Rip! A Remix Manifesto has me torn. There’s no questioning the fact that I was completely drawn in to its vibrant cut and paste aesthetics and infectious pacing, but ultimately I couldn’t help but feel like there was a bit of a missed opportunity that could’ve turned this ‘great’ film into something ‘extraordinary’. Director Brett Gaylor looks at the idea of ‘intellectual property’ and how the ownership of ideas has hindered the creativity of artists like Girl Talk, a cut and paste ‘mash up’ artist whose liberal use of popular samples would set him back 4 million dollars if he were to clear the rights to legally sell his album.
I’m not really one for complaining about bias in documentaries, but I think this is one case where Galyor’s love for Girl Talk and clear stance on the subject matter may have squandered the opportunity for a potentially complex and in depth double-sided discussion. Just look at the scene where he shows a ‘Registrar of Copyrights’ video footage of Girl Talk assembling a track from a sampled Elvis Costello guitar riff. The scene would be great if it weren’t for the fact that this particular example — a 4 second guitar riff — completely misrepresents the true nature of his music; recognizable, clearly identifiable top 40 pop samples. Seemed to me like making your proof fit your argument. The topic of downloading and intellectual property is a labrynthine endeavour that could have made Rip! the definitive copyright/intellectual property film. Regardless, the documentary is great and is a sure bet conversation starter. It’s just too bad more of that conversation didn’t happen on screen. 4/5
I heard you talking about this on the podcast, and I have a couple points to make.
The doc is biased no doubt, but what it is asking for, and he says it several times throughout the documentary, is fair copyright legislation that respects the rights of the artist and allows for a healthy public domain. He is not saying as an agitprop manifest that we must destroy ALL copyright and all that matters is the public domain. What he is illustrating is how out of control copyright has gotten, and the case with the Registrar was a single point to show how complex it actually is (I don’t see it as unfair in context to the rest of the movie where he let’s us hear LOTS of Girl Talk tracks to make our own case).
The bigger point, though, and where I differ from you, is a balanced, or even remotely balanced debate documentary showing both sides fairly and saying to the audience, now what do you think, is NOT what should be done. Because that will be a theoretical, removed discussion about what is art, what is ownership, a kind of legislative demarcation of these issues… the point enforced in the film and one I strongly agree with is… we do not live in such a vacuum that that sort of pro vs. con argument has any relevancy anymore. Technology being what it is, it is now impossible for corporations to enforce their copyright laws and it is only going to get worse because of the dissemination of the means of production in society. So you either incriminate everyone, or the vast majority or you evolve to accept this new paradigm.
That to me is what I find so both fresh and optimistic about this documentary, it dispenses with the old world way of deciding ethics, it understands that this is happening and celebrates this emerging artist class, because at the very least the proliferation of more people indulging in artistic endeavors will instill a greater appreciation for art en masse. The dinosaurs will die off, and a generation accustom to self-expression will take over.
I don’t care if they show both sides fairly. I just wanted to see both sides. Not for the sake of being ‘fair’, but for the sake of exploiting any complexities that this topic contains for the sake of the film. The argument may not be relevant to you, but it certainly still seems relevant to the industry and, to be fair, probably a handful of recording artists. I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that ALL musicians are willing to give up their high paying licensing fees.
That’s not what this film was, and so be it. It was entertaining enough and had some good information.
Personally, I would’ve been interested in some discussion regarding what is art and what is ownership. I’m not a big fan of Girl Talk. I think his music is an aesthetic mess that borders on novelty. However, I can appreciate what it represents.
“The argument may not be relevant to you”
No I am saying, at least with the notion of criminalizing sampling, downloading, remixing, that the argument is moot, not because I say it in my mind, but because the technological environment makes it so. On the dvd there is an hour lecture by Lawrence Lessig that goes into more detail, its worth checking out. It is like the war on pot going on, that there comes a point where it is so easily distributed and so widely spread that if you are going to legislate it as illegal and enforce it, you are criminalizing an entire generation.
To make a documentary solely focusing on the ethical questions for or against copyright, irrespective of the reality, would be a quite literally futile enterprise. Unless you are talking about vigilantly regulating the internet, which to my knowledge cannot be effectively done this late in the game, all you will have is millions of litigations with no actual resources to go to court. There is a reason Girl Talk, mash-ups, downloaded songs, you tube clips, are so ridiculously accessible, its no more containable that what is attempted in the War on Drugs, its rhetorical only.
so bypass the rhetoric, this is the reality, now you either legislate according to the reality, making a healthy public domain and only defend the rights of intellectual property for higher level transgressions, or you impose a Communist-like censorship of the internet.
but I agree, I don’t think the word ‘art’ was even brought up, I would have liked some small segment on that.
I disagree about Girl Talk, I don’t think its ‘art’ as I define it, but I feel like something new has been created… maybe not in every song, but there are certain songs that are doing something innovative and fun.
Saw this at Popcorn Taxi and they had a Q&A with director. I think it was ok for those who don’t know anything about copyright issues but while they covered the basics, it was also missing lots. GirlTalk proceeds years of sampling history and litigation and represents a new breed of laptop artists who were born into sampling.
Ultimately, copyright is better explored in many other docos, many of which are free and intentionally available on bittorrent (as I think Rip is)… man this comment could have a been a mini review on my own site. haha
ps – don’t like GT either… mashups are pretty much a novelty
was I just censored?
New movie releases that you will truly enjoy. A real life drama and experiences of amazing people, check this site and savor the moment. http://www.ariztical.com/new_releases.html
Hey Rot, for some reason your comments keep getting held over in our spam filter. Are you in any way involved in the online pornography or gambling industry? Is there something you’re not telling us???
Thought Rip was well made but didn’t really say anything that hasn’t already been said before. That said I’ve always followed the topic and the debate so I’m sure people that don’t know much about the copyright discussion might take more from it.
Great one, but lets make an example, Im making a documentary about this same subject, and im using some footage from this documentary…is it right?
I think this review is all about the good side of this one.We need to look at the both sides.I think that is really needed.
I first heard about Rip on the Film Junk podcast as well. While I’m not sure I agree that Girl Talk’s specific brand of art should be legal to market, he should certainly be able to make it and perform it. It is a grey area that the industry will need to address soon.
Rip raises some very interesting questions that we just touch on slightly in our film, Cleanflix. The two films would actually make interesting companion pieces and I recommended that audiences watch it just to consider the issues it raises at all of our Cleanflix Q&As at TIFF last week.
Most of the controversy surrounding the copy-write debacle would go away , if remixers would write a song on there own and not cut some PRERECORDED material. That is more than likely too much of a CREATIVE jump for most of them. I have watched the movie twice and It still blows me a way that cannabolism of true art is considered the cutting edge of creativity by the numb nuts. The future? I cant wait to see what future musicians contribute of music culture after sitting around and listening to GIRLTALK in the formative years. The RIP documentry makes me realize how the movie “Idiocracy” got it right. If you write a song, it is yours to control.