Sounder SIGN UP FOR FREE
Talking Images
Talking Images

Episode 8 · 1 year ago

Mainstream Cinema: the Good, the Bad & the Ugly

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

In this episode Tom, Sol and Matthieu attempts to figure out what "Mainstream Cinema" even is.

You are listening to talking images, the official podcast of ICM Forumcom. Welcome back everyone, I'm Tom and today we are going to explore the world of mainstream cinema, delving into our thoughts on the topic and exploring the merits and the negative attributes of films that fall into this category. For those that have been listening since the very first episode, You may remember that Gary introduced the phrase mainstream trash when we're talking about our film journeys. However, there is much more to mainstream cinema than this aspect, and we're excited to explore an area of cinema that we've only briefly touched upon in our podcast so far. I'm joined today with my brilliant cohosts Saul and Mariew, who is joining us for the very first time. So if you'd like to introduce yourself, Matthew? Yeah, thank you. Hi, I'm at you or to pox on the MPOM. I'm VRENCH, like Clem, second Frenchman on the PODCAST. I guess I'm sitting in for him. I'm a much more recent cine file than most of you guys. I've only really gotten into a film around two thousand this UN I would say so very recent and I guess I'm a bit much less experience than many of you, but I am passionate Alchool so I'm very excited to participate in this. That's great. We're happy to have you here and over to you. So I'm so from Australia. I'm thirty three years old. I've been into cinema for nineteen years. So it's great to have everyone on board. Will start out with a little round table just to discuss a views on mainstream cinema and perhaps explore the angle that's not all mainstream cinemas trash. So looking forward to seeing what examples people may have a high quality famous films that fall within the mainstream. So Mafia fe're happy to start. That be great. So I guess I don't particularly think that mentioned cinema is trash. I guess there is a lot of trash in menam cinema, but I guess there is a lot of trash in cinema in general. But it is true that mention cinema because it is so pervasive and an avoidable when there is trash it's harder to avoid. So obviously we get more tested with that and with the idea of differentiating ourselves from that. That being said, yeah, there's plenty of mentioned cinema I love and I think there's a bit of a question about what mentioned cinema really is. Is it just blockbusters or it's a larger thing than that? There's also maintam comedy is one example. I guess for me would be something like the Blues Waters, is very mainstream comedy, which I love. I guess I grew up with it and I think that's also an important part of what kind of links us with mentream cinema is that often it's the stuff we grew up with, right, because obviously when you're like ten years old, you're not going to be watching black man or my thing like, you're not going to be watching very difficult spin to access, you're going to be watching mentioned cinema. So in a sense it's what we all started with to various extents. I guess for action terms, an example of a mentioned cinema that I that I really love is the Matrix, and I think the Matrix is an interesting example in that the fact that it is mainstream is kind of the point, because it has this very universal message and I think the way in which it's addresses the world at large is I mean the fact that it is mentioned. Cinema is really important to it. It's an intricate part of what the film is and I think that's an aspect that we can't really overlook, as opposed to us our cinema, which is great also but has different qualities. I thought it was a very interesting topic mainstream cinema, because I'm not sure myself what mainstream cinema means. I define that by films that are just playing in regular cinemas, or at supposed to films that applying an art house cinemas. It Tas have changed quite a bit over time. It was just interesting here. So My cohost comments, like Matthew talked about mainstream cinema being a stuff that we grew up with, and it was saying that ten years old, nerve is really watching experimental films. Actually started watching films like and Shianna are and a Lou from Louis Bun yell and films like the original noserrado very early on to my cinema, going journey to hon to see where films have progressed from. It's this interesting. That, ever, was concidering what actually mainstream cinema is like. It's great to hear from Soul Matthew and their experiences with mainstream cinema and how it has a great impact in shaping our viewing habits from a younger age. If you think about it, when your first getting into cinema, a lot of your idols will be people like James Bonds, Indiana Jones, Luke Skywalker, because they're what you're exposed to at a young age and it acts as a gateway into cinema. And this is in a way very similar to younger audiences now...

