Cape Independent
Film Association
MEANS OF PRODUCTION DOCTRINES FOR MOP FILMS
1. A filmmaker should shoot whatever he wants, whomever he wants, whenever he wants!
2. Truth through realism in locations, casting, dialogue, music, and imagery!
3. Everything in public view, earshot, or the imagination can be used by an artist in their art!
4. Things considered "obscene" or "illegal" by some occur in real life and can be used in a work!
5. Intellectual property and logos belong to NO ONE! The artist should redistribute this property!
6. No topic or viewpoint is forbidden! Real films of cinematic importance are not politically correct!
7. A true filmmaker avoids lawyers, unions, guilds, permits, releases, regulations, and all things that stand in the way of filming!
8. A filmmaker recognizes the fact that Corporate Hollywood and the Enemies of Free Speech will try to destroy a truly revolutionary film!
9. A true filmmaker artist does not consider sales, demographics, critics, or ratings while creating! It’s about the art!
10. Anyone with access to the technology can, and should, be able to make a film of any sort they want!
The MOP FAQs
THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION FAQS
by Michael L. Huntington, JULY 2005, Cape Girardeau, Missouri
1. What are the basic ideas behind the Means of Production? The Means of Production is a revolutionary film/art movement and philosophy that believes that the art of filmmaking needs an independent film revolution of creativity and innovation in our Digital Age to save the art of film. MOP sees the art of film creeping towards the precipace of mediocrity and corporatism, and away from the high ideals of important and meaningful cinema. The Movement contends that Corporate Hollywood, rampant with blockbusterism and sequelitis, has moved away from art and into the grips of cynical profit motivation. Less show, more business. The MOP now sees a new age! And a new opportunity to save film art through a REAL independent film movement, not the the co-opted so-called "Independent Film Movement" that is not really a movement, independent, or about true filmmaking art! The goals of the Means Movement are to encourage filmmakers to try new things and make new kinds of cutting-edge films (never seen before), prompt debate on the limits of art and free speech, and promote film as the ultimate art form that it is. MOP sees that the means of production for making movies, and distributing them, is now accessible to the artistic masses and common man - and not just the elist and wealthy of Hollywood. Film is on the verge of becoming a "democratic" art form, with all voices being heard and new types of innovation coming about as a result. But, this film revolution can not be just technological, it must also be artistic. The art of film must be pushed to the next level and limits. Thus, MOP promotes the artisitic philosophy of cinematic realism, a true realism of Cine Verite, to spurn creativity and influence film. All film movements of the past have come on the heels of realists approaches. MOP believes that art HAS NO BOUNDARIES and that the final barriers to creativity, corporate intellectual property and filmmaking timidness, must fall if the art form is to evolve. We support the utilization of accessible aural, visual, and intellectual concepts - that are experienced in our real world - in innovative and truthful film works. A filmmaker should be able to comment and convey ideas on all of the things in our modern culture: music, film, television, sex, corporate iconography, explicit subject matter, etc.. These are the real things that are experience by real people in their lives. And we should be able to create film art about our world and do so in a truthful way, WITHOUT PERMISSION, in a free society that respects freedom of speech. All paint on the pallette should be usable by an artist. Including film artists. (The MOP's philosophy on filmmaking is laid out in THE MOP 10 DOCTRINES).
MOP is an underground film movement that encourages independent filmmakers to break down all of the walls to creativity and make films with a spirit of freedom. Filmmakers should be allowed to make films with what they deem fit as a means to fufill the promise of art and meaningful cinema. The Movement hopes to spread this philosophy to whom we can, spawn MOP filmmaking and approaches, hold numerous underground film festivals, and inflitrate the vapid culture of industrial filmmaking.
2. What is meant by "the democratization of film?" This means that with the means of production (cameras, editing equipment, visual and special effects, reproduction, distribution, actors, etc.) to make a movie now accessible to the common man, a revolution is now possible whereby everyone can create film art and have their voices heard! Not just the elite and wealthy of Corporate Hollywood have the wherewithal to create and show cinematic works anymore, everyone has the means now! Film is increasingly becoming more democratic as more people's artistic voices are heard via public events, community TV, or the internet. Anyone can make a movie, and get it shown, in our Digital Age!
