By Scott Shaw
Originally from The Scott Shaw Blog
You know, the fact of the fact is, I could speak or write for days upon days about the reality of making movies. I’ve been doing it for longer than many people have been alive. And, I’ve taught courses on the subject for decades.
…Teaching really becomes the true place of learning as in that environment, the instructor, is constantly presented with new questions from new minds who are seeking to find their own new understandings and truths, which always paves the way for new and different evolutions to be given birth to…
In any case, the thing that I constantly realize, due to the fact that I am frequently confronted with the false reality that is project onto the world by those attempting to decipher what a filmmaker has actually created, is that most film critics are not the ones creating the art. So, a good number of them, never truly comprehend the divine inspiration that comes from the creation of actualizing that artistic something. It seems that all they have the power to do is to speak about the creation(s), created by someone else. And, here lies the clue for those of you out there… If someone is speaking about the creation of someone else, that almost always means that they are not the one creating some truly artistic vision of their own. It is a simple as that. With very few exceptions, the critic is not the artist.
The thing about creation, as can be proclaimed by anyone who has actually created something, is that creation emerges in their mind and then the artist finds a way to make that mental inspiration a reality. Do those who only speak of the creations of others do that? For the most part, no. They just speak about those who have actually created.
In terms of film, partially in the realms of independent filmmaking, creation is never a process where you are, for example, paid to create. It takes a lot more personal and focused effort than that. And mostly, any money comes out of your own pocket.
First, the indie filmmaker, particularly the filmmaker in the no to low budget genres, must initially possess the inspiration and envision their cinematic creation. Then, they must find a way to bring the team together to make it happen. They must also find the finances and the sets and the locations and the equipment and the all of that kind of stuff to bring their cinematic vision into reality. Not easy! I mean, really think about this… Think how much focused creative effort and energy it takes to first develop the idea and then activate the motivation and the skillset and the drive to be an independent filmmaker and bring that cinematic vision into reality. It takes a lot of work!
I always find it vastly amusing how critics go after a filmmaker, especially on the internet, with innuendos that create the illusion of uncertainty about the artist, their motivation, and the reality of their creation. In many cases, they even go after the person or persons who may like the work of a specific filmmaker or their filmmaking creations. But, the artist is the artist, the critic is not. How can the motives of the artist and their artistic truths be questioned? Moreover, why would you wish to hurt the creative process of an artist? What good does that equal? Sure, someone in the Out There may not like what a particular artist has created, but that does not change the fact that the filmmaker, (the artist), actually created that something that the critic did not.
To you film critics out there, and I know there are at least a few of you who read this blog, because you have communicated with me, I’m not saying don’t follow your calling, if you feel film reviewing is what your calling is. What I am suggesting is that instead of simply viewing a film, or some other artistic creation, from the perspective of YOU: what you decide you like or what you decide you dislike, what narrative you wish to add about some creator or someone else’s creation, take the time and possess the discretion to view that work of art through the understanding of what the artist had to go through and do to create it: what obstacles they overcame, what available option they possessed, and what factors came into play in their desire to create.
For example, (and I’m just using myself as an example as I am the one writing this), the budget of most of my narrative films were between zero and three-hundred dollars. That’s it! If you actually study my creative process, and did your research, you (or anyone) would know that. But, did you research that fact? I believe that it is fairly amazing what I have created was done so with that kind of budget. Have you done that? Could you do that?
Now, don’t get me wrong… There are some very good on-line film reviewers out there who have really studied the craft and the filmmaker and their films of those they are discussing. They present a true picture based upon the reality of the artist’s reality. Most are not like that, however. All they do is base what they disseminate upon their own predetermined prejudice.
Moreover, let me suggest that you on-line critics out there stop hiding behind screennames. If you want to be a Siskel or an Ebert, own who you are! Make your real name mean something.
Personally, film critics have never really bothered me on a subjective level. I have most often found their reviews amusing, even if they are very harsh. Because, as the creator of that film, I am very aware about just how wrong most of them are about the truth of my motivations and the actually process of my film’s completion. Believe me, I laugh and see the inadequacies in my films, as well. If I hadn’t been the one creating them, maybe I wouldn’t understand their essence either. But, as an artist, that doesn’t mean I would rip on the creations of someone else.
What I do care about is art. Pushing the envelope forward and paving a way in that new and innovative filmmakers may find a way to create their own cinematic, (and other), art.
For me, as the years have progressed, and I have peered into new levels of filmmaking, my process has consistently become more and more simple. It has become more and more Zen. What was first based in story-driven narrative, has shifted solely to visual and audio expressions. But somehow, some people, want to hold me to the past. They only speak about films I made decades ago. I keep saying this, but none of the reviewers out there seem to take note. The last narrative film I made; I created fifteen years ago. And, the years keep building upon that number. That is not to say I have not continued to make films. I make them all the time. I am constantly filming images. What I have been focusing on is, Minimalist Cinema, the Non-Narrative Zen Film. But, what critic takes the deep dive into those? There have been very-very few, as far as I can tell.
So, what am I saying here? Any artist, any individual who lives a life based upon art, constantly evolves. So sure, you can look at and love or hate the art they created way back in the way back when. But, do not hold them to that. Do not lock them to that point of time. For most likely, they will have evolved and developed new and different artistic patterns.
Have you change over the past ten, fifteen, twenty, or thirty years of your life? All you have to do is to look to your answer to that question to understand the truth in the evolution of the artist.
And please understand, I’m just using the film critic as the basis of this piece. They are not the only critics who tend to lose sight of the true meaning of art and the artistic motivation of an artist. You can apply this same understanding to the reviewers of painting, books, music, dance, the martial arts, you name it… Plus, you can attribute this understanding to anyone who talks about the life and/or the life work of anyone.
At the essence of art is the creation of art. Next to enlightenment, art is the purest form and process of living life. Because from the artist, all life is documented via the inspired mind of the individual who is willing to do all that it takes to make the visions they see and experience in their mind a physical reality.
Whenever you view art, always keep that in mind. Sure, you may love it, or you may hate it, but that does not change the fact that it is art. Simply because the artist possessed the wherewithal to bring that creation into reality means that they have truly contributed something to the evolution of humanity. Question, what have you contributed?
Copyright © 2024—All Rights Reserved
This article can also be viewed at:
Minimalist Cinema and Understanding the Art of the Artist on Scott Shaw.com
