for her concept of pure animation and non-narrative visual poetry.[27] For her films Deadline (1960) and Rondo (1964), Jovanovic painted directly on celluloid, while for Life is hard (Zivot je tez×ak, 1969), Fetis (1971) and Metamorphosis (Preobrazaj, 1972), she scratched the surface of the film, leading to comparisons with the work of Norman MacLaren.[28] In Zagreb’s cine-club, female filmmakers appeared sporadically, with Tatjana Ivancic being the key example. Between 1967 and 1986, she made approximately seventy shorts, mostly lyrical documentaries. The first female filmmaker within Split’s cine-club was Dunja Ivanisevic, who was active in the 1960s, but whose achievements were largely overshadowed by her male colleagues until 1987, when she made an experimental documentary Zemsko (1968).

It is because of such reversals of history that festivals like Alternative Film/Video Festival have a responsibility to paint a more accurate picture of avant-garde film by demonstrating women’s prolific input. This year’s Festival’s programmers, members of the advisory board and the jury, were all men. However, since the 2013 Alternative Film/Video Festival considered the theme of fragmentation in both film form and in the process of constructing a history of avant-garde film in Eastern Europe and the Balkans, it should also extend that theorizing to investigate how and why the contribution of women artists remains conspicuously left out. The consequences of such significant omission to the general history of avant-garde film require thorough exploration, something the Festival should address in the near future.[29]

Writing a history of anything is a non-objective, ideological practice, especially to consider the complexities surrounding histories of visual arts (where the contribution of women remains one of the most neglected aspects). Such a history and its complexities in the countries of Eastern Europe and the Balkans are still being assessed. Here it is worth mentioning Jackie Hatfield’s argument regarding the absence of women from the history of avant-garde film in general. In the 1970s and 1980s, Hatfield states, women were written out of the history of avant-garde film for yet another reason: their preoccupation with narrative, as opposed to abstraction and the formalist film tradition that dominated at the time.[30] This partially explains the exclusion of women from discourses surrounding the structuralist film tradition, with Vujanovic’s work as one example.

However, there are other considerations. In the United States, women filmmakers such as Carolee Schneeman who dealt with explicit sexuality and body art (Fuses, 1965) were often neglected, even within the feminist canon. In addition, numerous experimental women artists wanted to disassociate themselves from special consideration as women artists, often decrying the label “feminist.” This has also been true in the former Yugoslavia. For example, in my email conversation with the filmmaker, Vujanovic underlined that her concern has always been with the quality of her work, and she separated herself from any connection to feminism: “Can’t I be regarded just as an artist, irrelevant of my gender?”[31] Similarly, in a recent forum "Women’s Images of Men" (Nottingham Contemporary, UK, 2014) an artist Lill-Ann Chepstow-Lusty remarks: “Ideally one wouldn’t want to be a gender. One wants to just be an artist […] but in its time it was important to define that you were a woman artist.”[32] Chepstow-Lusty refers to the early 1980s Britain when she was involved, alongside Catherine Elwes and Sarah Kent, in promoting feminist art and discourse.[33] After all, as Rozsika Parker and Griselda Pollock argue, “[The] sex of the artist matters. It conditions the way art is seen and discussed.”[34] The inequality of the means of production and distribution of film, as well as the exclusion of certain films because of their approaches and subjects not fitting “into the current zeitgeist” still remains an issue that needs addressing when writing about the history of avant-garde film.

Considering the absence of women on the Festival’s advisory board and the jury, it is even more important to draw attention to at least one of the films made by an acclaimed female filmmaker in the Festival’s main competition, Gisèle Rapp-Meichler. Rapp-Meichler has been making films with her husband Luc since 1976 (Allée des signes, 1976; No Hans Land, 1988). They are also the members of Light Cone, a non-profit making organization (founded in 1982 by Yann Beauvais and Miles McKane), which promotes, distributes and preserves experimental cinema in France and which since 2009 is under the presidency of Gisèle Rapp-Meichler.[35] Her film for this festival, A Moment of Truth (Un instant de vérité, 2013, France), is an understated, and thus all the more powerful, meditation on the crimes committed in a Struthof concentration camp in Alsace. This fine and subtle film brings to mind Alain Resnais’ Night and Fog (Nuit et brouillard, 1955) in its examination of the impossibility of representing directly the horrors of the concentration camp. As the camera pans through the sterile interiors of the camp and the contrasting, sunny meadows around it, Nina Simone’s 1964 performance of Waring Cuney’s poem "No Images" (1926) plays on the soundtrack. A Moment of Truth is dedicated to the memory of four resistance women murdered in the camp: Diana Rowden, Vera Leigh, Andrée Borrel and Sonya Olschanezky, all executed on July 6, 1944.

