 |
| Miami Vice (Michael Mann, 2006) |
The following post was originally developed in a graduate seminar I
participated in earlier this year on the state of contemporary cinephilia. I originally
became interested in exploring Vulgar Auteurism after researching and talking
to Ignatiy Vishnevetsky for a podcast. So for a half dozen weeks, I watched the “canon” of Vulgar Auteurism and read every post, comment,
tumblr, and criticism that had been written on the subject. What I have developed below is part of a project that I hope to bring to next year’s
conference for the Society of Cinema and Media Studies. However, because Vulgar
Auteurism has become somewhat of a hot debate after Calum Marsh’s Village Voice piece on the subject, I’ve decided to post a partial part of my work on the
subject in order to give a full context and understanding how we can learn about contemporary cinephilia from the movement. As always, all feedback and comments are appreciated.
September 14,
2012 was a day of major anticipation for cinephiles that follow contemporary
cinema. It was the official opening of auteur Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master (2012), a historical psychosexual
epic shot in 70mm with two larger than life performances. However, there was
another group of cinephiles excited for another release by Paul Anderson…Paul
W.S. Anderson. Anderson’s Resident Evil:
Retribution (2012), the fifth film in the zombie franchise starring Milla
Jovovich, was released in 3,000 theaters without a single review to its name.
For most critics who later watched the film, Retribution was a slog (Rotten Tomatoes describes the consensus:
“[the franchise] seems to get more cynical and lazy with each film”).[i]
But this set of very special cinephiles saw not just silly entertainment, but
one made with as much craft and care as The
Master. Ignaity Vishnevetsky, in his review at Mubi, argues, “Anderson is uncynical. His work is eye stuff:
entertainment that rewards the viewer for watching rather than for being
clever.”[ii]
Critics disagree on films all the time, but what is going on with Retribution, and many other disregarded
films of its like, is a new trend in cinephilia. Welcome to Vulgar Auteurism.
Since
Jonathan Rosenbaum called cinema dead and cinephila the next step, critics and
academics have spent countless words trying to define “contemporary cinephilia.”
Some of this issue, perhaps, is that defining contemporary cinephilia as a
whole is an impossible task—one must encompass bloggers, democratization,
torrent cultures, DVDs and Blu-Rays, mashups, podcasts, social media, and the vast amount of stuff. To better
understand cinephilia, I propose that instead of making an encompassing vision,
we should instead take an in-depth examination of a small sect. Certainly, the
cinephiles who laud and champion Vulgar Auteurism fit that definition.
