The news out of the Cannes Film Festival yesterday (May 24, 2006) was that at a press screening for Sofia Coppola's new film MARIE ANTOINETTE starring Kirsten Dunst, Steve Coogan and Jason Schwartzman, the critics booed. As of this writing, the film has not yet premiered to the public but the damage in a lot of ways has been done. Before a "real" audience has seen the film, the international scuttlebutt is that the film is bad, really bad. I haven't seen the film so I can not comment on the quality of the work but I question whether or not critics can make or break a film or whether people listen to them at all.
Don't get me wrong. I think that criticism in any field including cinema is hugely important. Good criticism should help us understand something in the context of history, society and culture as well as give us insight from someone who is or should be an expert in that field. It seems to me that in recent years film criticism, save very few like AO Scott, is more E! Entertainment than Cahiers du Cinema with very little middle ground. Audiences are smarter than I think that critics (and studios for that matter) give them credit for and will go to see whatever they want regardless of what the critics say. Take The Da Vinci Code for example...one of the most anticipated films of the year based on a multi million dollar selling book - it was universally panned by the critics. The film opened last weekend and had the second highest box office opening weekend in history!
So with independent and foreign film not having the huge marketing budget edge over studio films and therefore not able to reach everyone on the planet in the vicinity of a television,magazine, computer, newspaper or billboard, how do indie and foreign films get a chance at the box office? Besides indieIN, of course - good reviews from those very same critics that booed at the screening of Marie Antoinette.
It is a vicious cycle. One that I think can change if audiences were a bit more informed about their choices. Not necessarily informed about whether or not a film is good or bad but things like cast, subject matter, how the film fits into the context of life, culture, and society. For me, indie film is sometimes like when you are a kid and you are trying new things, foods, tasks. You are initially reluctant and afraid because of what you have "heard" - you can fall off a bike and hurt yourself, broccoli is good for you so it must taste bad. But then, you get on the bike and you feel like you are flying for the first time. You eat the broccoli and is not really that bad. Either way, you have to work up to it. Take the time to learn balance, speed and confidence. In the fast paced culture we live in - with the desire for instant gratification driving everything we do, every decision we make, every food we eat - maybe if we took a little time, took a breath long enough to prepare for a leap of faith, we just might discover something incredibly satisfying that might last a bit longer than an instant.
Keeping it indie,
Julie
Don't get me wrong. I think that criticism in any field including cinema is hugely important. Good criticism should help us understand something in the context of history, society and culture as well as give us insight from someone who is or should be an expert in that field. It seems to me that in recent years film criticism, save very few like AO Scott, is more E! Entertainment than Cahiers du Cinema with very little middle ground. Audiences are smarter than I think that critics (and studios for that matter) give them credit for and will go to see whatever they want regardless of what the critics say. Take The Da Vinci Code for example...one of the most anticipated films of the year based on a multi million dollar selling book - it was universally panned by the critics. The film opened last weekend and had the second highest box office opening weekend in history!
So with independent and foreign film not having the huge marketing budget edge over studio films and therefore not able to reach everyone on the planet in the vicinity of a television,magazine, computer, newspaper or billboard, how do indie and foreign films get a chance at the box office? Besides indieIN, of course - good reviews from those very same critics that booed at the screening of Marie Antoinette.
It is a vicious cycle. One that I think can change if audiences were a bit more informed about their choices. Not necessarily informed about whether or not a film is good or bad but things like cast, subject matter, how the film fits into the context of life, culture, and society. For me, indie film is sometimes like when you are a kid and you are trying new things, foods, tasks. You are initially reluctant and afraid because of what you have "heard" - you can fall off a bike and hurt yourself, broccoli is good for you so it must taste bad. But then, you get on the bike and you feel like you are flying for the first time. You eat the broccoli and is not really that bad. Either way, you have to work up to it. Take the time to learn balance, speed and confidence. In the fast paced culture we live in - with the desire for instant gratification driving everything we do, every decision we make, every food we eat - maybe if we took a little time, took a breath long enough to prepare for a leap of faith, we just might discover something incredibly satisfying that might last a bit longer than an instant.
Keeping it indie,
Julie
posted by indieIN | 11:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home