Perhaps it should be remembered at this point in the 21st century, but there was a time when it was said that Buenos Aires was a cinephile city, where film culture was rich. When in the mid-nineties the priests of the old cinephilia were asked why in this city there was not a circuit of art and essay rooms like in Paris or New York, the answer was that it had not been necessary, because Bergman or Godard They went straight to the big opening rooms. Such a thing is half true; what is certain is that the cinematographic billboards had a diversity that they do not have today and that it is impossible to recover. The big question, however, is what happened to that cinephilia, if there is something left; and where and how you can access another type of cinema different from what the commercial circuit offers us.
First, what happened. The business, globally, was dedicated to the tanks”, which are increasingly expensive and, therefore, require, in order to recover their investment, more and more public. If you notice those movies getting sappy and full of rushed formulas, it’s because you have to bring a lot of people and leave no one out. Cinemas do not earn money from tickets -the “old fashioned” model- but from the sale of snacks and drinks. We must not disdain this public: it is the one that sustains the cinema (and even some of those films can be good). But there is something else: the permanence on screens, in times of platforms, is less and less. So the formula for these films to sell a lot of popcorn is that they saturate the market. Argentina is a small square: no more than 900 screens. And anyway, you see more movies than in the seventies. Even if it’s not in theaters.
With less variety on screens, an audience has also been formed in twenty years whose identification of the “cinema-experience” it happens less because of the curiosity to discover the new, than because of enjoying the known. And he does it from a sensory hypertrophy that doesn’t have much to do with realism either. an IMAX room It does not show real proportions, nor does the surround sound of multiroom complexes resemble what we experience in the world we know. Thus, the themes and characters that feed big-budget cinema, the massive one, are the vector for an experience that is not exactly witnessing an alien and curious story that takes place in a universe parallel to ours; but of another type of experience, a totally sensory and visceral one like that of a roller coaster.
the other cinema
This does not imply that there is no space for what we know as cinema. There is, only that it is much more hidden or restricted, and it has changed windows. That “shrinking crowd” In any case, it aspires to the audiovisual story, but to an increasing extent this cinema that does not appeal directly to the sensory (although it does appeal to the spectacular: every film is a spectacle, every film is larger than life) takes refuge in the platforms. Just look at the grids of mubi, the platform dedicated above all to festival and review films, or Qubit, which focuses on reviews and classics, to discover that much of the film is available to anyone who wants to see it. But it is also true that the appearance in theaters and a correct diffusion allow that audience to be expanded. That’s what doesn’t happen.
There are theaters, especially in Buenos Aires, that continue to bet on becoming an alternative territory (even if films that were massive, not too long ago, are broadcast there). The Lugones Hall, of the San Martín Theater, is something like the dean, with its cycles dedicated to infrequent themes and directors on the billboard. The same with the newer rooms of the Cultural San Martín, which appeal to a slightly more popular cinema and genres. He Malba-Cinema It usually includes in its programming a not inconsiderable number of recent Argentine films that are not interesting for the commercial circuit. And the Fine Arts-Cinema, For some years now, it has been generating an audience with the alternation of filmmakers and non-commercial cycles (it is, of all those mentioned, the only free space). That is where what we could call “classic cinephilia” takes refuge: the most specialized viewers or those who seek a review of the pleasures of the past.
But beyond these places, cinephilia and the viewer who is still looking for the horizon of the story and of the actor above the physical sensation takes refuge en masse in streaming. The thought (not entirely wrong) is “if this is not gigantic, why not watch it at home?”. And in addition, the technology of reproduction of image and sound in the home contributes. It is true: in today’s Argentina it is a bit risky to say that the price of such equipment is accessible, or the subscription to this or that platform. But it is necessary to see it with perspective: all technology becomes cheaper over time and this crisis will not be eternal (who will be left standing later is to discuss it elsewhere; in the meantime, let’s pray).
the festivals
Beyond these notes, there is something else worth noting. Film festivals (Argentina has two important ones, Bafici and Mar del Plata, which are still resisting despite the catastrophic economic conditions in our country) have a large audience, but what attracts them is less the selection of films than being part of an event. It is not “the movies” that summon (because “the movies” can be achieved in different ways and without leaving home) but “being part of”.
what did he make of Barbenheimer (Barbie plus Oppenheimer) a success? The idea of seeing two completely different but huge budget movies at the same time, the playful part of it, not Barbie or Oppenheimer themselves. And in fact, it is worth considering whether the success it had in the sixties and seventies, in the “cinemas of the L” (Lorange, Lorraine, Losuar and Loire), for example, Ingmar Bergman; he also had nothing to do with being part of the conversation, of what was being said then. At that point, the channels have changed (social networks, versus, coffee at Bar La Paz, today a sushi franchise) but not the central idea of the community of cinema. Same for streaming recommendations. This conversation is what creates those new event professionals we call “influencers”. But it is the least.
cinephilia it did not disappear: what seems to happen is that it has dissolved, it has ceased to have a center and has yet to find a way to recover its curiosity towards what is different. But the same goes for everything, from music to politics, from gastronomy to erotic relationships. The cinema, a modern reflection of the world, could not be oblivious to such movements.
*NEWS Film Critic.
Image gallery
