The 55 Strangest, Greatest Films Never Made (Chosen by John Green)

The Lord of the Rings star­ring the Bea­t­les?

The Lit­tle Prince, adapt­ed by Orson Welles?

Bat­man vs. Dwight D. Eisen­how­er? 

These are movies I’d pay to see! The first two made Men­tal Floss’ list of 55 Unfor­tu­nate­ly Unfin­ished Films, a roll call of movies that got hung up in pro­duc­tion or pre-pro­duc­tion, nev­er mak­ing it to the screen. As far as Bat­man bat­tling the 34th pres­i­dent goes, that one’s mere wish­ful think­ing, deliv­ered as a typ­i­cal­ly off-the-cuff remark from list pre­sen­ter, author John Green.

Mov­ing at a speed that will be famil­iar to fans of his Crash Course series, Green races through a tempt­ing menu of triv­ia and mis­for­tune, obses­sion and obscu­ri­ty.

Super­heroes fig­ure promi­nent­ly, as do musi­cians. The Clash in Gangs of New YorkThe Sex Pis­tols in Who Killed Bam­bi? (The screen­play of which is avail­able online, cour­tesy of its author, Roger Ebert.)

Death turns out to be anoth­er big plug-puller here. The untime­ly if not entire­ly sur­pris­ing ear­ly exits of John Belushi, John Can­dy, and Chris Far­ley led to the “curse” of A Con­fed­er­a­cy of Dunces.

As for Don Quixote, both Ter­ry Gilliam and the afore­men­tioned Mr. Welles have tilt­ed at that wind­mill only to find out their dream was impos­si­ble, if not unfilmable.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Orson Welles Explains Why Igno­rance Was the Genius Behind Cit­i­zen Kane

Mar­tin Scors­ese Brings “Lost” Hitch­cock Film to Screen in Short Faux Doc­u­men­tary

Jean-Paul Sartre Writes a Script for John Huston’s Film on Freud (1958)

Ayun Hal­l­i­day would love to see John Green under­take a Crash Course Cin­e­ma series. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday

David Lynch Lists His Favorite Films & Directors, Including Fellini, Wilder, Tati & Hitchcock

At least a few of you — more than a few, I’d wager — think of David Lynch as your favorite film­mak­er. Back when we post­ed about the great­est films of all time as named by Stan­ley KubrickMar­tin Scors­eseWoody Allen, and Quentin Taran­ti­no, you prob­a­bly won­dered what selec­tions the Eraser­head auteur would make. You can get an idea from the inter­view clip above, in which Lynch con­sid­ers the ques­tions “Whose work do you admire?” and “What movies have you watched over and over and could still watch a hun­dred times more?” Well-asked, since the movies we actu­al­ly watch most often reveal more about us than the movies we hap­pen to call “favorites.” “I love Stan­ley Kubrick,” he replies. “I can watch his movies over and over. I love Bil­ly Wilder, Sun­set Boule­vard in par­tic­u­lar, and I’ve watched it over and over. I loved the world Bil­ly Wilder cre­at­ed.”

“I love Felli­ni,” Lynch con­tin­ues. “Watched ’em over and over. If you want to see some great come­dies, check out Jacques Tati’s Mr. Hulot’s Hol­i­day. I like W.C. Fields. I like the movie It’s a Gift. I like Hitch­cock, par­tic­u­lar­ly Rear Win­dow.” And after a moment of reflec­tion: “I like a lot of dif­fer­ent film­mak­ers, but those are… some of them.” MUBI.com also offers a post on Lynch’s favorite films, drawn from Lynch on Lynch, Chris Rod­ley’s book-length inter­view with the direc­tor, and Catch­ing the Big Fish, Lynch’s own vol­ume on med­i­tat­ing your way to inter­est­ing ideas.