...digesting the the marvel film, idolizing the superheroes. That's a grace in the big screen so often these days. Yeah, I guess one aspect we can go into if we're talking about no idols and the way it is now, is the comparison that is often made between superhero movies now and Western in like the fift S. I mean, I think the comparison has some issues, but in a sense it is kind of this mainstream genre, the main successful genre, and and there are some variations on it that we are seeing that can be more or less interesting. And Yeah, the way in which it impacts younger people. I think is relevant to thinking twenty years we'll see that maybe some films that we don't necessarily think of as being that important will become part of the cannon. I guess that's another aspect of mentioned cinema. It is ever changing. What is mentionam cinema. Now my not get that. That's way tomorrow. And similarly I mean say Sims in general. Now it's not meanstream to watch them, but obviously and the tent s and it. That's one mentioned cinema. I don't know about myself, but you know, like the big thread. Now that's not mean stream, but at the time it twelve or even from a country to another, like Gibbley and Gibbli is definitely mainstream. In Japan I mean stair to the ways, like the most successful or one of the most successful films of on times, but in the US or in Europe Gidley is more of a cinema thing. I think that's a very good point from Matthew. It's one of the reasons why I've had a real hard time getting my head around this concept of mainstream cinema. I think mainstream cinema only exists in the mind because it does change, and not just over time. It's with things like the awards, films like the artist and even parasite, I think, are now mainstream films because I've one of the Best Picture Oscar. They've started being showing in cinemas everywhere. You can buy them, or can buy the artist, at least on DVD everywhere, so it's widely known. So that's changed just overnight or just over a period of months. Suddenly become mainstream. Think also about the studio Ghibli films. I think it's another really good example or something which might not be main stream over here but would be mainstream over there. And I guess a lot of the Australian films that I see in cinemas, although I see on dvd over here, with things where people would find quite exotic if you're shown overseas, whereas it's just an everyday film to me over here. That's an testing point that you make about parasites. I love the obviously a film that unexpectedly enters into the mainstream because of the water recognition that it receives into allows it to reach a wider audience and it's great when international films do that because it expands the herizes and s if movie goers who perhaps wouldn't usually take a punt on a South Korean film. Regarding the world, there's also the truire category of Bioteakus, and you know what we call awards date, those films that are made for the world, which are not necessarily that's commercially successful. I mean then maybe they do find but they are very much mainstream and often, generally these movies and to generally feel good movies, they going to come up for ups when you talk with people who are not particularly signifies. Just watch some movies and generally these movies tend to be stoptured or with the mainstream audience also, even if they're not as big as, you know, the big blood busters. That's a great point, Matthew, because I for one of watched a lot of biopics. It's one of my girlfriend's favorite go to genres. So we see most of the big mainstream releases that cover this territory. Now, even if the film quality isn't particularly great from kind of an artistic point of Sensibility, he will always enjoy them if the story behind it is fascinating, because she learned something new from it, whereas my view is that, regardless of whether the the backgrounds or is fascinating, if it isn't presented in in interesting way that captivates me, then I'm usually kind of disappointed in that regard. So I'd be curious to hear what your thoughts were on the biopics. To John, I think with biopics all of it depends on the person and how well they're known and how much the still a part of popular culture. And thinking of something like Bohemian rhapsody or even a rocket man, I would definitely be one that I considered be mainstream films because they're about us as musicians, singers whose work is still played time at a time again, so people know who they are, know about the stories. Something different like Jefferson in Paris, which is a merchant ivory film from the nineties, and not be so mainstream because outside of people in America people might not be so sure who Thomas Jefferson is. Yes, that's a good point. That's summer honors like biophics are super who movies now, with some at a certain time, are considered generally mainstream, but not. Obviously not all films in that genre are that mainstream. I mean you have artists experimenting with the genres and giving...

...you something that is very much outside the mainstreams. I guess, parallel but different from genre considerations, the issue issue of what is menstream. So, if we think about the idea of mainstream and how it doesn't always mean that films, I'd like to point out a shine example of this in the work of Christopher Nolan. Obviously started out with his independent films, following and Momento for becoming a household name when tackling the the dark knight trilogy and becoming a very successful director who was great critical and commercial success. It seems to combine a grand sense of storytelling with intelligent concepts to deliver fascinating feature films with mainstream appeal that also showcase an incredible awareness of the medium's artistic qualities. I would take interstellar and inception as two perfect examples of this, and you can't imagine many other directors working today being allowed such freedom when creating films requiring an enormous financial backing to bring their inventive vision to life. So I'm curious as to what examples you may they have of mainstream films that have, you know, blown your way that are being particularly impressive. was mentioned before. I'm not sure if the term mainstream really exists where there really is such thing as mainstream cinema. But I can talk about, though, is that there are some films obviously have much bigger budgets than others, and with something like interstellar, actually did really love that and obviously if Christopher Nolan didn't have such big success with the Batman films, you probably wouldn't have had the budget as despose will be able to make something as breathtaking as into stellar is. Oh, I guess from that one of view that's quite an achievement. And in terms of mainstream cinema, what mainstream is? I just think it really exists much in our mind. It's varies from country to country and it changes a lot with awards are things that bring films in the consideration. So I could talk about specific films, but actually about mainstream as a concept. It's something that I find really hard to still get my head around. I guess if you want another example of the mainstream film, I love one would be a fiction. I guess is in casing that it is in the sense and independent film, I think in the way it produced, I'm pretty sure. And it was a can which is not exactly the temple of the mainstream, but it ended up being very much a menstream movie and something that everyone knows. And Yeah, and that's my favorite movie in the way which plays also with these mainstreat dream tooks, but it takes all these elements of seventy swims in particular, but with you from also but also from more motto is stuff like Goba and I think for fiction, really what I love about it is the way in which it is playful like that, which is something that's, I think, the best of mentioned cinema can be an interesting point about how fiction, whether it is really a mainstream film if it was made as an independent film and if it's earning after it one they are palm door that it got all this extra recognition and then became an award success and everything to fill. It's the same way with a lot of other films like parasite. You know, if it hadn't won the palm door of it having gone on the awards trial path, we be talking about as a mainstream cinema film. M Of course not everything that wins the palm door can't necessarily goes on to be a mainstream film. and think of things like winter sleep. That's still vary on the side that if you told somebody about that film and so a good person street, they wouldn't have heard of it. But a lot of other films, obviously like taxi driver, that have won the palm door over time, might have started off as a small, maybe more independent film but has come on to have a much bigger reputation since then has actually become an ingrained part of cinema culture the same way that pulp fiction has. Pope fiction is a great example. It tapped into something about for the culture around the time that just proved to make it so successful, and that's an interesting thing to consider with mainstream cinemas. Some films get to be that way because of the marketing side of it, the big push by studios to make them a mainstream success, but there are some films that just through there the quality of the filmmaking, the the word and mouth eventually make it into the mainstream, which is an interesting point. Tom Bring it back to Christopher Nolan and a film like Memento. It's purely through word of mouth that meant to became such a big success start off as a very small or more budget type of film, and it's for everybody talking about in different structure and how was so different and also interesting that actually became part of the mainstream otherwise, much like following Chris Nolan's film from nine hundred and ninety eight, which otherwise might seem a little bit out of the usual as a huge horror fun and that's a quote that I seem to fit into most episodes, but given the chance, I can't help but speak about horror. I'm obviously interested in when horror transcends into the mainstream, and...