3. Is all this really necessary? If so, why? Yes it is. Film art is in peril and alot of people don't know it. The general public accepts what it is fed by Corporate Hollywood and asks for seconds. The problem is that this is starting to make us culturally sick. And people are beginning to blanche away in reaction! Meaningful cinema has become a rare thing and the vapid drudge of the Media Empires common. A revolution is coming. It is inevitable. This movement is necessary to guide this artistic revolution and spark the fire. The goal is to save film art by offering an alternative, encourage ground-breaking and provocative works, break down the remaining artistic barriers, promote artistic debate, and prompt the next generation of film artists to carry the torch to greater heights.
4. Is the Means of Production philosophy Marxist? Anarchist? The Means of Production is a revolutionary film movement that supports the democratization of independent filmmaking. All should contribute and be heard in this new cinematic realm. The common man has a voice in our eyes. The Empire of Hollywood, elitist and capitalist, has given up on the artistic imperatives of film and the needs of the common man. It has co-opted the independent film movement and has made it it's servant - just as the common man (the audience) is a servant to fill their bloated coffers. Their prime motivations are now the possession of profit, the purveyance of formula, and the perpetuation of their own power and political influence. With the Means of Production now in the hands of the masses, an artisitc film revolution can now occur to overthrow the materialistic Masters of Hollywood. Are we Marxists? Not really. We are filmmakers for freedom in film art and equality in expression. True freedom. Are we Anarchists? Not at all. We want true art in film to come to the fold and innovative film artists to be heard, not chaos. If some may benefit from a new art movement, this is a good thing. A fair playing field of creative innovation will only encourage more ground-breaking film endeavors. It's about art and freedom.
5. Why all the propaganda, totalitarian, and revolutionary imagery? As revolutionary filmmakers promoting an underground film movement it only seems natural to use visually provocative imagery as a means of conveying our ideas! Propaganda is, and has been, the tool used by and against repressive regimes. And Hollywood is no exception, albeit more subtle - it can be repressive and totalitarian. We thought it a good idea to comment on this and to use such imagery against the status quo and as a tool to encourage our militant movie makers, promote thought on the issues, and to markedly distinguish ourselves from other movements. Plus, it's fun and campy! No one should take it all too seriously. LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION!
6. Doesn't the Means of Production encourage the theft of intellectual property? It is not really as it, at first, seems. The Movement is not about the theft of other people's intellectual property, but the liberation of it for the sake of art! The aim is to create truthful films in which characters behave as in the real world. In the real world, in which we live, people exist in a culture - not a vacuum, a stage, or a set. They do things, see and hear things, remark on things, and are affected by the things in their world. It is part of our identity. In our society, prevalent with all sorts of corporate-owned sounds and images, we are affected by them. This is our culture...a Media Culture. We are bombarded with it! In reality, people: shit, fuck, masterbate, pick their noses, pop zits, watch TV daily, go to the movies, listen to CDs or the radio, eat at Mc Donald's and other places, drive, shop in the Mall or grocery store, wear corporate clothing, attend sporting events, drink, bathe (or don't), clean house (or don't), vomit, sware, attend funerals, get arrested, use drugs, fight, rape, abuse, brutally murder, etc. All the while people exist, they also comment and discuss these such things and their place in society. And, all the while, the soundtracks, props, and settings to our real lives can be experienced all around us. Really experienced.....and felt. We have never seen these sort of things used realistically in any film. ANY FILM.
There comes a point whereby all the things around us become a part of us. Filmmakers feel the compulsion to remark on them and express ourselves with them to the maximum effect. In our reality, we are inalterably influenced by the things in our lives. They become a part of us. Don't they? If we cannot truly use the things around us, the things in our world, then we are not real artists making something significant. The intellectual property of our culture is ours. We paid for it with our very existence.
Here are some other considerations: Why is it acceptable for TV news, documentary programs, and other media to show and discuss people, corporations, sex, violence, and other things - without permission - yet we are not? Why is the rap musician allowed to sample tracks, changing a work, and other artists are not? How is the paparazzi, and their Media Bosses, allowed to use celebrity imagery/property (and make money off of them), yet we cannot? Why are characters in novels allowed to reference the real world (drink Coca-Cola, listen to Metallica, watch and comment on sporting events, etc.), but film is not allowed to show such things? Mainly, these such things are allowed because they are all ultimately doing the bidding of the Media Empires - making money for the Machine. We are not.