Born in Upper Alsace, Rapp-Meichler visited the camp for the first time in 1959 on a family trip, she informed me, following the custom for the locals to confront the disturbing facts of recent history.[36] The film can be seen in contrast with the first feature film about the Holocaust, Wanda Jakubowska’s The Last Stage (Ostatni Etap, 1948, Poland). Although this was not a documentary, some of the film’s images were considered so "authentic" that Resnais used them as actuality footage in Night and Fog.[37] Rapp-Meichler’s short, subjective piece is a powerful journey around a now deserted concentration camp, and its emotional effect is achieved largely through the absence of any documentary footage. Instead, the filmmaker creates an impressionistic image of the camp based on her own memory of a ‘white and clean’ dissecting table in a cold and empty room.

Very few films in the program were as gripping as Rapp-Meichler’s, but Charles Lum’s eyebrow raiser, Lloyd Fein Must Die (2012, USA), deserves some attention. Part of the "Happiness is a Warm Projector: Select Work from Experiments in Cinema Festival, Albuquerque, New Mexico" program presented by the Festival’s Artistic Director Bryan Konefsky, the film is a fierce attack on Lloyd Blackfein, the CEO of Goldman-Sachs and of the highest paid executives on Wall Street. The film collages pornographic images of naked men and metaphorically equates them with the obscenity of Fein’s daily procedures, which contributed to the irreversible economic crisis. In tune with such recent documentaries as 99%—The Occupy Wall Street Collaborative Film (Audrey Ewell, Aaron Aites, 2013, US), the piece is a criticism of capitalism and its detrimental effects on nations.

Ioannis Savvidis’ The Residency (Germany/Ireland, 2012), which was singled out by the jury, and Krasimir Dobrev’s Bloody Mr. Tomazo (Bulgaria, 2012), the recipient of the Ivan Kaljevic Prize, should also be mentioned. Savvidis’ film is a witty take on the difficulties surrounding the creation of a work of art. It's a semi-autobiographical films about filmmaking. Faced with the near-impossibility of making a film as part of his residency, out of desperation Savvidis decides to film his everyday activities, ranging from washing dishes, watching cars passing by from his balcony, to purposelessly carrying a table up a mountain. Such impossible and pointless, Sisyphean task can also be seen in Francis Alÿs’s When Faith Moves Mountains (2002), in which the Belgian artist hired hundreds of volunteers in Peru to move a shovel of sand one step at a time from one side of a dune to another. In its simplicity and humor, Saavvidis’ film also resembles Jacques Tati’s gags. The Residency —in its diary-like form and investigation of the filmmaking process—is reminiscent of Robert Beavers’ From the Notebooks of… (1971); the U.S. filmmaker, inspired by the notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci, investigates his 16mm camera’s functions, following on-screen instructions, written by Beavers himself: “Close the window shutting to a crack, film my reflection in the mirror as my hand moves in front of the mirrored light.” Residency can be seen as a nod towards this self-reflexive tendency.

Awarded in memory of the avant-garde author and patron of alternative film, Ivan Kaljevic, this year’s prize went to Krasimir Dobrev’s Bloody Mr. Tomazo, a film that uses fast-cutting YouTube aesthetics to create an ironic portrait of Balkan machismo. The titular character, played by Dobrev himself, appears in a variety of costumes and poses to mock a cult of violence. Following the announcement of this prize, the audience was treated to a surprise screening of Kaljevic’s humorous 1975 film, Society for the Preservation of Silliness (Drustvo Za Zastitu Sasavih Dogadjaja). In this Dada-like piece a group of men perform surreal, meaningless activities, such as watching TV in a middle of a field. The amateur quality of the piece is deliberate and defies the conventions of mainstream cinema. The film’s title brings to mind Kurt Schwitters’ "Ideas for Poems" (c.1926), with his proposal for a "Society for Purposeful Services."[39] In Kaljevic’s film, everything these men do is purposeless.

