In every culture, no matter how democratic, no matter how open free speech is; there'll always be unspoken, unwritten rites of passage that must be obeyed with only ostracization as an alternative if we disobey(and sometimes even when we DO obey)them. And since this is true for real cultures; it is also true for sub-cultures; or in this case; the fan-boy wanking pulpit that is film-making aesthetic integrity.
I however, have NO reputation to lose, therefore, it's my duty to face ostracization for what I am about to say.
Independent films, and their maker's, are festering Cancer's on film, and should be discarded the way Roman's threw Christian's to lions.
We're told by them, that we HAVE to like independent films, without question, and that even if we dislike just one, or don't go see it; then we are all rednecks who eat Mcdonald's and listen to rap, that's what they say, and it's become an inalienable right of passage that we must agree. Disgusting.
It never occurs to them, that the people who dislike their swill have REASONS. It never occurs to them that that person DOESN'T like Mcdonald's or rap music, it never occurs to them that the people who hate their film's are huge enthusiast's of independent cinema who just didn't like one particular work, or that that person could be an artist, maybe even just an armchair intellectual; nope. According to them; if you dislike just ONE independent film, then you are automatically a redneck who eat's fast food and listens to rap, end of story. The people who iterate such opinion's call themselves's artists; I call them Nazis.
Now, don't get me wrong, I hate big-budget Hollywood crap as much as they do, in fact, anyone who knows me knows my disgust with remakes and those so-called 'parody' movies which don't parody anything. However, those are justifiable reason's for hating Hollywood, and you never hear those from Indie fans. They say it's about denying artistic freedom, it's not. It's supposedly because Hollywood makes bad film's, it's not, even though there are bad Hollywood films, undeniably.
Such was the case with 'Delgo' which I saw month's ago. The story was so unoriginal it was appalling, the animation looked similar to, but worse than those direct-to-DVD Barbie movies, with character's that looked like speculations of what evolved animal's would resemble. I don't even remember much about it, was probably the only person there, save this woman yakking on her cell phone while her kids ran around, and some sleeping geezer who kept having night terrors about someone named Charlie, he was much more entertaining.
Yeah, I hated it. Unfortunately, it was a indie film, and thus, I suddenly found myself branded a redneck who eats Mcdonald's and listens to (c)rap by decree of the grand Dragon of Indie film. I'm not kidding, check the positive reviews for this film, particularly the ones that have ONLY reviewed 'Delgo', SOMEONE has been paid to write them. Also hate the defense that 'Delgo' is better than any other animated movies because it's indie, how does that make something good or bad? I judge something on how well it entertains me or appeals to my sensibilities, how can you say 'Delgo's' better than 'Wall-E'? I know, everyone say's it's because everyone at Disney are fat-cats so we shouldn't see their movies. Who cares, honestly? I would have hated John Wayne if I'd met him, but that doesn't stop me from loving his acting. How is 'Delgo' any better, if 'Wall-E' is bad because it succeeded? The producer of 'Delgo' is some millionaire who financed it as part of a proposed trilogy intending to make millions; so what's the difference between 'greedy' Disney and this dude? Simple, his film didn't make money because of bad advertising, so he complains like a baby about it, and calls us a bunch of idiots who can't understand 'Art'. Jesus, if he'd spent as much advertising 'Delgo'(or better yet, trying to write a good story and making a good movie; after all, this film is 'Art' that I'm too dumb to get and 'Wall-E' was just drivel for the masses made by fat-cats who don't care about quality, right?)as he's spent complaining about it's failure then maybe someone would've actually gone to see it.
I admire filmmakers who try and gain artistic freedom without studio distribution. But that doesn't automatically make EVERYTHING indie into 'Art', in most cases, it's because the filmmakers are bad spokesmen. Ask yourself, what's worse: A greedy millionaire's film you can judge on it's own terms, or a greedy millionaire's film that you HAVE to like or get called a simpleton?
Lastly, I really hate how 'Delgo's defender's defend it as being Anne Bancroft's last film, and call us hypocrites for going to see 'The Dark Knight' because it was Ledger's last film(actually, it wasn't and most didn't)and not going to see 'Delgo'. That is just a pure bad taste defense and proves that the makers of 'Delgo' are the REAL greedy whores, they just couldn't make a halfway decent film like the other ones. It's also clear from the fact that this review has been down-voted by 7 people within the space of a day on this heretofore slow-moving board that the filmmakers are wise to me, and are fraudulently down-voting my review, all they're doing is proving my point. Let the hate flow, fan-boys.~
I however, have NO reputation to lose, therefore, it's my duty to face ostracization for what I am about to say.
