Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 09:04:44 AM

Login with username, password and session length

UK films urged to be more 'mainstream'

Started by Aploplectic, January 12, 2012, 10:44:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ignatius_S

Quote from: Ballad of Ballard Berkley on January 13, 2012, 02:59:03 PM
The special effects in Jaws...

Very quickly, that film was very significant as that was the kind of fare that traditionally that was the preserve of exploitation cinema and considered not fitting to be produced by the big studios. There's been a fair bit written about this and IIRC, Peter Biskind's Easy Riders, Raging Bulls contains Roger Corman's realisation that the niche that people like him had carved outfor themselves was in the process of being invaded by the big boys.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Ballad of Ballard Berkley on January 13, 2012, 02:59:03 PM
The special effects in Jaws[nb]Well, no one had ever built a massive sea-faring mechanical shark before, had they?[/nb], Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T? I know he wasn't responsible for them directly, but they were pivotal and, at the time, state-of-the-art components of those films.

This is true, he did usher in the era of the special effects film, which like neo-liberalism seems now to be eternally with us, crushing the life out of all smaller species. I think I could argue that all those films in some way are dependent on elements born outside the mainstream. Jaws is edgy visceral exploitation horror with a bigger budget. CE3K is a clean cut suburban version of 2001, a difficult, dark and decidedly arty film that caught the mood of the times. ET relies on the make-up effects of Carlo Rambaldi who got his start working for Bava, Argento and the like.

Mainstream cinema has always relied on the independent, underground, arty, alternative, whatever you want to call it, for new talent and new ideas - and also to fix up its own lousy ideas - John Sayles script doctoring work comes to mind here. Government funding, like the sort that is mentioned upthread that has traditionally existed in France, helps this sector stay alive, which is also good for the mainstream.

Funcrusher

Quote from: Ignatius_S on January 13, 2012, 03:05:59 PM
Very quickly, that film was very significant as that was the kind of fare that traditionally that was the preserve of exploitation cinema and considered not fitting to be produced by the big studios. There's been a fair bit written about this and IIRC, Peter Biskind's Easy Riders, Raging Bulls contains Roger Corman's realisation that the niche that people like him had carved outfor themselves was in the process of being invaded by the big boys.

This is what I was referring to as the "multi-million dollar exploitation film" in my earlier post. I'd forgotten that I'd nicked that idea from Peter Biskind...

It is basically what we have today. The model of film-making as ultra-high stakes gambling (obviously it was always risky with big budget films), like Goldman Sachs leveraging itself at a zillion to one, which wannabe-insiders like Pedro find so exciting but personally i find incredibly depressing, puts the major studio in the same place as some shoestring Corman type operation in the past.

The shoestring operation is fucked if their picture doesn't make money, but they've got zero budget for production values, name actors, promotion etc - so use elements that will create a sensation to get people in - tits, gore, weird creatures never seen before, new pop crazes the major studios aren't on to yet. The major studio faced with having to recoup a gigantic budget likewise needs something that creates a sensation to get huge numbers of punters in the door - so mega special effects, 3d, some pop star/rapper who's hot. Whether the script makes any sense, whether the film is well made just doesn't get a look in.

Edit - I should add that, IMO, the difference is that shoestring exploitation studios produced lots of interesting/exciting/fun/edgy films along with a fair bit of rubbish, whereas corporate exploitation films are mostly just really vacuous, which is a shame.