Posted by TeelaJBrown at user-37kasrg.dialup.mindspring.com on August 27, 2001 at 00:39:33:
In Reply to: Independent My ASS posted by camrenroc21 on August 27, 2001 at 00:17:26:
I've thought some more about what you have said...
What makes a film an independent film vs. a studio film?
Where the money comes from is one criteria and is the one you seem to focus on. If a major Hollywood studio puts up the money for a film to be made, you argue it is no longer "independent". Let's table this for a moment.
You cited another of the criteria for a studio film rather than independent is that you have "bankable" stars in the film. Here I find some fault -- there are MANY stars of Hollywood who participate in low budget films for the art of it, the passion for the role, or other personal reasons. This does not guarantee huge bank for a film. Cameron Diaz is a "bankable" star and yet she made "Being John Malkovich." The film was critically aclaimed, but I wouldn't call it a blockbuster -- and the money came from a smaller studio, if memory serves. Yet, her presence in the film did not draw the crowd of "There's Something About Mary."
You seem to feel that because Kevin has a devout following of fans who love and admire his work, he is automatically not an independent. We are -- sheep, as you put it. You contrast this with the idea that you are an independent because you are in the process of selling a project. I am certain (although, Kevin himself probably needs to confirm it) that Kevin has to go through a lot to sell his projects as well. 15 million for a film to be made is NOTHING in Hollywood these days. Most film budgets range between 30-50. Most films are lucky to make those budgets back. Kevin's film will make the budget back and then some, that is safe to say. Does that make it any less of a risk as "Ghost World", an excellent film I saw recently making the rounds.
I think that there is one criteria you have left out of the mix -- the audience. A studio picture seeks to please all. An independent picture seeks to please the filmmaker and a select group.
Why do most independent filmmakers fail? Because they try to please everyone and end up pleasing no one. Your film has to be something special to someone to get noticed. Kevin has done that. "Jay and Silent Bob" was a film for US, his fans, not the masses. If the general public discovers the film, great! Kevin himself has said that pleasing the fans was most important in making this film. From reading the posts here the last few days, I'd say he has succeeded.
You should be so lucky to have as strong a support system as Kevin has. He is an independent at heart, and will remain so until he starts making Freddie Prinze Jr. movies.
TeelaJ
--unless you are trying to make Freddie cool to us, Kev!