7. Why does MOP support realism? Does a film have to incorporate realism to be considered MOP? Ultimately, art is the search and expresion of truth. Film is art. True film, the ultimate of art forms, is the search for and expression of the ultimate in truth. The closer one is to truth, the closer one is to the fufillment of the promise of art. Thus, realism is imperative in this art form. True and truthful realism makes a cinematic work more meaningful to the filmmakers and the viewers. We have yet to see a film that really shows a reality or character that we can connect with in an all-encompassing way, even in earlier Cinema Verite works. Some have come close, but none have gone all the way. Those that have, have risen to the level of cinema, as opposed to merely being movies. True cinema moves the artist and all. And really truthful cinema, of the realistic sort, moves our very beings. Realism is necessary in this movement, and in film. It is what this is all about.
8. Does Hollywood make any good films? Do you hate Hollywood? Of course Hollywood makes good films. But, these tend to be few and far between. Of the more than 300 films that come out of the industry each year, the vast majority tend to be truly awful stuff. The bulk of Hollywood's efforts are increasingly re-hashed plots, drawn-out franchises, exploitative pandering, vapid effects-driven spectacles, and outright un-entertaining ordeals. The motive in the Industry is now the opening weekend dollar, not impactful and meaningful cinema. Not everything has to be high minded, but it would be nice if they were entertaining or cutting-edge. This is why people are going to the theater in less and less numbers, even for Blockbusters. The public is getting sick of the same stuff. Do we hate Hollywood? No. We love movies and are influenced by them as filmmakers. But, we do not like the current focus of the Industry and the movement away from meaningful film and towards the bland formula of the Hollywood bottom line.
9. Isn't the Independent Film Movement the real answer to Hollywood's ills? Ask yourself this: what is an independent film? The so-called "Independent Film Movement" of the 1990s initially started off as a promising answer to bloated Hollywood's diversion from cinema art. However, this film movement soon began to wane as some of it's brightest filmmakers began to become rich with success and soon moved away from the true independence in production and artistic spirit. Indy directors became a part of the Hollywood establishment as the money and fame came rolling in, they started to produce (and change their visions) to accomodate the Hollywood status quo and the demographic dollar. Indy companies were then co-opted by the Industry, and the Studios soon opened their own indy divisions, to where it has almost become impossible to distinguish between Hollywood and the so-called Independents. Independent Companies also began to more emulate their betters (such as multi-billion dollar Miramax, which still claims it is independent) in the making of films. To which, the term "independent" is now merely an identifying monicer for trendy, quirky character films with certain identifiable directors and actors involved. REAL independent film, made by independent and visionary artists, utilizing low budgets and making up for it with creativity, is what is truly needed now! Amatuer's with talent and drive, seeing art in a different way than through the lense of profit, will spawn the birth of a true independent film movement! Real film artists are not out to make a name or bucks, but to make movies!
10. I saw a John Water's film called "Cecil B. Demented." Are you guys wanting to do that sort of thing? In Mr. Waters' film the fanatic filmmakers were terrorists who stole, kidnapped, and murdered to make their films. They were very much like an obsessed film cult. This is not us. We are simply independent filmmakers who want to push the artistic envelope, create debate about the art and limits of film, and encourage creative and cutting-edge works. We do, however, agree with some of the rhetoric of the protagonists with regards to their criticisms of Hollywood and the Industry's motives. We like the idea of an artistic revolution in film and the return of meaningful cinema. Also, the MOP philosophy has been devised without having previously seen Mr. Waters' work. This Movement came about from necessity because of Hollywood. Perhaps Mr. Waters, a formerly provocative independent filmmaker, has come to realize Hollywood's problems, just as many other indy film artists have.
