Hollywood vs Festival

Sometimes when people check out my DVD collection they are a little baffled by my eclectic library. I hear questions like "Why the hell would you want that!" and sometimes more simple comments such as "That film is utter crap." They are no doubt saying this because I do have some questionable titles in my library, but with good reason.

As an aspiring film maker I learn a huge amount from both good, bad and utterly crap films (in fact you could argue that you learn far more from bad films then from good ones). As a film viewer I am easily entertained, but this is not to say that I would rate this "utter crap" highly, but that there are elements of the film that I like or have learnt from.

I enjoy watching a film with a person who is able to let themselves be totally immersed in the film (regardless of genre) but then to also have some perspective on it afterwards and maybe discuss it. As opposed to someone who just can't let the film be what it is and get into it, they have to keep projecting onto it 'how it should be' or 'how I would do it' (and share this with you during the film instead of after!). Of course one can't help but project sometimes too, especially when you make the mistake of walking into a film with strong expectations. Something I do my best to avoid.

But for me, the worst thing is watching a film with some kind of film elitist, the type who says:

"I hate festival movies, I never know what the hell is happening, I mean what's with all the longing expressions and lingering shots of landscapes man? Give me a good Dolph Lundgren movie any day [Side note: Is there a good Dolph Lundgren film you ask? Why yes actually, I am quite fond of Joshua Tree aka Army of One, it has a fantastic and totally over the top shoot-out near the end].

OR

"I hate Hollywood movies, all that commercial crap man. They are just a big machine, yeah! I only watch festival films, they are just so much more fulfilling and meaningful."

Right... Of course because Hollywood is literally a large machine made of faceless suits who only care about merchandising and box office, they are not in fact a huge bunch of diverse human beings expressing themselves within certain constraints. These are often called 'formula' films, but I think there is actually plenty of room for the talented filmmaker to mold this 'formula' to his or her needs, perhaps there are many sacrifices the commercial film maker will make, but there's still a hell of a lot of room for expressing yourself. Please don't get me wrong I enjoy a good 'Festival' (I hate this blanket term describing almost any film that has a small budget and sub-titles) film as much as any other good film, I just can't stand it when people wipe out an entire avenue of potential entertainment for themselves by being narrow minded.

Yes Hollywood does do a lot of re-makes and sequels, and yes a lot of the 'big films' are primarily driven by money, but the films themselves are nevertheless conceived and orchestrated by individuals with the best intentions in mind. I can't imagine anyone who would say to themselves "Now how can I put in the least amount of effort into this film and make as much money as possible?". I imagine that most filmmakers (including Ed Wood and Uwe Boll), both 'Hollywood' and 'Indie' start out with the best intentions. Sometimes the films turn out good and sometimes they are utter crap, yet still, out of 90% of films I see there is something in there that entertains, inspires or at the least teaches me 'what not to do'.

OK, but what is your point? I guess I am just trying to outline that I feel it's worth checking out all sorts of films and I feel angered when people pre-judge a film based on what type of film they think it is. I feel like people should allow themselves to be open to any film experience regardless of who made it, when it was made and why it was made. In my teens I watched a lot of Van Damme and Arnie action flicks (after my Neverending Story, Wonka and Pee-Wee stage that is) I also got a taste of classic 40's and 50's films from my Mother, which expanded my taste in films and I now love these 'classics'. Can't the reverse be true, can't that person who's favorite films are A Clockwork Orange and Donnie Darko go rent something from the "Action" section (of course avoiding all Chuck Norris films) and have a laugh watching stuff blow up? Do they really need to be "challenged" every time they see a film? What's wrong with just being entertained sometimes? Let's just all admit it, when you are channel surfing on TV how often do you catch yourself watching a film you would normally call crap and getting into it? You're getting into it because you just came across it and haven't thought about it - "Hey look it's some dumb film with Don Johnson in it, ha ha . Hey look Jennifer Connelly is on a beach with no top on... choice!".

Yet nothing scares me more then seeing someone enter the video store, walk straight up to the new releases and mindlessly grab something. What are they thinking at this moment "Duhhh, new release goooood"? Are they aware that the video shop even has additional shelving units filled with films that didn't come out this week? Perhaps I'm just jealous that it takes me over an hour to choose my DVD's (and that's if I'm doing good).

In conclusion I would like say: If you are an 'indie' film watcher go rent an action film, and if you are the kind of guy who has seen the last five Seagal films (you are the only guy on earth by the way) go rent some erotic french film from the 'porn', oh sorry I mean 'festival' section, who knows, maybe you'll get hooked on sub-titled films? All film communities or genres or whatever you want to label them have some great films on offer (and terrible films of course such as all the Chuck Norris ones), go rent something from a section you would normally avoid, who knows you might be pleasantly surprised. Then again you might not be and then you can come back here and abuse me.

Well I'm glad I cleared that up. I'm going back to the basement now...