One of the most engaging parts of the Alternative Film/Video was the "16mm Loop Workshop" delivered by the experimental filmmakers Michelle Mellor and Bryan Konefsky of Basement Films, Albuquerque, New Mexico. This friendly and inspiring event brought together local students and members of the public, as well as Festival participants. Opening with a screening of Bruce Conner’s Marilyn Times Five (1968-1973), the workshop resulted in the production of numerous loop films, which were projected during the Festival’s last night. Established in 1991 as an alternative film screening collective, Basement Films holds thousands of 16mm and Super8 films, alongside other archival media and also hosts the annual Experiments in Cinema International Film Festival.[40]

Lastly, a few remarks on the The Torso exhibition, which opened the Festival. Containing fragmented stories from Belgrade placed "in small appliances, objects and performances that tell those tales," the exhibition was created by three energetic performance artists: Erich Goldmann, Michael Strohmann (both from Austria) and Momo Subotic (Mostar/Copenhagen).[41] In a photo and sound installation, The Belgrade Loop, the push of a button, pressed by the viewers, allows a carousel of images to move and stop at a random moment. Every image (of various place sin the city: parks, clubs, blocks of flats) is synchronized with its unique, pre-designed sound recording. In My Private Belgrade—“the movie-hurdy-gurdy man,” Subotic is filmed strolling the streets of Belgrade, sharing stories of his life with passersby in exchange for their own stories. These tales are exhibited in a "movie-hurdy-gurdy": a box with a monitor and a crank, with which the viewer can control the speed of the film and rewind or fast-forward it. The interactive exhibition invites the viewer to be a part of it and thus engages with one of the most powerful principles of the avant-garde, as defined by Peter Bürger, among many others, as breaking the boundaries between art and life.[42]

The Alternative Film/Video Festival is one of the most dynamic experimental film festivals. In its admirable commitment to the spirit of alternative art and film, the Festival has been described by Karpo Godina, the Slovenian filmmaker, cinematographer and a former jury member, as a “factory of new film expressions.”[43] Since these "new film expressions" are often produced by women, the 2014 Alternative Film and Video should invite women to participate as programmers. In addition, women themselves ought to demand greater parity as members of the jury and advisory board.[44] The input of female artists and filmmakers within the cinematic avant-garde, with particular attention to Yugoslav artists, of whom we still know so little, could be dealt with by programming a selection of films by women filmmakers and explored further as a key theme of the Academic Forum. This gesture would constitute an important and long overdue step towards addressing one of the largest omissions in film history—the role of women within it.


Acknowledgments: I would like to thank Bojana Vujanovic and Gisèle Rapp-Meichler for their extensive answers to my questions, as well as Greg deCuir, Milan Milosevic, Diana Nenadic, Michelle Mellor and Bryan Konefsky for their help in gathering additional information for this review. Thank you to the artists for permission to use stills.

1. Miodrag Milosevic, ed., Film After Film: 30th Anniversary of the Alternative film/video festival (Belgrade: Akademski filmski centar, Dom culture Studentski grad, 2013), p.7 and Branislaw Miltojevi, "The cine club era, or a few theses about first (anti)cinema/alternative explorations and experiments," Milosevic, ed., The Cine-Club Era (Belgrade: Akademski filmski centar, Dom culture Studentski grad, 2011), p.77.
[return to text]

2. Peter Wollen, 1984, quoted in Milosevic, "Alternative Film and Video in Yugoslavia," 2011, p.55.

3. Barbara Borcic, "Video Art from Conceptualism to Postmodernism," Dubravka Djuric and Misko Suvakovic, eds., Impossible Histories: Historical Avant-gardes, Neo-avant-gardes, and Post-avant-gardes in Yugoslavia, 1918-1991 (Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003).

4. Pavle Levi, Cinema by other means (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp.14 and 47.

5. Djuric and Suvakovic, 2003, p.52.

6. Other festivals in the region include Amateur and Artist Film Festival in Pula (MAFAF, 1965-1990) and the Alternative Film Meeting in Split (1977-1987).

7. See, Miodrag Milosevic, ed., Found Footage (Belgrade: Akademski filmski centar, Dom culture Studentski grad, 2010) and Archives, Digitalization, Distribution of Alternative Films in the Region (Belgrade: Akademski filmski centar, Dom culture Studentski grad, 2012).

