Customer Reviews

Videohound's Independent Film Guide

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Read through some of the reviews in this book before you buy it!!! There are a number of things about this guide that are disappointing, so it's all the more pity that it seems to be the only published collection on independent films. (Let me preface my complaints by saying that, as with all film guides, the degree to which your taste lines up with the writer's makes a huge difference. Perhaps if I found this guide to be more consistent with my own taste, the other issues would not have bothered me so much.) Aside from the author's taste, here are some things about the guide that might bother you.

First, although the guide uses a rating system (from 4 "bones" [good] to a "woof" [bad]); you might be surprised, however, at how often the author will devote half a page describing a "woof" of a movie, and a mere few sentences describing a "four bone" film.

Second, although there are a number of useful appendices (films listed by director, cast member, category), there is no listing by rating; you'd think if they bother to rank films according to their bones system, at least they'd give us the chance to flip to the back and see a listing of what the author considers the best independent films.

Third, the author certainly knows film history, but it's annoying to have her rambling non-sequiters take the place of description or evaluation of a film (example: the entire "review" of "La Femme Nikita" is devoted to a tirade about how the American version of the film is a rip-off -- and how the tv series continues this corruption. Even if you agree with her, as I do, you may wish she at least described the orignal movie for those who have never seen it -- and gave some sense of what is interesting about it.)

Fourth, the physical format of the book is annoying; it is larger and "floppier" than other guides (such as the Time Out guide) and quite unwieldy (you won't find it is easy to sit and read, let alone carry into your video store).

Fifth, since Video Hound also publishes a companion guide to World Cinema, and since it's not clear what criteria are being used to include "foreign" (ie, non-English language) films in the current guide (the fact they are foreign? or famous? or the reviewer has seen them?), it's somewhat frustrating that there are a number of foreign films listed in this Independent Film Guide -- rather than more unknown or little-known indies.

For those who have been waiting for a reference guide to independent films, your time has come. Unfortunately, you will most likely be disappointed as the author of the book's reviews, Monica Johnson, occasionally rambles without giving much or any information on the film's plot, as noted by another customer reviewer. There are also some glaring omissions from the book, such as three fairly well-known indies from the summer of 1998, "Slums of Beverly Hills", "Buffalo 66", and "Your Friends and Neighbors". Why these films were not included is beyond me. Overall, the book is fairly satisfactory but I was left still hoping for a more comprehensive guide to this ever-changing outlet of American and world cinema.

Just because a male has a lack of appreciation for something written by a female does not make him a sexist or a leather-jacketed thug. As a near-lifelong film buff, I know how to separate the wheat (James Agee, Pauline Kael, and Roger Ebert, to name a few) from the chaff (Kevin Thomas of the LA Times, for example) and, Ms. Sullivan, your writing falls into the latter category. There are several glaring ommissions, as noted in a previous review, from this compilation and a handful of the 'reviews' neglect to mention plot elements; instead, the reader finds rants where they hope to learn about what exact strands, characters, or aspects of the film are flawed. Therein, the main element that makes the writings of Agee and Kael, for starters, so readable and cogent years after they ceased writing (death in the case of Agee and health problems for Kael) is missing. Great film criticism has an endless shelf life; this collection will soon find its place on the latter half of two-for-one deals at yard sales once a far superior guide comes about.

Tho it's more than I've ever seen available on this subject in 1 book, it's not quite what I expected. For instance, my favorite directors (Jaglom & Rudolph) did many, many films that are not included in her book. Perhaps the next edition can include EVERY movie by a diretor, while indicating with an * those that are actually reviewed in the book. Also, some classics are missing such as Diva, The Moderns, King of Hearts, etc.<P>PLEASE, WILL SOMEONE WRITE A BOOK THAT IS COMPREHENSIVE?<P>Thx,

This book has very bad reviews, many enteries lacking sufficient information, and even factual errors. I must agree with another reviewer who said that her analysis of "A Boy and His Dog" smacked of feminism. I think that Ms.Sullivan has some tricks up her sleeve, and her motives are questionable at best. A number of reviews have little plot description, and apparently Monica feels that this should be an outlet to unleash her boorish rants(I never thought a rant could be so mundane, until I read this book). One thing I must point out is that Ms.Sullivan calls the writer of "Kids" a she. Well, I am sure that Harmony Korine would be suprised to learn that he is really a woman! Come on, the author of this collection is obviously a hack who did the barest minimum of research. I could have come up with something far more accurate and amusing than this drivel. But still, I give this two stars instead of one, only because it is marginally helpful. Really, if you need info on a film, use the Internet Movie Database. Their compendium is far greater than anything in this book.

