Hmmm, I thought this was LOVE fest...

Wild Imagination Films

Wild Imagination Films

Well-known member
Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend were all well represented. Love, however, was left out in the cold in most of what I watched. So My question is, if the Fest is about Love, then how can a film be considered eligible if the theme isn't met?
 
Lol, Barry was clear, that with this movie being due at Valentines that romantic love was desired, but they would accept other forms. It's clear that people seemed to have wanted to do anything but romantic love.
 
My Gal Pal was the exemplary of romantic. If that is accurate, so far I can count, on my hand, qualifying entries.

But, most did involve tangible depictions of a certain type of love.
 
Yup. Love can be painful. It can tear you apart. Jason's story shows us the pain of losing someone while they die from a wretched illness. My Gal Pal took us back to the 80's when love was still innocent and Brat Pack silliness abounded. Wait a minute, they still make those kind of movies don't they. Dustin showed the sacrifice a man was willing to make to save someone he loved. And others, in their own way, touched on the bittersweet, difficult, awkward ways love touches us all.
My question was about the films with infidelity and (in at least two of them) murder. Why, with so much talent and obvious ability on hand, did people chose these themes?
 
It's not pretty or pleasant but it is just as legitimate to explore the negative or contrary forms of love as it is the positive.

Yeah, I just used an obnoxious Robert McKee reference. Booya.
 
Zak Forsman said:
mmmmm.... is it because they're morally bankrupt?
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.

No, I think it's because, (stick with me here) when this contest was announced, you could hear the collective groan. Then the inevitable Porn v Love questions. How much is too much etc. Then it was all cleared up. The theme is Love and you have to have a camera and viewing starts on Valentines day.
So what happened next was the tendency for people to see how far they can push things before they get caught, yelled at, DQ'd.
So we played hide and go seek with the cameras. But unsatisfied and not really wanting to make a "love story" about romantic love, it became affairs and cheating and eventually murder.
We do tend to behave like little kids. "Can't I stay up just five more minutes?" "Can't I make my love story about a man and a woman who hate each other so much they would rather kill one another than just walk away?"
I guess we were all too cool to make one of those sappy love stories. (Obviously not meant for those of us who made sappy love stories)
If the next fest is action movie fest, I think I'll make mine about inaction. It's kinda like action, but without all the movement. Like love stories without all the love.:thumbsup:
 
Jared Meyer said:
It's not pretty or pleasant but it is just as legitimate to explore the negative or contrary forms of love as it is the positive.

Yeah, I just used an obnoxious Robert McKee reference. Booya.
Click to expand...

See, this is what I'm talking about. Why do we have themes, or required elements, if we can then rationalize "exploring the negative or contrary?"
I ask, because I was recently in a film contest in which the winning entry had nothing to do with the genre of film they had been assigned.
If the rule stipulated love, how does hate constitute adherence to the theme. If the rules stipulated a camera must be in one scene, how does a pan past it during the credits count? I'm asking these questions in all sincerity as I must have missed the "theme/ props are optional" memo.
 
this is an interesting topic, worthy of discussion. imo, i think the filmmakers looked for conflict, because out of that they knew they would find drama. was it all incredibly original? nope. did some latch onto clichés and obvious devices. a few. but were their characters still motivated by their want or need of love or a lack thereof. i think so. i really do. in every instance. it can't all be wedding cake, right?
 
Last edited:
This thought opens a very large can of unruly worms. Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element? Glad it's 5am Texas time while I'm pondering this question. This way I'm not really awake and therefore not responsible for a real answer.
 
Wild Imagination Films said:
Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element?
Click to expand...

i think so. because the lack of a thing doesn't create a void, it isn't "nothingness". it's filled by an antithesis (or anti-thesis). my feeling is that a thesis about a lack of faith, teaches us about faith. a thesis about a lack of communication teaches about communication. a thesis about the lack of love, teaches us about love. of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be good or effective storytelling.
 
Last edited:
Zak, go to bed, you're not getting the jokes anymore.
Recap:
Will- Can the lack of an element satisfy the need for an element
Zak- Blah blah blah "yes," blah blah blah "the lack of love points out love" blah blah blah.
Will- I really hope the next fest is Action Fest.

I'm out, gotta shoot in a couple of hours and I haven't slept in a couple of days.
 
jokes, huh.
ohbfrank.gif
he's a regular groucho marx, this guy.
 
For a film to work it should jog certain work-shy neurons. You can't set narrow guidelines according to what only you understand of the theme. Some of the more naive interpretations lost the game early on for me.
 
Last edited:
Wild Imagination Films said:
Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend were all well represented. Love, however, was left out in the cold in most of what I watched. So My question is, if the Fest is about Love, then how can a film be considered eligible if the theme isn't met?
Click to expand...

