The Indie Film Thread

[Arturo21]

Raijin - I don't think that Garden State should be considered 'independent'. It doesn't seem like it at least, it was very famous, had famous actors...I don't think so either. However, it was a very good film.
Faust - Where I live, only losers watch indies I mean, how could you ever turn down Legally for a very well made, indie flick ?!?!?! And I think you'd be surprised what the Hollywood Video ninja in my neck of the woods carries ..but yes, I have thought of joining netflix. Thankyou for the list, I'll try and see all of those.

I just watched Mean Creek last night. Many people see an indie film and don't consider it indie because of the people the story is about, maybe in this film they were teens whose only major topic of discussion was ' licking'. However, in the end their cheap talk was left for a very deep music amidst the silence and the only other sound was the creek and their tears. The film ended in a very thought provoking manner. The acting was a bit bad at times, and very good at other times, but I still recommend this film. I definately recommend this film.

 

[faust]

I agree with you, waukon73.

Thirteen may has gotten a lot of press for being "avant garde," yes, but does that media attention mean it was a major Hollywood production? No. The film was produced by Michael London Productions and Antidote Films, and we should all ask ourselves, "Are these major production companies?" Simple answer: No. Sure, they've produced a few other films, but they're not the big boys when it comes to the league of big-time blockbusters. Moreover, simply looking at the finances, Thirteen's budget didn't even reach $1.5 million, nor did it gross $5 million in the box office. Can you even compare $5 million total to an average of over $50 million the first weekend for major blockbusters? Probably not. Finally, Thirteen was distributed by Fox Searchlight in the states. Yeah, it's Fox, and yeah, Fox is big and ugly and evil, but the truth of the matter is that Fox Searchlight was created for the sole purpose of distributing indie flicks like Thirteen. Granted, the film's not as "indie" as some of the ultra-low budget films out there just barely scraping along, but it still definitely falls under the "indie" category and qualifications. That said, it was a really good film, and even if it weren't indie, which it is, I'd still recommend it.

Last I've heard, big advertising campaigns and hype BEFORE the film gets into theaters kind of disqualify the film from beind an indie. Just because it deals with a serious subject matter, doesn't make it an indie. The film was not bad, I never said it was. Yet, it had that Hollywood polish under all the rough stuff. It's still worth watching, but it's not nearly as strong as Kids, that's all I'm saying...

Arturo let me know your opinion of the films as you go through them, I'd be interested to hear. I just remembered another stong one, which I haven't personally seen yet, "Brazil."

 

[MulletProof]

P.S. Another esteemed indie/foreign director is Romanian (or is he Yugoslavian?) Emil Kustiritsa. His films are just too weird for my taste, but I know a lot of people love them.

 

[fashionologie]

Last I've heard, big advertising campaigns and hype BEFORE the film gets into theaters kind of disqualify the film from beind an indie. Just because it deals with a serious subject matter, doesn't make it an indie.

Ok, let's take a quick example: Primer. The film had a measly $7,000 budget, with no major financial backings; ThinkFilm was the only Production Company/Distributor that got behind it. It ended up winning the Grand Jury Award at the Sundance Film Festival last year, but before doing that, was hyped out the wazoo. There were posters, flyers, trailers in major movie theaters; from what I know, they ended up spending more than twice their budget on advertising and the subsequent hype just built from there. Now this film was about as indie as they come, but it was hyped, yes. Does that mean it's still indie? Why not? It just happened to do well. Now I hate hype as much as the next person, but you can't lie to yourself and say that any movie that's hyped automatically falls out of the indie category.

Now, on to your example of Kids as a good indie film, better than Thirteen. Quality aside, if you're going to disqualify anything that's hyped or advertised as indie, you're going to have to disqualify Kids as well. Why? First off, one of the Production Companies was Miramax Films (read: ultra-mainstream film company). Next, it got so hyped it was almost disgusting, and the hype is still alive and kicking. In fact, among college circles, it's still probably the most hyped film (comparable with City of Lost Children). Moreover, it had the exact same budget as Thirteen but ended up making a whole lot more money than it. By your standards, Kids is actually less of an indie movie than Thirteen.

Oh, and as for your recommendation of Brazil, it's a great film! However, not indie at all. It was directed by Terry Gilliam (Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, assorted Monty Python films, aka not an indie director but good nonetheless), and produced and distributed by Universal, one of the largest film companies around. Needless to say, it's not indie film at all (although it may feel like it is), but it's still good and recommended.

 

[Arturo21]

I just rented Primer and Noi (an Islandic film). Noi has one 19 international prizes and was an official selection in over 30 international film festivals. It seems very good, but I have yet to watch it. Primer looks quite promising as well.

BTW - "indie" comes from "independent". Regardless of popularity, if a film is created by an independent group then it is indeed an independent film.

 

[fashionologie]

BTW - "indie" comes from "independent". Regardless of popularity, if a film is created by an independent group then it is indeed an independent film.

exactly, i agree.

 

[waukon73]

^ I agree with what fashionoligie said.

 

[raijin]

I agree with what faust said earlier.

