Going to the movies? What’s the point?
I used to love going to the movies. I can’t remember a first date that wasn’t at the movies. Yes, I am quite selfish that way. But it has been two months since I have been to the movies. I have been to film festivals but that is quite a different trip than a visit to my local multiplex.
What is even weirder is that I don’t miss it. I think this is largely due to what I do here at Ticklebooth. What I post here is so much interesting than what the studios are putting out. Look at our recent picks selections in our sidebar, it is riddled with original ideas.
The short film/ online video genre are putting movies to shame. When I say “movies”, I mean feature films mostly from Hollywood. However, I seriously cannot tell the difference between mainstream Hollywood and independent cinema. People are playing poker by the book. Where is the fun? Where is the gamble? When is the last time a movie was willing to upset you? I don’t mean Batman losing his girl in Dark Knight kind of gambles.
The style of modern film is contained in very small boxes. You either have the tripod look or the shaky hand held look. Everything is high contrast. If it is an action film, you see more blue. If it is a drama, you see warmer colors. Cinema has a language but it isn’t this narrow.
Other notes:
- Why aren’t critics paying attention to shorter films? Every other review of a mainstream movie sounds like the same old sarcastic , ironic horseshit. If you want to be stimulated, look for better material!!
- Why aren’t we focusing on short films in film school? There is so much more learn and be inspired by.
- You want better features, stop spending your money on crap at the multiplex. Better yet, spend it on filmmakers who are posting their films online.
My best-of-the-year list for online video is a much harder decision to arrive at than my best theatrical released movie list. I have more choices, a more diverse set of qualities to compare. I have no sequels, no reputations, no teases to deal with. What do you think?
Comments
11 Responses to “Going to the movies? What’s the point?”
Leave a Reply
Recent Picks
Wow, well said. I completely agree with you on this. The fact that hollywood continues to pump out predictable meaningless content and spends billions of dollars on it is so tired. There are so many more interesting stories, techniques, styles being expressed in short form online. Even film festivals are beginning to seem so tired, and outdated. There isn’t one film festival that I have seen that will accept a quicktime link to a film. Really? We have to waist another dvd and packaging for it, and pay you 50 dollars so 45 people can watch the film on a sunday morning. The alternative now is posting on youtube and vimeo and such and sharing your film with thousands of people a day. Not to say that film festivals are no longer relevant, but there needs to be more tailored to the short form. Resfest was amazing in its day, but not much has come to replace it in the physical world . You could sit through one program of shorts at a resfest and see 50 more interesting ideas than all of the hollywood films combined. I guess that’s where blogs like this come in. It will be interesting to see where cinema goes in the next 50 years. There will always be mainstream films as long as people pay to see them. But there should be more incentives and rewards for those of us short form creators that do bypass that system and publish online. There is a balance somewhere, but yeah I agree with you. I have only seen 1 movie in a theatre in the last 3 months, and it was the new Woody Allen film, and i do have to say i really enjoyed it. But for the 25 people watching it with me, there were 350 people watching Tropic Thunder next door…
“People are playing poker by the book. Where is the fun? Where is the gamble?”
That’s the problem. For those who can afford to gamble, they don’t want to. They want a return. Features aren’t art anymore. They’re not supposed to be inspiring. They’re supposed to create revenue – fin.
It’s unfortunate.
So here’s a different question: If trying to make art, to stimulize, to upset via the medium of film, how far inside the film-for-maximum-profit system should one play? If compromises start at the very beginning, also, what’s the point?
Follow up question to that: Is there even a provocative-film-taking-chances middle ground anymore? Even the art-house companies are folding…
I’m sure lots of people would love to tantalize you with their feature wit, Ajit. Unfortunately, they can’t.
So online we turn.
THE INTERNET: “Give us your weak.”
Hey Ajit,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this subject. I’m a regular reader and RSS subscriber to TickleBooth, from Norway.
And I agree with your points; the short films and online video pieces that you post about here are truly fascinating and inspiring work. I must say that I credit this a lot to your ability to make that selection something special.
Having said that, theatrical distribution in the US seems to be quite flawed, in terms of opening up screen space to innovative, original features and docs. Because – those films are made, they exist; they must exist, locally and internationally, but the problem seems to be that (at least theatrically) they are not made available to the public.
And that may be where those films should learn something from the success of those shorts, and other kinds of video, that is distributed on the web and find that audience, for example through your site.
So – thanks for this post, and for all the wonderful work you put into this site – it is very much appreciated.
I’m not particularly educated on the subject of film, but I can definitely say that the majority of films I’ve seen in the past year that got me thinking, got me talking about them, and got me willing to discuss them later were almost entirely short films.
I used to feel bad that I lived in a small town, and our theater would only get the usual mainstream crap– now with Fandango, I can tell that the mainstream crap is in every major city across the nation, so I’m no longer missing anything. Kinda sad, but at least there’s Ticklebooth!
Keep up the great work!
Response to Nice:
You are right, sending out DVD’s is ridiculously pricy. I don’t think patrons of film festivals realize that. Filmmakers spend more money sending their films to festivals than making the actual movie. That’s insane.
Response to stump blankenship:
See, I disagree. Independent films have long challenged viewers. Some of the classic films were incredibly difficult to watch when it first came out. The market isn’t as large as say a film that makes you feel good or whatever. But there is still a market. I see it like food, there is only so much sweet stuff I can take. We want variety, original films tend to provide that. We have to remember Godfather, Deer Hunter, The Conversation were all made by studios.
Thanks Karsten and Dave X. Like me, it sounds like you both live outside of the the big markets.
Well of course all those provocative films like The Conversation, The Deer Hunter, Godfather – hell, I even watched Bullit (1968) a few weeks ago and couldn’t believe how NON-studio it felt. Long moments of silence, unhappy resolution, no catchy lines, very dark undertones, subversive and not-so subversive, smart, unabashed, social commentary, an eye into a not well understood world (those “strange” hippie freaks in SanFran who scare, white, middle America).
Ah, so refreshing.
You and I and everyone else still see a smart-movie goer market, but how are The Conversation, Godfather, etc relevant to today’s Hollywood productions? Wasn’t that kind of your point in the article: The studios but out (sweet) crap and the only outlet for provoking though it online?
How did you see my comment as saying independent films don’t take chances?
- a confused and loyal reader
perhaps my original post was too obtuse. i was basically agreeing with you Ajit: movies suck, online shorts are filling the void
but I took it a step further and was trying to ask:
Since we know movies suck, should filmmakers wanting to make meaningful features give up the hunt for feature money and stick to (ghetto), though provoking shorts which only live online?
Tiss a question for you.
And I was also saying that the indie-art house distributors, production companies, indie-studio arms are all folding up. So where then for “independent” cinema?
Hi Stump Blakenship,
Sorry if I misunderstood the question. Those movies we just mentioned can be produced only by Hollywood. There is a profit to be had for Hollywood to embrace those kind of films.
I don’t want Hollywood to die. I want them to stop making crap. In your earlier comment, you said:
“That’s the problem. For those who can afford to gamble, they don’t want to. They want a return. Features aren’t art anymore. They’re not supposed to be inspiring. They’re supposed to create revenue – fin.”
This will change. It will have to. TV changed, adapted. Movies will too. I don’t see it as a permanent state.
Thanks for your comments. BTW.
Your optimism is inspiring. And I don’t mean that in any cynical way at all.
Thank you for being you, Ajit.
ajit,
i enjoyed this article and thread this morning while on the weaver street lawn. i read your article before i realized you wrote it! good thoughts and commentary. i love ticklebooth.
-nic