Seth Paxton
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 1998
- Messages
- 7,585
My point was, or was trying to be , "how can you tell".
How does this group differentiate from cinephiles who just happen to appreciate these films? Liking the film itself can't be enough. Are you implying that you know of a group of people who clearly don't normally appreciate good cinema but noticebly grabbed on to these particular films?
I understand the idea of people having more interest in going against the grain, especially in the angst years between 16-24, but how do you identify them against a backdrop of true cinephiles who happen to love these films? (and the extended set of films that I understand you imply exist beyond your examples given).
It sounds a tad bit like "I see these cool guys with their (whatever outfits) hanging out (whatever place) talking about how they love these films like it makes them so cool to know something that no one else does", which might be more a judgement of how they look and act and who they hang out with than their actual film tastes.
It seems likely to me that cinephiles in the 16-24 range tend to already be in outsider groups by the very nature of the hobby. The average person, young or old, just doesn't get into film to that extreme and to do so at an age when image is so critical can make a person an outsider, which they may or may not play up in defiance of the judgement levied on them.
And there is a natural kinship with other people who happen to have seen a lesser known film that they also enjoyed. That can seem cliqueish but I don't think it lessens their real enjoyment of the film.
What you are saying is that if these films were more popular they would be less popular because the people supporting them only do so because they are less popular in the first place??? Sounds contradictory to me.
And how my post relates to Donnie Darko I'm not really sure. :b
How does this group differentiate from cinephiles who just happen to appreciate these films? Liking the film itself can't be enough. Are you implying that you know of a group of people who clearly don't normally appreciate good cinema but noticebly grabbed on to these particular films?
I understand the idea of people having more interest in going against the grain, especially in the angst years between 16-24, but how do you identify them against a backdrop of true cinephiles who happen to love these films? (and the extended set of films that I understand you imply exist beyond your examples given).
It sounds a tad bit like "I see these cool guys with their (whatever outfits) hanging out (whatever place) talking about how they love these films like it makes them so cool to know something that no one else does", which might be more a judgement of how they look and act and who they hang out with than their actual film tastes.
It seems likely to me that cinephiles in the 16-24 range tend to already be in outsider groups by the very nature of the hobby. The average person, young or old, just doesn't get into film to that extreme and to do so at an age when image is so critical can make a person an outsider, which they may or may not play up in defiance of the judgement levied on them.
And there is a natural kinship with other people who happen to have seen a lesser known film that they also enjoyed. That can seem cliqueish but I don't think it lessens their real enjoyment of the film.
What you are saying is that if these films were more popular they would be less popular because the people supporting them only do so because they are less popular in the first place??? Sounds contradictory to me.
And how my post relates to Donnie Darko I'm not really sure. :b