It's not Represent True Love fest.

It's a fest that has to do with love and relationships. No one said that every film had to have TRUE LOVE in the movie to qualify. That's an EXTREMELY narrow interpretation, and narrow interpretations are the opposite of what these fests are about.

It's not about making 50 movies that have the same point of view.

Sometimes one person loves another and gets shafted. We have some of those movies, we have some where the most noble parts of the human spirit are brought to bear. So you could have cheating and whoring and killing by one party while the other blindly adores them.

But again, no one said it had to be real love, true love, pure love, good love, the best in man kind love.


I think most people tried to make movies rich in conflict that had to do with wanting, needing, being blinded by, driven to extremes by, hurt by screwed over by love.

And if you look in the dictionary you will find lots of definitions of non-platonic love that don't have anything to do with Meg Ryan and Tom hanks find at the end of a movie and have a helluva lot to do with

Wild Imagination Films said:
Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend ...
Click to expand...

1.a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person. 2.a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend. 3.sexual passion or desire. 4.a person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart. 5.(used in direct address as a term of endearment, affection, or the like): Would you like to see a movie, love? 6.a love affair; an intensely amorous incident; amour. 7.sexual intercourse; copulation. 8.(initial capital letter
thinsp.png
) a personification of sexual affection, as Eros or Cupid. 9.affectionate concern for the well-being of others: the love of one's neighbor. 10.strong predilection, enthusiasm, or liking for anything: her love of books. 11.the object or thing so liked: The theater was her great love. 12.the benevolent affection of God for His creatures, or the reverent affection due from them to God. 13.Chiefly Tennis. a score of zero; nothing. 14.a word formerly used in communications to represent the letter L. –verb (used with object) 15.to have love or affection for: All her pupils love her. 16.to have a profoundly tender, passionate affection for (another person). 17.to have a strong liking for; take great pleasure in: to love music. 18.to need or require; benefit greatly from: Plants love sunlight. 19.to embrace and kiss (someone), as a lover. 20.to have sexual intercourse with. –verb (used without object) 21.to have love or affection for another person; be in love. —Verb phrase22.love up, to hug and cuddle: She loves him up every chance she gets. —Idioms23.for love, a.out of affection or liking; for pleasure. b.without compensation; gratuitously: He took care of the poor for love. 24.for the love of, in consideration of; for the sake of: For the love of mercy, stop that noise. 25.in love, infused with or feeling deep affection or passion: a youth always in love. 26.in love with, feeling deep affection or passion for (a person, idea, occupation, etc.); enamored of: in love with the girl next door; in love with one's work. 27.make love, a.to embrace and kiss as lovers. b.to engage in sexual activity.


Should we have called it passion fest?

And what do you think all those people that are cheating and horring and killing are doing it for. Either in response to the lack of romantic love, being hurt by it, or being driven to extremes by it.

Now you can argue that real love doesn't make you do that, to which I would say two things
  1. So what. Again, no one said it had to be noble, pure, good, and grand love fest.
  2. If you want to get specific about it, the Ancient Greeks used three different words for love: Eros, Phiia, Agape.
    • Eros (erotic) having to do with intense burning sexual desire.
    • Philia having to do with a fondness of (but less selfish) and intense feeling of loyalty beyond friendship such as for family members, but again more absent of selfish longing.
    • And Agape drawing on the both Philia and Eros ... an intense attraction and passion for but without the need for reciprocity, in other words not selfish ... not something that would drive you to malicious acts.
It seems like you are advocating an All Agape Fest. But since the Festival Planners and coordinators did not specify one vs. the other and since they screened and admitted 50 films as qualifying based on the criteria they set forth ... I'd say every single official entry and even the non comps I've seen so far have to do with the theme of love in some form, or the fallout that can be caused by too much or too little of it.
 
Wild Imagination Films said:
This thought opens a very large can of unruly worms. Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element? Glad it's 5am Texas time while I'm pondering this question. This way I'm not really awake and therefore not responsible for a real answer.
Click to expand...

It's not even one worm and he's far from unruly because the physical absence of THING X in a film does not mean X is absent as a theme.

If we had GOLD FEST, and some filmmakers made a film about pirates that died trying to get it and failed, or an old prospector that went mad looking for it and never found it. Or a conman who got conned by someone else on the heist and wound up stealing aluminum bars painted gold, or another prospector that went mad and thought he'd found gold and tried trade donkey feces (which he thought was gold) for goods at the general store, those films would still deal with the THEME of GOLD and how it can affect you even though nary a nugget, bar, or coin was present.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top