Advertisement
6. I predict the death of mumblecore movies by 2011. Independent films will once again boast strong scripts and, as such, will reach a broader audience. This is probably as good a time as any to reiterate to critics who invoke the name of John Cassavetes in their reviews of so-called mumblecore fare: John’s only improvised film was Shadows. Suck it.
Indie film distribution stalwart-turned-director Jeff Lipsky has written a two-part, ten item list of reasons he’s “bullish on the state of indie” film for Ted Hope’s blog Truly Free Film. There’s no denying that Lipsky has seniority in this realm, even if the introduction to the piece, presumably written by Hope, strains credibility by refering toLipsky’s recent Sundance premiere Once More With Feeling as a “hit” (John Anderson’s declaration that the film “would be a natural for cable, if the execution weren’t so distractingly strange” was one of the kinder notices). But much of Lipsky’s numbered so-called optimism comes off as cranky old man-ism.
Whether he’s celebrating setbacks in digital projection via questionable cause-and-effect logic (”Fewer digital screens…will mean fewer bad digital movies”), dismissing “download, PPV, and VOD numbers” as “paltry” without offering examples or comparisons, or making broad generalizations about the production methods of emerging filmmakers, as in the quote above (we’ll presume critics of Andrew Bujalski, Barry Jenkins, and any other “mumblecore”-associated writer/director who works off a screenplay are excused from “sucking it”), the whole post is anti new-technology, anti-experimentation, pro-traditionalism. It’s as if Lipsky’s ultimate reason to be bullish is something along the lines of, “all this shit you crazy kids keep throwing at the wall ain’t sticking, and that makes me feel good personally.”
Kevin Buist
FLAME + CITRON Review
Christopher Campbell
Happy Halloween Links. Today in Film...
Brandon Harris
5 80s Literary Adaptations Worse Than...
Kevin Kelly
John Krasinski, Brief Interviews With...
Karina Longworth
SpoutBlog, Now Available in Book Form
Paul Moore
October 31, Karina’s Last Day
Lauren Wissot
Sasha Grey Interview
We’ve had a bit of trouble getting this episode to go through the iTunes feed, so we hope this re-post will fix the problem. The original post, with episode description and embedded player, is here.
filmcouch-114
I read that post earlier this morning and also found it pretty off-putting. Couldn’t put my finger on exactly why, but you nailed it. It seems to me that the same way that punk music was originally about an attitude, and not a sound, and now that sound still gets called punk, people want independent film to be the same thing it was ten years ago after much of what was independent filmmaking got absorbed into the mainstream. Which is unfortunate.
Wow, that was rough, especially the last lines about the media switch over, seemed unrealistic, even borderline deluded, in-your-face optimism.
As for the ‘mumblecore’ argument, you can always tell the ones who got the whole thing late; they’re the gentleman who still, despite the fact that most younger critics laid it aside shortly after August 2007, use the term.
Can’t believe that a man once responsible for distributing Cassavetes’ films is willing to go on record stating that Shadows was an improvisation. That is wrong, a misconception played up by the filmmaker himself, and has been written about and disproved at length by several scholars, most notably Ray Carney. It’s even been disavowed by Cassavetes himself. What does it take? And yes, I’ve seen the unfortunate title card at the film’s end.
Not that I don’t like what you do here or appreciate you’re being the first to point to Lipsky’s article and to call bullshit on the use of the word “hit,” but that’s a lousy job you do with the pull quote to assess a review. Kinder than what other notice? The Hollywood Reporter? Is “notice” a British term that includes polls of the best and worst? Opinionated hot blogging works best with journalistic integrity, I think.
Wow, he is kind of cranky, isn’t he. I’d say he had a better chance of not seeming so “get off my lawn”-ish had he bothered to cite some specifics. But I’ve found that even doing that is no guarantee that some whippersnapper’s gonna call you a geezer anyway.
@Kane: If, say, Joe Swanberg ever makes as galvanizingly great a film as the Ramones’ “Leave Home” was an album, I’ll go down on him. Which ought to give you some idea of what I make of the odds.
One day, whippersnappers will rule the roost and polls will stand for criticism, and not a day too soon.
He’s right but unfortunately goes off the rails; which is easy to do when you have a dog in the fight.
JB
Perhaps my comparison was unclear. If someone wants to be ‘punk’ in this day and age, they’d need to find some new musical style that is contrary to what’s currently popular and/or accepted, like say, what The Ramones did in the 70s. If you start a band that sounds like traditional punk music now, there’s nothing punk about it because the ‘punk’ sound has been co-opted by bands like Green Day that don’t have a punk bone in their body. Punk was a reaction against what was on the radio, and independent film should, in a sense, be a reaction against what’s at the multiplex.
One could say Pulp Fiction represented part of the high-water mark of 1990s independent cinema. If I go out and make a movie that matches the tone and approach of pulp fiction today, would it be considered independent film?
