The evolution of the film bro – The Face

As far as cinephile archetypes go, none are quite as notorious as the film bro. Once upon atime, they were characterised as the obnoxious student who worships at the feet of Quentin Tarantino, Nicolas Winding Refn and Stanley Kubrick. They completely miss the point of American Psycho, and claim they understood the plot of Inception on the first watch. Their movie appetite is limited to the IMDb 250, acanon of films directed by mostly white cis men, deemed to be worthy by mostly white, cis male gatekeepers.

But as arecent TikTok trend demonstrates, the definition of the film bro has now expanded. The videos involve users filming themselves with their mouths agape, alongside ironic captions maligning apicky moviegoing partner. Film bros when you tell them you want to watch aMarvel movie and not atwo-hour black and white movie about the Serbian government shown through the eyes of apigeon, one reads. Pretentious film bros when someone says they would rather watch acomedy than a15-hour black and white Polish film that critiques capitalism, says another. Further TikToks mock the film bros horror at someone who wont watch a Croatian film about amans divorce process with his wife.

The message is clear: film bros should simply lighten up abit. But theres also been acurious shift in the perceived tastes of the film bro online beyond Christopher Nolan and the like, these now seem to include anything perceived as foreign. The geographical descriptors in these captions imply that anything non-American is automatically pretentious and elitist (which in itself is pricked with xenophobia.)

Is it silly to put this much thought into ameme? Perhaps. But when film bro movies are seen as misogynist red flags, its concerning that the number of films branded as such stretch far beyond Pulp Fiction and Joker. To close oneself off from all cinema in favour of what feels comfortable sets an alarming precedent. Theres adisturbing lack of curiosity when it comes to cinema, evident in the near-complete erasure of the mid-budget movie, and calls for the Academy Awards not to reflect the best films of the year, but simply whats popular at the time. Now that the cinematic scope of the average viewer is as narrow as the original film bros, the goalposts have moved.

In 1993, Martin Scorsese wrote aletter to the New York Times in response to an article criticising Federico Fellinis films for being too opaque to decipher astory. Its not the opinion Ifind distressing, but the underlying attitude toward artistic expression that is different, difficult or demanding, he said. I feel its adangerous attitude, limiting, intolerant. If this is the attitude toward Fellini, one of the old masters, and the most accessible at that, imagine what chance new foreign films and filmmakers have in this country? Its telling that Scorseses words from almost 30years ago continue to resonate today.

View original post here:

The evolution of the film bro - The Face