...it seems to be doing this stantly a lot of success, with quite a bit of intelligent horror coming through. Recent film that was in the mainstream that I really enjoyed was the invisible man. Thought this was a brilliant reimagining of the original source novel. So I suppose in this one, in a toxic masculinity and abusive relationships are introduced to Hu Wild's classic story about invisibility. In this updates the science fiction thriller for Contemporary Audiences in a vicious reimagining of the source material gone. Of the toxins and chemicals used by the villain to become undetectable by the eye in wilds is novel, and in place of these is a technologically advanced suit that bestows its where with invisibility. And after this you q oneting scenes where the camera pans around empty rooms that surprise and they never become easy to stomach. The constant threat of an unseen presence is exploited to its maximum potential, and I think this is a great example of a mainstream film that it appeals to mass audiences, but there's also a lot of intelligence in the writing and the presentation of the film that allows people with perhaps a finer appreciation of the artistic side of a cinema to get an injury it out to the film as well. Yeah, I definitely agree. I think invisible man is is a great example of that, and also it goes into the idea of entertainments like is a very entertaining certain way. It's still tackle those issues and I guess that's maybe the best of an interest in him I can do. Is the extremely entertaining why is still having underlying issues that is interested in. Haven't actually seeing the invisible man. It's one that I was very curious about. The invisible man was a film that I was interested in it, which I wanted to see, but then coronavirus here in the cinema's close so I never got around to it. Do you really like the James well film from one thousand nine hundred and thirty three, and I'm curious to see how it's updated for modern times? In question, I lie, when all the director behind it made a really cool film called upgrade a couple of years ago, and the question will be would upgrade now be considered a mainstream film? Was a bit like artem when it came out over here. Has a considered mainstream now because people are looking at more of his films after the success of the invisible man? I would tend to see now one that just because I don't think it's that well known yet. But maybe. I mean, that's a debatable point. I mean, I guess it's also another concept we haven't talked about exploitation or hope or, you know, this kind of film that is in some ways mainstream because they are made for the God gums writing theater, but in another sense because they are not very respected as opposed to even the blockbusters, which I respected a few industry. It gives us another kind of great area. I would put a great outside the mainstream, but it's debatable point. I just might mention with upgrade. It's interesting because it does an Australian film, or at least partially financed and Australia. So it was definitely a very mainstream film over here. Is actually showing in cinemas or cross Perth. So I could like see it without and drive all the way around our house cinema, but it's something where I've talked to people overseas and the people have seen it overseas and said all that to go to on our house cinema to see it they couldn't see at the regular cinemas. I would just shows a guest that cultural barrier and what's mainstream over here might not be quite so mainstream across the world. That's an interesting point soul in it. It bridges back to the notion of mainstream cinema being different for different countries depending on what is popular over there. It's any given time and I wouldn't class or grade as a mainstream film personally, but I think that you raise an interesting point about whether, when a director reaches certain level of success, their past films would then potentially have the opportunity to be considered mainstream by virtue of the director almost becoming a household name. I think that's an interesting area, whether a film could be considered retrospectively mainstream or whether it should only be considered mainstream if it is popular and successful at the time of its release. You know, it's a very good point and you can go back to people like Steven Spielberg, the films like jewel, which was a TV movie, and the Sugar Land Express with Goldie Horn, which is a fantastic filmer, and I don't think any of those are really big films. But since the successive jaws and close encounters and all the films in the Spielberg such a horsehold name that I think those two films, jewel and Sugarland Express, actually quite well known these days. And to take the opposite point, I think you know, don't sure side of movies an example, but also like some of the big sixty epics, like, even if you are Batwack, you about tace.

