I was only vaguely aware of A24, so I looked at the Vulture ranking of their films and, while I had never heard of quite a few, there were some I’d seen on the small screen (The Disaster Artist, Swiss Army Man, The Tragedy of Macbeth, Eighth Grade, First Cow, Minari, Under the Skin, The Farewell).
Other than the first one, I quite liked all the rest and still think about Eighth Grade from time to time (“Being yourself can be hard, and it’s like, aren’t I always being myself? And yeah, for sure.”).
A relative who teaches high school English had students read Macbeth and then showed them the Denzel-with-the-witches-in-the-rafters scene and he said it freaked them out. High praise indeed, right?
Two films in the list I would like to see: After Yang (since I liked Kogonada’s Columbus) and Everything Everywhere (to see what the excitement is about).
I guess a question would be, if A24 hadn’t been behind these movies, would they have been made? Or if still made, seen?
Thanks for your comment Frank! To answer your question, it’s true that the success of A24 has driven audiences, primarily young people, back to theaters and has helped spark a new investment in independent movies — a very good thing. But it’s also true that brand loyalty can be an enemy of critical media consumption, and a cult obsession with the studio can bring another slew of issues with it, even if its allowing smaller budget features into the spotlight.
This isn’t to say that I don’t like some of A24’s output (2016’s “The Lobster” is an all-time favorite of mine), and I didn’t intend this piece to be a critique of their films, many of which I enjoy. I wrote this piece to examine their unique marketing strategies and talk about why lauding a single studio as a savior of indie cinema has taken us down a precarious path. When people become loyal to a brand, they treat art like a product, which I think we can agree is a dangerous perspective to hold.
Glad you enjoyed reading it, and I hope you check out “After Yang” and “Everything Everywhere”, both of which I would recommend :)
They're not exactly churning out homogeneous product.
Demanding that audiences seek out other art of other films has no meaning or context. They're certainly seeing other films and other art, maybe often motivated to explore far and wide because they enjoy the variety of A24 output.
very thoughtful piece. thanks for writing it.
thank you so much! love your work & appreciate the support.
I was only vaguely aware of A24, so I looked at the Vulture ranking of their films and, while I had never heard of quite a few, there were some I’d seen on the small screen (The Disaster Artist, Swiss Army Man, The Tragedy of Macbeth, Eighth Grade, First Cow, Minari, Under the Skin, The Farewell).
Other than the first one, I quite liked all the rest and still think about Eighth Grade from time to time (“Being yourself can be hard, and it’s like, aren’t I always being myself? And yeah, for sure.”).
A relative who teaches high school English had students read Macbeth and then showed them the Denzel-with-the-witches-in-the-rafters scene and he said it freaked them out. High praise indeed, right?
Two films in the list I would like to see: After Yang (since I liked Kogonada’s Columbus) and Everything Everywhere (to see what the excitement is about).
I guess a question would be, if A24 hadn’t been behind these movies, would they have been made? Or if still made, seen?
Keep up the good work.
Thanks for your comment Frank! To answer your question, it’s true that the success of A24 has driven audiences, primarily young people, back to theaters and has helped spark a new investment in independent movies — a very good thing. But it’s also true that brand loyalty can be an enemy of critical media consumption, and a cult obsession with the studio can bring another slew of issues with it, even if its allowing smaller budget features into the spotlight.
This isn’t to say that I don’t like some of A24’s output (2016’s “The Lobster” is an all-time favorite of mine), and I didn’t intend this piece to be a critique of their films, many of which I enjoy. I wrote this piece to examine their unique marketing strategies and talk about why lauding a single studio as a savior of indie cinema has taken us down a precarious path. When people become loyal to a brand, they treat art like a product, which I think we can agree is a dangerous perspective to hold.
Glad you enjoyed reading it, and I hope you check out “After Yang” and “Everything Everywhere”, both of which I would recommend :)
They're not exactly churning out homogeneous product.
Demanding that audiences seek out other art of other films has no meaning or context. They're certainly seeing other films and other art, maybe often motivated to explore far and wide because they enjoy the variety of A24 output.
A24 is also working with YouTuber Kane Pixels, the high school kid who went viral with his Backrooms videos.
Either slow down or pull over and let me out . . . .