This week, I wanted to talk a little bit about why we watch movies, and why we make movies. Seems like sort of a broad topic and, to be sure, there is no exact answer...but that's why I wanted to talk about it. The topic came up when I read this New York Times Article:That Film’s Real Message? It Could Be: ‘Buy a Ticket’ . Reporter Michael Cieply discusses responses to the film '300,' in particular, one reporter's question about which character represents President Bush and what the underlying message is. Director Zach Snyder said that he had never intended the movie to have a political message about current events. In essence, Snyder had set out to make a movie for the sole purpose of entertaining...but I have a feeling that many in the audience will interpret it as a political message anyway.So this brought up the following questions for me: What do we, as viewers, get out of films? Why do filmmakers make films? And finally, is it alright for viewers and filmmakers to disagree over intended messages in movies?
I think reasons for watching movie are two-fold. Sometimes you watch a movie and you are looking for meaning - for a message, for enlightenment of some sort, even if it's just another voice that agrees with your own. Movies like Syriana or a classic like All the President's Men -- you don't see these to escape, you see them to pay attention. Other times, movies are purely escapist. Purely entertainment. Movies like Mr. and Mrs. Smith or The Holiday - we go to these to zone out, and be in another world where we laugh and we cry and we watch pretty people in action. Often times, movies are a little bit of both - the Little Miss Sunshine's of the world or Pan's Labyrinth - and perhaps film's greatest power is disguising a movie as the latter, while still giving you the merits of the former. Movies that are escapist, but also have a message.
Filmmakers make films for the same reasons - and I think it is totally possible for a filmmaker like Snyder to say, hey, I just want to make this really cool looking movie with a bunch of action scenes. There is no fault in that. Somehow our culture has become a little snobbish. In the same way that the Academy Awards rarely reward comedies, we don't always give credit to filmmakers who seek only to entertain. But entertainment is perhaps the most important aspect of movie-making, so how is it so inconceivable that a smart director could be satisfied with only that?
Finally, can there be a difference in how filmmaker and audience sees and uses the movie? Is it okay to interpret '300' as a critique of the Bush administration, or even an endorsement? Is it okay to see a movie like Good Night and Good Luck and see it only as a historical piece and not as a subtle critique on today's media? As much as I'm coming from the side of the filmmaker, I have to say yes to this. People see movies for their own reasons, and as much as the movie itself may be a public spectacle, I think the interpretation of the movie is a private event. The same way you and I might look at the same Picasso painting and feel different emotions stirred inside us, so we can see the same film and get out of it different things. Not only the judgement of the film - good or bad - is subjective, but also its meaning, and I think that's a good thing.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Alex M., Movie Correspondent
Alex's column, Sunset Boulevard, published every Friday to Gather Essentials: Movies, is a weekly summary of the movie industry's biggest stories.
Alex is a film school grad working at a production company in Hollywood. She's been passionate about movies since she knew what they were and always has an opinion (for better or worse).
You can find all of Alex's Sunset Boulevard columns at gather.com/SunsetBoulevard
Keep up with Alex's other postings and Gather activity by joining her Gather network -- just click here and select the orange “Connect” button on the left-hand side of the page
You’ll find Alex and other Movie Correspondents, plus celebrity content and plenty of other movie buffs at Movies.gather.com
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 8
Christine - I totally agree, however I would hesitate to condemn people for wanting pure entertainment, too. Sometimes we need an escape. I think balance is the most important thing.
Right now the state of his "Art" often seems to be satisfied to be what it was before he elevated it with his genius (he would probably run screaming to HBO and Showtime and make thought provoking and challengingly adult mini series for the sophisticated few (while stirring up trouble with violent, chavanistic, and rabbelrousing action shows for the broadcast networks under an assumed name).
When even the Academy prefers a well made but under demanding entertainment like "The Departed" with the twin human epics Of "United 93" and "World Trade Center"...it is difficult to expect "Balance" from the general public...or the moviemakers out to win their interest!
As for movie-going, I'm kind of a snob. I prefer to go to the more independent fare. But, I did love "Dodgeball," as well as "Good Night and Good Luck." For me it's a matter of watching the trailer and gauging whether it's worth $8 and two hours of my time. I'm usually 85% right on it.
Then again, sometimes I don't have that $8
-Chas
The third reason? Well, sometimes I go for the eye candy. Give me a movie with one of my favorite guy stars in it and I'm there.