While the main focus has been on the group as a collaborative whole, I'm wondering, outside of using this "movement" as a marketing strategy, COULD any of these filmmakers have made it on their own? And aside from this well-regarded series at the IFC, has anybody noted that none of these pictures has received traditional theatrical distribution?
#
posted by @ 8/25/2007 12:10 AM
Well, "The Puffy Chair" was distributed by Roadside Attractions.
What interests me about this group, however, is that the emphasis seems to be on expression, making the films, and connecting to like-minded audiences. It's not about the theatrical holy grail which, no matter what the quality of the film, is increasingly a dangerous crap shoot for any filmmaker these days.
In terms of "making it on their own," I don't think any filmmaker anywhere in the world can make it completely on their own. Film is the quintessential industrial art form. It requires people (and capital). I think the mumblecore filmmakers are experiencing now what is perhaps for them the unexpected result of a few years of friendly collaboration. I don't think there was a grand overarching marketing strategy intended to make it to the IFC. Instead, a few filmmakers outside the system created a network of friends that wound up in itself becoming a hook for people interested in new ways of making and promoting indie films.
#
posted by Scott Macaulay @ 8/25/2007 10:39 AM
In addition to Puffy, Andrew Bujalski has had more than a fair amount of success, especially considering that there was not an existing "movement" when Funny Ha Ha debuted in 2002.
And the fact that many of the films have not received "traditional theatrical distribution" is a misnomer in a time when "traditional theatrical distribution" is diminishing. If Gus Van Sant's latest Cannes winner is going the day-and-date route, how can you determine quality by whether or not a film is grabbed by Sony Pictures Classics or the like?
Scott is right. Part of the excitement of the group is the joy that they take in creating film - not worrying about whether or not they can "get over". For anonymous to impose his version of success upon these filmmakers - who have implicitly rejected it - seems to be missing the point.
#
posted by AJ Schnack @ 8/25/2007 4:31 PM
I think I'm rebelling against the hype. The movement is being marketed as though it's this really significant thing. And I don't think it is significant enough -- not at this point anyway -- to merit the huge push it's been receiving. Their work certainly isn't that impressive or entertaining -- not in the context of DIY or the history of indie film. There have been plenty of no-budget DV movies crowding film festivals for years now. Only these filmmakers became friends and through their association are being credited with starting a "movement." It's the way it's being marketed that's a turn-off. I feel like the community so desperately wants to push a new movement that it's settling for something.
#
posted by @ 8/26/2007 1:14 AM
