For my second lived post of the semester I will be discussing the movie Juno. It is actually really interesting to me that this film is classified as independent. First of all it seems that for some reason to me anyway a film should be independent for more than just the reason of being financially made by ones self, with no help from a big studio. Even if this film had no help from a big studio it is filled with established Hollywood stars and should therefore not really be classified as independent, because, I am sure, that they didn't have as much trouble making it as one of us in film school would have. The director is an already established person in Hollywood so making this movie was probably not very difficult for him. I am sure he had the support of most if not all of the actors and I am also sure that money wasn't that big a deal anyway seeing as he is a famous actor in Hollywood.
I am not trying to diminish the films integrity or deny that it is a good piece of work all I am saying is that the system for making movies in our society is a little one sided. People that have the money or the connections already in place seem to make all of these movies and want to advertise them as independent films as to say they are on the same page with El Mariachi for example. Rodriguez was a nobody and had no money and made that film what it is today. He is a true inspiration for young filmmakers that are trying to make it in the film world. It was an excellent movie dont get me wrong, but when it comes right down to it, it just seems like the system sort of sucks.
Enough of my ranting and raving, I think that one thing that stood out the most about this film though was its acting, it was up for some academy awards and I guess it deserved to be. I was really impressed by the leads acting as well as some of the supports like Jennifer Garner. It sort of surprised me that she was in here because she doesn't really seem like the person to do an independent, lower budget film. She seems like she would want the bigger paycheck in the end, but I suppose I could be wrong too.
3 comments:
Yes, I do agree that already well known directors such as Jason Reitman should give struggling unknown directors such as ourselves a chance to make it big on the screens. I have previously blogged about Juno and did feel unfairness in its production value. However, there’s an undefined line between independent and Hollywood in regards to visual style, but we also have to think about the difference between the two in contents. When was the last time you saw a Hollywood film that was actually good in content? I can’t remember. All I know is that independent films seem to have better content that doesn’t always meet people’s expectation. Maybe that’s why it’s so independent, because it’s not what the majority would expect to see, therefore, Hollywood are more reluctant to make it.
Also, if Juno shouldn’t be considered independent because of its director and budget, where would we place Tarantino’s films? To me, he by far is the most well known, has his own style, director in the independent business. Would he and his films be considered too rich to be independent?
I think that I am probably the only person who hasn’t seen this film yet, but I will say that I am a little intrigued by it. Everyone that has seen it that I know has told me it was a really good film, but what interests me the most is your discussion of whether it was really an indy film or not. It seems that you are correct by saying it has established actors and probably had support from Hollywood connections. The marketing for the film personally gave me the impression of an indy film. The commercials talked about what the critics were saying about it, as well as the overall look of the ads as well. It is kind of funny how strong of an influence marketing can have on what we are made to believe about a film without actually knowing anything about it at all.
I enjoyed this film but by no means think it was the greatest film ever made. What I liked about it was that for the most part it was unexpected, and I feel that this is something that independent cinema strives to be. What I personally didn't like about the film was the music name dropping. I know that many people establish new relationships based on music, especially very music oriented people, and especially intergenerational relationships are started through shared love of music, however, I did find the ad nauseam name-dropping annoying but in a similar way to when people do this in real life. So my only complaint with the film was my inability to appreciate the fiction because it reminded me too much of an annoying situation in real life, which isn't much basis.
I have to disagree with you on your attitude. It seems you're saying that success is bad or unfair and that putting one film out there is going to oversaturate the market and allow no other independent films to be made. In response to the comparison made to Rodruigez, I'm not sure what you're trying to say? that a good independent film is a high quality to cost ratio? and that Rodruigez is some sort of master because he made an inexpensive film? I think independent film is about using the resources that are available to you and making something that is a genuine film and is not a cookie cutter star-ridden profit builder. Money should be relative, and not contribute to our perception of the quality of the film's substance. Why shouldn't he use these resources available to him? Why shouldn't he use these actors? Most of them were television actors, who are not known for their roles in movies, why not give them a chance to show how they work outside of a consistent television character? And to say give unknown directors like us a chance to get in the market? what? so, he shouldn't make a film, that he wants to make, and has the means to make, simply because other people might have another film they want to make? that doesn't make any sense. I'm done ranting, to be honest I never thought I would be defending Juno, I guess i see what you're trying to say about the system sucking, but the alternative would be chaos. Youtube is probably the closest thing to the alternative, and that works on a no pay basis. So there is always youtube.
Post a Comment