Pretty we're known, I guess, because it was so expensive and stuff that. It was a big deal at the time just because it was very famous, but I think most people don't necessarily know about it now. In the other way around, right, stuff that twelve men stream at some points and isn't really up. It's a very good pointback clear Patra and one of the big films of one thousand nine hundred and sixty three. You go the nine hundred and sixty three Oscars and the film Tom Jones. One Best Picture and you mentioned Tom Jones. These days people think all the singer. Nobody actually knows that British film that won the Best Picture. Asker you know the big films from one thousand nine hundred and eighty three are stuff like the great escape or it's a half. If you're into cinema you might know that the fling film. It's like Tom Jones might have been big back then, but then I actually big these days. So as a counterpoint to the mainstream films we like and preciate, thought it would be interesting to perhaps put forward some examples of the mainstream films that haven't made such a positive impression on it. I've got it quite a recent example in the Harley Quinn Superhero film birds of prey, and in this it Doz linklidoscope of colors and comic but violent awaits anyone who enters a world basically Quinn narrates her own lerid tale involving it a stolen diamond and a prize ransom as she smashes away through Gotham city and I cly destroying everything in her path and offer making it through unscathed thanks to sheer look. Apart from once slick fight scene in a circus that thiss with phrenetic energy, these sequences are mostly forgettable, offering light entertainment but bringing nothing new to the oversaturated world of Comic Book Adaptations. If you are someone WHO's after popcorn fodder or mindless entertainment, you could probably do far worse. But when another villain of Gotham city is recently graced the big scream of such an unforgettable impact, it's hard enough to view beard to pray as a missed opportunity, and it strikes me that it's a film that people who don't visit the cinema there often will perhaps enjoy more than others, because you know, it's loud, it's bright, it's in your face. It's it's noisy and it's easy to get lost in you when you really take a look at the quality of the film and how it's being produced, there's a lot of areas in which is lacking. The man example of a Mentionam filment I don't like is actually a specific French example. You may not even know it, I guess, but it is very famous in France, and that is Texis, which is a film by Not Bailey Bison, the director is actually Jerachies, but it was written maybe this wine produced and it was a very influential film. I think I picked it because it's very representative to me of a certain were of the whole business thing right, because that's definitely the part of French cinema that is trying to emulate Hollywood to because there is a lot of mentioned cinema that's just comedies, that there's not a lot of action and Hollywood type films, and so this one is trying to do that, and I think taxi is a very good example of the ways in which he takes everything that's wrong with Hollywood blockbusters without much of the goods, because there's a lot of in the way the women characters are written, or are they written at already? You have my Lin courtier and that film and she's playing nothing. You have a main character who supposed to be charismatic, but I mean, I guess there's something there, but the way the character is written is extremely flat, and even the action seems there are some other busin things like the transporter that you will listen better with us. That taxi is supposed to be to have the exciting chasing. Then they are very flats, very mean. They don't really work. I think it's in a sense and a vishes too many. I guess you could respect it for that, but it is so backwards looking in both its viewers, on women and also on foreign people's typically people from Asia in the film. And I guess, I guess I picked it because it's in a way of disappointments. It's the cat. I would like friends and other countries to be able to make that kind of movie, because why not at all? I mean it's interesting that China is examples, but it's and it's interesting to have a thing like in Massa, because often Paris is a big thing for action in France. But yeah, it's it's very disappointing to me, and it's a film that really represents the yet the missology especially, that is very present in the line of films and that I kind of hate that it is has become a representative attist in Europe and I think, as worse where, of kind of action French cinema. Although I haven't seen taxi here, your description of it just reminds me of countless of the commercial films that seem to be made first and foremost with the idea of making money. So you get a all these big franchises, unnecessary sequels and spin offs today,...

