September 21, 2005
Asia. Who's watching? And why?
"What is it about the American market that makes it so resistant to Asian movies, or conversely, what is it about Asian movies that makes them so difficult for the American market to absorb?" asks Grady Hendrix. Of course, he's thinking on a broad, popcult scale, as he points out several examples of films that have become major hits around the world but have gotten next-to-nowhere in the US. "Are we getting left behind?" he wonders, or in other words, are we stewing in our own overcooked juices only to be puzzled as movie attendance slumps.
Still, Asian movies are obviously all the rage among a certain set, and Nick Rombes has a few ideas as to why that might be: "So many of the gestures of the 'invisible' style of the classical Hollywood era - ranging from traditional narrative arcs, cause and effect, character development and identification, the masking of the apparatus of filmmaking, a generally realist sensibility - all these features that have been deconstructed (and sometimes mocked) by academics and others have returned with a vengeance in Asian cinema, in films ranging from Spider Forest, to Ringu (Hideo Nakata, 1998), to Ju-on (Takashi Shimizu, 2000), to A Tale of Two Sisters (Ji-woon Kim, 2003)."
The appeal of these films, Nick suggests, is that they hold out "a myth counter to our own New Tyrannical Myth, which holds that every story deserves a good deconstructing." There may be something to this, but I can't help but think that those who are enthusiastic about films in this vein, which buy into an established genre with every last cent, are often also enthusiastic about Asian films that don't. Works by Tsai Ming-liang, say, or Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Jia Zhangke and so on. I'm thinking of the constant flow at Twitch, for example, where the giddy anticipation for a wide-ranging mix of films from Asia is not only infectious but even baffling at times in its multifariousness. Or look to the "East Meets West" issue of Reverse Shot, where a piece on Oldboy is a click away from another on Café Lumière.
There may be, as Andrew Tracy suggested in that issue, complex or even uncomfortable things going on in any given cinephile's attraction to Asian films (note that "the lure of exoticism" pops up in Tracy's first sentence) while the rest of the country either ignores or is never or rarely exposed to them, but there may also be something as simple and as mundane as the sheer pleasure of discovery going on as well.
Posted by dwhudson at September 21, 2005 3:05 PM
Great articles.
Folks often ask me why I love Asian films so much, and I often respond by singing the praises of Asia's more extreme films, be it OldBoy, etc. But I can't help but wonder if we Asian film nuts haven't shot ourselves in the foot a bit.
By constantly singing the praises of the more extreme Asian films - be it Jackie Chan's kung fu hijinks, Park Chan-Wook's bloody revenge sagas, Miike's gross-outs, the recent tend in J-Horror films, etc. I know I'm certainly guilty of that. And for obvious reasons - those films are very unique. Try as they might, Hollywood has never been able to film an fight sequence that quite measures up to the insanity in a classic Jackie Chan movie.
I wonder if all of this has an effect opposite of what we intend. Sure, it gets films like that in the public awareness, but I wonder if such vocal acclaim causes the public to associate "Asian cinema" with only the more cult-ish, extreme end of the spectrum. And since those films tend to appeal to a more niche audience, the public unfortunately ignores and writes off the rest.
Posted by: opus at September 22, 2005 3:17 PMDoh... that's what I get for posting before finishing up the edits. The last two paragraphs *should* read...
"We often sing the praises of only the more extreme Asian films - be it Jackie Chan's kung fu hijinks, Park Chan-Wook's bloody revenge sagas, Miike's gross-outs, the recent tend in J-Horror films, etc. Not every fan might, but I know I'm certainly guilty of that. And for obvious reasons - those films are very unique and unlike anything else out there. Try as they might, Hollywood has never been able to film an fight sequence that quite measures up to the insanity in a classic Jackie Chan movie.
But I wonder if all of this has an effect opposite of what we intend. Sure, it gets films like that in the public awareness, but I wonder if such vocal acclaim causes the public to associate "Asian cinema" with only the more cult-ish, extreme end of the spectrum. And since those films tend to appeal to a more niche audience, the general public unfortunately ignores and writes off the rest."
Posted by: opus at September 22, 2005 3:25 PMI think there could be something to this idea, Jason, in that, particularly among fellow fans, we tend to drive each other towards the edge: "You thought X was wild? Wait'll you see Y!"
At the same time, though, I wouldn't want to tweak my own taste for the good of Asian cinema (and I realize that's not what you're saying). I'm reminded of an entry Girish posted at his blog a while back about what sort of recommendations you'd give to someone interested in foreign films and he made a comparison to jazz. In other words, if a friend says, "I'm kind of interested in jazz, but it's a little weird to my ear - what's good?" You don't hand them Ornette Coleman. Same way, I don't think any of us would hand a curious novice Izo.
But amongst ourselves...!
Subscribe to GreenCine Daily RSS
Subscribe to GreenCine Daily by email