Here he pro­vides more details on his fel­low film­mak­ers of choice:

  • In , “Felli­ni man­ages to accom­plish with film what most­ly abstract painters do – name­ly, to com­mu­ni­cate an emo­tion with­out ever say­ing or show­ing any­thing in a direct man­ner, with­out ever explain­ing any­thing, just by a sort of sheer mag­ic.”
  • In Sun­set Boule­vard, Wilder “man­ages to accom­plish pret­ty much the same abstract atmos­phere, less by mag­ic than through all sorts of styl­is­tic and tech­ni­cal tricks. The Hol­ly­wood he describes in the film prob­a­bly nev­er exist­ed, but he makes us believe it did, and he immers­es us in it, like a dream.”
  • Mon­sieur Hulot’s Hol­i­day wins his favor “for the amaz­ing point of view that Jacques Tati casts at soci­ety through it. When you watch his films, you real­ize how much he knows about – and loved – human nature, and it can only be an inspi­ra­tion to do the same.”
  • Rear Win­dow does the same “for the bril­liant way in which Alfred Hitch­cock man­ages to cre­ate – or rather, re-cre­ate – a whole world with­in con­fined para­me­ters. James Stew­art nev­er leaves his wheel­chair dur­ing the film, and yet, through his point of view, we fol­low a very com­plex mur­der scheme. Hitch­cock man­ages to take some­thing huge and con­dense it into some­thing real­ly small. And he achieves that through a com­plete con­trol of film mak­ing tech­nique.”

Com­mu­ni­cat­ing with­out direct­ly say­ing, show­ing, or explain­ing? Craft­ing abstract atmos­phere? Evok­ing a dream­like ver­sion of Hol­ly­wood? Cast­ing an eye on soci­ety that sees things dif­fer­ent­ly? Cre­at­ing worlds in tight con­fines? Seems to me, as some­one who’s expe­ri­enced more than his share of screen­ings of such films as Eraser­headBlue Vel­vetLost High­way, and Mul­hol­land Dri­ve, that you could ascribe new ver­sions of not one but all of these cin­e­mat­ic ten­den­cies to Lynch him­self. We call imi­ta­tion the sin­cer­est form of flat­tery, but sure­ly it counts as a whole oth­er order of com­pli­ment to take the accom­plish­ments of the cre­ators who inspire you and some­how make them com­plete­ly your own. It takes, as the man says, a sort of sheer mag­ic.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The 10 Great­est Films of All Time Accord­ing to 846 Film Crit­ics

David Lynch Talks About His 99 Favorite Pho­tographs at Paris Pho­to 2012

David Lynch Explains How Med­i­ta­tion Enhances Our Cre­ativ­i­ty

David Lynch’s Sur­re­al Com­mer­cials

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture and writes essays on lit­er­a­ture, film, cities, Asia, and aes­thet­ics. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­lesA Los Ange­les PrimerFol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

The Irrepressible Bette Davis Recalls Her Good and Bad Days Kissing in the Movies

In 1971, a year before Last Tan­go in Paris was released in the US,  Bette Davis went on The Dick Cavett Show to dish on a career’s worth of onscreen kiss­es. Four decades on, when access to Net­flix is all that’s required to enjoy a visu­al inti­ma­cy bor­der­ing on the gyne­co­log­i­cal with Halle Berry or Maria Bel­lo, Davis still cap­ti­vates. Watch the above excerpt and don’t feel ashamed if you spend the rest of the day try­ing to guess the iden­ti­ty of the actor who—in Cavet­t’s words—“was so repul­sive that you just could­n’t stand to do it.”

Glenn Ford? Paul Hein­reid? Pop­u­lar opin­ion points to Edward G. Robin­son.

Who­ev­er he was, she cashed her pay­check and took one for the team, just as she did in 1930, when under con­tract to Uni­ver­sal, the self-described “Yan­kee-ist, mod­est vir­gin that ever walked the earth” was pressed into ser­vice as a “test girl.” This involved lying on a couch as a suc­ces­sion of 15 audi­tion­ing actors demon­strat­ed their pas­sion­ate kiss­ing abil­i­ties.

That ses­sion was filmed, but evi­dence has yet to sur­face on the Inter­net. Fans will just have to con­tent them­selves with sneak­ing onto a three-acre pri­vate arbore­tum in Mass­a­chu­setts for a glimpse of an Anna Col­man Ladd foun­tain fea­tur­ing four frol­ic­some nudes. Word has it a cer­tain mod­est vir­gin Yan­kee served as the mod­el for one of these fig­ures while still in her teens. Or so a leg­endary actress revealed to Play­boy at the age of 74.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Woody Allen on The Dick Cavett Show Cir­ca 1970

Dick Cavett’s Wide-Rang­ing TV Inter­view with Ing­mar Bergman and Lead Actress Bibi Ander­s­son (1971)