11. What does MOP hopes happens to film/cinema? The Means of Production hopes to change the face of cinema, independent and industrial, through creativity and provocation. MOP also seeks to further promote true independent filmwork and encourage the coming democratization of film. We are trying to save the art of film from mediocrity and cynicism. We envision a day in which millions upon millions of film, and other artists, are creating and influencing others. We foresee real independent film channels, theaters, and internet sites becoming an alternative source to Hollywood's tripe. This will encourage Hollywood to make better films of a more meaningful nature. we see filmmakers creating new kinds of art and sharing their visions with the world around them. Out of this may come future filmmaking Mozarts, who will make unbelievable works of cinematic art. The MOP wants not only a film/art revolution, but an "evolution" in filmmaking. Without evolution, a thing becomes stagnant and dies.
12. What does an MOP film look like? An MOP film can look like alot of different things. All artists are different. And some may use more elements than others in a work. Ideally, an MOP film is "ultra-realistic". Meaning, that there is a connection of the characters and story with viewers because of realistic elements from real life. A viewer will truly be able to identify with a film and suspend disbelief. A true MOP film will have realistic plots, realisitic characters, truthful dialogue (and delivery), believable acts and acting, believable outcomes, and subtle elements of culture and iconography in which people can identify. A true MOP film HAS NEVER BEEN MADE! Documentaries come close, but they tend not to have as dramatic an impact as fiction/drama.
13. Is MOP pornographic? An MOP film can be considered "pornographic" if certain explicit, sexual, or violent elements are utilized by a filmmaker. People have their own definitions as to what this consititutes, this is unalterable. The aim of the use of these elements, however, is to speak to the "truthfullness" of the scene - not as a means of exploitation for purient interest. If an element is used in a work, it should be realistic and have an impact upon the story or characters. MOP is an attempt to speak about reality. If there are elements in a film that are there simply for obvious shock or rebelliousness, absent of impact, this is not true MOP in intent and spirit.
14. Does a Means of Production film/director have to follow all of the 10 doctrines? No. A filmmaker is free to use as many, or as few, of the doctrines if they choose. The doctrines are a license and a philosphical/artistic guideline, not commandments. The more the elements are used, however, the closer a work becomes a true MOP work. The use of the doctrines, of course, should be used as a part of the truthfullness of the work, not simply as a demonstration of solidarity with the cause. The use of the doctrines must be real.
15. Is MOP an extension or continuation of Dogme 95, Slamdance, and the like? MOP is similar to some earlier independent film movements in intent, but not in focus. Some earlier movements have seen the necessary need for artistic change in film, and we agree with those. Others have gone about attempting to make a philosphical impact through restrictive and dogmatic means in their philosophies and festivals. We believe in the freedom of the artist and the lessening of restrictive artistic boundaries, not in telling artists what to do. In fertile ground, artists will prosper on their own.
16. How is MOP like other film or art movements? We see MOP as a continuation, or re-birth, of earlier film and art movements that made an impact. We seek to continue the provocative ideas of earlier film realists, neo-realistic cinema, Cinema Verite, the French New Wave, the Pop Art Movement of the 60s, the impact of the documentary, and the realistic grittiness of early 70s fare. Things need to get back on track in cinema art in this Post-Blockbuster Age. The promise of the "Independent Film Movement" of the 90s (more of a reaction to the blockbuster glare than a real movement) needs to truly be fufilled and nurtured.
17. Is Means just a film movement? Is film art, anyway? Film is art. In fact, it is the ULTIMATE art form as it incorporates all of the other art forms in the world: literature, writing, acting, theater, photography, design, music, set and costume, etc. And, since film is art, the tenents of MOP easily transplant into the other artistic realms. A painter should be able to make a true work about the world around him without consequence. A photographer should be able to photograph what thay wish without approval. A writer should be able to pen a controversial work that has societal impact. MOP is a film movement, but it is also an art movement and philosophy that will expand into all areas of art.
18. What happens if an MOP filmmaker is sued? Will they be? It is quite possible, depending on the circumstance and use of material, that Corporate Hollywood, egoistic artists, and dogmatic moralists will try to squash an MOP work and/or filmmaker. They may sue for damages or for the destruction of a work. This will happen. This is because they are about money, not art. They are about property not freedom of artistic speech. The Industry is about the protection of their corporate logos for profit, not for the free access and commentary of regular people with stories to convey. If the Movement remains an underground, exposure will be limited and the threat lessened. If it spreads, a War of Lawyers will ensue and the issue of the limits of art will be debated. Ultimately, in our Communication Age, the Powers That Be will not be able to maintain control, less they clamp down on all art and information transmission. There are a number of art an free speech organizations that will aid the cause when battles ensue. To silence us, successfully, will only result in more noteriety for the cause and sympathy by fellow artists. All revolutions have battles, casualties, and martyrs. We feel that the risks are worth our goals to seek truth through our art.
