Several mashups have appeared recently which aren't in the typical, humorous vein. They push the limits of what mashups are. Contra Bruce Sterling, who said mashups would always be jokes, what does it say about the form that they can be actively offensive?
Case 1: the climax of Once Upon a Time in the West (1968), with a new soundtrack. First off, do not watch this if you haven't seen the entire film. And if you haven't watched Sergio Leone's masterpiece, possibly the greatest western of all time, go take the day off, find a copy, and screen it at once. I won't sing the praises here (Henry Fonda as villain! Morricone at the top of his form! Claudia Cardinale! the pacing) - it simply must be watched.
Which brings us to why this remix is interesting. It's a good example of matching new music to preexisting footage, yes, especially in aligning lyrics to movement. But it gleefully spoils the emotional impact of a long film, gives away a secret painstakingly built up throughout the film, and also has the audacity to replace the music of Ennio Morricone. Even embedding it here risks offense on ant of these (ahem) scores.
I had to watch this orchestral performance to, well, feel better.
Case 2: "Ocean's 911". This mashup is easily the most offensive I've ever seen. It takes sequences from Ocean's 11 and mixes in... historical footage of the 9-11 attacks in New York City. The music selections are energetic, driving home, even celebrating the jarring juxtaposition. There's a ferocious grinning at, or with, horror based on connecting these real-world images to goofs from the movie, from George Clooney's lazy smile to the final airborne thumbs-up. It's the video complement to Stockhausen's 9-11 comment.
The creators are quite explicit in their intentions, and offer a manifesto.
To feel such horror, shock, dismay, embarrassment, loathing in the face of a mashup suggests this form has taken a developmental step.
Comments