The term “art film” is a crazy word for films that are made outside the blockbuster machine: No giant budget, no major marketing campaign under every rock, not too many giant stars (although some big stars have been known to do art films for the experience), and no big release.
Most art films do not make it to your local megaplex. Instead, you see the latest blockbuster playing in four auditoriums and the other latest blockbuster occupying the other six. Art films are relegated to independent theaters and cinemas, those places that show all those weird films – foreign, strange, things no one has heard of – yes, the Normal Theater is one of those.
And, if you’re one of those people who don’t go to movies merely because they don’t show at the megaplex, I can assure you you’re missing out on some of the more unique and possibly best movies out there.
Throughout the history of films, there have been certain directors who personify the art film. Sadly, we have lost many more great directors than we have gained in the past 20 years, but some remain active, and occasionally make a film to remind us that film is an art form as well as an entertainment.
Terrence Malick is one of those directors. His signature work always features sweeping outdoors vistas where humans represent only a fraction of the meaning of the scene, and there is an autobiographical element to every film Malick directs. His body of work includes “Badlands,” “Days of Heaven,” and “The Thin Red Line.”
Note that nothing here in his award-inspiring best titles has come out within the last decade, which brings me to a very important question: Are legendary art film directors really relevant in today’s movie entertainment biz?
A bit earlier this year, Malick came out with the film “The Tree of Life,” a character study of a 1950s family living in a small Texas town.
A simple enough theme that could be approached in many ways, Malick here approaches it through the eyes of the eldest boy, who has to come to terms with life’s ups and downs – like we all do. This film is then the story of all of our lives, of life in general, and, aw shucks, of the universal concept of life. That’s what art film directors do to simple subjects – they take them out of their simple zone then attempt to reel them in so we can leave the cinema feeling enriched, enlightened, either floating out on a much higher plain, or confused and headed to the closest coffee shop for discussion and clarification.
I think this is why most people don’t go to art films. Film as entertainment doesn’t require discussion, or deep thought. You sit, you watch, it’s over and you go home. But an “art” film scares some people into thinking that they need to take notes, that they somehow don’t have the capacity to understand an art film, and that, if they talk to anyone about it, they will appear, well, not brainy.
Aw come on! Films are stories – like those you can read at a library – you don’t want to read the same one over and over again. Blockbuster films cover a narrow category of themes. Art films tell a variety of stories. Where would libraries be if we only had mindless blockbuster books? Where would music be if we only had one style to listen to? Without the “art film” it would be a dull world. We need art film directors who can show us other dimensions that give us something else to ponder. It’s not all about blue people, explosions and giant alien monsters.
Come see “The Tree of Life” at the Normal Theater this weekend, Thursday through Sunday at 7 p.m. each evening. It’s an “art film” in the truest sense.
No comments:
Post a Comment