Independent films, and their maker's, are festering Cancer's on film, and should be discarded the way Roman's threw Christian's to lions.
We're told by them, that we HAVE to like independent films, without question, and that even if we dislike just one, or don't go see it; then we are all rednecks who eat Mcdonald's and listen to rap, that's what they say, and it's become an inalienable right of passage that we must agree. Disgusting.
It never occurs to them, that the people who dislike their swill have REASONS. It never occurs to them that that person DOESN'T like Mcdonald's or rap music, it never occurs to them that the people who hate their film's are huge enthusiast's of independent cinema who just didn't like one particular work, or that that person could be an artist, maybe even just an armchair intellectual; nope. According to them; if you dislike just ONE independent film, then you are automatically a redneck who eat's fast food and listens to rap, end of story. The people who iterate such opinion's call themselves's artists; I call them Nazis.
Now, don't get me wrong, I hate big-budget Hollywood crap as much as they do, in fact, anyone who knows me knows my disgust with remakes and those so-called 'parody' movies which don't parody anything. However, those are justifiable reason's for hating Hollywood, and you never hear those from Indie fans. They say it's about denying artistic freedom, it's not. It's supposedly because Hollywood makes bad film's, it's not, even though there are bad Hollywood films, undeniably.
Such was the case with 'Delgo' which I saw month's ago. The story was so unoriginal it was appalling, the animation looked similar to, but worse than those direct-to-DVD Barbie movies, with character's that looked like speculations of what evolved animal's would resemble. I don't even remember much about it, was probably the only person there, save this woman yakking on her cell phone while her kids ran around, and some sleeping geezer who kept having night terrors about someone named Charlie, he was much more entertaining.
Yeah, I hated it. Unfortunately, it was a indie film, and thus, I suddenly found myself branded a redneck who eats Mcdonald's and listens to (c)rap by decree of the grand Dragon of Indie film. I'm not kidding, check the positive reviews for this film, particularly the ones that have ONLY reviewed 'Delgo', SOMEONE has been paid to write them. Also hate the defense that 'Delgo' is better than any other animated movies because it's indie, how does that make something good or bad? I judge something on how well it entertains me or appeals to my sensibilities, how can you say 'Delgo's' better than 'Wall-E'? I know, everyone say's it's because everyone at Disney are fat-cats so we shouldn't see their movies. Who cares, honestly? I would have hated John Wayne if I'd met him, but that doesn't stop me from loving his acting. How is 'Delgo' any better, if 'Wall-E' is bad because it succeeded? The producer of 'Delgo' is some millionaire who financed it as part of a proposed trilogy intending to make millions; so what's the difference between 'greedy' Disney and this dude? Simple, his film didn't make money because of bad advertising, so he complains like a baby about it, and calls us a bunch of idiots who can't understand 'Art'. Jesus, if he'd spent as much advertising 'Delgo'(or better yet, trying to write a good story and making a good movie; after all, this film is 'Art' that I'm too dumb to get and 'Wall-E' was just drivel for the masses made by fat-cats who don't care about quality, right?)as he's spent complaining about it's failure then maybe someone would've actually gone to see it.
I admire filmmakers who try and gain artistic freedom without studio distribution. But that doesn't automatically make EVERYTHING indie into 'Art', in most cases, it's because the filmmakers are bad spokesmen. Ask yourself, what's worse: A greedy millionaire's film you can judge on it's own terms, or a greedy millionaire's film that you HAVE to like or get called a simpleton?
Lastly, I really hate how 'Delgo's defender's defend it as being Anne Bancroft's last film, and call us hypocrites for going to see 'The Dark Knight' because it was Ledger's last film(actually, it wasn't and most didn't)and not going to see 'Delgo'. That is just a pure bad taste defense and proves that the makers of 'Delgo' are the REAL greedy whores, they just couldn't make a halfway decent film like the other ones. It's also clear from the fact that this review has been down-voted by 7 people within the space of a day on this heretofore slow-moving board that the filmmakers are wise to me, and are fraudulently down-voting my review, all they're doing is proving my point. Let the hate flow, fan-boys.~