George Har­ri­son in the Spot­light: The Dick Cavett Show (1971)

Ayun Hal­l­i­day recalls Lau­ren Bacall shilling for a lip aug­men­ta­tion pro­ce­dure in No Touch Mon­key! And Oth­er Trav­el Lessons Learned Too Late. Fol­low her @AyunHalliday

Dark Side of the Rainbow: Pink Floyd Meets The Wizard of Oz in One of the Earliest Mash-Ups

Dude, I’m seri­ous; you cue up The Wiz­ard of Oz, you cue up Dark Side of the Moon, and you start ’em up at the same time. It total­ly works. Too many syn­chronic­i­ties to explain away. Blow your mind, man.

Laugh though we may at those who con­sid­er it an intense evening to enter their pre­ferred state of mind, shall we say, and feel for res­o­nances between a 1939 MGM musi­cal and Pink Floy­d’s eighth album, we can’t deny that the mash-up Dark Side of the Rain­bow, as they call it (when they don’t call it Dark Side of Oz or The Wiz­ard of Floyd), has become a seri­ous, if mod­est, cul­tur­al phe­nom­e­non.

In fact, since enthu­si­asm for play­ing Dark Side of the Moon while watch­ing The Wiz­ard of Oz goes back at least as far as Usenet dis­cus­sions in the mid-nineties, it may well count as the first inter­net mash-up ever. Word of the view­ing expe­ri­ence’s uncan­ni­ness has, since then, extend­ed far beyond the wood-pan­eled-base­ment set; even an insti­tu­tion as osten­si­bly square as the cable chan­nel Turn­er Clas­sic Movies once aired The Wiz­ard of Oz with Dark Side of the Moon as its sound­track.

Clear­ly, peo­ple get some­thing out of the com­bi­na­tion no mat­ter their state of mind. At the very least, they get amuse­ment at the coin­ci­dences where the album’s sounds and lyri­cal themes meet and seem­ing­ly match the events of the pic­ture. Dark-side-of-the-rainbow.com offers a thor­ough­ly anno­tat­ed list of these inter­sec­tions, from the fad­ing-in heart­beat that opens the album align­ing with the appear­ance of the movie’s title:

In this con­cept album, we have [sym­bol­i­cal­ly] the begin­ning of human life. Many par­ents begin the process of nam­ing the child, as soon as they become aware of its exis­tence, often before they even know the sex of the child. Here, we have the name of a movie, which just hap­pens to be the name of one of the char­ac­ters in the movie, just as we are becom­ing aware of this new life.

To the lyric that accom­pa­nies Dorothy’s entry into Munchkin­land:

“Get a job with more pay and you’re OK”: Dorothy does­n’t know it yet, but she is about to be pro­mot­ed from farm girl to slay­er of wicked witch­es.

To the album-clos­ing heart­beat that plays as the Tin Man receives a heart of his own:

On the album, this heart­beat going dead rep­re­sents death. Tin Man’s new heart, which we can hear tick­ing, sym­bol­izes rebirth. Once again, this con­trast of what we see in the movie, and what we hear on the album is about pro­vid­ing bal­ance. And as this is how the sto­ry ends, this bal­ance speaks of how, in the end, the fairy­tale has indeed over­come the tragedy.

Pink Floyd them­selves have dis­avowed any com­po­si­tion­al intent in this mat­ter (Alan Par­sons, who engi­neered the record­ing, calls the very idea “a com­plete load of eye­wash”), and even Dark Side of the Rain­bow’s most ded­i­cat­ed enthu­si­asts sel­dom doubt them. Some may insist that the band, already adept at com­pos­ing film scores, did it all sub­con­scious­ly, but to me, the endur­ing pop­u­lar­i­ty of this ear­ly mash-up stands as evi­dence of some­thing far more inter­est­ing: mankind’s unend­ing ten­den­cy — com­pul­sion, even — to find pat­terns where none may exist. “When coin­ci­dences pile up in this way, one can­not help being impressed by them—for the greater the num­ber of terms in such a series, or the more unusu­al its char­ac­ter, the more improb­a­ble it becomes.” Carl Jung wrote that about the psy­cho­log­i­cal con­cept of syn­chronic­i­ty. If only he’d lived to watch this.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

