actually, american cinema of the 1970s is sometimes referred to as american new wave or new american cinema.

Yo Flossie

I point out this paragraph lifted from Roger Ebert’s discussion of “Five Easy pieces” “….Nicholson was not the film’s only discovery. There were quirky supporting roles for Karen Black, Lois Smith and Ralph Waite, all pitch-perfect, all relatively new to movies. It established Bob Rafelson, the director and co-writer, as a leader of the American New Wave. Its cinematography was by Laszlo Kovacs, a Hungarian who’d also shot “Easy Rider” and “Hell’s Angels on Wheels,” and became one of the best of all cameraman. The film’s greatest influence came through the screenplay, by Rafelson and Carole Eastman; it allowed detours and digressions, cared more about behavior than plot, ended in a way and tone that could not have been guessed from its beginning….”

Reading this article, over two years old now, concerned me a bit. I’m not sure if it was the writer’s intention-out of either wit or maybe self-referential comedy- but the actual American New Wave, a movement that was and is in its influence, still very much alive, is treated as nonexistent. A few individuals did make the same point in responses above, but I’d like to clarify that an American New Wave, heavily influenced by the New Waves in Eastern Europe and to a much larger extent of those in France and Italy, did in fact take place in the late ’60s and throughout the 70s, until the advent of the “summer blockbuster.”

Though it is not a household term, any cinephile, film-maker, student or person heavily interested in film culture understands this to be true. It’s often accepted that the New Wave officially began with Arthur Penn’s “Bonnie and Clyde” but some will accredit John Cassavetes as the movement’s earliest contributor. Dennis Hopper’s “Easy Rider” is also a film that is often referenced as one of the New Waves’ earliest contributions. Hopper would also go on to make one more film in the New Wave called “The Last Movie.”

Though the terminology is particularly tough to track down in mainstream media outlets, there have been countless books, of them the most accessible being Peter Biskind’s “Easy Riders, Raging Bulls,” which delve deeply into the movement and treat the particular era in American Cinema as a New Wave, without question. Rather, it is assumed. Not to mention, in Film Schools across the country, the American New Wave has been a mainstay in the curriculum.

Others like Scorsese, Bogdanovich, and avant-gardists like Andy Warhol and Kenneth Anger (who had been heavily involved in the burgeoning avant-garde scene since the 40s) played major roles in redefining American Cinema and culture with techniques displayed in the Italian Neo-Realist films of the 1940s as well as those in the later French New Wave.

The examples I’ve given are merely starting points. These are some of the easiest and most accessible film-makers tied movement. There a hundreds of other films, directors, writers, actors, and sub-movements associated to the very real and highly regarded American New Wave.

Oh, brother. Will I ever live this post down?

I’m no film expert, never declared myself to be. If my post gave the impression that I thought I was, I assure you all that it was not intentional.

I simply saw a pattern of similar themes and cinematic sensibilities shared by a number of filmmakers coming around at about the same time and posited that it amounted to a movement or wave of sorts. That I gave it a name that folks take issue with is regrettable, but how about talking about this kind of movement or wave that I was observing, maybe in more detail than simply calling Garden State a piece of shit. (Notice that I never said it was a great movie, only that it shared some thematic content with the other films I mentioned.)

It’s funny, the second comment came just before the post turned two-years old, and another came soon after that, so I was tickled to have the attention.

Then, six months later, commenter “Pete” wrote:

Reading this article, over two years old now, concerned me a bit.

So, I’m thinking: Of all the crazy stuff spaceneedl and I write about here, corruption, lies, war, environmental destruction, even canibalism, my alleged misuse of the phrase American New Wave Cinema gave Pete cause to be concerned.

To each his own.

The post that wouldn’t die! My pride and joy. I’ve not been able to post anything new in weeks, so the timing couldn’t be better.

Now, Kat, bless you! That’s what I’m talking about! I’m validated at last!

Oh, and I was remiss not to include Charlie Kaufman in my original post. What a terrible oversight. Starting with the first thing of his that I saw, Being John Malkovich, and continuing in others like Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, his films totally resemble what I said about the others:

What I’ve enjoyed about the films listed above has been the existential crises of the characters, offbeat and unconventional narrative styles, the generous use of pop music, but perhaps most importantly, a very big heart and sympathy for the characters. There’s a sweetness in the common underlying theme that just beneath their quirky exteriors can be found human beings with feelings and a deep desire for love and connection.

Now, this Derek Hill character, writing a book on MY premise, I think I should get a cut.

Oh why did I ever get lulled into thinking that this post had finally gone to sleep?!

This MUST be some sort of record! Seriously, I wrote it close to 4-1/2 years ago. I’d be flattered if I didn’t know that this is nothing but a search engine fluke.

Anyway, Henry, I will say that I AM flattered that you’d ask for help with your dissertation, but I have one question back for you.

While I certainly see Michel Gondry’s films as fitting in nicely with those of the other filmmakers I’ve mentioned, especially given his collaborations with Charlie Kaufman (who, if you read the other comments here, I sadly overlooked when I originally wrote this), but isn’t he French? I particularly loved his last film, Be Kind, Rewind, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The Science of Sleep are great as well, and fit the profile I was writing about, but I’d have to say that including him kinda messes up my original premise that this was an American movement.

Maybe that could be an angle for you, Henry. Focusing on Gondry as a kind of bridge, connecting America’s New New Wave with its roots, with France, the birthplace of existentialists Sartre, de Beauvoir and Camus, the birthplace of existentialist cinema.

Henry, short of being able to actually contact Kaufman, I thought I’d refer you to an October 2008 interview with him on a U.S. public radio show called Fresh Air. While he’s clearly brilliant, he’s also incredibly neurotic, like many of his characters, and listening to him was actually a little painful at times because he’s a potent combination of intensely analytical and self-doubting.

He’s a neurotic existentialist, like Woody Allen, a great formula for a filmmaker, though Kaufman is MUCH more experimental in terms of narrative and visuals. (Although, I’d argue that Woody Allen’s Stardust Memories was very Kaufmanesque.)

I can’t recommend the interview enough.

Ok so after a little research and reading i think it’s safe to say that this could be considered a actually movement, or at the very least, these filmmakers could be catagorized within an area of film making together. I think thats what I’m going to do with my dissertaion. Exploring these filmmakers and prier movements which I’ve discovered through reasearch such as The Independent Film Movement and The “new” american new wave, and ofcourse taking your original post further to explore exactly when this new movement may have started and which film makers are involved and ofcourse I’m sure more disscussion points will pop up as I research further.

I move encounter your Rss food i would suchlike to purchase to your proportionality.