...churned out solely with the purpose of making money. Somewhere the talent of the the filmmakers or actors and perhaps point to best use. I see that there's been a number of sequels of taxing. It kind of reminds me of the same thing that's happened with the fast and furious sequels, although they are two varying degrees of quality, but it does at times feel like films from Hollywood, and there the big studios follow a set template and they rarely take risks and they don't like to innovate or try different things because when they do step outside of there, the comfort zone, there is a chance that the films that are made could potentially end up losing the money, and I think that's a sad state of the industry. Put in it is something that exists. Yeah, and I guess I should point out that's textually does have four sequels. So yeah, didn't this is not a unique problem to Hollywood. Thought it was interesting. A lot of people are doing examples of the sequels and remakes and franchises. I'm talking about a mainstream film that didn't really do much for me. I might go with the recent Halloween from two thousand and eighteen. It doesn't actually add anything extra to the story. It was really hypedime. It's going to be this big confrontation between the Loris droid character Michael Myers. A very little the film's actually dedicated to it. Much of it's a very standard psycho killer type of film. It should, I guess, is good for drawing in crowns and getting in the money. And of actually look at the Halloween Franchise in general. Most of the sequels aren't very good, at least not compared to not Murney Elm Street, which is actually got some decent sequels in there are really good Halloween sequel, decent for the franchise at this was Halloween resurrection, which actually tried to do something different with the concept bit of like virtual reality going into the house, which is actually a little bit different, whereas the more recent Halloween was just another slasher film. And I suppose we're homes being so cheap to make. Usually that's why we see a lot of remakes and sequels, because she is don't have to invest a lot of money for a big return, because a lot of mainstream audiences will go and see how, regardless of it its quality, they send to be a good film for first dates and things like that and groups of friends who just wanted to laugh. So I think horror always tends to do quite well in the main regardless of the quality. I get that with horror films that they are very good for the mainstream. I guess a lot of people going into them because they want to be scared or shocked or frightened or see something unexpected and with a lot of the more recent ones they sort of playing on people having not at seeing the order films going something like or not all stitch from one thousand nine hundred and eighty four. Yawn, I don't want to see that. I'm going to see this new version with Rooney Mara in it. Instead. There were cycling the same ideas. Are trying to outdate them for different generations and there's lots of your recycling which goes along and there are some good horror films out there, but a lot of it's just playing to you know, people want a scary image here and there. I jump here and there, a boom moment here and there, but it's actually not the sort of intellectual horror films that we saw like really showing, I guess, in the S and people like David Cronenberg and where's craven? We really flourishing a ring, a whole lot of new ideas to the screen. So something that's Bot of your examples make me think of is that I haven't seen them, but what I've heard is that the new Halloween remake has a whole thing about a podcast and that's those are phray is would be feminist movie, and whether or not it is is the whole discussion and I think that's kind of an element of been stream films that don't work. That they try to be of the moment, but it seems artificial and fake and watunistic, as opposed to what we talked about earlier with fiction, is that it is of the moment just because it is. Maybe maybe he tried to be of the moment. Whatever, whatever the case, maybe it succeeded. So I think that's Kad of the type of mainstream films that fail is they try to be of the moment but it comes off as official. The new Halloween film is definitely not a pro feminist film. Stuff with Laurie strode farther of Michael Myers is contained to a very small section of the film and if you want to see a better version of Halloween, I'd actually go to the Rob Zombie film, which and I got bashed a lot when it came out, but it's actually a really good film that actually explores Michael's back story and presents them as more of a character rather than just a monster. Actually, after Min I prefer it to the John Carpet original orther. Of course nothing can replace John Carpet as original music score. That's a complete classic. I must say that your comments about beer to pray and bet the feminist stunts and how artificial it feels were spot on the money, which is quite impressive considering you haven't seen...

...it yet. Well, that's what listening to podcast to those for you. I know a bunch of hats I haven't seen. It's maybe not the most useful of information. Other good example would be the Fourth Mad Max film, Fury Road, that was really talked about as being really pro feminist. Has got this you feminist angle in there. It's going to be so great, better than the first two films, and I sat down and watched it. Then the first three mad vac films didn't really do much for me. I did sort of prefer the fourth film out of the four films, but not by huge amount of I wouldn't really say having that Charlie's thrown character and they're really pushed it much in the feminist way that people would talk about when they're raving about it online. I would disagree on that film in particular. I do, I do really like Shuri road, and I mean whether or not a feminist certainly not for me to say, but I do think there is more than just having for your side charactor, you know, maybe, but played by Charlie sellon. I think it's not just that. It's of the whole way that the world is set up right, the whole structure of the modern drule thing with the women who's exploiting for Milligan stuff. I mean I think there is a lot more there that is substantial and the and I do really like to as I'm concerned, you think does so. I look, as I said before, I probably liked throughout the most of the Mad Max films are then really did much for me and I guess it wasn't maybe feminist and the way that I was led to it, believe to believe, but as probably had more of a pro feminist drive than the original films did, from one, Thou hundred seventy nine and the two from the S. I really love her we rode. I think it's a brilliant film and it's a great example of another mainstream film that it can be enjoyed just face value for what it is or, as you mentioned, the feminist stance, the other things in there in the subtext can be appreciated as well. So it works on both levels and think that films that offer that that, you know, the kind of on the surface, the immersion for audience's who just want to escape, and then the subtext for people who want to analyze their films and get a bit more out of it. Films that can combine those two element do particularly while in and that kind of links us into our next topic, where we were going to talk about challenging or unique films that have broken into the mainstream. So for me I think that horror again has it greater it doing this. So I spoke earlier about the invisible man, but there are many of a young talented directors, Jordan Peel, who it on get out and us at a particularly well in the mainstream, and are Asta with hereditary and midsummer. Maybe made lesser an impact as their previous films, but they still found a way to tap into modern audiences fears. And all these films are horrorfying films that contain thought provoking subtext which acts as a powerful foundation to the original offerings of the storyline. So these films again can be taken it at face value for the friend in horror films they are, but they also provide intelligence audiences with the chance to delve further into the deeper social and political messages that the director striving for thought. I might just mention on that hereditary and midsummer were not mainstream films in Australia. Not sure about who read ricks. I saw that on DVD but it wasn't showing in a lot of cinemas and when I went to see midsummer I think there are only two cinemas in the hall my city that were actually playing it. So and quite call those mainstream. But I guess over in the UK there might be a mainstream on. Here they're sort of more left or field, so to speak. Of maybe not quite. I'll fish in terms of Jordan, pill get out was an excellent film and I really enjoyed that. That was really thought provoking and really funny. Also at times US was interesting, but I thought as it went along I thought it fell apart because that a lot of things with its mythology which weren't properly explained or left a lot more questions than answers. At the end of early it actually felt very generic to me, even though what pell was trying to do, and I could see was trying to do something a little bit different with as mythology. I just thought it came out a little bit jumbled for me and I just felt just like most of the horror films by the end. Unfortunately, I did love get out. I thought that was really innovative, I guess, a little horror adjacent. To me, the most obvious example of a film that's really why successful, despite not being very strange and weird and not being mentioned in is two thousand and one. I guess there's only one sections, pusend one that you could qualify as mainstream, which is the third section, which is bit of a thriller, but even then it's a pretty slow one and somehow twice a pretty big box office hit, with people going to midnight screenings and it's kind of started a...

