Art Film Aims To Suck
OLYMPIA, Wa. – Young
filmmaker Mark Ziweski recently started production of what he hopes will be yet
another piece of pretentious schlock that nobody really cares about.
“It should be quite bad,” said
the beret-wearing Ziweski, stirring some powdered cream into his Fair Trade
coffee. “I will bring the people nothing less than the most uninspired thirty
minutes ever caught on low quality camera.”
Ziweski, who graduated from The
Evergreen State College in June of 2007, has been careful not to disclose any
major details about the film, but assures the public that it will have its
requisite share of white noise, arbitrary color splotches, broken dialogue, and
close-up shots of long drags on cigarettes.
The film, whose title is too
cliché to mention, is set to debut statewide in so-called “art theatres” late
this summer. The theatres, which will eventually close and become community
churches, hope Ziweski will outdo himself and produce something that is at least
bearable. Ziweski, however, is not interested in pandering.
“If people want to make up
reasons to like this trash I’m producing, then I guess I can’t stop them,”
conceded Ziweski. “But what I’m aiming for is a film that sucks by any standard
you throw at it.”
Ziweski held a makeshift
fundraiser at his apartment earlier this year and was happy to see that it was
poorly attended. “I have the blessings of my closest friends, and they have all
been very supportive of the project,” said Ziweski. “My only hope is that
behind their thinly veiled smiles they all secretly think this is a horrible
idea.” Their donations barely covered the party’s expenses, which included a
tray of cubed cheeses, plastic cups, and two jugs of Carlo Rossi.
But in spite of the expectedly
shallow pockets of his hippie friends, good funding has become one of the
largest obstacles in his pursuit of worthless cinema. Over $50,000 in donations
have already been received from artists such as Phillip Glass, Matthew Barney,
and Chuck Close, none of whom have any desire to see their own art outclassed by
a piece of truly unadulterated garbage. Ziweski, while thankful for the support,
promises he will take every precaution necessary to make sure the money doesn’t
get used in any way that will actually improve the final product.
Experimental film professor
Ruth Hayes acted as Ziweski’s mentor during his time at Evergreen, but
nevertheless feels that his sucky film project is destined to fail. “The only
art that is unequivocally bad is the kind that fails to live up to its own
promises,” argues Hayes. “He promises a bad film, and if that’s what he gives
us, then he will have paradoxically created a fabulous piece of art in spite of
himself.”
Ziweski confidently dismissed
these arguments saying “No. It’s just going to suck.”
When asked about a possible
ending for such a horrible film, Ziweski said the following: “The ending is
probably the area that I’ve given the least thought. After all, the idea is
that most people will have left the theatre long before then.”
“Normally my lack of focus and
direction are a liability, but in this film I’m going to bring those failings to
the forefront and make them work for me,” continued Ziweski, musing about what
is sure to be his pathetic and non-existent career. “I’m eager to see just how
many doors will be closed to me as a result of this cultural travesty.”
“I can just see the reviews
now,” added Ziweski, waving his hand in the air as if to spell out the words.
“Piss Poor.”
By Michael Wakcher
|
