Love & Pop -- extended re-mix

[Dunn Brian]

Just a few quick personal opinions on film:

I think film is different than literature.  Film is short and can be enjoyed 
by just sitting down and watching, whereas literature and books require 
something from the reader, not to mention the time and effort it takes to 
read it.

So while film scholars may have these lofty ideals about what film should or 
shouldn't be, I think film is still entertainment and films should be judged 
as that - not whether or not they fit your definition of what "good" cinema 
is.  This reminds me of the ramen debate in _Tampopo_, where the cooks at 
one ramen-ya said their ramen was gourmet ramen and couldn't be understood 
by regular people, to which the main characters replied something to the 
effect of "if normal people can't truly enjoy/savor it, then what good is 
it?"

I'm sure film scholars can debate cinema until the cows come home, but 
cinema is meant for the masses, is it not?  So I think there needs to be 
some balance in the types of films.  After all, if all films were "boring, 
introspective, underground flicks," film wouldn't be so popular.  People 
still need the "typical Hollywood 2-hour no-brainer" film to escape the the 
worries and the stresses of life.  Aside from that, there is of course a 
place for more intellectual films, etc.

But I find a trend among all aspects of entertainment (especially music), to 
label any musician/band/filmmaker who "makes it," who is "successful," to be 
labeled as a "sellout," as not "keeping it real."  And I think this 
generalization is dangerous.  For example, you could take this to say that 
the Beatles were a crap band and sellouts, because so many people liked them 
and they sold so many records.  But many people think of the Beatles as one 
of the greatest bands of all time.  I'm not accusing anyone here of this 
labeling, but I notice everyone seems to be playing down Shunji Iwai, whom I 
happen to love, for some reason or other.  Is it because he has become 
'successful' and the common people like him, or is there some other reason?

I would think that a good band/musician/director would have better chances 
at becoming successful, and better chances at connecting with people, and 
hope that the fans hope the band/musician/director is successful.  There may 
be good bands/musicians/directors who are too academic and difficult for 
mass-consumption, but does that mean that anything other than this doesn't 
deserve to be looked at or heard?  Anything other than this isn't real 
"film/music"?  I hope not, because that's just artistic elitism in my 
opinion.  If you don't like certain band or director because of techniques 
or stylizations they use, that's fine and that's a personal opinion.  But I 
hope we don't get into intellectual elitism here in the discussion of films 
and directors. (sorry if I offend any of you with this)

I myself am not a film scholar, and am only on this list because I have a 
great interest in Japanese film and like the discussions.  But I hope the 
discussion doesn't get so deep and esoteric that it's like "only film 
historians deserve to watch and discuss films because they are the only ones 
who truly understand it."  I'm not trying to say that this is happening now. 
  On the contrary, I really am really enjoying the discussion so far.  But I 
hope the conversation doesn't get too caught up in everything that people 
forget what film is and where film came from.


Thanks for listening.


Brian Dunn (who wishes he had time to add a film studies major, but can't 
spend another 2-3 years in college)

b1dunn at hotmail.com
University of Washington
Dept. of Asian Languages and Literature


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com