What’s with that indie vibe?
Do you want to be a filmmaker or a wannabe filmmaker? (Manila Bulletin/Unsplash)
Remember when Martin Scorsese criticized Marvel movies as “not cinema?” It was a divisive statement because superhero films were at their highest point then. Almost everyone loved them.
Almost.
Some people hated both superhero films for being too crowd-pleasing (*cough* mainstream *cough*), and Scorsese for being a much-lauded boomer (*cough* mainstream *cough*). Most who took this stand, perhaps unsurprisingly, branded themselves as “indie artists” — young filmmakers who want to make a mark and change the scene.
The thing is—and I don’t say that this is true of every indie filmmaker out there—but this kind of perspective is flawed on so many levels, particularly because it is a disservice to the very art these indie film folk presumably venerate. Because whether Marvel’s films conformed to some standard of what makes for good cinema or not, these flicks drew in crowds.
Droves.
They commanded attention the likes of which indie film makers are (probably) secretly dying to have.
This also doesn’t mean that the famous director didn’t have a point. For cinema, at least according to what has been considered as artistic, goes beyond being just a CGI fest.
Before “indie” became a brand of filmmaking, it was simply an adjective that described films produced without the financial backing of some big production company. Made independently, often by filmmakers trying to make ends meet by spending from their own pockets or from the generosity of like-minded folk - they enjoyed a freedom from some corporate oversight. And since the need to recoup an investment was *ahem* out of the picture, indie films started to appear more artistic and appeal to a more “discerning” crowd.
Indie films were suddenly the standard of what a film should be.
But are they?
Over the years, many filmmakers who started out in the indie world have since moved to the mainstream, or have started their own production companies. Considered carefully, this is a natural progression. After all, every filmmaker, indie or not, wants their art to be seen and enjoyed by many. Anyone who says that they make films just so to upload it on a personal YouTube and watch it in their free time is not being honest to their craft and to the audience. Every film is made to be seen, not by some but by many, by everyone if possible.
In this sense, the goal of every indie artist or filmmaker is to be mainstream, to be exposed to a larger audience, to be appreciated by the like-minded, and to be felt by the like-hearted. Not just to be watched by those who “understand” their craft.
What is the point of filmmaking if a film’s beauty cannot be appreciated? The reality is, this usually goes hand-in-hand with a more practical concern: for the film to make money. There isn’t anything wrong with that.
As has been argued by better minds so many times before, perhaps it is time that we do away with the whole branding of what is “mainstream” and what is “indie.” Perhaps it is time that we do away with pretensions. This is advice I offer to young filmmakers or to anyone considering to progress in the craft— just make films of considerable quality. Branding it indie or mainstream shouldn’t really matter.
Unless of course, indie-ka “feel maker.”