Cretins vs. Churchgoers
Marshall Fine has written a fairly sage Sundance sum-up piece, although the only film he seems to have fully embraced is the fascinating but faintly icky Catfish. What about The Tillman Story (which I saw and responded very well to last night), Buried, Get Low, Animal Kingdom (top-tier Australian crime pic in the vein of At Close Range), The Mormon Proposition, Winter’s Bone and Boy?
“Ultimately, audiences want what they want,” he writes, “and the mass audience wants mass entertainment. Whereas Catfish, one of the most surprising and moving films I’ve seen this year, will never appeal to a mass audience — even if you give away free tickets that included a raffle chance at dinner with Brangelina.” (New iconic power-glam couple needed — these two are apparently toast.)
“It’s not that the mass audience is made up of cretins — it’s that the vast majority of people don’t go to the movies (or to the theater or turn on their TV) to be challenged,” Fine explains. “Life is challenging enough on a daily basis; entertainment, they believe, should be entertaining. That’s not a judgment, just a fact.”
Here’s another fact: moviegoing cretinism is precisely defined by those who primarily view films as get-away vacations or hideaway shut-downs. People of depth and intelligence view films as opportunities to feel, commune, turn on, see inside and dig into the richness of things. To them, theatres are churches. But to the lowbrows the ideal movie experience is equivalent to popping a nice Lemon quaalude or getting a soothing, emotionally reassuring massage.
I love going into comfort zones also — who doesn’t? — but to be only interested in movies that are the equivalent of a luxury Carnival Cruise is basically an admission of spiritual failure and cowardice.
To the church-going crowd, movies like Catfish, The Tillman Story, Get Low, Animal Kingdom, Four Lions and Boy are entertaining. Because they’re clever, oddly hilarious, surprising, gripping, head-turning, quietly emotional and always up to something fascinating, sometimes in a slightly off-kilter sense and sometimes not. Imagine that!
“It’s not that the mass audience is made up of cretins — it’s that the vast majority of people don’t go to the movies
He should have left it there. I’d wager the average person in America sees about 5-10 movies at the theater every year, maximum. Probably less than that. Of course they’re going to want to be entertained by the obvious “must-see” films. And the “must-sees” are the ones that gain the most exposure on the TV or the radio or magazines, etc.
There could well be someone in Kentucky who’d really enjoy Animal Kingdom, but he will probably never hear of its existence. There are hundreds of movies released every year and it’s hard to keep track of them unless you read specialist sites like this one.
They’re not necessarily stupid. They just don’t worship movies as much as the posters on this site do. I’m sure there’s a sports correspondent out there who can’t fathom why you’d want to sit in a theater watching a documentary about dolphins on a Sunday when you could be watching the NFL.
Plus, factor in the ridiculous cost of movies these days and you have another reason why people want to be fairly sure they’ll be entertained. If they’re going to drop $12.50 per ticket plus parking and popcorn, why take a risk on something there’s a good chance they won’t enjoy?
People of depth and intelligence are also entertained by the very act of being challenged. Which isn’t to say that’s all they are entertained by. But they do enjoy having their minds blown, stretched, or pummeled. Films should not be a passive experience, it should be interactive with the viewer/consumer bringing something to the party.
I think David Cronenberg said it best… I can’t remember the exact quote, but it was something along the lines of: he doesn’t want his films to entertain people… he wants people to entertain his films.
Another thing you’ve got to consider is that, particularly in its earlier days, films were seen as a dumbass timewaster by many of the elites in the same way that reality TV is today. So not all people of depth and intelligence are drawn to movies. Some very intelligent hate the artform altogether, and probably think we should all spend our time reading books instead.
What exactly is the point of Sundance and other film fesitvals anyway? The truly independent films have almost no chance of going anywhere, and the other films are big-budged films with stars that didn’t need the exposure.
I would wager that 98% of the population has never seen a film by Sundance darlings the Duplass Brothers, yet they are mentioned as the forefront of an entire movement in film!! Sundance loves these guys, yet their films never go anywhere. So what’s the point, exactly?