8. ‘Timeline: Break-up of Yugoslavia’, BBC News Channel, 22 May 2006 at
Accessed on 25 July 2014. See also Tim Judah, The Serbs. History, Myth and the Destruction of Yugoslavia (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000), pp.312-337.

9. See also Greg de Cuir, Yugoslav Black Wave: Polemical cinema from 1963-72 in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Belgrade: Film Center Serbia, 2011).

10. This A4 flyer formed a part of the retrospective, Anti-Cinema 1963/64; 1965/70 at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Belgrade (23 June – 16 July 1976).

11. See P. Adams Sitney, Visionary Film. The American Avant-Garde 1943-2000 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp.347-348.

12. Ibid., p.348.

13. Peter Gidal, Structuralist Film Anthology (London: British Film Institute, 1976). See also Materialist Film (London and New York: Routledge, 1989).

14. Gidal, 1976, p.1.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid. 82 and Peter Gidal, Materialist Film (London and New York: Routledge, 1989).

19. David Curtis, A History of Artists’ Film and Video in Britain (London: British Film Institute, 2007), p.25. See also A.L. Rees, A History of Experimental Film and Video (London: BFI, 1999), pp.77-82.

20. Paul Schrader, Transcendental Style in Film. Ozu, Bresson and Dreyer (Boston: DaCapo Press, 1988), p.166.

21. See Slobodan Sijan, "Antifilm: Us & Them" diagram, June 1976, as well as Milosevic, 2013, p.52.

22. Sijan, 1976.

23. Gidal, 1976, p.6.

24. Email conversations between Bojana Vujanovic and myself, July 29, 2014.

25. Email conversations between Bojana Vujanovic and myself, March 13-26, 2014.

26. Email conversation between Diana Nenadic and myself, February 28, 2014.

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. See, for example, Rozsika Parker and Griselda Pollock, Old Mistresses: Women, Art and Ideology (London and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981), xvii.

30. Jackie Hatfield, "Expanded Cinema and Narrative. Some Reasons for a Review of the Avant-Garde Debates Around Narrativity," Millennium Film Journal, no. 39/40, Winter 2003.

31. The question of feminism in Eastern Europe and the Balkans requires a more complex discussion, which is outside the scope of this review. See, for example, Allaine Czerwonka, "Travelling Feminist Thought: Difference and Transculturation in Central and Eastern European Feminism," Signs, vol.33, no.4, 2008.

32. Lill-Ann Chepstow-Lusty, "Women’s Images of Men," Discussion Forum, Nottingham Contemporary, UK, 2014. With Catherine Elwes, Lill Ann Chepstow-Lusty and Amy Tobin. Available at
. Accessed on 14 June 2014.

33. This talk centered on the two ICA exhibitions from the 1980s: "Women’s Images of Men" and "About Time."

34. Parker and Pollock, 1981, p.50. See also Cindy Nemser, "Art Criticism and Women Artists," Journal of Aesthetic Education, vol.7, no.3, 1973 and Mary Ann Doane, "Aesthetics and Politics. Beyond the Gaze: Recent Approaches to Film Feminisms," Signs, vol.30, no.1, 2004.

35. For more details on Light Cone, see

36. Email conversation between Gisèle Rapp-Meichler and myself, March 8, 2014.

37. See for example, Marek Haltof, Polish Film and the Holocaust. Politics and Memory (New York: Berghahn Books, 2014).

39. See Kurt Schwitters, "Ideas for Poems," Jerome Rothenberg and Pierre Joris, ed. and trans., Kurt Schwitters: poems performance pieces proses plays poetics (Cambridge: Exact Change, 2002), p.87 [1926].

40. See Basement Films at

41. The Torso Exhibition leaflet.

42. See Peter Bürger, Theory of the Avant-Garde (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984).

43. Karpo Godina, 2012, quoted in Milosevic, 2013, p.121.

44. Women's exclusion as decision-makers in the film world still remains an issue even in mainstream cinema. Take, for example, the fact that only in January 2014 a renowned Polish filmmaker Agnieszka Holland was made the first female chair of the European Film Academy. See Polish Cultural Institute, New York at

To topJC 56 Jump Cut home

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.