James here with Wednesday’s News Reflections!
One of my favorite writer/director teams of recent years is Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman (strike that, reverse it), responsible for ‘Being John Malkovich’ and ‘Adaptation’, thoughtful, poignant movies about creativity and other dreadful things. Kaufman and Jonze, as explained in a SlashFilm article, are reuniting for an untitled satire (not the title, of course, but it tickles me to think that it could be). Apparently it’s “about how world leaders gather to figure out all the seismic events that will take place in the worlds [sic, maybe?], from oil prices to wars that will be waged.” Which is a lovely concept.
Which is what I love about these guys: They don’t skimp on big ideas.
I see a disturbing sensibility in too many creatives; the lack of enthusiasm for really off-the-wall ideas, genre-bending or genre-less concepts that are so interesting in themselves that they buy the audience’s attention from the get-go. As a cinephile, uniqueness is way at the top of my subconscious list of things to look for in a potential viewing experience. I don’t go to very many films or watch too much television. I’m James the Unmerciful, mediocre filmmakers beware. In truth, I do try to look for the good things in film in general and in specific movies, even bad ones. This is why my reviews typically are of cream-of-the-crop stuff. I’m a picky eater. I realize many folks are casual in their relationship with the cinematic arts, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay to make films for the lowest common denominator. Bad movies either fade or live in infamy, and when they achieve the latter they often define their creators’ reputations. Not a place a creative wants to work in, unless you’re Tommy Wiseau.
It’s entirely possible to execute a great idea horribly, but it’s always better to start with the best ingredients, even if you bake the cake too long. At least you (or someone else) can use the recipe later, and people might even forgive you for it. In the business of screenwriting, I get it that producers like to buy stuff that duplicates the latest big thing in spirit, but there’s always the question, “How did that popular thing get made?” Somebody has to take a risk, and it might as well be the writer. If the writer takes big artistic risks but doesn’t skimp on excellence, and if they show tenacity, their work might get sold and the project’s distinctiveness could very well carry over through the process. There’s never a guarantee of a big hit. There’s that Hollywood aphorism that “Nobody knows anything”, and there’s some truth to that. Nobody knows absolutely what will get a massive audience and a billion dollars. If we knew, we’d be Harry Seldon.
I recently watched a documentary on the composer Philip Glass, and he said something along these lines: “If you don’t have to invent a new technique, chances are you don’t have anything new.” So instead of recycling the latest garbage, try for something absolutely insane. If you get nervous or wise, you can always tone it down later. Creativity is a gamble, but it pays to bet radically, let the chips fall where they may. At least an attempt is made to rise above the mediocre. The world needs more bizarre untitled satires, chronologically mismatched film noirs, movies based on dream logic with ambiguous endings, and something that only exists in your brain, or else I’d reference it here obliquely. Big ideas stick with us, and they stick with their creators, and audiences get stuck on them in turn. It all rolls into a giant ball of timelessness we like to call Classic Cinema.