I went to the
cinema to watch a new release and here’s how the story began: a young man owes
a few thousand dollars to a drug dealer who will break every bone in his body,
before killing him, unless he repays the money by Wednesday. Already I see the
plot is flawed: he won’t be able to reclaim his money from a corpse. But I am
missing the point of the film which (call me slow-witted) becomes clear only
towards the end: the point is to cram as much graphic, sadistic violence as is
possible into 102 minutes of expensively crafted cinematography - and then
persuade people to buy tickets.
Unremitting
violence unhindered by human compassion is not my idea of entertainment yet
there are those who think otherwise. Well, maybe I’m just not the target market.
But then I wasn’t the target market for the film I’d seen before that either,
the one in which all the characters were lovelorn 20-somethings floundering in a
shallow pool of self-obsession. I suppose such subject matter is interesting if
you’re, well, 20-something. Perhaps I should stick to films aimed firmly at my
sector of the market – whatever that may be: and therein lies the problem. The
film industry has its sights set on all its various market segments up to a
point – children, family entertainment, teen humour, twenty-somethings,
thirty-somethings etc. - but then, around middle-aged bloke (MAB), it all
starts to lose focus. I think the film industry and I both need some help.
A universal
understanding of what constitutes a MAB would be a good start. Is it literally a
bloke who has reached the middle of his lifespan? If so, a previous generation
which lived to an average age of, say, 56 would have achieved middle-age at 23.
Nowadays we live longer and it would be nearer to 40 (giving us more time to go
to the cinema). But those are averages: specifically it makes even less sense. Those
who die at 100 would not reach middle-age until 50 and those who die at 20 would
get there at 10. By these calculations the definition of a MAB becomes a
constantly moving target which even the most accomplished marketing people
would find very tricky to hit.
This
one-dimensional classification clearly won’t suffice, since MABs may not be simply
defined by arithmetic. There’s no denying that ageing brings with it
recognisable physical and mental characteristics which surely merit inclusion
in the equation. Among these a particular ‘state of mind’ can be observed, mid-way
between youthful exuberance and elderly rigidity: a transitional phase during
which the brain’s decision-making process is modified by experience causing
attitudes to become entrenched. It’s difficult to quantify empirically but not
so hard to spot intuitively. I have heard it said that you can recognise its
onset when your broad mind begins to swap places with your narrow waist. If
this is true then I, for one, should be very vigilant indeed.
But even if
MAB recognises himself the film industry is missing a trick: it really should
be shipping him a steady stream of suitable product – just as it does for other
sectors. So, to help both parties out, I propose that the film industry tags a
classification to the end of its titles which reflects the intended audience. It
could start with CO for Children Only, FF for Family Fun, TH for Teen Humour
and so on ending with AC for All Comers. At least then MABs could work out
which ones we need not bother seeing and the industry might realise that it’s portfolio
is light in the MAB department.
And the film
I saw? I can’t bring myself to recommend it but try listening to this instead:
It’s the classic tune of the same name,
written and performed by Benny Golson.
No comments:
Post a Comment