Celluloid Mavericks

Celluloid Mavericks; A History of American Independent Film, Greg Merritt, New York, 2000


Independent cinema is hot right now. A significant portion of hipsters look upon it as the only watchable cinema as demonstrated by the exchange in the 2006 Simpsons episode where they imitate an episode of 24.

Martin: "It's as boring as mainstream cinema."
Lisa: (snort of laughter) "So true."

That is definitely an attitude you frequently hear. Independent cinema is better written, acted, smarter, and just all around better in every way for many hipsters. Yet to numerous non-hipsters, independent cinema is where stories go to get poor production values, relatively unknown actors, stories that are not as exciting or entertaining and are just generally inferior in every way.

Neither is entirely accurate, nor do either of them accurately represent the history of independent cinema.

In his book Celluloid Mavericks Merritt goes back to the very beginning of cinema to show how independent cinema started, how it has developed, and how it impacts the movie industry even today.

He starts out by trying to define what is and what is not an independent movie. He points out a lot of "independent" movies are financed, produced, and directed by companies that are owned by major studios, though others are indeed truly brought to the screen from outside the Hollywood studio system.

He makes a powerful argument that even the first "feature movie", The Birth of a Nation (1915) was also the first independent movie. D.W. Griffith directed a lot of shorts for the studios but Birth was financed and distributed against their will. Of course, looking back we all know the result and how Birth caused the feature film explosion. The success of an independent film completely changed how movies were made and marketed.

Ironically, the success of Birth essentially turned the United Artists into a studio.

It happened again when Walt Disney made Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937). Again his position as an independent allowed him to take a risk the studios would not take and after his spectacular success animated features made their way onto the big screen. Of course, these days Walt Disney Studios are a major studio with subsidiaries of their own.

Of course, not all independent movies were such spectacular successes. Many of them made little or no money. However, this itself led to a cottage industry with men making inexpensive movies that did not need to do particularly well to generate profit. Many exploitation pictures fell into this genre.

Merritt does a good job of exploring every end of the spectrum. He traces the careers of directors who worked primarily outside the studios to create works of varying quality and explains how independent films affected movies within the studio system.

He does an excellent job of exploring the good and the bad of independent cinema and making it come along with a variety of anecdotes and miniature essays that reveal the history, the trials, the triumphs and tragedies that come with independent cinema.

He also does a good job of showing how independent cinema and mainstream cinema are very symbiotic, each helped by the existence of the other.

If you are interested in movies and their history, this is a book you should definitely read. You will come away with a greater appreciation for all forms of cinema.