I speak as a member of the church, I watch and love all kinds of movies for all kinds of reasons. I don’t care if a movie has subtitles, is a documentary, or is animated so long as it works, I will give it a try.
That being said, there’s often a huge disparage between what’s really good at Sundance versus what was better than the rest of the selections. There’s always lots of film festival “buzz” around films that barely escape from the mountains not because the mass audience isn’t buying, but because the church drank the Kool Aid.
Do we really need a Sundance film festival? It gives some trust fund kids an excuse to wear some really bitchin’ outdoor duds, but besides that, what the point?
What’s the point of saying “what’s the point”?
Eloi Manning – you must be single and/or childless.
Most of my other friends with families see ONE maybe TWO films a year other than kid flicks. I’m the exception, but even my own attendance is way, way down because of responsibilities.
Of course, we’re talking actually going to the theater. Everyone has home theaters and if you include DVDs, then the entire point is moot. There are plenty of films that get viewed in that form because they did win an award at Sundance, which seems to be the point of the festival.
No point. bloomcounty_groupie makes an excellent point, though. Sundance, like the Oscars, moves product.
every time I see AT CLOSE RANGE mentioned I have to simply say that it is the shit. One of the best films of the ’80s and one of the best examples of the style of its time. Walken should be a two-time Academy Award winner.
The comparison gets me very excited for ANIMAL KINGDOM, which I’m sure won’t open in D.C. until March of next year. Which reminds me of a big problem I have. If a film goes over well at a festival, don’t they have some responsibility to get it out that calendar year? These films aren’t waiting for the right slot for a wide release anyway, so why does it take so long? I’ve been stoked for THE WHITE RIBBON since reading about it last May, and I don’t think it opens here in Washington until next weekend. A PROPHET doesn’t come out here until early March I believe. As George would say, what’s the point?
Yeah, the ridiculous gaps between festivals and wide actual release date need to be shortened. It’s why so many people feel a bit underwhelmed by films like An Education when they finally get to see it. After the best part of a year reading about it, it’s never going to live up to those expectations.
I’ve never quite understood why a film can’t be entertaining and challenging at the same time. It used to be that way. Citizen Kane is both. The Godfather is both. Lawrence of Arabia is both. Psycho is both. And so on.
One suspects that, in their desperate need to prove their worth and their elitist cred, some critics equate challenging with depressing and opaque. “Well, you didn’t like it, so obviously you didn’t get it and YOU’RE NOT WORTHY!” Small wonder they’re a dying breed.
Seconding the love for At Close Range, as well as After Dark, My Sweet, Glengarry Glen Ross and Confidence. James Foley is one of the more underrated directors, IMO. Too bad Perfect Stranger sucked out loud.
Marshall Fine is an idiot. A colossal idiot. That’s both a judgment and a fact.
He seems to think the point of Sundance was to get ALL of mainstream America to embrace these films. No, it was to raise their profile so they might find more of an audience than they otherwise would have. He cites CATFISH as something that the demo for TRANSFORMERS isn’t going to embrace, blithely ignoring the fact that it proves Sundance did accomplish this year what it set out to do with that film alone.
He also pulls facts out of his ass, ie “… the audience for them seems to be shrinking, not growing.” Yet he cites NOTHING to back that up while its well known that one of the factors that helped fuel Netflix’s growth was the fact they carried so many of these films that Blockbuster wouldn’t. In fact, that was touted in many of their press releases.
I hate to use personal anecdote, but I know my own viewing of these films has increased five fold in the age of DVD. Not only on DVD, but trying to catch them in theaters.
He also gets it backwards when it comes to other festivals vs. Sundance. Because the reality is, most of the other big festivals out there have simply become venues for the studios to launch their high profile “difficult” films. The ones with name casts and critic-fave directors.
I know the point was to launch this “aren’t we special for loving all kinds of film” debate, but Fine’s off-base assertions derailed it for me.
