i love reading reviews for exactly what you name here, to get another person's perspective and opinion. whenever i finish a book or movie i am quick to look up reviews and i read both ones that align with my stance on the media and ones that differ, because it's interesting to me to see people's differing interpretations, and to see what i have missed or what the reviewer has missed or picked on based on their own life experiences and tastes.
Terrific take. "Cinephilia" as syndrome rather than natural becoming is one of the many pathologies social media had plagued the world with. I like how you evoked Barthes' Mythologies but I also think you glossed over the mythological aspects of Cannes/film festival as a whole (?) too quickly. The paradoxical historicization of Cannes, putting it in a veil of its "historical significance" and selling it as such alongside, as you've mentioned, glamour and vivacity, filmmakers and producers, talents and critics, leaves a mythological vacuum where there reserves "special" spots for "true cinephilia", a VIP of sorts, and from that imbalance of powers, hierarchies form. This returns in the pop culture of "let people enjoy things", a rudimentary slogan in a bid to upend this imaginary hierarchy they themselves have mythologized into existing, and as Rosenfield had already pointed out in their article, it is only used to defend megacorporate, well-established, prolific (hence profit), capitalist charttoppers that had always already cemented itself as a globetrotter. This in itself is another myth, that TV shows alike, say, Game of Thrones aren't just pixels forming imageries that flash across LED screens in quick succession, but something organic in which the human body can impose itself unto. Hereby forming an opinion that MUST be defended, that MUST not be challenged, that MUST be mythologized to bring the show's status into existence, setting aside its massive commercial success (as with Coppola, Cronenberg, Lanthimos, Nolan, Tarantino, Anderson, Scorsese, and the same 50 film festival directors). All very anthropogenic, arrogant behavior. Cannes then, seeks to hide its true self under its historical myth from being a manufacturer, who manufacturers labels (and syndromes) that contain "cinephilia" in the mix. But what of local festivals? Or equally celebratory spaces that haven't been able to mythologize itself as well as Cannes or Berlinale or Venice or Sundance or TIFF? What of the Asia-Pacific festivals (MWIFF, HKIFF, BIFF, MIFF, Golden Horse, Kaohsiung, to name just a few), Vancouver DOXA, Portugal FEST, and countless others? How many of these do you have to go to to "love movies"? Something to be mindful of rather than just hyperfixating on the easy targets.
However, our differences of opinions end there. I wholeheartedly agree that criticism is always generative (despite all the talk and debate on what's "constructive" and what's not. "Deconstructive" criticism, in itself is a fascinating subject into the human psyche, defaulting itself to criticize just for the sake of it, but why so?) and should always be welcomed. We hold on to our opinions all too strongly, and yet my enjoyment of your piece is not soured by my criticism of it. Such is the life of a "movie lover". I hope you had more fun in Cannes than those who spend their time making sure everyone has had their dose of mandatory fun.
i love reading reviews for exactly what you name here, to get another person's perspective and opinion. whenever i finish a book or movie i am quick to look up reviews and i read both ones that align with my stance on the media and ones that differ, because it's interesting to me to see people's differing interpretations, and to see what i have missed or what the reviewer has missed or picked on based on their own life experiences and tastes.
Terrific take. "Cinephilia" as syndrome rather than natural becoming is one of the many pathologies social media had plagued the world with. I like how you evoked Barthes' Mythologies but I also think you glossed over the mythological aspects of Cannes/film festival as a whole (?) too quickly. The paradoxical historicization of Cannes, putting it in a veil of its "historical significance" and selling it as such alongside, as you've mentioned, glamour and vivacity, filmmakers and producers, talents and critics, leaves a mythological vacuum where there reserves "special" spots for "true cinephilia", a VIP of sorts, and from that imbalance of powers, hierarchies form. This returns in the pop culture of "let people enjoy things", a rudimentary slogan in a bid to upend this imaginary hierarchy they themselves have mythologized into existing, and as Rosenfield had already pointed out in their article, it is only used to defend megacorporate, well-established, prolific (hence profit), capitalist charttoppers that had always already cemented itself as a globetrotter. This in itself is another myth, that TV shows alike, say, Game of Thrones aren't just pixels forming imageries that flash across LED screens in quick succession, but something organic in which the human body can impose itself unto. Hereby forming an opinion that MUST be defended, that MUST not be challenged, that MUST be mythologized to bring the show's status into existence, setting aside its massive commercial success (as with Coppola, Cronenberg, Lanthimos, Nolan, Tarantino, Anderson, Scorsese, and the same 50 film festival directors). All very anthropogenic, arrogant behavior. Cannes then, seeks to hide its true self under its historical myth from being a manufacturer, who manufacturers labels (and syndromes) that contain "cinephilia" in the mix. But what of local festivals? Or equally celebratory spaces that haven't been able to mythologize itself as well as Cannes or Berlinale or Venice or Sundance or TIFF? What of the Asia-Pacific festivals (MWIFF, HKIFF, BIFF, MIFF, Golden Horse, Kaohsiung, to name just a few), Vancouver DOXA, Portugal FEST, and countless others? How many of these do you have to go to to "love movies"? Something to be mindful of rather than just hyperfixating on the easy targets.
However, our differences of opinions end there. I wholeheartedly agree that criticism is always generative (despite all the talk and debate on what's "constructive" and what's not. "Deconstructive" criticism, in itself is a fascinating subject into the human psyche, defaulting itself to criticize just for the sake of it, but why so?) and should always be welcomed. We hold on to our opinions all too strongly, and yet my enjoyment of your piece is not soured by my criticism of it. Such is the life of a "movie lover". I hope you had more fun in Cannes than those who spend their time making sure everyone has had their dose of mandatory fun.