19. What happens if an MOP film is banned or censored? What if MOP is outlawed? If an MOP film is banned or forcibly censored, the film will more than likely become popular as an underground work. People tend to want to see forbidden works of art. If a judge were to order the work destroyed, which to do so is impossible in this Internet Age, it would become even more of an underground cult favorite. If the MOP were to be outlawed as an illegal group or philosophy, this would only result in the consolidation of the cause and it's promotion. This is natural. Such attempts as these would only go to further fuel the notion that Hollywood and it's lawyer are out to get real independent film and not truly support the aims of art. To do so would show their true colors. This will happen, you can count on it. We will be labelled true film rebels....and a rebellion has a way of getting supporters.
20. How would you feel if someone took your ideas or work? It depends. If a work was stolen in it's entirety, changed, or not given credit - an artists should be pissed. However, if a work or intellectual property has come to be a part of our culture and impactful upon people's lives, it seems only reasonable that it should be allowed to be referenced in a plot or character significant way in order to create truthful art. An independent MOP filmmaker, for example, would not want to re-make "Star Wars", but would want to refer to it - or other cultural icons - in a plot/character-truthful way, such as it was done in Kevin Smith's film "Clerks". You can borrow, but not take.
21. Does MOP re-make or steal other people's films or plots? MOP does not believe in or encourage the outright theft of entire films. Taking a Picasso and signing your name to it is not creating art, it is hijacking it. But we do believe that in an original work, whereas a previous film or plot has signifigance to a new tale or character, that they should be able to be commented upon and certain elements used. This is for the truthfullness of the film, not for piracy. As artists, living in an age where we are bombarded by film and television images that impact our lives, we should be able to use that "intellectual property" because it does impact us. We should be able to show a Picasso, or discuss a film, or react to our corporate society if we wish.
22. Can a true Means of Production film be sold or successful? A Means of Production work can be sold if the filmmaker wishes. It is their's to do with. That is up to them. However, if the driving force during the creative process is profit, then such considerations can have a negative effect upon true creativity. The artist becomes shopkeeper, speculator, and salesman looking to hawk their wares and their integrity. Formulism and demography have a way of creeping into a work when it is seen as a mere commodity to be sold. This is what Hollywood has come to be....show BUSINESS. This is what we are trying to remedy. Sell, yes. Sell out, no. It must be about the art.
23. Can an MOP filmmaker become a successful Hollywood movie-maker? Is he or she a Sellout? An MOP filmmaker can become successful (known and wealthy, presumably), if he or she wishes, within present day Hollywood. It depends, however, upon the types of movies made, their focus, and intent - if they wish to remain MOP. If a filmmaker surrenders his convictions of devotion to film art, accomodates the corporate dictates at the expense of his vision, and abandons his cutting-edge views and artistic drive just to be successful - then one may question if such a person has become a Sellout. As long as the driving forces in creative filmmaking are not profits and fame, but rather ART, an MOP filmmaker can and should work within the existing paradigm. We could always use some good insurgent, rebel filmmakers (and screenwriters) in Hollywood! Ultimately, it has got to be about the art, about the journey, and not the destination.
24. Is the Means of Production philosophy the official ideology of the Cape Filmmaker's Cooperative (CFC) or the Cape Independent Film Association (CIFA)? The Means of Production film philosophy is not the official position of the CFC or the CIFA. It came out of these groups and is supported by a number of it's members - and others are interested in it and may adopt it's tenents - but, the CFC and CIFA membership are free to make any kind of films they wish. The CFC and the CIFA are merely the soil from which this has sprung.
25. Does MOP have, or plan on having, a film festival? MOP does not have a film festival yet. But plans are in the works. It is anticipated that a Means of Production Underground Film Festival will take place sometime next year, perhaps in May, in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. It is intended to become an annual event and spread to other cities. Of course, MOP films must be made first to be shown. A number of filmmakers have already expressed an interest in MOP and plan on adopting the philosophy in a few works.