Added: 4 years ago
From: cavettbiter
Views: 6,377
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (38)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • When the presenter said 'I'd love to see the whole thing', I didn't quite believe him.

  • @insaneforstuff254 Right on, this is supposed to make your mind work, its to turn you on. turn your mind on. More intellectual than making just your eyes work, it makes your mind work.

  • Andy Warhol, Me too!

    signed Yoko.

  • I love it! thanks for posting

  • well this movie inspired you enough to post it. Yoko would be happy to hear your negative review. It is still after all a review

  • Like watching paint dry...or did she make a movie about that as well?

  • LOL, OMG I just noticed there's a part 2!

  • This was done 40 yrs ago tards! Lennon thought the idea of stop motion to watch a building being raised was WAY too cool, Sure we can see it done better today! but 40 years ago? you're a bunch of morons for dissing Lennon! bite me! *however, I DO agree with the sound track, ARGGHHHH*

  • John & Yoko made another movie called "Self-Portrait" which shows John cracking a fat in slow motion after reading a copy of Playboy magazine. Yoko tried to pose for him erotically but it didn't get the results. She later told a reporter about the film "The critics wouldn't touch it". Bunch of fucking prudes.

  • This movie rules! :D

  • Shitty. Some people should stick to making music.

  • Boring is right. Defeats the purpose of a time lapse if it's going to be this long...and the pretentiously haphazard soundtrack is supposed to give the impression of creativity? bah! lennon and ono sucked at this point. I'm surprised noone in the audience got up and plugged lennon unconscious. A simple tap would have sufficed for that frail big-mouth hippie who's only achievement after the beatles was adulterating the concept of peace with profanity.

  • I think this sort of avant garde stuff (including Yoko's music and stuff) is more about concepts or feeling than entertainment. Even if it's not entertaining, it still has ideas behind it. Even if it's not genious, it can still make you question or think.

    Just labelling it as crap or weird or not understandable is a little too harsh...but it shouldn't be taken TOO seriously either.

    Does anyone know what I mean? There's a middle ground here.

  • @insaneforstuff254 or this is just piece of shit

  • @GAGLY04

    :facepalm:

    You can have whatever opinion you want.

    But you not liking something does not make it shit. You calling it shit doesn't make it shit, nor does it invalidate the opinions of those who find meaning in it. Nobody's asking you to like it. So why do you and every other ignorant prick have to take the time to judge it?

    God, I'm sick of repeating myself to ignorant assholes.

  • @insaneforstuff254 so you rather nobody cares about this at all its like what were you thinking and why is it thinking this is piece of shit is ignorant why you have to judge me based on my opinion on this piece of shit film

  • @insaneforstuff254 Of course it's about concepts rather than entertainment, however what makes good art is being able to convey those ideas. THIS IS SHIT.

    You only want to believe there's a middle ground because you don't want to have to accept that obvious truth.

  • I find it ironic that back in 1966 John Lennon was quoted as saying "Avant Garde is french for Bullshit" so I guess John was full of bull shit then. doesn't matter everone knows John was the Mouthpiece of the Beatles But Paul was the Brains & Genius & Heart That drove the band to greatness & george was the soul of the band John was just a loudmouth to stoned to even be a good bandleader.

  • @jayceerocker Actually John was behind some of the greatest ever written Beatles songs.

  • yea jayceerocker id suggest you educate yourself, watch beatles anthology, you obviously have something against John because that is a completely false statement.

  • I don't understand what the fucking point is to post something and then call it boring. Is this an elaborate vandetta post. You can call it boring Cavettbiter, yes you, but you obviously don't know much about art or the art of influence. How many people are taking time lapse stills or videos of anything and posting them on youtube? Millions. So I guess her point is proven. And she made it in 1971. 35 years before. If someone pontificates without knowing, now that's fucking boring.

  • one thing Iforgot. You can't judge a twenty minute conceptual film like this on less than 3 mins.

  • You think this is boring, try watching Warhol's Empire. It's just 8HOURS of one static shot of the empire state building.

  • i dont know about you guys but all this groaning really turned me on...

  • hahahaha LOVE the heading you gave this. subtle.

    love john and yoko's alright but their non musical art....

  • great song yoko......NOT!!!!!

  • This would be fun if it was like 5 min total, not 20.

  • part 4 explanation: On the soundtrack Yoko sang two songs, 'Airmale' and 'You', using tapes of recordings of Joe Jones Tone Deaf Music Co., which was, in fact, a number of toy percussion instruments that played themselves, a squeaky style of sound devised by a former associate of Yoke's Fluxus days, Joe Jones. The hotel was situated at 147 Cromwell Road and later became the London Swallow Hotel."

  • PART THREE EXPLANATION: The stills were presented in sequence in the film, which ended with a shot of the completed hotel where all the lights were then turned off, leaving a black screen.

  • part two explanation:A nineteen-minute film by John & Yoko, which was made in London during 1970and1971.When John had heard that the London International Hotel was to be built in Kensington,he sought permission to film its entire construction.Once he'd obtained it he contacted the photographer Iain MacMillan and asked him to take a series of photographs of the construction.MacMillan had a stills camera and filmed the erection of the hotel from a fixed position for a period of eighteen months.

  • so, THAT'S what they meant by "Erection"...

  • PART ONE EXPLANATION this film was from 1971: Erection is a 19-minute film showing the gradual construction of the International Hotel in London. A stills camera had been placed in a set position and shots were taken over a period of eighteen months. When the film is shown, the building seems to arise before the viewers' eyes.

  • can anyone confirm this was in NEW YORK or LONDON? I CAN GET THE WHOLE THING!!! its avaliable for free online on another webpage!!! oh this is dick cavett, right???

  • cavettbiter, do you like john and yoko? are you kidding when you say boring on a lot of their videos. or do you mean it but you are just posting because you like them or just because it's from dick's show?

  • Dick: "I'd love to see the whole thing!" lol

  • oh cool...

  • i like exciting movies... eh yes.

  • LOL!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more