 

[tiffany]

yes, triplets of belleville was another really fanastic movie

I can't believe I forgot that one, I thought it was adorable. I had the theme song stuck in my head for days after I watched it

 

[Arturo21]

Last I've heard, big advertising campaigns and hype BEFORE the film gets into theaters kind of disqualify the film from beind an indie. Just because it deals with a serious subject matter, doesn't make it an indie. The film was not bad, I never said it was. Yet, it had that Hollywood polish under all the rough stuff. It's still worth watching, but it's not nearly as strong as Kids, that's all I'm saying...

I agree with that somewhat..theoretically at least..but remember the definition of the word 'indie'. So are we looking at this theoretically or technically?

 

[faust]

Ok, let's take a quick example: Primer. The film had a measly $7,000 budget, with no major financial backings; ThinkFilm was the only Production Company/Distributor that got behind it. It ended up winning the Grand Jury Award at the Sundance Film Festival last year, but before doing that, was hyped out the wazoo. There were posters, flyers, trailers in major movie theaters; from what I know, they ended up spending more than twice their budget on advertising and the subsequent hype just built from there. Now this film was about as indie as they come, but it was hyped, yes. Does that mean it's still indie? Why not? It just happened to do well. Now I hate hype as much as the next person, but you can't lie to yourself and say that any movie that's hyped automatically falls out of the indie category.

Now, on to your example of Kids as a good indie film, better than Thirteen. Quality aside, if you're going to disqualify anything that's hyped or advertised as indie, you're going to have to disqualify Kids as well. Why? First off, one of the Production Companies was Miramax Films (read: ultra-mainstream film company). Next, it got so hyped it was almost disgusting, and the hype is still alive and kicking. In fact, among college circles, it's still probably the most hyped film (comparable with City of Lost Children). Moreover, it had the exact same budget as Thirteen but ended up making a whole lot more money than it. By your standards, Kids is actually less of an indie movie than Thirteen.

Oh, and as for your recommendation of Brazil, it's a great film! However, not indie at all. It was directed by Terry Gilliam (Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, assorted Monty Python films, aka not an indie director but good nonetheless), and produced and distributed by Universal, one of the largest film companies around. Needless to say, it's not indie film at all (although it may feel like it is), but it's still good and recommended.

First time I hear about Primer. What does that tell you? Thirteen on the contrary was EVERYWHERE. I didn't go see in a special indie/foreign film movie theater, I went to the mainstream one. Kids was all word-of-mouth advertisement. It didn't have Hollywood actors, not even professional actors in it. It got a lot of attention because it was such a strong film. The "hype" is still alive because Larry Clark is still preoccupied with the adolescency theme.

And your point about distribution is not a good one, almost everything is distributed by major studios.

 

[faust]

I agree with that somewhat..theoretically at least..but remember the definition of the word 'indie'. So are we looking at this theoretically or technically?

realistically

 

[Arturo21]

realistically

You just won me over.

 

[faust]

You just won me over.

hmmm

 

[Spacemiu]

Raijin - I don't think that Garden State should be considered 'independent'. It doesn't seem like it at least, it was very famous, had famous actors...I don't think so either. However, it was a very good film.

Well he won the Independant Spirit award for best new director... famous actor apear in indie films from time to time, for instance Nichole Kidman was in Dogville.

 

[fashionologie]

First time I hear about Primer. What does that tell you?

Clearly, because you haven't heard about Primer, that means there was no hype - not in New York City, where you're from, of all places, anyway. Whereas I could go to the local video store in North Carolina and see plenty of flyers and posters. Clearly if you, of all people, didn't see any hype, then it most definitely doesn't exist.

I'm fine with it if you don't want to look at distributors as a case for indie flicks. But that wasn't my point, just a little bit of topping to the cake. But let's be "realistic" then, and look at production companies, aka the people who give up the cash. According to your definition of an indie film, it isn't hype or the stars that stud it, but rather the simple fact that it was not originally backed by a major financial company. Period. Kids was backed by Miramax, not to mention it made the career of Chloe Sevigny. It's doubtful that someone's career would have been made solely based on "word-of-mouth" hype.

Now, back on track, if you're really going to define "indie" as a film without hype/famous people in it, Donnie Darko (Patrick Swayze, Drew Barrymore), Brazil (Robert De Niro, Ian Holm), Y Tu Mama Tambien (Gabriel Garcia Bernal), Garden State (Natalie Portman), Boondock Saints (Willem Dafoe), Dogville (like Spacemiu said: Nicole Kidman, Paul Bettany, Jeremy Davies), and the list goes on, all disqualify. And those are the worst, because not only do they have famous people in them, but they were very hyped. Finally, because Kids made Miss Sevigny famous, you ought to disqualify that one as well. You really need to look past hype and advertising and look at the root of the definition of indie films, which is really only financial. So ask yourself this: does the fact that Kids didn't have anyone famous (at that time) outweigh the fact that it was financed by a major production company, and, mind you, the same film company that financed Cop Land (Sylvester Stallone) and Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights? If that's true, then we've got another problem on our hands.

 

[travolta]

have you guys heard of the The Yes Men? it's about people who posed as members of the world trade organizaton, i haven't seen it yet, but i heard it good.

 

[Arturo21]

Y Tu Mama Tambien also has Diego Luna in it. Garden State has the guy from Scrubs (I saw him on a commercial, I definately don't watch that)

 

[PrinceOfCats]

wings of desire

Talk to the avatar...

<-------------------

 

[Arturo21]

^which I love, btw.