October 11, 2007
Wilma, please stay whimsical
“We are going to continue to show movies,” said Rick Wishcamper of Rocky Mountain Development Group” (Missoulian, Sept. 28). Yes but what kind of movies? Hollywood blockbusters or indies and foreign flicks?
Having lost the Crystal Theater and its independent and foreign movies, “last best place” Missoula may now lose what the French call a cinéma d’art et d’essai (a theater showing different movie types). How different? Movies not conceived and produced by the filmic mass-marketing of the Hollywood studios (the majors.)
The Wilma not only showed sub-titled French, German, Inuit, Irish, Italian, Korean, South-African, Spanish, British and American independent movies, but also political movies and documentaries. These films showed situations and people not pre-prepared, framed, conditioned and streamlined by the Hollywood entertainment behemoth. The Wilma ex-manager Bill Emerson selected films that made a difference. Not only were viewers’ hearts touched, but their mind “moved” too: engaging in post-filmic discussions, they saw the world through different spectacles.
Hollywood ‘ready-mades’ do not produce the same effects on minds and feelings. With some excellent exceptions (the topic of complex academic papers) they are generally predictable, politically correct, or made to induce a quick burst of adrenaline. They are consumption products for the escapism of a public tired by the hustle and bustle of a 40-hour-long workweek or the entertainment of a youth captivated by its own representation.
Why should Missoula have a theater showing different movies? Because Hollywood’s audio-visual politics have three main negative consequences.
a) It closes America’s mind by conditioning Americans to only select its images and narratives. Except for a few channels, foreign films and indies are rare on American screens, creating a vicious circle: the less these films are shown, the less people want to see them—and the more theater managers refuse to program them, arguing that people do not like them.
b) It weakens America’s imagination by saturating Americans with the same type of films. The apparent diversity of titles and themes is but a variation on the same.
c) It closes the American mind to foreignness, since Americans only positively address otherness if exposed to its image. But since foreign movies do not play any role in American popular culture, the majority of Americans tend to ignore otherness. Globalization opened the world to commodities trade. This does not hold true for movies: the exchange is one way. While Hollywood floods the world with images, America only watches a trickle of foreign flicks. America invented a commercial world-culture generating astronomical profits for her industry, but clogging up (American) minds in the process –a first in human history.
America’s palate opened up (Wilma’s smaller cinema will become “a small deli or coffee shop”), but her eyes are wide shut to foreignness. Americans are “exposed” to other cultures, and they consume “ethnic food.” But they snub foreign flicks – save for the occasional, “risqué” Frenchie. Hollywood is to cinema what fast-food is to cuisine. Heavy fast-food meat consumption clogs arteries (Spurlock’s “Super Size Me,” 2004). Watching the same type of images atrophies the mind and petrifies creativity and dreaming capacities. One loses touch with both the inner and outer world. Is this why the American dream seems out of breath?
Is this one of the reasons why only 6 percent of Americans watch foreign movies, only 20 percent own passports? Only a minority of U.S. representatives travel abroad (except for the military, of course). International business relations are not enough to enhance cross-cultural knowledge in the much-celebrated “global village.” They profit a certain class but do not do much to establish a significant cross-cultural appreciation among the peoples of the world. The cheapest and quickest way to understanding of foreign culture is through foreign cinema.
Hollywood films have two Carmike multiplexes. Indies and foreign films have the Wilma. Its new owners/manager must keep the Wilma’s windows open to the world. They owe it to Missoula and what’s left of its “different” culture and culture of difference.
Michel Valentin (Alliance Française de Missoula’s President/ UM associate professor of French.)
Co-signers:
Fazia Aitel (assistant professor of French – Claremont College, California)
Christopher Anderson (UM professor of French)
Samir Bitar (UM lecturer of Arabic)
James Byrnes (Montana elementary school teacher)
Maria Bustos (UM professor of Spanish)
Kathleen Evans (MD – Missoula)
Sean Gibbons (UM student and activist)
Linda Gillison (UM professor of classics)
Christopher Johnson (UM student)
Clare Kelly (Continuing Education)
Mladen Kozul (UM assistant professor of 18th century French studies)
Anna Lokowich (UM ESL Instructor)
Andrew Long (assistant professor of comparative literature – Claremont College, California)
Alan McQuillan (UM emeritus professor of forestry)
Todd Mowbray (UM English graduate student)
Minie Smith (Missoula and environmental and cultural activist)
This story has been viewed 320 times.
Comments
There are no comments for this story yet.
