tips on radiance

If the operative criterion in paracinema culture is affect, the most frequently expressed patron desire is to see something "different," something unlike contemporary Hollywood cinema. As A.S. Hamrah and Joshua Glenn put it, "Let's face it: Hollywood films are cautious, uninventive, and bland, and young filmgoers are increasingly uninterested." Paracinema fans, like the cineast elite, "explicitly situate themselves in opposition to Hollywood cinema", and they do so in a way that academics would recognize as highly sophisticated. As Sconce notes, "the paracinematic audience recognizes Hollywood as an economic and artistic institution that represents not just a body of films, but a particular mode of film production and its accompanying signifying practices. Furthermore, the narrative form produced by this institution is seen as somehow 'manipulative' and 'repressive,' and linked to dominant interests as a form of cultural coercion". Paracinema consumption can be understood as a a reaction against the hegemonic and normalizing practices of mainstream, dominant Hollywood production.

- another excerpt from Cutting Edge. It's worth noting however that the way paracinema fans position themselves in opposition to Hollywood and the way cineastes do and the complexities of why are extremely different. From personal experience within both circles, I've found paracinema fans are looking for something more "shocking" and "less safe", understandably so within their interests, but the word "politically correct" as an epithet is also thrown around an awful lot as well. Cineastes on the other hand are usually asking for something more to chew on, something more substantial - but also hold an air of derision over what they perceive to be or associate with a lesser art form. Where the two meet is in the increasingly less rare combo of visually/viscerally, as well as intellectually, stimulating and innovative works, something that can be seen exemplified in films as early, if not earlier (Lewton comes to mind), as Cronenberg's Shivers to Zulawski's Possession - and additionally throughout both of those director's oeuvres. When the two meet and genres are breached, audiences from both sides aren't repelled but rather their interest is peaked. Low culture enthusiasts find themselves fully capable and even interested in comprehending complex themes while cineastes find themselves just as able to appreciate and at times learn to embrace the horrific. They may not seek it out as top priority but it's these films that breach that gap that lead to a greater understanding/internal expansion of both parties involved. What keeps me especially hopeful and enthusiastic about such art forms is both the destruction of pompous value systems by cineastes, which among the younger set is significantly more lenient already, and the destruction of unquestioned stimulation through misery that's prevalent among low culture consumers, esp. when this exploitation of misery is so often at the expense of women and women's bodies.