BBC Radio Play Based on Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon Stream­ing Free For Lim­it­ed Time

Pink Floyd Pro­vides the Sound­track for the BBC’s Broad­cast of the 1969 Moon Land­ing

Watch Pink Floyd Plays Live in the Ruins of Pom­peii (1972)

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture and writes essays on lit­er­a­ture, film, cities, Asia, and aes­thet­ics. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­lesA Los Ange­les PrimerFol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

The Pleasure Garden, Alfred Hitchcock’s Very First Feature Film (1925)

Last week, we fea­tured Sight & Sound mag­a­zine’s last crit­ics poll, in which Alfred Hitch­cock­’s Ver­ti­go unseat­ed the long­time cham­pi­on, Orson Welles’ Cit­i­zen Kane. The lat­ter famous­ly appeared as Welles’ debut, released in 1941, just days before the direc­tor and star attained the ripe old age of 26. Ver­ti­go, by con­trast, rep­re­sents the work of a mature film­mak­er; when it came out in 1958, its 59-year-old direc­tor had 46 pre­vi­ous pic­tures under his belt. Today, let’s go back to the first of those, to a Hitch­cock film far less wide­ly seen — though of no less inter­est to Hitch­cock enthu­si­asts — than the San Fran­cis­co tale of the trou­bled Scot­tie Fer­gu­son and elu­sive Madeleine Elster: 1925’s The Plea­sure Gar­den, view­able free in full at the top of this post. This silent adap­ta­tion of an Oliv­er Sandys nov­el, a British pro­duc­tion meant to show­case Amer­i­can star Vir­ginia Val­li, plunges into the roman­ti­cal­ly tur­bu­lent milieu of Lon­don cho­rus girls.

It takes that plunge by open­ing with a sequence crit­ic Dave Kehr calls “a clip reel of Hitch­cock motifs to come.” Clear­ly the 26-year-old Hitch­cock arrived with his skills and sen­si­bil­i­ties in place, but when he took on this project in 1925, he’d already had a bad expe­ri­ence in the film indus­try: 1922’s abort­ed Num­ber 13 would have giv­en him his first direc­to­r­i­al cred­it, but that pro­duc­tion ran out of mon­ey when pho­tog­ra­phy had only just begun.

The Plea­sure Gar­den itself would­n’t get pub­licly screened until 1927, after Hitch­cock had already had some suc­cess with his third fea­ture The Lodger. But the pic­ture that will always remain his first has accrued a good deal of respect over the past 86 years, and it received a BFI restora­tion this year. If you can’t find a show­ing of the restora­tion yet, watch the ear­li­er ver­sion right here. You can also watch the trail­er for the restora­tion here.

You will find oth­er great films in our col­lec­tion of Free Hitch­cock Movies Online, as well as in our larg­er col­lec­tion 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. Or fol­low our posts on Threads, Face­book, BlueSky or Mastodon.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Watch The White Shad­ow, the Recent­ly-Dis­cov­ered and Ear­li­est-Sur­viv­ing Hitch­cock Film

Stan­ley Kubrick’s Very First Films: Three Short Doc­u­men­taries

The 10 Great­est Films of All Time Accord­ing to 846 Film Crit­ics

Watch 25 Alfred Hitch­cock Trail­ers, Excit­ing Films in Their Own Right

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture and writes essays on lit­er­a­ture, film, cities, Asia, and aes­thet­ics. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­lesA Los Ange­les Primer. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

The 10 Greatest Films of All Time According to 846 Film Critics

citizen kane best

We’ve recent­ly fea­tured the all-time-great­est-film-selec­tions from such cel­e­brat­ed direc­tors as Stan­ley Kubrick, Mar­tin Scors­ese, Woody Allen, and Quentin Taran­ti­no. Some of these lists came from the grand poll put on last year by Sight & Sound, the British Film Insti­tute’s well-respect­ed cin­e­ma jour­nal. While scru­ti­niz­ing the vot­ing records in the direc­tors’ divi­sion yields no small plea­sure for the cinephile, to focus too close­ly on that would ignore the big pic­ture. By that, I mean the over­all stand­ings in this most painstak­ing crit­i­cal effort to deter­mine “the Great­est Films of All Time”:

  1. Ver­ti­go (Alfred Hitch­cock, 1958)
  2. Cit­i­zen Kane (Orson Welles, 1941)
  3. Tokyo Sto­ry (Yasu­jirô Ozu, 1953)
  4. La Règle du jeu (Jean Renoir, 1939)
  5. Sun­rise (F.W. Mur­nau, 1927)
  6. 2001: A Space Odyssey (Stan­ley Kubrick, 1968)
  7. The Searchers (John Ford, 1956)
  8. Man with a Movie Cam­era (Dzi­ga Ver­tov, 1929)
  9. The Pas­sion of Joan of Arc (Carl Theodor Drey­er, 1928)
  10. (Fed­eri­co Felli­ni, 1963)

These results came out with a bang — the sound, of course, of Ver­ti­go dis­plac­ing Cit­i­zen Kane. How many who watched the young Orson Welles’ debut dur­ing its finan­cial­ly inaus­pi­cious orig­i­nal run could have guessed it would one day stand as a byword for the height of cin­e­mat­ic crafts­man­ship?

But Cit­i­zen Kane just flopped, draw­ing a good deal of crit­i­cal acclaim even as it did so, where­as, sev­en­teen years lat­er, Hitch­cock­’s Ver­ti­go not only flopped, but did so into a fog of mixed reviews, tum­bling uncer­e­mo­ni­ous­ly from there into obscu­ri­ty. Prints became scarce, and the ones Hitch­cock afi­ciona­dos could lat­er track down had seen bet­ter days. It would take a kind of obses­sion — not to men­tion a thor­ough restora­tion — to return Ver­ti­go to the zeit­geist.

We ignored Ver­ti­go at our per­il, and if we now ignore Cit­i­zen Kane because of its new sec­ond-chair sta­tus, we do that at our per­il as well. The 90-minute doc­u­men­tary, The Com­plete Cit­i­zen Kane, orig­i­nal­ly aired in 1991 as an episode of the BBC’s Are­na. It looks at Welles’ mas­ter­piece from every pos­si­ble angle, even bring­ing in New York­er crit­ic Pauline Kael, whose essay “Rais­ing Kane” took a con­tro­ver­sial anti-auteurist posi­tion about this most seem­ing­ly auteur-dri­ven of all Amer­i­can films.

Fol­low us on Face­book, Twit­ter, Google Plus and LinkedIn and share intel­li­gent media with your friends. And if you want to make sure that our posts def­i­nite­ly appear in your Face­book news­feed, just fol­low these sim­ple steps.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Quentin Taran­ti­no Lists the 12 Great­est Films of All Time: From Taxi Dri­ver to The Bad News Bears

Woody Allen Lists the Great­est Films of All Time: Includes Clas­sics by Bergman, Truf­faut & Felli­ni

Mar­tin Scors­ese Reveals His 12 Favorite Movies (and Writes a New Essay on Film Preser­va­tion)

Stan­ley Kubrick’s List of Top 10 Films (The First and Only List He Ever Cre­at­ed)

Philoso­pher Slavoj Zizek Inter­prets Hitchcock’s Ver­ti­go in The Pervert’s Guide to Cin­e­ma (2006)

Orson Welles Explains Why Igno­rance Was the Genius Behind Cit­i­zen Kane

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture and writes essays on lit­er­a­ture, film, cities, Asia, and aes­thet­ics. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­lesA Los Ange­les Primer. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Don’t miss any­thing from Open Cul­ture in 2014. Sign up for our Dai­ly Email or RSS Feed. And we’ll send cul­tur­al curiosi­ties your way, every day.

Watch The Amazing 1912 Animation of Stop-Motion Pioneer Ladislas Starevich, Starring Dead Bugs

Last week we fea­tured 1937’s The Tale of the Fox, the crown­ing glo­ry of inven­tive Russ­ian film­mak­er Ladis­las Stare­vich’s work in pup­pet ani­ma­tion. But he did­n’t always shoot pup­pets as we know them; at the dawn of his career — and thus the dawn of Russ­ian ani­ma­tion — he had to make use of what lay close at hand. Today we go back a cou­ple decades fur­ther, to the time when Stare­vich (then known, before his immi­gra­tion to Paris, as Władysław Starewicz) worked not as an ani­ma­tor but as the direc­tor of Kovno, Lithua­ni­a’s Muse­um of Nat­ur­al His­to­ry. Inter­est­ed in film­ing noc­tur­nal stag bee­tles but unable to get a per­for­mance out of them under film lights, he hit upon the idea of shoot­ing not liv­ing insects but dead ones, their legs replaced with wire which he could repo­si­tion frame-by-frame. The result? Stare­vich’s ear­ly, still-enter­tain­ing shorts like 1911’s The Ant and the Grasshop­per (also known as The Drag­on­fly and the Ant) at the top.

