'Mumblecore' and the indie-rock analogy

I went to the "Generation DIY" panel discussion at New York's Soho Apple Store last night. Hosted by the great Eugene Hernandez of Indiewire, it featured director Joe Swanberg and actress Greta Gerwig, of LOL and the just-premiered-in-NY Hannah Takes The Stairs; blogger, Premiere reviewer, bon vivant, close personal friend and Fish Kill Flea co-director Aaron Hillis (who's also added DVD entrepreneur to his gallery of hats—I'll get to that); writer/director Aaron Katz, whose Dance Party U.S.A. and Quiet City are among the best pictures to come out of the so-called "Mumblecore" scene; and Matt Dentler, a producer of the South by Southwest arts festival, which has premiered a good number of films by members of this not-quite-movement, which has recently been the subject of pieces in The Village Voice and The New York Times.

It was a lively, informative panel, and during the Q&A portion Andrew Grant (the blogger behind Filmbrain and the founder of Benten Films, the DVD label he's co-running with Mr. Hillis, whose inaguaral release, a well-done disc of Swanberg's LOL, streets next Tuesday, and by the way, do you think this post could use more hyperlinks?) asked the panel what they made of a recent, perplexing blog post by Anthony Kaufman which stated that "[i]f these films are hyped, they may be doomed" because the hype might attract people who really liked Superbad and will hence be disappointed in the low production values of the average "Mumblecore" film, or something. Okay, I'm oversimplifying—"[D]o these films stand a chance in the real theatrical marketplace?" he asks.

When Dentler addressed the issue, he pointed out that Andrew Bujalski, director of Funny Ha Ha and Mutual Appreciation and kind of the spiritual godfather of "Mumblecore," is now writing a script for Scott Rudin, and that what with such things taking place while Kaufman's promulgating his particular position, it reminded him of what goes on in indie rock when a band achieves some commercial success outside of that willfully insular world. "It's like when people would say, 'Oh, The Shins sold out when they let their song be in a Zach Braff movie' or something," Dentler observed.

Which cracked me up, not because Dentler's point was off, but because the notion of The Shins selling out, which has in fact been "hotly" debated,  is kind of ludicrous. Unless you're coming at it from the perspective of, well, a hipster jackass. I mean, The Shins make what anybody would agree is reasonably accessible pop-rock. The music draws from a tradition that's not so muscularly represented on the airwaves or the Billboard charts as it used to be, true, but it's not like these guys are Henry Cow or something. There's no earthly reason they shouldn't go after the biggest audience possible by whatever means desireable or deemed necessary. Actually, there's no earthly reason any other musical artists, from Britney Spears to Smegma, shouldn't go after the biggest audience possible. And there's no reason the "Mumblecore" filmmakers shouldn't do the same. Not to mention make some kind of a living from their work. Aaron Katz told the audience at the panel last night that Dance Party U.S.A. cost about $3,000 (and a bunch of unquantified favors) to make. Not to sound like some kinda freaky free-market libertarian or something, but why shouldn't he seek to earn that money back via the product of his labor?

The key phrase is "biggest audience possible." Which you can't necessarily discern by hiding your goods under a bushel of in-crowd love. Insofar as I understand the term, "selling out" means betraying your own principles for profit. It does not mean betraying the untested principles of a portion of your early audience that, for some particular and likely pathological reason, believes it owns you.

Comments

[CBO]

These movies blow. On to the next trend please, one that doesn't involve preening hipsters engaging in lazy improvs about their oh-so-complicated love lives. Puke. If these movies have anything musical analogy it would be Pop-Punk, Mall-Punk, that Green Day, Blink 182 bullshit. Seen it before and seen it done much better. I'd rather stay at home and watch the films of Luc Moullet. As Jimmy Caan would say: Middle-class bourgoise horseshit.

[Peter Debruge]

Kudos to the trend-setters keen enough to spot these fringe acts early on (Glenn, both you and Aaron Hillis have always had an aptitude for sussing out such talent), but shame on those who turn their backs on them when they finally catch on with audiences.

It makes sense with a restaurant -- loving a quiet, undiscovered place where you could always get a table, only to stop patronizing when a NYTimes review brings in the throng -- but why would anyone wish to make a filmmaker's ongoing obscurity a condition of their enthusiasm? And yet, it happens all the time.