...whole movements and I think that's kind of a fascinating example of a thing that is. It wasn't supposed to be mainstream in the sense and is the being. And Yeah, the ways in which mention can be unpredictable, but, as I mentioned earlier on, I think the awards have a lot to do with how films that are a bit challenging break into the mainstream. Already mentioned the artist which before one the best director at car wasn't really picked up. It wasn't made for the mainstream market and something like parasite light, which again he was definitely not made for mainstream crowds but has become much a household name now. Even some other things recently, like moonlight, wasn't much of a mainstream film. That's one that was only showing a couple of cinemas and actually see it myself in cinemas. But when I saw moonlight on blue right I was actually really blown away by it. Oh, in terms of challenging yeah, it's interesting. You could even go to things like parents malick. Are you going to say something like the tree of life is mainstream? I don't know if I actually would, because that's an anti narrative film, even though I got a best picture and best directed domination. But I think a lot of the award sermo, especially when films win very big awards, I think the sort of propel them up a little bit further and give them a bit more recognition and become a bit more of a film. was somebody guys or have you seen that film, and they go on, Oh, I have it and then actually maybe go out and finally see it. Another good example, I think is the favorite, which was only showing, I think, in a couple of cinemas when it first came out here. However, after a leave a common on the Oscar for people going or have you seen this film on the Best Actress Oscar? And that's actually a very challenging film. It's very different. The Fish I photography there is very unusual and it's a superb film, but it's one that wasn't quite in the mainstream, I don't think, and allow that Academy Awards success. The favorite is a great example and again it it kind of reiterates the importance of the awards because they raise attention two films that might not necessarily have mass appeal or when they have the right promotion behind them or get the right word of mouth, they reach wider audiences and inevitably make an impact. And it's great to see films such as a favorite or or moonlight or again the two thousand and one that Matthew mentioned, striking such a cord of audiences and showcasing, you know, the best of what can mainstream can be agree of the favorite, I think. Yeah, there's again two different aspects of mainstream here. Is that sometimes we are team can wig into mainstream via box office, but that's not the most usual thing and sometimes they can break into the mainstream. Of Yea would and as you mentioned, sort that's definitely the most common way, and the favorite is an excercent example of that. I guess. I don't know exactly how famous it is among non sinepires, where it's more famous than it would have been added not want the officer. When we think about the merits of mainstream cinema, one of the aspects that I touched upon briefly earlier was from discussing Christopher Noland films and the large budgets that he is afforded to create these films on such a grand scale. And that's an important aspect of of mainstream cinema, because you get films like gravity, which push the boundaries of the technology that is available and and create these incredible sci fi spectacles in a way that will appeal to mainstream audiences because at the heart is such a human story. For me, that's one of the most important things that mainstream films have to offer at the fact that they can push the boundaries of technology because they have the support, if the studios, to create some audiences haven't yet seen before. I guess one thing that also comes to mind is we haven't discussed much the marvel films and there's very much in the way down they are made. There are certainly very conventional, but the fact that the film, like any game, which is essentially a season finally of the big TV show composed of a bunch of movie could break all these records in the box office, even though it's unadjusted. Still it was the huge performance for a film. That doesn't make sense if you haven't seen like at least five or six films before. That's kind of strange. I mean, even though the same in itself is in some ways very conventional, the structure of the mcu is a very strange thing that has managed to see the on what is popular now, especially with the rise of TV shows, and make that mainstream. Just going back to gravity, I thought those interestings. I will that's home or up, because obviously our funds are require on. Got Quite a big budget to make it and add some very striking of visuals in there. Still mainst dream film and...

