Film fans are too cynical

You are right Deadite and to be honest I find the whole doom and gloom, rage against the film industry thing kind of funny - so much hatred, so much exerted energy for no really reason other than "LISTEN TO ME! I HAVE A POINT!!". But it's not just film but popular culture overall. In music it is the same in the sense that I know people who dislike bands with no reason why other than they are popular so those certain people have to go against the grain because that is how they are inclined to believe - which frankly is just as pathetic and just as sheepish "why do you like justin beiber?" "oh he is great". "Why do you hate justin beiber?" "cos he is a prick" - woah! Slow down there son! I need to evaluate your answer as it is so complex.

I don't however believe (and this is not pointed at anyone specific here, just a observation I have seen inside and outside of the IMC) that everyone who likes indie scene films think thats money is evil, that co-operations are evil and that the main stream cinema is the devil in a frock (well, aside from Rupert Murdoch but well, yeah) but the problem is those people are the ones who get the most heat and therefore get the most coverage. If anything I think people need someone to hate as much as they need someone to like.

This could really be broken down into a massive debate more about society than cinema culture (for example "hipster" and god that makes me angry hearing that) because society determines how things go but as I said before there will always be a part of society that just doesn't like it.

__________________
twitter: @ginock
livejournal film reviews: http://windsoc.livejournal.com/
photos: http://www.instagram.com/christopherwindsor

Thanks, but I don't think I'm being pessimistic. It's just how it is.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

for whatever it's worth, i've gotten to the point where i'm not too concerned with the current state of the blockbuster Hollywood movie industry. there are so many movies to explore whether it be past or present, to fit anyone's interests... that complaining about what's out now just seems lazy. all it takes is a little research to find a whole wealth of films that can keep any one person occupied for as long as they wish. and with the internet you can order pretty much anything you want legally and have it ready to watch on your home widescreen

Dont roll up in here with common sense Nostromo. We are pissed off and were not gonna take it anymore.

__________________
Letterboxd

I beg to differ. I'm getting tired of your pessimism, it's effecting forum morale.

I think this is a rather mood point. Most people in here are interested in / loves popular films which is pretty much represented in the Mofo lists. I think im on the Nostromo bandwagon, that it so easy to explore other parts of film history than the current big advertised blockbuster.

However i would say that im probably a part of that audience who hates most of what is popular / mainstream movies. Specifically because they usually does not have an interesting filmlanguage and follows formulaic narratives. If im a cynic because of that, thats fine by me, as there are a huge of amount of movies that try to engage me as a viewer and there are quite a number of directors i would call auteurs, both past and present, who in a pretty industrialized film industry gives a personal footprint. Some directors even manages to combine popular succes with quite artsy / personal pictures like Yasujiro Ozu.

In some respect i think its more interesting to talk about art versus formulaic pictures, than mainstream versus indie (foreign) pictures.

All in all i would have to say that the average generic hollywood movie does not interest me one bit, even though its been made by a director who has made good stuff before. In this regard i think the huge industrialization is a backward leap versus more personal (art) movies.

__________________
TokeZa's Top 100 Movies through Space and Time

TokeZa's inane ramblings about film

Letterboxd profile

You are right Nostro to an extent. What I would say however is that it can be difficult to find niche films because cinemas don't show indie style films - but you can't blame the film makers themselves really.

For example, I wanted to see Tracks earlier this year but the major cinemas were not showing it and I was able to see it purely by chance at a local arts cinema. I could have downloaded it if I wanted to do but I knew that it was a film that was better to be viewed on a large screen.

Now I know this mainly applies to newer films rather than films that have been around for some time but if one thin is being done by larger cinema releases is it can affect cinemas showing films that people may wish to see but will not due to a lack of confidence.

Anyone agree?

