Yesterday, we figured out that a conventional movie was a Hollywood movie : a kind of movie with some stereotypes, huge actors and, generally, a known story and a known way to tell it.  Conditioning the viewer to see everything like this don’t help him to open his mind to another kind of cinema.  However, this situation can hardly change, because the American cinema takes so much place on the market that other countries have difficulty to promote their films worldwide.

Now that we’ve talk about Hollywood cinema and its stereotypical way of making movies (by following a winning formula in a desire of making money and entertain), let me ask you some questions :

• Why is a movie obligated to follow a storyline?
• Why does a movie needs to be efficient and entertaining?
• Why should we make movies always in the same way?
• Why is a fast rhythm considered like entertaining, and a slow rhythm, boring?

There are movies that are really slow, with almost no storyline, no entertainment, but they can be considered as captivating and great. 

Why?  Because they bring up original ideas and they try to find different ways to tell it. 

A movie can be made to question people, to express a reflexion, to experiment techniques, etc.  Thus, a movie isn’t entertainment anymore.  It becomes art.

Most people aren't open minded to unconventional movies.  This fact isn't new.  However, to allow this kind of movies to continue to exist, it has to change.

A conventional movie is what we see the most in cinema today: a Hollywood movie.  I'm not saying they're always conventional: nevertheless, they are too often produced in the only purpose of making money and follow a formula (for example, there's a hero and a bad guy, they confront themselves and here comes the happy end).  Entertainment, efficiency is the priority.

We can't blame American cinema for being what it is.  However, it's just too bad that it takes a lot of place on the market and doesn't let other countries (like France, England, Sweden) to promote their cinema.  Maybe people would like French movies better if they were crossing the Atlantic more often.

BRAINWASH

If some people watch only Hollywood movies, they start to create expectations into their minds, and they begin to be conditioned to it.  Slowly, they forget that a different way of making movies exists.  This explains why, when an unconventional movie arrives, people reject it.

To illustrate my point, let me show you the example of a war movie.  After having watch these kind of movies, people expects that it has to be entertaining, have a lot of action, define who are the good and the bad and, finally, show some patriotism. 

So, the viewer conditioned to this way of thinking, arrives in front of The Thin Red Line and says: where's the action?  Who are the bad guys?

The Thin Red Line is a one of a kind war movie.  It's an American movie, but...

- there's no patriotism

- bad guys could be the Japaneses OR the Americans, but mostly the human nature

- the rhythm is very slow

Worse than all, the viewer has to wait until 42 MINUTES to hear the first explosion!

Also, there are a lot of Hoolywood actors (Woody Harrelson, John Travolta, George Clooney, Sean Penn, just to name a few), but there's no star.  John Travolta appears only 4 minutes in the film, and George Clooney, 2 minutes.  

So, the conditionned viewer will say that the film is bad because the rhythm is too slow, there's no action and great actors are reduced to cameos.

However, they probably won't see that the film presents a huge reflexion on war and human nature, that pictures  and voice-over are poetic, and that the peace portrayed is universal and very moving.

In brief, people conditioned to Hollywood movies is a vicious circle: 

This has to change.  That's why, in this blog, I'll write about, at least two times a week, different and original cinema.  But for now, the next publication will be an introduction to what it is.