Watching Films

If you're watching a film, you're taking a chance. You're investing two hours of your life to a film that may or may not be good, and the decision of whether it's good or not is personal. Some films have broad appeal. Nearly everyone watching it can enjoy it. Some have narrow appeal. Some people aren't going to "get it". This is problematic if you want to watch the films that people consider great. There are popularly great films, and there are not-so-popular great films.

I remember reading Jonathan Rosenbaum, a Chicago critic, bashing some renowned New York critic, whose name escapes me. The New York critic rarely attended film festivals, relying instead, on the films that showed up in New York. If you're a critic, and you couldn't attend film festivals, then you could no worse than be in New York City. It gets as many of the films available as any city in the country. It is the premier place to be to watch films.

Apparently, this critic started film criticism at about the time of the French New Wave. Now, I can't say I've seen too many films of this time, nor do I know exactly what constitutes the French New Wave. As I understand it, these films don't follow a predictable storyline. From moment to moment, you don't know where the story is heading. Instead, you follow what happens to the characters, who are rebelling against something. The closest kind of filmmaking in the US is probably from the late 60s and early 70s with Scorsese and Coppola, which brought a gritty kind of filmmaking not seen in American cinema.

Since the French New Wave, many different countries have given rise to their own brand of movie making. Iran, Taiwan, Thailand, Korea, and so forth, are giving rise to new visions. Yet, this critic, claimed Rosenbaum just wanted more films like those he saw in his youth. He couldn't embrace the new films. They were too different. They weren't what he wanted.

I find this kind of criticism amusing. Film critics already get a bad rap because they seem to like inaccessible films like those of Peter Greenaway while poo-pooing such films as Indepedence Day. The real problem is the average movie goer watches movies like a music listener who just likes pop music. The funny thing is that the musical tastes of these moviegoers are often quite sophisticated compared to their moviewatching tastes.

I try to read a fair number of reviews so I can see where the buzz for new movies lie. Even so, I miss quite a few, because mostly I pay attention to films that make it to the Landmark or the AFI. Quite a few films will come during DC Film Fest or this year's Korean film festival or German films shown at the Goethe Institute. A few months ago, I watched Cinévardaphoto, which I wouldn't have seen had I not been invited by a friend. Even though I watched only the first two parts of the three (one person fell asleep) it was the best two parts of the film, and introduced me to a filmmaker I hadn't heard of, Agnes Varda.

But as many films as I watch, many of them will be misses. Even though I use reviews to help gauge my interest, there are going to be critical darlings that I'm just not going to enjoy. For example, I didn't quite enjoy Tropical Malady, but intellectually, I can see how the film could be seen as brilliant. However, it's not a film I'd recommend to all but the most cinema enthusiasts. If my friends were turned off by Fallen Angels, then really, Tropical Malady would be far too uninspiring.

Here's the list of films I'm looking forward to watching. Brokeback Mountain, Serenity, 2046. I might even be interested in seeing Pretty Persuasion for an odd reason.

Most of the critics I follow are Internet critics. Scott Renshaw, Mike D'Angelo, Bryant Frazer. I also read Roger Ebert. There was one fellow from Canada, Skander Halim, that wrote reviews too. Like Mike D'Angelo, he wanted to write film screenplays. Unlike D'Angelo, he's been successful. Pretty Persuasion is his first screenplay credit.

I'm also planning to attend Funny Ha Ha, which I wouldn't have heard of, had Dave not told me about it on Thursday. We were going to watch in on Friday, but he went to another movie earlier, and didn't want to watch two more films back-to-back on Friday, and decided instead to hang out with friends. The director, Andrew Bujakski, has been showing up on Friday, Saturday, and today at the AFI theater where his film is showing. He'll appear 5 times in all (once Friday, twice each on Saturday and Sunday).

I even found a review by Michael Sicinski on the film, which gave it a moderately positive review. I'm encouraged to go see the film and see it at 9:45 this evening. Likely, it will end shortly after 11 PM. We'll see how it goes.