Last night I went over to the Gene Siskel Film Center and saw “Tall: The American Skyscraper and Louis Sullivan” . The film is touted as being “remarkably poetic” and I suppose a few of the final montages touch upon some social subtleties extensions within our architecture, but overall I think the general composition of the film was a bit dated, but that is because I really enjoy more rich and textural surreal depictions of our landscape i.e. Baraka than I do an archaically narrative film made with shots of postcards. Is history really limited to this? I dunno I guess I would hope to see some sort of progress in this typology of film.

Aesthetics of the film aside, it seemed very brief though it lasts 82 minutes. I really enjoyed the second half of the film, focusing during and post sullivian. The film used the relationship between Burnham and Sullivain and their respective styles as the basis for their question: what did we miss out on by turning a blind eye to Sullivains work? Watching the movie took me back to freshman year and dotting those blasted Sullivain plates. They are beautiful however and I walked away with a better understanding of what Sullivain's vision was and a great idea for utilizing Flash, Adobe premiere and a video camera for a montage of my own reflecting my apparent understanding of his work.

If only I didn't have to work 9 to 5 I could get so much more out and done. While watching this film I found myself trying to remember the variety of movie clips Kiel Moe had shown us in class last semester. He had some good ones that appealed more to me and still managed to get their point across without being redundantly archaic. Mental note: find those.