Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
The industrial definition of indie (especially American indie movies) is a distraction. most people looking for those movies are just looking for a certain type of film, in terms of feel and theme: something not overtly genre based (or if it is, a tendency to deal with it ironically, ie Tarantino: Coens, etc) and leaning towards contemporary 'realist' subject matters. It's probably better just to think of a lot of it as American youth-oriented arthouse cinema. There are obvious examples that contradict that but generally, when I think of an American Indie movie, that's what I'm thinking of. Sofia Coppola would make 'indie' movies regardless of who financed them, IMO.
|
I can't tell if you mean they aren't/weren't indie cos they very much were.
TBH you've got to hand it to Miramax and Sundance for being able to get a bigger audience for those films. Films that only 5-10 years before would've struggled were able to get the audience they very much deserved. Whilst, as with every subculture, it's been taken, ravaged and morphed to an unidentifiable beast the indie is still alive. It's just that the major studios have pretty much bought all the more reliable indie ie/smaller film companies out there and it's difficult to find the greats now.
Actually that's wrong to a point. The internet has been a great help in finding the films we would never have seen or heard of before. And if we had it would only have been in film magazines then nothing more.