Does film have a home in “Designed Art and Creative Fields” ?

In a recent class discussion of my blog, it was pointed out that my movie reviews felt a bit out of place for the topics at hand.  I absolutely agree with this observation, as my other posts are much more design based- advertising, graphic design and so forth.

I didn’t give this too much thought, until a different class discussion, in which our teacher lectured on movies that are “artistic” and movies that are not. Writer/Director Quentin Tarantino was used as an example of someone who is often “misrepresented” as an artist.  I have to admit, this topic left my mind racing with aggravation. With all due respect to my professor,  this categorization of “art films” vs. Hollywood movies, which the entire class discussion danced around for nearly three hours made me want to run screaming from art school and never look back. I could write a whole paper on my frustration with this hierarchy of the arts, but If the creativity found in some of Quentin Tarantino’s work, among other movies discussed, are not considered art, then art is a bigger mystery to me than I ever thought. I may have taken this discussion a tad personal, as True Romance, Tarantino’s very first film is my absolute favorite movie. (How can you not adore Alabama, the slutty sweetheart, and Clarence, the senseless defender of romance and Elvis??)

Anyhoo… if the movies I love don’t have a place in the world of art(sy fartsy flicks), then I will give them a place in a discussion of all things creative and wonderful.

I will continue to include film as an aspect of DART, and hopefully in furthering my content to more and more creative fields, my posts on movies and the film industry will start to feel more at home in this “Designed art and creative fields” blog.  So here’s an overarching opinion piece on the current state of the film industry.  Enjoy!

“Hollywood is the main repository of cultural memory- and authority,” according to J Hoberman in his essay, The Film Critic of Tomorrow, Today. Whether you like it or hate it, the current state of the film industry is something that will bookmark the years and the decades we live in through Box Office ratings, entertainment “news” programs, and celebrity gossip.
The Today’s film industry is two sided. It’s the epic blockbuster hit vs. the art film battle. Recent movies like New Moon and 2012 fall under blockbuster hits, while some recent art films can only be found in select theatres with small audiences and little publicity. But if one is mostly cheapened knockoffs of recycled stories, and one is not accessible to most people, than are either proving successful?
A Jaded critic may look at the box office listings of the past two weekends and shake their head in disgust. New Moon, based on the novel by Stephanie Meyer, has not only reigned supreme two weekends in a row, it has also clawed its way past The Dark Knight for highest opening day gross in history, making an estimated 72.7 million. Avoiding overt cynicism in this perspective, let us acknowledge that just because a movie makes disgusting amounts of cash on opening day, doesn’t automatically demerit its value. After all, when adjusted for inflation, Gone With the Wind still holds a second place record for its release in 1939. New Moon, on the other hand, is based on a literary soap opera that capitalizes on the loopy hormones of teenage girls and exploits their emotions during a pivotal time of maturation. It takes the nauseating story line, pairs it with sexy, talentless actors and abracadabra- box office magic!

On the opposite end of the spectrum lies movies that most theatres never see, and many people never hear about. The Music Box Theatre in Chicago is a rarity that positions itself as a year-round film festival. It recently presented Antichrist, written and directed by Lars Von Trier. This artistic twist on a horror movie is composed of painfully beautiful cinematography, outstanding performances by the two leads, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe, and terrifying scenes of sexual violence and self-mutilation. Gainsbourg won best actress at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival, and director von Trier was nominated for the coveted Golden Palm Award. The themes of grief, evil, and feminism would be a beneficial experience to general audiences, but the dark and twisted plot makes it difficult for most to digest.
The hope of the film industry today lies somewhere in the middle- between blockbuster hits and artsy flicks. They are few and far between, but movies do exist that qualify as artistic and groundbreaking, while still relating to mass audiences. Recently released, The Road, a film adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel, directed by John Hillcoat, does just that. Although the plot is simple; father (played by Viggo Mortensen) and son trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world that exists of cannibalistic tribes and a scattered handful of “good guys,” the message is deeply moving. The images of an ashen, nearly lifeless world somehow achieve a certain tear jerking beauty. Extreme measures of what loved ones might do for each other are explored, and boundaries are shattered in the realization that the father carries two bullets; one for his son and one for himself. The Road is proof that good films can still exist, even in the mainstream movie theaters. Sadly, the numbers don’t reflect this, as The Road has only made about 2 million in its first week.

Today’s film industry reflects the rift between the arts and the general public. Unfortunately, the more creative, innovative artistic endeavors are looked at as highbrow, or just plain weird. The popularity of mindless reality television, big-budget films, and shallow sitcoms makes it nearly impossible for art to find its place in popular society- even in something as culturally pivotal as film. In order to remain relevant and receive responses outside of the film critics and movie buff circles, filmmakers must strike a delicate balance between Blockbuster hit and artsy flick. It’s that simple.