I think taking it as a sci fi bath looking at it, I found it a bit disappointing as a narrative because it wasn't really about the vastness and the mysteries of space, and that sort of what I'm looking for the SCI FI film. The gravity was basically a thrill ride or was very viscerals, all about bouncing from one thing to our next, trying to survive in space, not like castaway in space. I think it's impression I had at the end of it. So not surprised that it hit well with the UNRUAL public, with the mainstream market. Guess what, if I am more impressive as something like Inter Stella, because what it's taking you on with that ride is something completely different and completely unconventional which we haven't actually seen before. But I agree with a whole idea which Tom said about big budgets in one of the main factors that make mainstream films worth while. If I good director gets to work with a budget, it's one of my favorite directors is a guy called Philip Ridley, and he made a really cool film core, the reflecting skin, back in one thousand nine hundred and ninety, but he refuses to make a film lets it's actually got sufficient funding for it to any made two film since then. One of them is called heartless, which came out around ten years ago with Jim Sturgison, and it's an excellent, thought provoking, challenging film where nothing's but exactly as it seems, even unless you've actually got the budget it would to be able to make it, and it's really hard to that vision forward. That's a great example. I seen both reflecting skin and heartless and they are great films but, as you said, their unconventional ideas and perhaps they are stories that obviously worth telling, but ones that the people who finance films aren't willing to take a risk on because they're not really bankle ideas, things that will sell those artistic merit to them in their great film. They're never going to appeal to the masses. Sadly, it's unless they get a filmmaker like Tom Ford, who made a single man, made nocturnal animals and psycho whole lot of his own money into it. But unless you're independently wealthy like that, you can't really afford to make films like that just because you feel like making a film. One notion of mainstream cinema that we haven't touched upon yet is the world of animation. Obviously mentioned marvel, but when you consider studios like Pixar as well and toy story, they are mainstream films that have captured a moment with children in there the nineties, and then they've managed to build on that success and create seat calls that are almost has called as the original, and I always think that's an impressive feat that they can build on the nostalgia for the original, bring something new to the table and make it appeal to multiple generation. Yeah, we regret to animation. I think, coulsture, we have to mention you and the way in which it's is a company that has managed to remain at the center of the main dream for almost a century now, with some shallow fellow periods and some better periods, but it's kind of an impressive feet in a sense, and agree with what Pixar has done recently. Those are impressive in that sense and staying in the mainstream and I think they have used to the advantage nostalgia, which is of course a very popular and very strong force nowadays. We see it with the various remakes of films. That's we're very successful. Twenty years ago, the Jurassic worlds and that and them. We mentioned Halloween earlier and I guess that's that's an element of mainstream that people criticize a lot. Is How an original it can be easier because it is all adaptations of stuff. What's of your before or just remake sequels? I guess the post elements of mantion cinema is that it is building on itself. Really like what Matthew said about there, about mainstream cinema building on itself. I will would actually thoroughly agree with that. A lot of films coming out these days are sort of like made to expect to see quel. The maide in a way that a sequel can come out quite easily if the film was a success, which I think is what's happening a lot with the animated films. And if you just run through the box office list, are the ones from box office merger, which are official list or not? I checked movies, is actually countless sequels there to animated films and to a lot of films that weren't really good in the first place but they made a lot of money at the box office, therefore a sequel came about. This is deflecting from the animation conversation, but an interesting one would be poor blot more cop, which is a really stupid Kevin James Film. People went and saw it because it was Kevin James made a whole lot of money and made enough money that they managed to finance a sequel to nobody really like the original and even less people like the sequel. Everything about mainstream center but does seem to be about building on itself, being on the familiarity, like Matthew said, with Jurassic World and the Jurassic Park sequels, and also that nostal draw. So I guess we'll he would grow up...

