For the past year now, I've been watching pretty much every film on the site and I'm pleased to say that I've enjoyed many of them. Lately however, I've noticed a marked increase in highly dramatic films or "emo" films. While these films aren't necesarilly poorly made films, I don't find the repetitive nature of all this media to be enticing in any way. I don't know what caused this sudden increase.
I don't mind a little emo every now and then, but it seems as though almost everything is now about death or relationship troubles and whatnot. While most of the people who submit to these forums are moody teenagers like myself, I previously didn't believe that depression could hit so many people at once.
Understandably, the recent tragedies in the US are a extremely unfortunate and depressing event, but all the same, what's with all this emo? Even before all that happened, I was seeing a dramatic upsurge in films dealing with suicide, death, depression, and romantic troubles. So basically, I just want to know what possessed everyone to make all this? And, can we stop? It's too much...

Makes sense, if you ask me...I mean, a lot of our most classic films are downers, so why shouldn't student films follow suit? Hell, even It's A Wonderful Life was one of the most depressing movies I've ever seen...(except for the end, obviously)

Yeah, but most of these aren't very good

I agree, student films have been doing waaaay to much of this lately. I suppose the directors want to be more deep and serious, so as to be taken seriously. But it doesn't work. The acting typically is not of a standard where one should be tackling these subjects yet.

This thread makes me happy. If only the teen emo kids who made these kinds of films would read this and listen...

Emo isn't depression...Emo is gay. Or at least on its way. I'm with you, though. There have been quite a few "depression" films coming in lately. I wish to see some more clever and funny work, like Ace Ramano, or Spring Heeled Jack, even the new Dead Shift. Enough of these "feel sorry for me" types. I notice the more deep and serious a director usually goes, the more crappy the movie turns out. Or if the movie isn't bad in its technical aspects, then its just plain not fun to watch. And that's what the whole aspect of a "movie" is. We don't make them to make a statement, people, we make them for entertainment. Not for political persuasion, or to show other people what is going on in our heads, or to tell us what is wrong with ourselves. Well, actually, that's how movies are nowadays, what ever happened to the classics? To the days when people went to the movies to watch a great movie? Long gone I guess. But yes, the depression wave is getting old, fast.

i think its funny when amateurs try to go dramatic. i mean the hearts there but there still amateurs trying to act like pros. and tehy definately arnt pro. i'm not ready to make drama films, so i dont try untill im ready. people here should think about that.

and emos gay.

Dudes, calling emo gay is doing a diservice to the gays. Now that's gay.

elliott...

dont tell me what a film should (or shouldn't) be, show me

'Emo' is short for emotional you tards. Emo shouldn't even be a genre, but apparently it is in music now. Eventhough all good music should evoke emotions from within. But a lot of young dorks try to be all serious and depressing with their movies and yeah, it's cheezy, because these people aren't masters of their art yet. Plus it's just so trivial and it's been done so many times without much originality. So it's boring.

This site definitely needs more creative movies like the ones done by Harris, and the movie Ace Romano. Those were actually entertaining and fun to watch. But it's still possible to do an entertaining creative movie that's still deep, but they're harder to do. I've yet to see some of these here. I'm on it.

Tards? Ha!

Thankfully I haven't fallen into this trap, I stick to making things I know I'm capable of pulling off (mostly comedies). Besides, you don't have to make a drama or "emo" film to be considered a good filmmaker, which is what a lot of young filmamkers tend to think. The comedy genre is often overlooked and underestimated (in my opinion) because it is generalized as the "safe" genre that anyone can pull off. However, GOOD comedy is very difficult to write. Very few studentfilms, and hollywood features, for that matter, that are classified as "comedies" are actually funny.

Yeah, I made a drama-- er 'emo' short. I wasn't made just because I wanted a depressing short, it was more because the concept was brewing around in my head for a while that I had to do it... But I think after that, my friends and I are going back to action-comedies we always do. The stuff we're actually good at.

Emotional Tard.

Retarded, gay or handicapped homosexual at least those films are attempting to say something. I love Spring Heeled Jack and Ace Ramano but they don't really say much at all, just tounge in cheek cheekiness! Harris makes no bones about it and he'll be the first to admit that its pure entertainment and good sh*t cause at least he has a clear vision. Now Hariss knows I'm a fan, but imagine if he used those talents to make a real statement. Of course Spring Heeled Jack has more reviews than all my work put together so what do I know!