As someone who lives in a small town I completely agree. I live within 15 minutes of 5 multiplexes but have to wait months to see whst I want on DVD. Throw me a bone in one of your smaller theaters once in a while. I would pay to see Chef, Locke, or Joe this weekend. Its not going to happen. Bummer

I know what you mean. I am very lucky to have a cinema called FACT who not only show seasons of films but also none major films as it were (I went for example to see all five alien films in one night in that cinema, it's what they do). I am willing to pay a little more to see the films and what bothers me the most is the level of hatred of piracy, I get it, piracy is bad BUT there are quite a few of us who only download films because we want to see them Hollywood and YOU stop us from seeing them.

My biggest pet peeve that has started over the last few years is the ramping up of limited release. The "great" movies for the year are all back loaded but not in wide release. So the stuff I am dying to see is not getting to my little town till three or four months after what feels like everyone else has already seen it. Every year the past three years I say I am waiting and not watching these movies on my laptop but I always cave because I want to be part of the conversation.

I'm rolling my eyes.

Why can't something be money grabbing AND creative?

Screw this "they're only out to suck away our souls" mentality when it comes to movies. If they entertain me and give me a good time somehow, they can have my money.

Hookers are money grabbing, too, but get a good one and you'll be handing her (or him) dollar after dollar after dollar.

And what you're doing here is just giving them another warm blanket to lay on.

Not replying to the rest because I'm not reading it.

Oh, you're agreeing with me. Alright.

seanc, windsoc, I don't know how you guys feel about On Demand/Pay-per-view, but a lot of art house releases are taking that route (depending on where you live, etc.), but it is an option to watch recent releases legally. I know Blue Ruin, a film I loved, was released streaming and in limited release around the same time.

However, you are sacrificing the big screen experience, but watching films at home is becoming a better experience all the time.

sexy celeb, no, making money and making art are not mutually exclusive, it just appears that way most of the time in the pursuit of the 4 quadrant appeal. That said, I feel there's plenty of creative types who are working within the system to at least make some of the major releases more interesting.

__________________

I would love to have that sort of service (I live in the UK) and would be prepared to pay for that in the same way I am willing to pay for the likes of netflix. What services do you know about Brick? I would be interested in what I could get hold of.

Amazon has some available. I know right now they have the Jesse Eisenberg movie The Double for $6.99 US. They also have Blue Ruin and Ti West's new film The Sacrament.

I know I can get a bunch through my cable provider, but I have no idea how that works across the ocean.

I only subscribe to Netflix and Hulu Plus, but there are one time watch options other places.

Don't be angry, I made you famous.
http://www.movieforums.com/community...82#post1099382

Vudu is another one time service option.

I get what you're saying and I actually somewhat agree with the general gist of wanting more "personal" films, although I still enjoy my "big" movies which are basically roller coaster rides for my inner kid and I'd never give em up completely. However, I dislike the dichotomy of "formula vs art". It just isn't that simple. I'd say the more accurate opposite of formula would be novelty so "novelty vs formulaic" makes more sense, since I don't consider a film automatically something special just because it's not formula. Some people have an attitude that any film which defies convention is superior and so artistic but IMO there are a ton of "indy", "experimental", "artsy fartsy", and so on, which are just plain terrible films and bigger wastes of my time because they didn't even provide me the simple entertainment of my "formulaic Hollywood blockbusters".

The plain fact is, while I love depth and novel ideas and intelligent writing and all that, there just aren't too many filmmakers capable of that and fewer capable of doing that consistently. So I enjoy the best of both "worlds" without hesitation or silly hipsterish shame about "supporting" evil Hollywood - When I find the former I'm happy to put my thinking cap on and appreciate nuances and whatever else it offers, but I'm also happy to enjoy my less mature interests too, to let my hair down and just have fun without getting too hung up on those films not being "arty" or "serious" enough to suit some unrealistic hipster standard.

__________________
#31 on SC's Top 100 Mofos list!!

- don't worry bro, we cool

To try and explain though as I appreciate sometimes my sentences don't always make sense what I mean is that larger chains such as Odeon etc may not show smaller or indie films because they are afraid they will not get bums on seats. I don't blame them for that but it ends up becoming a problem that if you don't take the risk you will never know but if you know you get lots of people into the larger films why take the risk?

I hope this makes sense

^^ Yes, now it makes sense.