In spite of JW’s protestations (though I admire his thesaurus with its infinite variations on some aspect of dumbass cretinism) going to the movies is about the worst way to get serious information about any particular topic, therefore his theater as church analogy is illustrative — and about as useless for spiritual enlightenment as church as church.
Everybody gets a kick out of the movies sometimes, one way or another, but to make it your life and reason for being is about as dumbass and retrograde as being addicted to tobacco and justifying it by subscribing to Cigar Aficionado. Unless you’re pulling loads of cash, that is, which goes without saying and does not require the hypocrisy of a supposed “higher calling.”
If you’re out to enlighten, then 1) it ain’t gonna happen, and 2) making movies is probaby the silliest way to try, so where does that leave blogging about them?
Burma..I’m definitely on board w/the “At Close Range” reverence. “Animal Kingdom” will get a look from me based on Wells’ comparison. Unfortunately I will have to wait for the DVD..no way it plays in theaters anywhere close to here.
Judging by how it sounds, I think Catfish could do some business if it got a good solid marketing campaign behind it. It sounds pretty interesting and I think it could be made into a relative must-see for tweens and 20-somethings. It’s got that social network pull and apparently a whopper of an ending that would keep people talking.
“or to the theater or turn on their TV) to be challenged,”
People do turn on their TVs to be challenged. I’m still willing to put a season of The Wire (even the 5th season) against any “big thinking church” movie that’s come out in the last decade.
And Netflix has changed the game. Movies cost money to see. We’ve gone beyond the $10 ticket and most major markets have turned the matinee into the morning commuter time slot. Whereas I pay $18 a month for about 20 or so netflix DVDs to come to my house – I don’t have to even worry about parking. I do see more church movies because if I read about the buzz, I can just add it to the queue and it shows up when it shows up. I don’t even have to look for that tiny arthouse ad in the paper or hope it plays during a good weekend.
I’ve got a 8 month baby in my house. I don’t really want to drag her down to the local arthouse so she can scream halfway through a quiet moment. It’s easier for me to put that title on my queue so that when it arrives, I can watch it with the subtitles going in case she does scream during a big moment. Or I can just rewind it.
Of course I’m killing the indie film market since they’re missing out on my box office action. I’m not even buying the DVDs. I didn’t even see my own movie in the theater when it came to town.
Sure my home theater lacks the charm of the Angelika with the subway rattling and the wheezing of filmgoers that can decide between popcorn or their ventilator. But I’ll suffer to enjoy the art.
if Indie film wants butts in the seats, make ‘em Imax 3-D. Then I might spring for a sitter to see Duplass brothers floating in space in Jim Jaramusch’s Coffeeshop on the Moon – Shot on the Moon
Jesus, Rusty– you sure did a whole lot of defining there! You’ve swallowed a load of capitalist semen as well!
Ray Winstone interview @ http://www.darkhorizons.com/interviews/1539/ray-winstone-for-edge-of-darkness-
Also via Dark Horizons:
More Airbender stills.
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/movie-stills/gallery/1799/the-last-airbender-stills
Cars 2 concept art.
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/404700/cars_2_first_concept_art_image_released.html
Go, Stark Racer.
http://screencrave.com/2010-01-25/tony-starks-latest-iron-man-2-photo/
One of these things is not like the others.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2010-01-22-2010preview22_CV_N.htm
Runaways pics.
http://tinyurl.com/ygjdnou
More Philip Morris stills.
http://www.darkhorizons.com/gallery/347/?image=0
Ironically, this might actually be a step down from Caligula for Mirren.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a198752/tarantino-offers-mirren-medieval-role.html
Sundance can’t make any dough on Youtube.
http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2010/01/25/googles-box-office-bomb.aspx
The return of Mortal Kombat(again).
http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/18833
Alice featurette.
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2010/Alice-In-Wonderland/trailer.php
New Percy spots.
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2010/Percy-Jackson/trailer.php
Oh, yeah, missed this one. Via the New Bev tweet, R.I.P. Zelda Rubinstein.
http://bit.ly/aIxN24
He missed one.