...with the original Classic Park and he is definitely quite raising what Disney's managed to do with things like Mary poppins and have the original nine hundred and sixty four and now I've got the Rob Marshall version from two thousand and eighteen, I think too. To get back to animation a bit, an interesting phenomena is the way in which animation, because of d animation, has kind of democratize itself in a sense. But democratize, but they are more studios making animated terms than they were before. The S Essentially Pixar is one, though it's part of Disney, but you also have the dream works and Suwny and whatever, and I think you really see kind of a statification of those movies in that the Pixar movies that popular, but their respective the Disney movies kind of the same, I mean difference, but these days they are relatively when liked even by the critics. And then you have stuff like a minions and maybe they're good dream works movies. I don't let Mada Gascar stuff like that. That is explicitally for children and nothing more. I guess. I guess maybe that's doing off topic, but it's with a fanastic of the mainstream. Is that when you are targeting a very specific after the operation. But that is huge because children of coming. Many people have children. I mean that's a big part of it. And Yeah, I guess the way also in which Disney is we inventiate off with those live action movies which are our very live action, like the Lion King is an interesting gaseless it right. Is it live action or is it actually animation, just computer and nation with a live action remakes, Disney essentially sitting on a gold mine because everything's they're ready for them to go. They've just got a remake it and these films are famous. Adults and children love them. So the children want to go and see the new versions because it's a reimagining of it ever classic. They want love and it's just a bankable hit for Disney to tune these out. I've not seen many myself, so I can't comment on the quality, but it seems sad when the mainstream is becoming inundated with remakes of films and these big studios are pumping money into them, because you know there's so many stories out there to be told and it would be great if we could have more original hits. Actually has seen them, and I think it. One interesting aspect of those live action remakes is that generally the more popular the original team was, like the ranking, the less interesting the remake is, because they tend to fold, or I guess they don't dare to change anything. They just good, like we take the old clots, even shots, and we do just do that for you, whereas with something like your jungle book, which is a Pastetar firm but older and maybe he's less nostalgia. They went with a different story. I don't think it works at could wait for that him, but it's own thing as opposed to something like you tim the beast ranking champion, almost shutter shots we make of the animation originals just in that action could quat. But interesting because Disney does have that whole period twin, I guess, the Aristocrats and a little mermaid, where they had a lot of films that didn't really take off and yet they haven't started those for live action remakes. When have a live action of the company, we don't have a live action bazzle, the great nous detective that we serden, which they could bank on. But then again, if there is a nostalgia for that, those on as well known, on as well liked, and perhaps there's less reason for them to want to turn those into live action films. But also say that we probably need to it. Sometimes do a podcast about remakes because it does come up quite often on film boards people discussing or be are making this film now going to be remaking this classic. Yet remakes actually have existed from the very first days, like even films like the wizard of Oz was remake of a site from from one thousand nine hundred and twenty five. Would be interesting topic to discuss at some point. Yeah, definitely remakes are not a new phenomenon, and the lack of wold originality in Hollywood is also not new. I mean, I think in the s there were a bunch of literary and play adaptations that are completely dominating. I mean, you know, everything is new and nothing is. So we've looked into a wide range of genres and and filmmaking styles when discussing the mainstream. I'll be curious to find out what my care has had to think on there. On the mainstream is concluding point, I guess. To me what I would say is that mention cinema to me is very interesting because the way in which I watch cinema, the main motivation for me is to see it as a cultural object. You know, what does it say about the time and place it was made in? And, in the case of main stream movie, what does it say about that that it is mainstream? I outst movies also interesting in that way because they can show more obscure parts of society, more outsider elements. That I think mainstream films have that quality that they really tell you what the values and the ideas that are are going on at a time in the place. So...

I think we talked about those are pray and you can look at a bunch of Hollywood films of this Area Right now, in twenty years, and you can say, oh, yes, obviously feminism was a big subject. You know whether or not it was done well in such and such movie is not a question, but it's just interesting to look at and I think generally that is what I find most interesting. And mentioned cinema. What does it say about us that this is mainstream? It's a good point that Matthew mentions about mainstream cinema looking about values and society and things that are commonly held up. In terms of my viewing mainstream cinema, not particularly fascinated with it in general, but then it's a fluctuating term. I think it there's always going to be fluctuating. So what is mainstream, what is a mainstream, will change over time. One thing which I think was mentioned the podcast, which is a very good point, is budgets and being allowed to make different sort of films something's popular enough to be dem mainstream, as well as the whole ideal with a sequels and building on themselves. And some sequels out there are really good. A lot of them try and copy the original or try to out do the original rather than actually present something new. Some of them are worthwhile, some of them may be less worth while. I don't avoid mainstream cinema, it's not something where I'm looking while the first platinum or a water I want to get on. I checked movies is the box office list, sort of like the last platinum award that I want to get. Like Sol I don't avoid mainstream cinema, but it's never usually a priority for me. I think it's clear that mainstream cinema has a lot of merit, not just for being it a gateway for most film fund into the world of cinema and kindling that initial passion, but for the ability to create cinema on a grand scale that perhaps wouldn't be possible with out the backing of major studios. There is a lot of forgettable fair that is chained out by the studios, but every once in a while they are capable of producing cinematic gems that resonate with the masses as well as those who are more tuned to the artistic attributes of the film that they see kept. So we hope you have enjoyed listening and would love it if you would join us from next week's episode, where we will be exploring the fascinating world of modern science cinema and how today's filmmakers use new techniques and styles to breathe fresh life into the medium's humble origin. You have been listening to talking images, official pathcare of ICM forumcom higher on this griff there's wanted to drop in for a tiny cameo. Got To be an all them and let everybody know that. If you join us again next week, the films will be discussing will be filent movie, Archie her is Marquis, you hut, the call of cut roulem brand upon the brain, Dr Plan Lantana, the artist, and rocky wis. See. Yeah, joing us again next time, and let's roll the end credits again. You have been listening to the talking images, the official pathcare the ICM FORUMCOM.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (54)