Introducing non-cinephiles to film

I wasn't aware Do the Right Thing was a movie about hip-hop.


I also wasn't aware there was a single culture that hip-hop represents. It's about as emotionally and musically and intellectually varied as any kind of music.

I'd suggest doing exactly that. There are lots of popcorn movies that ARE really great and Spielberg comes to the top of that list.

It has to be fun, otherwise why would anybody go to the movies. Art for Art's sake is good, but you have to be able to stay in your seat.

Way back in my undergrad days, I recall taking a course in Film (note the pretense of a capital F), being assigned a list of movies considered academically worthy, seeing them (stuff like old Bergman movies) and nearly deciding to become a sports fan.

It's hard to become an anything-phile if you don't enjoy the starting point, especially since nobody NEEDS to see movies. My suggestion is urge this person to go to the IMDB Top 250, see what appeals content wise, since most of them are available somewhere easily and all of the have stood the test of time.

https://www.imdb.com/chart/top/?ref_=nv_mv_250

Finding a DVD or stream of the LOTR movies, Star Wars, It's a Wonderful Life, Hitchcock movies, etc., is a great way to feed an interest. It has to be fun to watch or why bother, unlike Bergman's gloomy Swedes or Fellini's monochrome Italians, which are advanced content for someone who already has an interest they'd like to expand on.

I'd start with what exactly you want to see in a film? Do you want to be inspired by cinematography? Do you want a really amazing story? Do you want to see something you've never seen before because it can only be done through a movie? I think that's where you start. And as you grow, you'll learn more and more about the world through these things that you're seeing and you'll adapt. What I watched at 20 isn't what I saw at 30 and certainly isn't what I see now in my early 40s. I used to love spectacle. Now I'm all about finding the message. So it's a pretty personal journey.

So start with what you love, then maybe discover more from the filmmaker you love. Then dive into another one from another filmmaker. And if you find a genre or something specific you don't love, ask yourself why and challenge yourself to look inside. That's the real secret of art.

OK, wait wait. I've got it. First, and this might sound weird at first, shame them. Mention films they haven't seen. When they say they haven't seen them, subtly imply that that's like not knowing that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. Roll your eyes and sigh when they mention the latest Vin Diesel flick. Trust me, they will soon learn to appreciate your corrections. Second, overwhelm them. Use words like "cinephile," mise-en-scene," "undercranking," "Rembrandt lighting," etc., etc. The more they feel like they're about to take a quiz they're about to fail the better. This will motivate them to study. Third, suggest the most obscure and perplexing works you can think of. Go heavy or go home. Throw them in the deep end. They will learn to swim or were never worthy of your attention to begin with. Fourth, don't reveal everything at once. Always have a new vocabulary word and unseen genre ready for next week. When they start feeling comfortable, remind them that you're still the boss and that they're going to need to set up their own intellectual Amway scheme to stand on top of their own pyramid of expertise with their own normie acquaintances. Fifth, plot. Meet up with fellow elites discuss how to shepherd your herd (you've kind of already skipped to this step before gathering your herd).

So you have chosen a person who doesn't like or love a single film . . . and your plan is to turn them into a cinephile? Bless.

So this person maybe likes fantasy elements in their movies, or science fiction, or just loud action sequences. There's a reason they love Marvel movies as movies, and you build from there.

Now, if they just love Marvel movies because it's pretty people and noise for three hours and they don't really engage with them on any deep level, then I go back to . . . and your plan is to turn them into a cinephile? Double bless.

A big part of my work is getting kids who say things like "I hate reading" to want to pick up books. I've taken students from "I hate reading" to voluntarily participating in a lunchtime book club reading high-quality historical fiction about Valley Forge in the space of a year. You do it by finding what creates a spark in that person and laying a pathway for them one stone at a time. The temptation is to want to put the best stuff (or what you think is the best stuff) in front of them first, but there's an in-your-face quality to a lot of mainstream content (books, media, music), and it can create a negative shock to move from a diet of basically a handful of candy to more nuanced, slower-paced, narratively complex work.