As the previous reviews note, this volume has a lot going for it - decent scope and background info on many movies - but it has several flaws which prevent it from being as useful as it could have been: 1) The informal tone of the writing occasionally leads to overly juvenile and not overly illuminating rah-rah or boo-hiss opinionating on the film/director/whatever being discussed, 2) Too often background info on the movie is about the only thing discussed in the review, and little things like, well, what the movie is actually *about* get ignored (see, for ex., the "Gaslight" 'review'). Whether this is oversight or intellectual arrogance - "hey doesn't everybody know about this movie already?" - is hard to tell, and 3) the author's flaky politics occasionally intrude - for ex., her PC 'women are so oppressed yet smarter than men' views taint some reviews (see "Bad Lieutenant", for one ex.), and some films, such as "And the Band Played On", are included/praised more for their Grand Political Importance than anything worthy about the film in itself. Nevertheless, if you've an interest in the indie-film scene this is a worthwile buy, but just in case its style doesn't agree with you, be sure to either read through it first or buy it on sale!

Since I own a lot of VideoHound books and am a fan of Independant films, I decided purchase this book. Bad idea. The author is an elitist snob. She is constantly dropping names. When she reviews a movie, most of the time she will tell you that it reminds her of another, more foreign sounding movie. It is written with a complete lack of humor that is so pleantiful in other videohound guides. If you don't believe me, read her overbearing, femminist review of "A Boy & His Dog." In short, this book exemplifies everything that I hate about "independent" (read: multimillion dollar-artsy films with no immagination) movies. Its a cold, sterile entry into the otherwise great VideoHound library. The only redeeming value it has is the wonderful indexes that has become a VideoHound trademark.

This guide to independent films is quite a mess. A straight alphabetical order makes it easy to find films, but without some mention of distributors or a production company, it really doesn't explain what makes each film an indie. The reviews themselves are subjective to the point of annoyance, focusing more on the author's lies and dislikes than on the merits of the film. Some reviews actually have two different scores, ("Evil Dead" three bones for fans, but for me just one.") a concept that makes absolutely no sense. Have an opinion and stick with it don't hedge your bets. Even the indices serve no real purpose, listing some actors and directors and not others and only in the indies that are in this book-pointless. As a critical guide, this book is useless; as a list of films you might not be familiar with, it has a purpose.

I liked the book because of its personal nature. Its a good step in the right direction. I think Sullivan is funny and knows her stuff. A true film buff is rare. Its also outrageously comprehensive. What a way to spend your life--watching fabulous movies or not even so fabulous, and then writing your piece. The reviews are short--and I liked that--also, makes me want to dig deeper. A lot of worthwhile info!

I enjoy reading books by movie buffs and I think that this book reveals the spirit of a reviewer who sees a lot films and is not afraid to like or dislike what she sees.

She puts it out boldly in her review on 'Valentino'. That is a film most people clearly disliked-- but she loved it. It is clear that Sullivan has seen everything she reviewed and for that reason it makes the book very special. Even if she dislikes a film, its worth it to me to have this reference when I see it. I certainly agreed with what she wrote about 'A Boy and a Dog' ( and I would say BARF, not just WOOF). After all, Don Johnson begs for ridicule, and its funny to hear that the press attaché begged her to go back in! And that's an example of a film that people seemed to like.

The same went for'Cold Feet' when the press kit included instructions on what to laugh at or not. I enjoy these insides to a reviewers life, just as all aspects of the movie business. I particularly loved Sullivan's review of 'Jackie Brown'! That was what I was thinking exactly. Pam Grier rocked in 'Coffie' but in Tarantino's film, she remains only an icon. I was also disappointed with the film 'Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! by Almodovar after his brilliant 'Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown', and the insights of the review point to some reasons why it didn't work.

Check out the review on 'Good Will Hunting' and you can imagine the effects of media bombardment that tells the public to like something, through sheer advertising. How about 'The Player', which Sullivan cryptically warns us if its a case book study: 'Heaven help Hollywood in the 21st Century'. ( And we 'were' warned! I am not looking forward to the Oscars 2002!). And I want to see Altman's 'The Delinquents' now, which she suggests.

Sullivan demythologizes film demagogues even in the Indie scene for us. I can understand that this is controversial but I love it!. With so much information (and since this in second reprint) I'm sure that any small discrepancies can be patched in for a third book, and I'm waiting. 1000 films are reviewed, and the special inserts are colorful and interesting for example on Lawrence Tierney, Ida Lupino and Sandra Goldbacher, to name only a few. Sullivan reveals so many aspects of independent film history which are valuable such as production code indies. ( 'Who Killed Teddy Bear') and Mary Pickford's work ( 'The Sparrow').

How about an overrated enigma indie like 'Spanking the Monkey', my sentiments exactly. And plots are revealed. 'Take Clay Pigeons' and 'The Journals of Jean Seberg' for example I have to say this is an excellent and personal review book. Critics have to dare to speak their truth, and I can't imagine their lives are always fun when their work is questioned. As Monica says "under threat of social torture, I will confess to being a movie reviewer". Further, she says 'I don't want a film to reinforce an opinion I already have. I want to see and hear the world from a perspective other than my own. I love it when a filmmaker shares a world that is wildly different from the one I've experienced up till now. Indies fill that need".

Monica's website 'Movie Magazine International' lives on in between reprints where I can keep up on independent film. I enjoy being a Monica Sullivan fan, she deserves her own cult and I sign up!