It'll certainly be interesting to watch what happens with the Mumblecore crowd. The handheld, shot-on-video quality and use of non-professional actors (it's probably more fair to call them "non-recognizable actors") is so much a part of their aesthetic, I can't help wondering how working with a budget will impact the result.

Take "Hot Rod," a symptom of a separate (but not altogether different) group, where a scrappy comedy team who excels at shoestring web-based shorts finds themselves not quite adjusting to the resources a studio picture provides. They may not have "sold out," but they're well on their way to losing touch with the qualities that attracted Paramount to doing business with them in the first place (namely, an ability to generate laughs).

I've seen only a few of the Mumblecore movies myself, but I'm rooting for the Duplass brothers (whose excellent Puffy Chair pretty much nails my generation in a way no $30-million ever picture has). I'm curious to see whether working with the Weitz brothers (American Pie) results in any sort of artistic compromise.

Personally, I expect the opposite. Having access to experienced industry professionals should give the Mumblecore crowd a leg up at making movies that earn enough for these guys to keep making movies. And, worst case scenario: If they end up producing a brain-dead commercial hit that's well beneath their potential, their newly expanded audience may go back and re-discover the early films only a select crowd currently knows about.

When it comes to any film or director's popularity, I say the more the merrier.

[Cinephile]

Dear Mr. Kenny,
Thank you for this great piece, and especially for the last two paragraphs, as succinct and elegant a dismissal of that exhausted, mendacious ideology as one could hope for.

[Talking Moviezzz]

As a Gen Xer who worshipped Linklater's SLACKER, I don't know what to think of the whole "Mumblecore" movement.

While I love Bujalski's FUNNY HA HA and MUTUAL APPRECIATION, I didn't care for THE PUFFY CHAIR.

Just this afternoon I saw HANNAH TAKES THE STAIRS and, well, I just wish Swanberg had used better microphones. And as for the film, you can praise the style all you want, but the characters had very little if anything of interest to say or do.

Maybe I am just too old, but, while I admire what they are doing, it wasn't for me.

[Dentler]

You're right. The Shins was a poor example in what I feel is an otherwise appropriate analogy. Personally, I think the lo-fi and experimental spirit of someone like Joanna Newsom or Antony and the Johnsons, would probably be closer to what "mumblecore" represents: truly personal work that is inaccessible to some/most. The indie-rock parallels are plentiful, from blogs to distribution to demographics. But yeah, The Shins are pretty darn catchy.

Thanks for coming to the panel!

- MD

[don]

You're spot-on GK. It's not selling out to want to have as many people as possible see your film and *gasp* make enough money to not have to order off the McDonalds value menu everyday. A long time ago I think it was Juliana Hatfield who said (when confronted about "selling out") something to the effect of "the glamour and romance of sleeping on people floors for your art kind of wears off after 5 or 6 years."

[WP]

Mr. Dentler--I agree with you that some work is, as you say, "truly personal," and therefore by its very nature not appealing to everyone or even to most people. But there's this other, more artistically dangerous attitude, held less by artists themselves and more often by fans and occasionally critics, that there's some kind of inherent nobility in being inaccessible, and that mainstream approval constitutes a betrayal of one's core fan base. Being one of the first to know about a band or a movie or a movement conveys a sort of false sense of exclusivity, an idea of oneself as extra-clever or uniquely sensitive to the culture. Once the band/movie/movement starts to pick up steam, the exclusivity disappears, and it's much easier to blame the artist for "selling out" than to admit that one's sense of running with the cool kids was always kind of empty. This is completely the nature of consumer culture, and I'm certainly not immune--I have a closet full of abandoned purses and dated-looking shoes to attest to this--but it has very little to do with the art itself.

[y0m0mma]

Talking Moviezzz nailed it. Always suspected that Linklater's debut film would have a lot to answer for, but never imagined that the gestation period would be 16 years or whatever. Seriously, would y'all stop using the m-word, too? It's really a lame tag and I don't understand how you can say it out loud and not feel ridiculous. Finally, I'm going to offer that the musical parallel is really the freak-folk movement that has spawned Devendra Barnhart, Wooden Wand and that ilk. Lo-fi, incestuous, navel-gazing meditations of first world problems.

Whit Stillman, where are you when we need you most?