I'm very interested in this topic, as you call it the sludgification of film which I think has at least a few possible/plausible explanations. First of all, it seems unlikely that a ballyhooed top hollywood release, the investment of many millions of dollars, leaves much to chance -- not even the sludge, directorial artistic license be damned. Focus groups. It turns out folks want to look at sludge! (this is just a theory)
It may be a reaction to the anodyne perfection of digital cinema, nostalgia for analogue film look, and the newfound desire for 'authenticity' (100% authentic digital sludge). Or simply all the recent box office winners have it. Cheap gravitas that may otherwise be MIA between preposterous storylines and dialled-in performances by unconvincingly de-aged stars.
I'm interested in it because my latest cinema-inflected (or infected) faux photo book project is all kinds of sludgy! I will post a link in due course, once I am satisfied it isn't pandering to fellow cataract sufferers. Or even if it is. Double-vision is underrated!
All my projects are shot on consumer film stock with broken cameras: the sludge is free, and plentiful."Man cleared of charges in ransom plot to turn Confederate chair into a toilet" |