Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Andrew T. (A) on February 05, 2002 at 09:40:34

In Reply to: Re: OK, Andrew T, you've done it again posted by Victor Khomenko on February 05, 2002 at 05:21:18:

Hello Victor,

Agreed. Taste is pretty much a function of one's upbringing, education being a primary component
thereof. I guess much of the vitriol and enmity which gets stirred up during discussions about
things which have a strong subjective component to them is when one confuses or blurs the distinction
between what they 'like' and what is 'good'. I tend to think of it as food..candy/treats = 'bad' ,
veggies/5 food groups =' good'( at the risk of oversimplification). I like both, but would be hard pressed
indeed to justify ever calling candied treats good for me! But. human nature being what it is, I guess
people just don't like hearing what they like categorized as trash.... the implicit assumption being
that they're being called stupid. Probably gets most everybody's goat.

The American filmmaking industry is an interesting animal. Some of my (US)friends have in fact insisted that
the popularity of American films is proof positive of their inherent superiority ( as films, that is)! This
is probably where it gets tricky...so much being dependent on one's definition of such. As vehicles
of mass communication to reinforce a certain conformist idea ....I guess they are second to none.
But as 'art'...obviously you would disagree;-).

I agree that corporatism is one of the ills of mainstream American filmmaking. But I think the constant progression
toward very basic, unsubtle, overly simplified films is also a function of US popular culture. I don't believe, for instance,
that one makes a film with anything other than a domestic audience in mind ( with the exception of a few 'internationalists',
who intentionally pitch their films at international 'art house' audiences ). Most audiences are typically culturally
homogeneous, with shared references, histories etc.. thus there isn't the need to have to put everything in bas relief
or underline every theme. The US demographic audience however, is probably more diverse than most other places.
It is no wonder then that the films, in order to reach as many people as possible, are designed to appeal to the lowest
common denominators : sex, violence, feel good, triumph of the underdog type stories. The films are designed specifically
for easy consumption, to not be challenging, which would otherwise alienate its primary constituency.

"
Just how many times can you recreate the silly story about a lovable underdog attaining a competely undeserved wictory at the final
moments of the boring film? Some of that is deeply rooted in the American phyche and probably shall continue being with us forever. "

LOL!!

Re: In The Realm of The Senses...well, now you've opened a can of worms ;-). While I realize that Oshima's purpose
is to incite indignation in the audience ( I believe one japanese critic called his films ' provocations directed at the spectators ' ),
and in the context / milieu , his aggressive and graphic films work as protest, I have to say that I never warmed to the film.
But then perhaps I was never meant to?

Regards,
A.