Foreign films

I've been on this board for close to two and a half years now. I think most people are well aware that I'm not an American. Despite the small print, this thread was made in an honest attempt to find out what exactly falls into this category as well as the general attitude of MoFos towards it, not to "educate" anyone (if by educating you mean introducing people to non-English films, I try to do that here ).

And please, do us all a favor and read your posts before posting them, I have enough trouble deciphering your stream of consciousness without having to deal with your poor grammar...:\

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/diezelpower/

Hmmm, that didn't go well never the less I dont think you can argue what you believe others are or aren't cognizant of because even if this is a surreptitious forum it isn't exclusive. So for you to scold me for my absence of commas the typographical error of using 'forum' when I intended to use 'foreign.' In only a five paragraph reply when you were negligent of something as equal to... yeah.
Further more if you are going to ask for the personal criteria and the opinion of others you owe to those you have asked to not only share your own criteria but to offer enlightenment if their views are infelicitous. You obviously hold a personal grudge about this topic but if you want to earn the right to publically gripe then you need to take it upon yourself to atleast attempt to educate and do so in a manner that doesnt demean others while honoring yourself. It is up to them if they choose to adopt this indoctorination but you are cleared of any responsibility in causing in the problem and become part of the solution.
Also I clearly paid you several different compliments and if you are the kind of person who doesn't take the time to even acknowledge a compliment for someone else stranger or no... then maybe you're the type of person I shouldn't acknowledge at all.
Think about it.

Adidass dont pay any attention to her, she is still an idealist who thinks one person can change the world. Soon as we are married I will beat her a couple of times to put an end to that.

I'm going to try and guess at what you just said because apparently my knowledge of English isn't as good as I thought it was (or I'm just dumb). This is a community, and despite it being an English-speaking community, it should be clear to everyone that it isn't exclusively an American community. We have members from Ireland, the U.K., Canada, Australia, Sweden, France etc. From the answers given in this thread, it was made clear to me that the definition of "foreign" differs from country to country and person to person; some have said that (most?) Brits wouldn't really consider American films to be "foreign" while others (Americans) have said that they do perceive British films as "foreign". Which makes my opening post and the questions posed quite valid, regardless of whether or not my nationality is clear to all. No idea what you said, or its relation to...well anything. I'm not saying my grammar is perfect, and I welcome anyone who wants to correct me, I'm always striving to improve on my English. You on the other hand should have mastered it by now...sorry, but it's a fact that people wont take your arguments (as) seriously if you compose your responses like a 5 year old...:\
Putting aside the technical answer to the opening post (meaning every film that isn't Croatian is to me "foreign" and to which some people have clung to too strictly), my attitude towards film is that of non-discrimination. I watch films from numerous countries and have no problems with subtitles (otherwise I would have been condemned to a plethora of low quality domestic films). And just like with the American cinematography, most are shit, and it takes a good effort to weed out the really good ones. Most people that have responded share my attitude towards "foreign" (non-American) cinematography (although most lack the means or my enthusiasm to explore it), but what I really wanted was answers and reasoning from those that do not.
You did...? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware of that...I was under the impression that your post was filled with reprimands and accusations...O.o

We have an argument thread, folks. If you would like to continue the Ad Hominem methods of discussion that are blooming in the last few posts, which is off course allowed, but not encouraged, head on over to the Argument thread, and have at it. Otherwise, let's stick to the topic of this thread.

Some of the comments in the last few posts are on topic, of course, but they are becoming more and more littered with personal strikes.

Thanks,

The Staff

__________________

I was trying to put a light hearted spin on it all, but since you want to insult the woman i love let me translate for you.

She said you had a great point, but you shoot yourself in the foot because you act like a snob. So any point you are defending isn't even noticed because you are too busy pointing out how your indepth knowledge of all things you makes everyone else nothing more then intellectual peasants.

But don't worry she wont be responding to you and I will not be responding to you as well because she was right...

People who act like you don't deserve to be acknowledged.

P.S. there won't be any private message apology for that anytime soon.

P.S.S. I dont care if this is deleted, but for a male you act like a little & that isn't a shot at sexual preference. You act like a 5 year old girl who just had their doll taking away anytime anyone says anything that might be in conflict of your beliefs.

I'll try to get this thread back on track.

For me, "foreign" is obviously a relative term. I use it to refer to any film outside of my home country, and generally assume that others do the same. I realize, however, that common usage tends to hold "foreign" to mean anything outside of America, Canada, or England, as it's sometimes difficult to tell the three apart, even though some of them could be called "foreign" under my definition.

Of course, to some, it simply refers to anything which requires subtitles. I don't think any of these definitions are really wrong, and are only a problem if we use them to define the film's content. As long as it's used simply to convey the film's origin somehow (or the fact that it has subtitles), and isn't used too qualitatively, I think it's okay.

I really enjoyed Apocolypto, but even though it had subtitles, I don't consider it a foreign film.

I guess, foreign to me means that the whole process and most of the people involved in making the film, should be from another country than your own.

I don't rent foreign films very often, but when I do, I'm never disappointed. Guess that means I should be sticking more of those on my 'to rent' list...

