What is a film "about?"

"Natural Features"

(Gunvor Nelson, 16mm, color, sound, 30 min., 1990)

I have chosen to answer the question of what this film is "about" while keeping in mind the context of the statement by Hollis Frampton which declares, "Certainly a film must be about whatever appears most often in it."

Upon review, the most predominant items or features which quantitatively stood out to me were: paint/painting, reflective material(s)/broken glass, photographs, and sound. 

Combining all of these elements together can lead to the conclusion that humans are constantly repeating history and that each time it is repeated it only leads to a more disturbing result. To expound further, I believe that the black paint which was used to cover certain parts of the photographs was significant in that it tended to only cover the eyes and mouth, and acted as a silhouette around individuals in the photos. Interestingly enough, at times the paint was subject to gravity as it aimlessly flowed vertically downward across the photos, while at other times the paint was purposely placed with the use of a paintbrush so as to make a definitive statement. I think the statement which was made by the paint "dripping" downward was that as hard as humans try, we all eventually become "blended" into the dark abyss of history itself and combine to form one large vague memory. The purposefully placed paint on the eyes and mouth might symbolize a lack of vision (figuratively) and a lack of being able to speak up for oneself. To be socially oppressed by a group of individuals who seek dominance and power rather than the approval of the public might also be symbolized here. Also, the sound of people screaming and short sound bits of people humming or talking acted not only as a disturbing element, but also reminded me of a horror film in which they might torture people. Upon further analysis, I begin to feel as though there were some communistic undertones applied within this film. However, I am not sure that this "advances my understanding of the film" or helps me to understand it better since the theme, while presented with older photographs, black paint, and unnerving sounds, is still quite vague to me. I cannot be certain that the analysis which I developed relates directly to the film since it doesn't present its purport directly, but rather leaves the viewer to unravel its abstract meaning in their own mind.  

I am uncertain how Kevin's observation of the projector dominating his experience of Frampton's "Lecture" can be called into question when I thought that it was a "narrative" using film attributes, but not a "film" in itself. I may be completely wrong, but the blog requirement states, "Choose one of the two films seen in class today" which leaves, "Love's Refrain" and "Natural Features" as the "films" screened in class. If I am to contemplate how the sound of the projector or "performer" relates to the entire work, I would say that this is dependent upon a few variables. First, how close was Kevin to the projector? The closer Kevin was, the louder and more predominant it would be therefore carrying the most attention and commanding the entire work. Secondly, was Kevin in front or behind the projector? His position in relation to the projector would either allow him to be distracted by it visually, or to be aware but not "forced" to look at it, as the projector would have been in front or behind him. Thirdly, how large was the room, and how many people or other sound absorbing objects were in it? In other words, was the sound in a closed hollow space which would make it louder and more prominent, or did it have some space in which to travel and be somewhat distorted before being reverberated off a wall or object?

My own observation and thinking about the projector and its being the "performer" of the work is something that I agree with. The "Lecture" spoke of and described what the projector was creating on the screen, "...a bounding box filled with white light" which in turn made me think of the projector and "hear" it even more frequently than if I had been distracted by other sounds and images. The projector, even as it produced monotonous sounds,  was the "performer" for me... as it was for Kevin. As I was positioned in front of the projector and saw the blank frame it was producing on the screen I rarely was lost in the confines of the frame but rather the projector and the narrative which spoke of it.