The Dogme95 manifesto sets out rules to follow to break the cycle of bourgeois film production. These rules include banning of artificial lighting, color, effects and sounds, stating that these are the tools of fake 'high art'. While the approach seems somewhat limiting, it implies that there is absolutely nothing of value to be found in a film which uses these techniques, which I find to be completely wrong. Certainly, technical prowess does not make a movie, but it can help in many ways, and there's nothing wrong with interesting visual stimulation alongside intellectual stimulation. Film still is a visual medium isn't it? Why restrict yourself to filming what the eye can already see (admittedly, not with the same artistic sequencing)?
The Lumiere manifesto has a similar, albeit more tactfully proposed, purpose. Again, while an exciting endeavor - producing film stripped of visual distractions, filled instead only with meaning and 'analytical truth', it falls into the trap of completely denouncing modern techniques as lies, as 'propaganda'.
The Mekas manifesto seems a little outdated, seeing that digital media are becoming an increasingly accepted artform, that video art is quite prevalent, and that many independent filmmakers do get recognition. It's not perfect yet, but it's going somewhere. If this were written 15 years back, maybe they've got a point, but in today's context it seems a little alien.
Sure independent film is nice. But an exploration of the inner soul and of human existence is not all I want from my film experiences. While I do agree that there are many, many works out there which do not function without their cinematic effects, these are also the movies that are dismissed for their stupidity (often...not always).
No comments:
Post a Comment