Nah....movies are fun and recreation, otherwise it becomes like calculus, something you have to know if you're going to do something else. Seeing Bergman, so you can say you did might be a pre-req for a film professor, but being not faculty, I don't have to sit through those. I did, at one point and I will never have those hours back and it didn't make me feel like a better person. Some of those are like having a boil lanced.

Who doesn't wonder what it would be like to be a gladiator. Find out at least a bit of it. See the movie. Save your limbs and probably your life.

I'll never be James Stewart, running through the street in some mythic, cute town, yelling Merry Christmas or even Scrooge doing that in Britain, but I appreciate the vicarious ability to do it in the movies.

The Seventh Seal is a pretty good start. There are probably numerous directors and films which could classify as being in the deep end, but I'd say the ones Minio explained are certainly fine places to start. I think that a film/director has to defy cinematic tropes or rules in a significant way to count as such. It's not enough to just be "slow" or have talk-heavy dialogue.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

I haven't bothered to read through the thread, so apologizes if someone already said this....If I wanted to introduce 'non-cinephiles' to serious film watching/study, I would do the following:

First I'd make sure they were receptive to the idea and had a desire to embrace film as a means of exploration and learning. If they didn't care, I wouldn't bother.

Second I'd suggest they immerse themselves in film study and stop watching tv series, stop the habit of scanning Showtime HBO etc for movies to watch and stop rewatching favorites.

Third I'd suggest they sample a wide range of decades, styles, directors, countries, film movements, etc...and when they find something they like they should watch a few more similar films, before going back to sampling.

Every sentence of this post functions as a further reason not to respond to this post. But the loneliness of the cinephile demands I must.



Personally, I hope Minio is planning on immediately applying his Ludovico methods on this guy. Bring out the Lav Diaz, stat! We've got an emergency on our hands.

I’d simply tell them this:

There is no set of rules for cinephiles, but you should at least branch out into everything to appreciate film more.
That should include marvel movies but if you don’t like that’s fine. Just don’t tell anyone they shouldn’t either. Now, that doesn’t mean I’m going to rate any Marvel (or DC) film in my personal top 100. (Dark Knight falls just outside it).

Watch what you want, try branch out and challenge yourself, don’t let anyone tell you different. If artistic films aren’t your thing, that’s ok. You also don’t need to watch 10,000 films to feel “worthy”.

And most important, it isn’t a race. There’s a lot of film to cover. And lot of movements, a lot of countries, and a lot genres, covering over 100 years in its history. Try to sample what you can from each, and remember that it takes time. Don’t feel like you have to watch it all right away.

It’s the journey that matters, not the destination.

It's not an emergency. I saw Bergman, way back when, but it was like getting my shots. I knew I had to do it for the sake of my cinematic certification, but it was not something I enjoyed. For the most part, I could not figure out why those unfortunate folks in the movies went on living. I DID know why I was finished with Bergman.

Did you think you were supposed to figure that out? It's a Bergman film.

I was still young and naive.

If you think Bergman is never fun/always gloomy, then you need to watch The Magic Flute!

Or The Devil's Eye, which is stupid for the most part, but does feature one heck of a kiss.

I thought Wild Strawberries is the definitive atypical Bergman film.

I did, but that's not typical Bergman. It seemed like a contract job....film this lovable opera (quite nicely at that) and we all make some money with your name on it. You'd have to really try hard to not make a lovable version of the Magic Flute. It was nice, not that usual Swedish gloom and drear that I expect from Bergman. As a person with partly Swedish ancestry, I'd like to think that most of "us" are not really all that gloomy.

Or another with the same star---All These Women. His comedies always landed strangely!

It felt too genuine to me to just call it a contract job. Watching the making-of documentary, he certainly seemed to be having a great time with it, from what I recall.

This sounds like someone that doesn't want to be a cinephile, and therefore my approach would be to not bother them.

__________________
Captain's Log
My Collection