In Defence of Trash Cinema

The other day, the aversion that certain film eclectics have to a very particular type of cinema came up as a topic in a conversation: trash cinema. When I talk about trashy cinema, titles such as the saga of Piranha (1978-2012) or Sharknado (2013-2021) come to mind, films that I think we can all agree do not represent the creme de la creme of cinema. However, there is an aversion on the part of moviegoers to these films and I could never figure out why.

In my opinion, this aversion arises when film students begin to see films by renowned authors such as Godard or Tarkovksy who are considered by many to be the greatest exponents of cinematographic productions. It is a natural tendency, it is true, no one who tastes fillet mignon wants to eat a worse cut ever again. However, we cannot downgrade the poorer cut because it also has its importance. Cinema is one big tapestry made up of every movie ever made, and it's important to realize that de-emphasizing trashy cinema is creating a hole in the tapestry.

If we were to look at trash cinema with an open mind we'd realize that this is a form of entertainment no less valid than Tarkovsky. The audience is extremely diverse and not all films can please everyone. They do not become, just because we don't like them, less worthy of study by anyone seeking a film education.

This is a problem that is often seen in academia. The student is faced with a new world of highly intellectualized works and is encouraged to reject their old reality, but here I leave a warning to those who enter academia: do not let yourself be carried away by what is indoctrinated, everything is cinema and everything is valid. If you want to know about the history of cinema you cannot exclude part of it. I once heard a colleague of mine at the academy say that she didn't watch black and white films because she thought they were less deserving of her attention than the others.

If you don't agree with this statement how can you agree with the undervaluing of trash cinema?

The paradigm of how we see cinema is changing. The ritual of going to the movie theater, buying popcorn and drinks and sitting in the dark of the room watching the ads in anticipation for the movie to start has been replaced by logging into one of the many streaming platforms and watching one of the movies suggested by an algorithm that adapts with each view. Gone are the days of watching a movie in a room, shared by a series of strangers. But will the growth of this new way of seeing cinema be the end of theaters?

Well, it's certainly possible that theater viewing will become a niche for the pseudo-cinephiles and pseudo-filmmakers out there, those rare birds who truly appreciate cinema as an art form. However, for everyone else, who makes up the vast majority, streaming is proving to be more than enough for their tastes. The growing expression of streaming platforms over the years has finally reached the point of being one more of our day-to-day amenities and, despite its contribution to the expansion of cinema, it also takes something away from it.

Digital media prevail more and more as the primary medium for the public of popular cinema and, curiously, physical media such as bluray or dvd are becoming collectors' objects for those who see cinema as a passion. It is a curious phenomenon to observe, the return to the ritual, from the few, of watching cinema at home, as in the days of vhs, the idolization of a film to the point of wanting it just for us, like Gollum in Lord of the Rings (2001-2003).

This phenomenon is becoming the salvation among home cinema cinephiles. It is the recovery, albeit lame, of the ritual of the theater but in the comfort of our own homes. Like vinyl, this collecting movement will never be adopted by the masses, except in passing fads perhaps, but it calms the soul to know that there will always be those who keep and collect relics that will be lost over time because they are not favored by algorithms.