When it comes down to it, Hollywood keeps its eye on the bottom line. Artistic vision, social commentary, emotional poignancy, the provocation of thought, even originality, are all expendable in the name of profit -- in fact, they're often too dangerous... [more]

When it comes down to it, Hollywood keeps its eye on the bottom line. Artistic vision, social commentary, emotional poignancy, the provocation of thought, even originality, are all expendable in the name of profit -- in fact, they're often too dangerous to address at all. Over the past 30 years, Hollywood has developed a set of movie templates which, if they don't guarantee box office success, at least stack the odds in the studio's favor. If a film concept doesn't fit a template, its chances of being produced in Hollywood grow slim. As a result, big studio films tend to be somewhat predictable reworkings of past movies, which were themselves derivative. The American Independent film movement sallies forth against this tide of mediocrity, reinvesting originality into films. The films are independent because they are made (ideally) on the premise that the director is the auteur and has ultimate artistic control over the final product. Uncompromising, without the same level of concern for financial success as studio productions, Independent filmmakers strive foremost to preserve the integrity of their artistic vision. Orson Welles, Sam Fuller, Ed Wood, and John Cassavetes were early pioneers of the Independent movement. Famous (or infamous) for their trench warfare against studio executives over control of their films, these men carved out the artistic space that would later be occupied by the likes of John Sayles, Hal Hartley, Jim Jarmusch, Allison Anders, Gus Van Sant, John Waters, Gregg Araki, Quentin Tarantino, Radley Metzger, and many others. Of course, many major studios, in an attempt to capitalize on the newly burgeoning Independent film market, have created Independent spin-off companies that are actually anything but. Perhaps the Independent movement will, like a virus, gradually infect Hollywood, causing it to look away from the commercial value of filmmaking. Conversely, Hollywood could corrupt the Independent film movement, offering more money than even an idealistic filmmaker can ignore. The battle that has been brewing -- and it could be for the very soul of the industry and perhaps for the film audience itself -- will continue to be waged in the coming years. Regardless of the results, some interesting films will come out of it. [show less]