No. It wouldn’t. My point is that independent film should be about pushing envelopes and advancing the way we view the art form. What constitutes independent film is not static. It changes to present an alternative to a changing mainstream. Fifteen years ago, Juno would have never been made by a studio and you could have called it independent. Now? Not so much.
Any belief that independent cinema needs to ‘return to its glory days’ of when it was racking up Oscars by the Weinstein-sized handful is just plain ridiculous. The mainstream co-opted that era of independent cinema.
I like both Hope & Lipsky’s optimism - precisly because, regardless of what obstacles there may be in the world, such optimism is absolutely necessary to work in an art form as demanding, challenging as filmmaking - specially if said filmmaking is being done outside of the comfort afforded by being bank-rolled by indiewood or Hollywood companies.
And not just filmmaking anymore, but distribution/self-distribution - something every new indie filmmaker will have to deal with if they want to build a career.
Excellence in art is a matter of taste. I too am not a big fan of improvised, unscripted mumblecore movies. However, some of the scripted ones - Puffy Chair, Mutual Appreciation, Dance Party - are very good/enjoyable - and I am a lot younger than the two gentlement mentioned - so good scripted work can be attractive to audience members from different generations.
Lipsky is right, I believe, it will be far easier for a wider audience to connect with a scripted work because that’s what most audience members in America are used to dealing with. Not that this cannot change or there aren’t great improvised filmmakers (mike leigh for example), but the chances of novice, low budget filmmakers making high qualtiy improvised art films are very low. however, no filmmaker who wants to try that should be discouraged even though the odds are against their success in that endeavor.
I am glad, regardless of whatever flaws they may have in their comprehensive vision & understanding of the future of indie film, that both Lipsky & Hope are both optimistic about the future & are actively engaged in making & distributing movies. Without people like that there would be no indie film.
- Sujewa
“Optimism” that demands the eradication of mumblecore? This reminds me of those cineastes who try to excise Christianity from Bresson’s oeuvre. Delusional bigots. A couple of years ago I might have suggested that those who despise mumblecore merely boycott SXSW. Now it looks like they will have to boycott Sundance as well. It would probably be a good idea to give up the label “indie filmmaker,” too, as it’s been irreparably tainted. I also recommend shooting on 70mm on a studio lot, just to distinguish yourself from the novices.
I commented at length on Lipsky’s post, so I’ll refrain from going further here.
Hey Alejandro,
Re: comment at Lipsky’s post: “Anyone who truly cares about the history and/or fate of independent film will set their personal taste aside and acknowledge that mumblecore has, in its way, been as mind-opening as the work of Cassavetes pere and perhaps even more door-opening.”
Anyone who knows about indie film or foreign films should know that shooting on digital video became accepted internationaly in 1998 - with The Celebration’s success - a good 7 years or so before mublecore. Also, the US indie film venture InDigEnt made & released at least half a dozen minidv shot low-budget features before SXSW focused on the m-core group of directors. Who else - Rick Schmidt has been working using digital video for features since 2001 or earlier, same for Todd Verow. Also, two projects by Asian-American directors - Robot Stories (which was actually self-distributed theatrically, something very few m-core movies have done yet they are grouped as DIY films), and also Charlotte Sometimes - pre-date m-core in using video, unknown actors, & those two flicks have very unique & interesting stories.
What other “mind-opening” aspects are there? using non-actors - that’s been done forever in indie film, using small plots - ever see Stranger Than Paradise? So, what exacly is the mind-opening content or aspects of mublecore? There is no there there, just hype.
Not that there is anything wrong with hype or building a brand or selling tix to screenings & DVDs based on a marketing “film movement”. But, beyond those business aspects, there is nothing very original about m-core, they are just low budget indie movies, the kind that ppl have been making since the early 80’s - some shot on dv or hd, w/ filmmakers working on each other’s/friends projects - as all indie filmmakers have done forever.
so, what actually did happen was the combination of the SXSW attention & explosion of indie film blogs & sites & attention from same & Gen DIY fest @ IFC Center made it possible to create a mumblecore brand to market several directors & films. so, yeah, great marketing angle for low budget/no star films, but “mind-opening”, are you serious Alejandro?
- Sujewa
@ T. Holly “One day, whippersnappers will rule the roost and polls will stand for criticism, and not a day too soon.”
When the whippersnappers rule the roost, they will no longer be whippersnappers.
However there will be new whippersnappers.
You’ll see.
One last note on “cranky old man-ism”: you don’t have to be either old or a man to be guilty of it. I love old men! But I can’t abide by an attitude that dismisses opportunities for innovation and discovery on the grounds that the old way was better.
[...] kids today and their dreadful lack of talent.Or such would seem the implication of a recent post at Spout Blog, in which Karina Longworth has at veteran distribution svengali Jeff Lipsky after he passed some [...]
[...] the growing backlash against Mumblecore films, one that he sees as generationally marked, a problem correctly diagnosed by Karina as “crank old man-ism.” I’ll admit that some Mumblecore films leave [...]