Meta-Cinematic Cultism: Between High and Low Culture Fátima Chinita Lisbon Polytechnic Institute, Theater and Film School, Portugal
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
AVANCA Meta-cinematic Cultism: Between High and Low Culture Fátima Chinita Lisbon Polytechnic Institute, Theater and Film School, Portugal Abstract Nevertheless, both approaches describe the mechanisms of filmmaking; it is essentially the focus Meta-cinema can depict film viewers’ attitudes and the goals that change in each case, but filmson- towards cinema and their type of devotion for films. film tend to be more descriptive. As examples of the One subcategory of viewers - which I call meta- first variety one could mention The Man with the spectators - is highly specialized in its type of Movie Camera (1929, Dziga Vertov, USSR), and consumption, bordering on obsession. I contend that Contempt (1963, Jean-Luc Godard, FRA/ITA). As there are two main varieties of meta-cinematic examples of the second kind one can point to Sunset reception, not altogether incompatible with one Boulevard (1950, Billy Wilder, USA), and The Player another, despite their apparent differences. As both of (1992, Robert Altman, USA). Laurence Soroka (1983) them are depicted on meta-cinematic products, the proposes a synthesis between the two approaches, films themselves are the best evidence of my adopting the expression “Hollywood Modernism” to typology. My categories of film viewers are the refer to artefacts that obey a hybrid aesthetics: they ‘cinephile’, an elite prone to artistic militancy and the are simultaneously self-conscious about the form adoration of filmic masters; and the ‘fan’, a low culture (enunciation) and manifest a thematic reflexivity that consumer keen on certain filmic universes and their exposes the meanderings of filmmaking (7). He respective figures and motifs. I will base my rationale includes in this category The Last Movie (1971, on four films that portray such reception practices: Dennis Hopper, USA) and Singin’ in the Rain (1952, Travelling Avant (Jean-Charles Tacchella, 1987, Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, USA), two absolutely FRA), The Dreamers (Bernardo different products. As the prefix ‘meta’ - derived from Bertolucci, 2003, UK/FRA/ITA); Free Enterprise the Greek word μετά, which refers to a cognitive (Robert Mayer Burnett, 1998, USA); Fanboys (2009, activity centered on itself - indicates, there is not Kyle Newman, USA). necessarily a single way for films to be ‘about’ the cinema in general. Keywords: Film Reception, Cinephilia, Fandom, It is my contention that meta-cinema addresses the Cultism, Meta-cinema. strong attraction that film has always, since its inception, exerted on filmmakers and audiences alike. Meta-cinema as intense cinematic devotion In this broad scenario, making a meta-film could be a way for creators to question their own artistic Although regularly met with in academic discourse, propensity or the nature of their engagement in the the idea of meta-cinema is not entirely uncontentious. activity. The essence of cinema has a magnetism for On the one hand, it is considered a film practice creators of different periods of history, geographical derived from modernism, for all purposes synonymous locations, and cultural traditions. In a certain measure, with self-reflexivity. For instance, William C. Siska meta-cinema is a form of authorial discourse, provided (1979) claims it is a practice that evinces the essence the cinematic depiction takes place throughout the film and structure of the film proper and not the subject or as its main subject, rather than just as a setting; and the story: the production and reception apparatuses provided that cinematic techniques of filmmaking and are shown in the films in order to break the audience’s film viewing are exposed to a substantial extent. The empathy with the characters and the action (287-289). audience, likewise, is deeply engaged with cinema, as According to Kiyoshi Takeda (1987), meta-cinema is a an entertaining activity or a mesmerizing force. radical and experimental film category which stresses Viewers appreciate seeing themselves in films and the materiality of the film rather than immersion in the love to know the inner secrets of the activity; some of story (89). Both theoreticians place the process of them become true connoisseurs of films and cinematic enunciation above its narrative result. On the other praxis or, on the other hand, the resulting filmic hand, meta-cinema may also refer to the conservative universes. practice of making films about the industry, which has There is a complicity between these filmmakers and become known as “films-on-film” or the “Hollywood- film viewers: a meta-cinematic communication which onHollywood” film genre. Robert Stam (1992) points becomes more important in films that specifically out that these films approach cinema as an institution portray specialized reception. These films have to and a technical and artistic process including its address very different spectators, if they are to cover inherent operations (171).1 Nicholas