But you haven’t tru­ly expe­ri­enced dead-bug ani­ma­tion until you’ve seen The Cam­era­man’s Revenge, just above. Stare­vich made it in 1912, by which time his ani­ma­tion skills had devel­oped to the point that each play­er moves in a man­ner both real­is­ti­cal­ly bug­like (some con­tem­po­rary view­ers mis­took them for trained insects mov­ing in real time) and par­o­d­i­cal­ly evoca­tive of human char­ac­ters. Slate’s Joan New­berg­er describes the plot of this “com­ic melo­dra­ma in metic­u­lous­ly detailed minia­ture sets” as fol­lows: “We meet a bee­tle cou­ple, Mr. and Mrs. Zhukov (zhuk means bee­tle in Russ­ian), both of whom are car­ry­ing on extra­mar­i­tal affairs. Zhukov wins the affec­tions of a drag­on­fly cabaret dancer, but flies into a rage when he comes home to dis­cov­er his wife in the ‘arms’ of an artist (also played by a bee­tle).” But the plot thick­ens, and this seem­ing­ly sim­ple (if obvi­ous­ly com­plex in craft, espe­cial­ly for the time) tale even uses a bit of cin­e­ma-with­in-cin­e­ma at its denoue­ment. Starewicz made ear­ly stop-motion for sure, but he did­n’t make the ear­li­est. Smithsonian.com has a post on that, cit­ing the 1902 Thomas Edi­son-pro­duced Fun in a Bak­ery Shop as the first sur­viv­ing exam­ple — but, alas, a bug­less one.

Stare­vich’s films can be found in our col­lec­tion, 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More. Look under Ani­ma­tion.

via Slate’s Vault Blog

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Tale of the Fox: Watch Ladis­las Starevich’s Ani­ma­tion of Goethe’s Great Ger­man Folk­tale (1937)

The Mas­cot, Pio­neer­ing Stop Ani­ma­tion from Wla­dys­law Starow­icz

Col­in Mar­shall hosts and pro­duces Note­book on Cities and Cul­ture and writes essays on lit­er­a­ture, film, cities, Asia, and aes­thet­ics. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­lesA Los Ange­les Primer. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

Avant-Garde Poet Henri Michaux Creates Educational Film Visualizing Effects of Mescaline & Hash (1964)

You don’t need to under­stand French to appre­ci­ate the project. In 1964, the Swiss phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­ny San­doz (now Novar­tis) com­mis­sioned the Bel­gian writer, poet and painter Hen­ri Michaux to pro­duce a film that demon­strat­ed the effects of hal­lu­cino­genic drugs. The com­pa­ny saw the film as a way to help its sci­en­tists get clos­er to the hal­lu­cino­genic expe­ri­ence — not sur­pris­ing, giv­en that San­doz was the com­pa­ny that first syn­the­sized LSD back in 1938.

Hen­ri Michaux had already pub­lished accounts where he used words, signs and draw­ings to recount his expe­ri­ences with trip-induc­ing drugs. (See his trans­lat­ed book, Mis­er­able Mir­a­cle.) And that con­tin­ued with the new film, Images du monde vision­naire (Images of a Vision­ary World.) At the top, you can find the trip­py seg­ment devot­ed to mesca­line, and, below that, Michaux’s visu­al treat­ment of hashish. Watch the com­plete film, except for one unfor­tu­nate­ly blem­ished minute, here.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

This is What Oliv­er Sacks Learned on LSD and Amphet­a­mines

Aldous Huxley’s LSD Death Trip

Ken Kesey’s First LSD Trip Ani­mat­ed

How to Oper­ate Your Brain: A User Man­u­al by Tim­o­thy Leary (1993)

Beyond Tim­o­thy Leary: 2002 Film Revis­its His­to­ry of LSD

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 3 ) |

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.