From now on in my work I'm working to create a balance of entertainment with emotional content that actually says something. And when Killswitch says "We don't make them to make a statement, people, we make them for entertainment" I sort of shudder at how he underestimates the power of film to motivate, express and empower people beyond just making them giggle or say "wow that explosion was cool"

So my next movie is about a handicapped lesbian that is suicidal that just happens to be a stand up (sitdown) comic who has to save an orphanage. And she's a hitman. And a drug dealer. And she smokes in slow motion. It's called "Flameing Wheels of Emo"

This message has been edited. Last edited by: REDking,

hahah: tards.

I'm not saying that films can't be used to make statements, I'm saying that films aren't supposed to be used to make statements. They are made so you CAN go "Whoa, that explosion was cool" and go and see it again. Because when I go see a movie, I want to see something that'll make me feel like I just saw a kickass movie and make me want to go see it again. I don't want to see a movie that tells me how bad the president is, or how depressed most of America's youth is, or any of that crap. I want to see **** explode. With a vengance.

That's also YOU... Some people feel the need to express something in a media that reaches so many people. I personally love dramady... I find the perfect mixture of comedy and drama is the best thing that can happen. I personally just finished working on a drama-ish script... Although its for a competition... I think the judges will like it and theres a 10,000 dollar scholarship involved... :-p... But really, don't bash just because they do something dramatic. In order to get GOOD at it they need to practice at it... Anywho... :-)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dickens,

I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling this way. I didn't wanna come off as too much of an idiot. I think everyone has the right to make whatever films they want, I just wanted to make my voice heard. Oh and by the way, you think "tard" is amazing? For once and only once in this special one time deal only, just this one time, once, you get to witness the brilliance that is......
Mortard (n. or adj.)

Noun: One who is extremely stupid and/or dumb.
Man, Jimmy is such a mortard. He shouldn't have eaten that baked bean burrito before attending his grandpa's funeral.

Adjective: Used to describe the pitiful and or stupid state of something or someone.
Those emo films are so mortarded. I can't stand them.

Yeah so anyways, home grown original smooshed up bastardization right there.

quote:

In order to get GOOD at it they need to practice at it

I'm a firm believer that if you don't have it, you never will. Some people are able to grasp a better perspective of 'worldliness' than others. The reason student filmmakers suck so badly at dramatic films is because they're grown up in the comfort of their own middle-class homes and don't understand where the subject of their movie stands in relation to everyone else.

By worldliness, I'm referring to one's ability to place himself in context of the world--where he (and his film) fits in terms of the lives of everyone and his surroundings. Good filmmakers are able to create an idea that can everyone can relate to and not just certain emotional subjects that interest only the filmmaker, or 'emo' films.

Student films are just that, films made by teenagers. When the filmmaker is emotionally immature, so are his movies. It's hard to make a film that sways the audience to tears when you just cried for two hours because your prom date turned you down.

Take Crash for example. It was an emotionally powerful film because we live in a world that suffers from racial prejudice. Everyone can relate to losing something or someone close to them, which is another channel this film goes through, and therefore the audience knows the intention of the film and respects it.

I have a feeling there are two or three different kinds of student drama filmmakers. 1, the ones who want attention, and 2, the ones who suffer from a conflict and want to express it themselves. Neither are successful--no matter how hard that breakup was with your girlfriend, nobody here gives a sh*t about it.

People don't walk into a movie theater looking to be emotionally moved or swayed. They're looking to be entertained, and that's your first priority. This is the entertainment business, and if you're not looking to entertain, you shouldn't be a filmmaker.

A good film (n.)

Noun: one that is witty, clever, sophisticated on one level or another, inspiring, powerful, but moreover entertaining.

Teenager (n.)

Noun: Person, Young and immature, clumsy, unsophisticated, socially inept, uninspired and lacks proper perspective on the world he lives in.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: funkbomb,

I generally side with Clark's point about actions over words, but I feel some of the comments on this topic need to be addressed. I find this recurring advocacy for entertainment over ideas both depressing and alarming. It seems to go without saying that film is no less an art form than any other and thus a venue for expressing ideas and emotions. True, a good deal of art can be appreciated solely for its technique (from Pablo Casals to Helmut Newton), but without ideas or emotion behind it, the work is dead on arrival. Even some of the more popular "spectacle" pictures are propelled towards the climax by a build of emotional content and the character's pursuit of a certain idea or belief. What's dangerous about film is that there is so much smoke and mirrors for filmmakers to hide behind that they can get away with not truly exposing themselves in their work. I am certainly not saying that ideas and emotions automatically make the work "better" than others, but in my mind it is more noble than simply trying to please your audience for whatever length of time. That ultimately serves no one.
The fact is that the headrush of "see(ing) **** explode with a vengeance" in a "kickass movie" can be reproduced through masturbation or good Swiss chocolate. There is no substitute for content.