Schmidt (2007) the complete gamut of meta-viewing. However, all considers that such artefacts can be embedded meta-films about film reception share a common trait: narratives, depicted as film showings or shoots, as they portray cinema as a passionate and engaging well as a critical portrait of the agents of production. In medium that tends to arouse a strong compulsion in these cases the narrative result is paramount. its viewers. These films portray the meta-viewers as being endowed with a more poignant love for the 28 – Cinema movies than the average viewer who also, in his/her cluster of ideas. These classic cultists devoted their own way, ‘loves’ films. The specialized affection of the entire lives to watching as many films as possible and metaviewer and the way it has been addressed in writing about them in specialized magazines such as certain films is the main subject of this article. Cahiers du cinéma and its rival publication, Positif. Two opposing types of film cultism The writing was as important as the film viewing because it was a way to remember the primordial act I contend that this strong meta-cinematic affection of watching every single film. The cinephiles’ is a form of cultism, covering apparently opposing obsession with the films extended to the practice of types of meta-reception. Usually the expression ‘cult compiling lists about almost anything related with movie’ is associated with artefacts of dubious quality cinema: filmmakers, films, particular objects such as and/or bizarre aesthetics, thus carrying a pejorative posters and photographs, and so on. connotation.2 Bruce Kawin, actually, claims that they In De Baecque’s opinion, all of this points to a are subversive films projected before a transgressive counter-culture, endogenous and protected from audience, and that the eventual lack of quality is a by- outside intervention. At the time there weren’t as many product of the wish to induce a strong artistic or technological channels to view films and interact with ideological impression on the viewers. This implies them or because of them as there are now, but that they are niche products valued not because of certainly the essence of the activity was the same. their essence but rather because of their difference. There is, nevertheless, a difference: whereas the However, mainstream films and/or films directed by classic cinephile watched films on a big screen, taking artistic hallmark filmmakers are also applicable as cult full advantage of the apparatus and considering the films. Federico Fellini’s 8 ½, (1963, ITA/FRA) the film theatre a sort of religious temple, the 21st century Coen Brothers’ Barton Fink (1991, USA/UK), Spike specialized viewer is able to appropriate the object in Jonze’s Being John Malkovich (1999, USA), Orson a more physical way, tampering with it or molding Welles’ Citizen Kane (1941, USA) and F for Fake himself or herself to it, if he/she so wishes. French (1973, FRA/Iran/West Germany), H.C. Potter’s cinephiles of the fifties, a young generation of viewers comedy Hellzapoppin’ (1941, USA), Alain Resnais’ marked by its youth, formed a close community of Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959, FRA/JAP), Olivier cinematic twin souls. It is no wonder that this Assayas’ Irma obsession and form of artistic militancy turned many of Vep (1996, FRA), Haskell Wexler’s Medium Cool them into the most successful filmmakers of the next (1969, USA), David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive (2001, decade in France. François Truffaut and Jean-Luc FRA/USA), Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom (1960, Godard, for instance, derive from this sort of elite cult UK), Preston Sturges’ classical comedy Sullivan’s and both would go on to direct meta-films. In Travels neighboring Italy and in Germany, to where this (1942, USA), and Billy Wilder’s Sunset Boulevard affiliation had spread, other people also professed (1950, USA) are all straightforward meta-films who themselves to be born filmmakers, truly obsessed have come to be considered cult movies, either in with the nature of the cinematic medium and their own specialty books or sites such as Imdb, Rotten attraction for it (take, for instance, Federico Fellini and Tomatoes and Wikipedia. Therefore, I adopt the word Wim Wenders). ‘cult’ as synonymous with revered and proceed to It is from this professed cinephilic community that explain how the so-called ‘love of movies’ has no most of the meta-cinematic films stemmed. According specific pedigree. to Jean-Paul Tőrők (1978) and Frédéric Sojcher (2007), it is only natural that filmmakers should a) The sanctity of cinephilia dedicate at least one film in their directorial career to this concern. In fact, some of the most influential In its colloquial meaning, the word ‘cinephilia’ directors in many countries have done so repeatedly, 3 expresses no more than a severe attraction for films, building a notorious meta-cinematic oeuvre. Jean-Luc which is induced by the cinematic apparatus itself and Godard, who is usually known as ‘Monsieur Cinéma’ can strike pretty much everyone.