Hi Marc
The grounds of which independence is measured is a subject of continued
debate and dispute, and I don't think there is a single answer. Some insist
on a purely industrial definition (Greg Merritt, for example, in Celluloid
Mavericks). I argue in my book (due out in the early new year) for a broader
basis of definition, including the capacity to define a distinct indie
quality at the level of aesthetic/formal approaches and in terms of
social/cultural/political perspectives. Some films are clearly independent
on all three counts. Others vary, in assorted combinations. I think
'independence' is a dynamic concept, rather than one subject to fixed
definitions. It suggests a quite wide field of possibilities - from the
avant-garde at one end to the margins of Hollywood at the other, and also
including other elements such as low-budget exploitation cinema. Some films
sit unambiguously in the independent sector, while others exhibit varying
degrees of independent qualities industrial, formally or in terms of their
treatment of issues with social/political implications. Merritt argues that
any basis for definition of independence other than industrial is too
slippery; I'd agree that it can be slippery, but that's what makes it
particularly interesting: the assorted varying degrees of independence that
can be defined from different perspectives.
It's worth noting that this debate isn't confined to critics and
commentators - it's a live issue in the independent film community itself.
The Independent Spirit Awards (the indie 'oscars' awarded by the LA branch
of the Independent Feature Project) have criteria that include industrial
and other factors, and often get themselves in some confusion about what
qualifies. 21 Grams, for example, was excluded from the awards on the basis
of budget and resources (industrial factors - but where they draw the line
varies) but was given some special recognition awards at the same time
(clearly because those involved thought the film merited indie recognition
for its formal qualities).
I'm sure the debate goes right back close to the start of cinema: the
companies that set themselves up as 'rebels' against the MPPC in the 1910s
declared themselves as bold independent pioneers - even though they soon
developed quite substantial institutions of their own. And I'm sure it's a
debate that will continue - because there's no final answer.
cheers
geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Film-Philosophy Salon [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Marc Hallbrecht
Sent: 27 October 2004 18:52
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Political "indies" - follow-up questions...
Dear Felicity, dear Geoff,
thank you very much for your suggestions!
Happiness, Gummo and the films of the L.A. School are surely the kind of
'indies', which are worth having a look at, when searching politically
alternative indies. I agree that Happiness certainly neither is in any
explicit nor even significant way challenging the status-quo.
I'm very much looking forward to any further suggestions (except for
documentaries and 'non-narrative' avant-garde films).
Another point I'm not sure about, and which I think literature about
Independent-Film hasn't answered sufficiently yet, is which, from a broad
historical point of view, is the traditionally dominant characteristic of an
Independent-production? Is it only the independent financing/ production of
a film or those two characteristics plus distribution?
My next question would be if, historically, industrial criteria really were
the dominant criteria that defined whether a film was called independent or
not. And, a very last question, when did the discussion about what is
independent about Independent-films first appear?
Thank you so much...
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are
replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to:
[log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|