Underground Film Journal
More » Online Cinema

Clint Enns: Spider-Man Vs. Macrovision

Uh oh! My illegal art senses are tingling! Canadian filmmaker Clint Enns appropriates a thrilling old ’60s Spider-Man cartoon — the one where all the characters look like stiff cardboard cutouts — where Spidey faces off against Doctor Octopus in a dank underground cave. Except, through some funky distortion the cartoon is almost virtually unrecognizable. In fact, it’s a little bit groovier.

There’s a couple of reasons I posted this video up. One, I like those old Spider-Man cartoons. Two, I like Clint Enns’ videos. Three, I particularly like the ghosting effect that permeates this particular video by Enns, especially how heads from a future or past scene suddenly appear on the heads of a character during the current scene. It’s also cool when ghostly approximations of Doctor Octopus’ metal tentacles start snaking through a shot, which start making me think of those classic Amazing Spider-Man comics where Doc Ock seemingly returned from the dead to bedevil his ex-fiancĂ©e, Aunt May. (“Seemingly” because, of course, he wasn’t really dead in the first place.)

But, I also like the statement that Enns is making by putting this video up.

Spider-Man tied up in a cage

First off, I don’t believe in video piracy. At the same time, though, I thoroughly enjoy artists remixing films, TV shows, advertisements, music videos, etc. However, in order to produce such remixes, artists must frequently ignore and/or circumvent the protections that are set up to deter piracy, such as Enns has done here and has made a specific statement about it by referencing Macrovision, the anti-piracy encryption software, in the title.

I suppose — although I haven’t rationalized it all out fully — that an artist taking a previously created piece of art to create a new piece of art significantly synthesizes the original into something totally new, which is different than just ripping people off, no matter what the motivation is, e.g. selfishness, a belief in sticking it to the man, a disbelief in the use of copyrights, etc.

Although sometimes it feels tough to justify that distinction, sort of like trying to justify Roy Lichtenstein — my favorite painter — ripping off comic book artists to create his early Pop Art work.

Anyway, I believe it’s all a very complicated issue. And I’m still not linking to or embedding bootlegged videos, unless they’ve been artistically modified. Does that make me hypocritical?


Underground Film Feedback (5 comments)

Sorry, no new comments allowed, but please read through our comment archive.

  • Not hypocritical. I think this all fits within an argument for fair use. Of course, fair use implies some amount of necessary argument, so, no, you are not being hypocritical at all.

  • Clint Enns says:

    i view artistic “fair use” as creating a new context for old images. if an art work is significantly different from the original work, i feel it has been used fairly regardless of legal copyright laws.

  • BM says:

    Great work, Clint. It’s a way interesting age in which we are alive today.