What do you think about indie film?

Tools    





I think art film is art. Indie films can be just as dull and unimaginative as the dullest blockbusters, and we get examples of that yearly.
They can, but it's more forgivable since indie movies don't have some whole corporate machine behind them. When an indie filmmaker make a dog, you shrug your shoulders and think that at least they tried.

When a big studio does a dog, you have to wonder...a whole corporate process of vetting, getting investors, hiring a producer, director and actors, market studies, product tie-ins, trailers, ads, many millions in production and somehow ALL of these people got it wrong.



Gangster Rap is Shakespeare for the Future
They can, but it's more forgivable since indie movies don't have some whole corporate machine behind them. When an indie filmmaker make a dog, you shrug your shoulders and think that at least they tried.

When a big studio does a dog, you have to wonder...a whole corporate process of vetting, getting investors, hiring a producer, director and actors, market studies, product tie-ins, trailers, ads, many millions in production and somehow ALL of these people got it wrong.
So with indie filmmakers, it's "at least they tried," and with studios it's "they tried wrong." Your argument seems to fall under the assumption that either every person in contact with the film is responsible for it and therefore should be able to fix it before it is released, or that all of these people are to blame because every part of the film is bad.
__________________
Mubi



They can, but it's more forgivable since indie movies don't have some whole corporate machine behind them. When an indie filmmaker make a dog, you shrug your shoulders and think that at least they tried.

When a big studio does a dog, you have to wonder...a whole corporate process of vetting, getting investors, hiring a producer, director and actors, market studies, product tie-ins, trailers, ads, many millions in production and somehow ALL of these people got it wrong.
I can vaguely see where you're coming from in regards to indie filmmakers, but I'd have to argue the opposite on your second point. It's less that everyone involved got "it" wrong and more that collective creation often ends up stifling the creativity of the end product. It's almost inevitable that studios will end up turning out a higher ratio of duds. A camel is a horse designed by committee.



I really enjoy indie films in general. I think that they're allowed a broader spectrum of freedom in terms of style and imagination.

With huge Hollywood blockbusters, the people at the top are always making sure that the movie appeals to a wide audience, because money is their priority. That's fine, but it does lead to typical cliches and obvious pandering.

It's also great to see directors really get creative with the usually limited budget. It just results in a fresh take on film making. Usually.
__________________
Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching?. And my straw reaches acroooooooss the room, and starts to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake!
-Daniel, There Will Be Blood



Gangster Rap is Shakespeare for the Future
I can vaguely see where you're coming from in regards to indie filmmakers, but I'd have to argue the opposite on your second point. It's less that everyone involved got "it" wrong and more that collective creation often ends up stifling the creativity of the end product. It's almost inevitable that studios will end up turning out a higher ratio of duds. A camel is a horse designed by committee.
But if we take an auteur perspective on indie film, which I believe we are, then the creativity and quality of the product depends on the creator, so it's very case dependent. Some American independent filmmakers (Richard Linklater) can regularly produce quality work, but then there are directors (Joe Swanberg) who will regularly turn out garbage because they're not good filmmakers. I think that it's safer to say that Hollywood and big studios will produce the most consistent work, while independent film fluctuates more in quality.



.

But I can't distinguish between an independent film from a regular. I have to look for a list and I watch 10 from 50 movies. Some of them did not look like Clerks.
Me neither. I don't look at a film and research which film studio funded it. Or what it's budget is. Similarly I don't consciously label a film indie or mainstream after having watched it. I find it a bizarre concept to be honest.



.....I think that it's safer to say that Hollywood and big studios will produce the most consistent work, while independent film fluctuates more in quality.
What? Do you mean like Thor? The big studios mainly have bigger budgets with which they can immaculately produce their junk, but spending that much money to make something so bad is just downright embarrassing. You could probably fund 100 indie movies for the price of a Thor and probably about 50 of them would be better...so, price it out - one really bad spectacle or 50 cheap but enjoyable movies.



What? Do you mean like Thor? The big studios mainly have bigger budgets with which they can immaculately produce their junk, but spending that much money to make something so bad is just downright embarrassing. You could probably fund 100 indie movies for the price of a Thor and probably about 50 of them would be better...so, price it out - one really bad spectacle or 50 cheap but enjoyable movies.
I find it strange that you used Thor as an example. I would have used The Last Airbender, which was a piling steam of ***** and hated by everyone.

But your point is right. If you took 50 Hollywood blockbusters and 50 indie films, the overall quality would probably be higher for the indie films.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
You guys are lucky that you haven't seen many of the crap indie films which get dumped directly to DVD and cable. I think we all believe the costs to produce and market a blockbuster are obscene though.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



recently i saw the movie Kings of Summer.
it was really awesome. great work by the camera.
the kids played an awesome role.
a must watch film for young age.



I find it strange that you used Thor as an example. I would have used The Last Airbender, which was a piling steam of ***** and hated by everyone.

But your point is right. If you took 50 Hollywood blockbusters and 50 indie films, the overall quality would probably be higher for the indie films.
I couldn't argue with your comment about Airbender. Calling it a dog is an insult to canines. I brought up Thor: Dark World mainly because it's recent and because I nearly fell asleep...all that crashing, noise and fighting and I was nodding out, which isn't good.