__________________
If God had wanted me otherwise, He would have created me otherwise.

Johann von Goethe

i consider them movies in foriegn languages - or made in other countries : there are some really good foriegn films that are some of my favorite movies of all time (oldboy , battle royale , city of god)

Some don't translate well to english - either it's their lack of english voices or bad subtitles

__________________

Don't mean to sound blunt but of course Apocalypto isn't foreign, it's an American film with American money and an American (auteur?) making it. And Darcy, the foreign films you find in rental shops are there because of their native success, they're there because they're good since there's no point spending money distributing rubbish unsuccessful films abroad.



For me a foreign film HAS to be by a foreign director/auteur (not necessarily in his some country, see Haneke), made with foreign money and importantly be completely seperate from Hollywood in production. Language isn't necessarily a factor, The Pianist fits the bill but is mostly shot in English. An American film shot abroad (for tax breaks or other reasons, see "Hollywood on the Khyber" period, example: Roman Holiday) is still American since that's the productive control behind the movie.

__________________

I agree with you, Pyro. I was responding to the post that said some people think if a film has subtitles, it's foreign. I don't think that's the only criterion for a foreign film, but it is certainly important.

I personally don't think subtitles are anything more than an inherent function of foreign films; really don't think they're important serving only to culturally differ them from American films. As it's been mentioned, British films for Americans are foreign, yet for Britain's American film's aren't foreign.

I don't consider British films as foreign. I feel subtitles are important. The language gives the film its feel. I've tried to watch a foreign film without subtitles, dubbed in English, but it takes something away from the film for me.

Oh, i don't even acknowledge dubbing's existence, loath it (bar comedy value on 70s kung-fu).

Ok, so the British cinema example didn't work. But you've kinda proved my point that language is what sets films apart culturally and physically but what i'm trying to say is it doesn't alter if a film's foreign, or at least shouldn't. Say, an Australasian films- Bad Taste, it's shot in New Zealand, i believe, yet is foreign geographically despite language. Your point that cultural signifiers like language mark a film's Nationality are a valid point but what about Apocalypto or say Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (which i think had subtitles in American, despite being in English)?

I believe it was Ritchie's follow-up, Snatch, which may have had subtitles, and if it did, Brad Pitt was the main reason it needed them Ken Loach films have had subtitles in America for years too, even though it is English everybody speaks. I don't try to get too hung up on the country/culture. Most countries have many cultures embedded within them. It will always be easier for some people to relate easier to some things than others, no matter what their etnicity or dominant language is. That's why I believe that film is a great instrument to teach people that, in the long run, we're all much closer together than we are far apart.

OK, now you can cue some silly bird-twittering and start shooting at me. I deserve it. Or not.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I used to hate the term mostly because it implies two categories: "our" films and those of the rest of the world--and it's a mighty big world. Furthermore the average philistine cannot be trusted with such distinctions because it causes others to see foreign as an aesthetic, which in the US anyway makes us look like even bigger idiots. Looking even further I see this "us & them" mentality as being an extension of politics, classism, racism...you name the ism and it's probably in there. It's due to thinking like this that wars are started, hearts are hardened and minds are closed.

Then again, just as many conflicts have been born out of this belief that we can assume ambassadorship to the globe, and ambassadors tend to have armed guards. So now instead of separatism you have hypocrisy. Wonderful.

So let's say categorizing films as "foreign" is a tad condescending. To be blunt, what of it? Doesn't every person in every country have a prerogative to be nationalistic or ethnocentric? Is this not the way civilizations have conducted themselves since like, forever? Of course this is metaphorical and bordering on sophistry, but let's just say the whole thing's a mess.

Back to square one. I've decided that until I start writing a bloody thesis on this, I'm sticking to practical terms. The internet may be a tool of global society, but for online discussion purposes it's majority rule. I can't expect to post on a thread populated by say, East Asians, and expect them not to call The Fellowship of the Ring a "foreign" film, and I certainly won't try to police them if they do. If someone wants to call a movie foreign, have at it. If another wants to object, I'll get the popcorn and pull up a chair. There's a reason the Academy calls it a foreign language film. They're probably as fed up with the argument as I am.

NOTE: The above was not directed towards any particular MoFo, of whom I believe the vast majority are probably loverly people in real life.

There is, I think, some justification for the 'foreign' movie tag. Hollywood is, after all, the entertainment cinema of the world, not just the US, and the non-American films that achieve wide distribution outside the countries in which they are made tend to do so because the appeal to the segment of the international public that isn't interested in mainstream American movies. In a sense, 'foreign' film is an aesthetic at this point, and its usage thus quite functional.

Actually that is a valid point which I meant to include...majority rule in the context of the market. While I'm sure someone is poised to bring Bollywood into this, I reiterate that those in India are welcome to regard American cinema any way they please, and with no argument from me. I think Darwin figures into the whole thing somehow, but meh...you get the idea.

Bollywood is indeed huge in absolute numbers - but it's also a niche cinema marketed primarily in India and to the worldwide Indian diaspora.

I don't think that's very true. Non-Hollywood films that have some sort of success (and I'm not talking on the festival circuit) are usually the ones that cater to the mainstream audience the most. Pan's Labyrinth isn't the most successful foreign film in the U.S. this year (or is that ever?) because it's an art drama...:j