I don’t post many commercials, but if I had to constrain such posts to things I love, whiskey commercials would be on my list. If I raised the bar higher, and made it only include those that I admire, I would not have many logs to put on the fire. Charles Bukowski carried me forward with his prose those years I was aged 22 -25. I wouldn’t normally recommend advice from a drunkard, but he was a great one. Live true.
“Live True” Dewar’s White Label [English] from &Rosàs on Vimeo.
Sometimes it serves us to let our dark paranoia run rampant. I have always had a love affair with conspiracy theories, but it is one of longing more than indulgence. If only governments and people in general cared enough about other people to actually strategize to the extent needed to control things to the level most conspiracy theories fantasize. But maybe instead of politics and community being the focus, the conspiracies exist in the pursuit of profit. Sometimes looking at the result of business structures as their intent instead of their coincidental effect sheds further light on a complicated situation.
We all know that there is a substantial flaw to our film infrastructure: artists and their supporters are not rewarded for the work they generate. I speak of this as a problem. If the industry actually tried to make sure that the people who made the work benefited from the work, we’d have more money in the system, and it would probably be smarter money (that knew enough to let the filmmakers have creative control — or at least more of it) at that. But all evidence points to the fact that the film industry wants to prevent creators from financially benefiting from their work. We can change that (and I am going to try), but that’s for another post about why I have chosen to work for a not-for-profit.
Let’s let our dark side work for us for a moment: if the model is not broken, but actually works, what is it trying to do? Why would the film business not want creators to benefit? Is it to give more people the opportunity to become filmmakers and investors since the current system virtually drives out all the experienced filmmakers and investors? Ah, alas, much evidence exists to show that access and opportunity is not of interest to film business leaders (like the disproportional representation of white males — such as myself). So what could it be?
What happens to those that survive in the film business? If filmmakers can’t survive by making feature films, how do they survive? There’s been one business strand that long has been there with a helping hand to the creative class and it seems like even our greats have long had to indulge in their offerings. Is the whole of film culture designed to create cinematic masters who then must be slaves to Madison Avenue and their international equivalents?
Fellini:
Evidently these bank commercials were the last films Fellini ever made, and they aired after he died.
I don’t think commercials kill directors, but I do think
Maybe my day will come. To make our art, we need someone to give us money, generally speaking. Hell, to pay for our health insurance or our kids’ education, we need some to pay for us to make some kind of art.
Even Jean Luc Godard made commercials. Here’s one he did for Schick Aftershave:
We keep trying to ban posting commercials in the bowl, but there’s too much good work out there to stop the sell. Dogs know what they want, and so do we.
Okay, we are placing bouncing balls in a bigger bowl. What can we say it? There’s something about an out of control ball that just makes us happy. Balls, balls, balls, balls, balls, and more balls.
Sorry about posting a commercial but sometimes a nose has just got do what it’s gotta do.
We all tried drinking the magic water, but we still couldn’t rollerblade like this. Maybe if we put on Rapper’s Delight it would do the trick.
True, true this is another commercial. We have a complicated relationship with commercials in The Bowl.
