Todd’s Movie Blog

I have always considered that people who love movies are just film fans, like sports fans, you have your favorite type and you might be sectioned off into a sub set like football fan or baseball fan/ horror fan or western fan, but you are essentially still considered a fan. But for some reason people can’t just leave it at that. I was over at Jim Emerson’s site last week and came upon this article that really bothered me. He was talking about an article by Dan Bordell that puts “true” film fans into one of two categories, cinemaniacs and cinephiles.

Here is the part of Bordell’s article that bugged me, “… I do see differences. For one thing, most cinemaniacs like only certain sorts of movies–usually American,often silent, sometimes foreign, seldom documentaries. Do cinemaniacs line up for Brakhage or Frederick Wiseman? My sense is not.

Cinephiles by contrast tend to be ecumenical. Indeed, many take pride in the intergalactic breadth of their tastes. Look at any smart critic’s ten-best lists. You’ll usually see an eclectic mix of arthouse, pop, and experimental, including one or two titles you have never heard of. Obscurity is important; a cinephile is a connoisseur.”

How many of us fit into either of those two definitions?  I know I don’t and it bugs me that there is a contingent of people who are pushing their own views about fandom being the only type there is.  Emerson himself in his article about the article says there is nothing wrong with not being either of these types, yet then goes on at great length to voice his fears that he is slipping from being a cinephile to a cinemaniac and equates it to converting from Catholicism to Episcopalianism.

And there in lies the problem, that belief that one way is better than another way.  We need to stop alienating people with elitist attitudes about film and just like what we like without forming value judgments about somebody  who prefers Highlander to Citizen Kane.  It is possible to enjoy both Fillet Mignon and hot dogs (though usually not at the same meal).

I like Kevin Smith, he is one of the few major film makers from my generation that isn’t pretentious or boring as a person.  He seems rather normal and has been able to maintain his normalcy even while working in the craziness of Hollywood. I’ve liked all of his films, with the exception of Jersey Girl (I’m just not a romantic comedy kind of guy) and his books, his college lecture tour DVD’s and his interview with Stan Lee.  Now it seems Smith has added a new title to his burgeoning resume, film critic.

Before Ebert and Roeper was officially canceled, Smith had occasionally appeared on it as a special guest critic during Ebert’s surgery.  I enjoyed the novelty of it but thought that that was just a one time thing.  Apparently not. Smith has popped up on online chat shows talking about movies (his thoughts on the direction the next Batman movie should take were very interesting) and now he has been allowed to see secret screenings of both Watchmen and the new Star Trek (he gives rave reviews for both without revealing any spoilers).

Some guys have all the luck.  He has a beautiful wife, beautiful daughter, owns his own production company and comic book shop, gets paid lots of money to do what he likes and to top it all off, gets to indulge his ubergeekness for free.  If he wasn’t such a great guy I would hate him.

Instead of writing the last post I should have just gone to a true fan and had it all explained to me. I was at work the other day and mentioned to a friend my confusion about the whole Anakin/ Padawan situation. He pointed out to me that you don’t have to be a Master Jedi to have a Pawan, you just have to be a jedi Knight, siting the end of The Phantom Menace as an example, Obi Wan Kenobi is made a Knight and takes Anakin as his Padawan. He then went on to explain that there is an implication at that the end of Attack of the Clones that Anakin is made a Knight for his battle with Dooku, and that in the beginning of Revenge of the Sith he is obviously not a Padawan anymore as he doesn’t have the buzzcut/ Padawan rat tail hair style. Being only a casual fan I missed those subtleties. So I now retract my comments about the confusion over Anakin having a Padawan in The Clone Wars, that now makes sense. As for my comments concerning the cynicism and greed on the part of the film makers, those things I still believe.