That had me rolling, Prager. Well done.
If Fine can be so wrong about the Tom Ford film, I will skip the rest of his observations about the cinematic terrain. For instance “big” “commercial” “studio” pictures can be just as honest, bracing and transforming as the so-called specialty films. Especially if they’re comedies. This kind of Goldsteinian pulpit proclaiming about the world we live in has become its own kind of tedium.
Ah, it’s the guy who claimed the highest grossing film of all time wouldn’t make past $400M worldwide (sorry I can’t remember whatever his last change was).
Really, D.Z. – how do you not get that you’re, as they politely say it, “off”?
Things were going so well in this thread, and then someone had to go and mention The Wire for the billionth time.
It’s a decent show — and I know I’m probably in the minority here — but it just doesn’t quench the same cravings that good cinema does. Actually, no show really does. Not The Sopranos, not Deadwood, certainly not Seinfeld or Curb Your Enthusiasm (although I love all of them!).
The serial nature of the medium just doesn’t allow for as “pure” of an experience in my eyes. There’s always that sense of “well, we have to come back next week/month/season with another episode, so sometimes it’s just too easy to see the wheels turning. Also a lot of shows totally jump the shark by staying on the air far too long so as to compromise their integrity/mystery that they worked so hard to establish in the first place (see X-Files, Lost, 24…how many “worst days of his life” can Jack Bauer really have??).
The closest I think I’ve ever gotten to a truly cinematic experience on television would probably be Twin Peaks, and even then I’d probably narrow that statement down to say only the first season really qualifies.
Actually, the first season of “The Wire” was superior to so much film that came out that year it’s laughable anyone would try to argue different to me. I’m a cinema person by preference, but I spent far more enjoyable hours in my living room than at the movies.
You have to have on rose tinted glasses plus blinders not to see that the last decade belonged to TV.
Of course, this is just my opinion, same as the last post.
Also, to be clear, someone can get tossed off this site for disagreeing with Jeff, but the obnoxious constant D.Z. posting of mucho plethoras of idiot links that wrecks every damn discussion here ain’t a problem?
Say it ain’t so, Jeff.
If you’re going to be the adult in the classroom, would you take care of the kid that’s eating the chalk and smearing his doodoo on the walls?
Or explain once for me why not, so I never have to waste time asking again? I’m assuming you must have a reason, but no one here has been able to fathom what it is. Are we all loco in the cabezas?
Respectfully, a confused but loyal HE fan.
star wars and godfather are serial in nature
“To the church-going crowd, movies like Catfish, The Tillman Story, Get Low, Animal Kingdom, Four Lions and Boy are entertaining.”
That’s exactly why it’s silly that you’re arguing against “”Life is challenging enough on a daily basis; entertainment, they believe, should be entertaining.”
Because ‘Serious Man’ *is* entertaining, for instance.
However, I also think the “churchgoer” thing is kind of apt, because there’s often a sense of blind worship among critics and film pundits; the agreements all sound the same because there’s a general consensus that nobody wants to deviate from (or, in some cases with a “controversial” movie like, say, Avatar, there are two very specific, very clearly delineated points of view, and everybody has one or the other)…
When I initially saw the title of this thread, I thought the point was going to be that (like the Eloi vs. the Morlocks) *both* sides were not something you wanted to be.
Rather than point out how obnoxious and stupid DZ is, I’m just going to point out that his “news” is also always out of date.
Just for instance, the link to the Helen Mirren / Quentin Tarantino story? If you look at that story, the top “related” link is that very website debunking the story.
You fail at news presentation, just as you failed to get a job at McDonald’s, dZ.
Acai | Acai Berry | Health and Acai Berry | Acai Berry
Gordon: I was joking.
you can find discount mac cosmetics and the cheap
benefit cosmetics online store
buy the cheap mac make up right now!
العاب تلبيس
العاب طبخ
العاب
العاب باربي
العاب ماريو
العاب اكشن
لعبة ترافيان
ترافيان
download msn messenger
Twilight Quiz