At the start of this film, particularly within the first seven minutes, there was a point where I thought this could be my favourite film in Haver's "12 films in 12 months" project. But as it progressed, it quickly became my least favourite.
When I say least favourite, I don't necessarily mean in terms of my viewing experience. Compared to something like Hiccups, I could gel with the style a lot more. The acting felt a lot more natural, it has a good sense of humour, and it's certainly more original. What I could not stand, however, is what this represents artistically in Joel's catalogue.
The 9th Movie is a grossly bitter and dishonest (or delusional), film from Joel. At the start, I thought we'd be getting an honest reflection from Joel on his filmmaking process. Something which expressed his inner turmoil and frustrations with creating zero-budget features. It's an approach that, without doubt, puts limits on the things you can create and cuts you off from working with very creative people who excel at this professionally. Especially for somebody like Joel, who has preached the idea of imperfection time and time again, I wouldn't be surprised if his insistence on creating zero-budget films has created pressure in himself to stick to that mantra, even if it comes at the expense of hurting his artistic desires.
How wrong I was. Previous to this project, it was my understanding that Joel's career and personal mission was to emphasize that zero-budget films are JUST as valid as Hollywood films. But The 9th Movie proves that what he really thinks is that it's an inherently better system.
Don't get me wrong, in some ways it can be. I think it creates more avenues for the people that Hollywood writes films about to create those projects themselves, making much more honest and grounded works for it. But in other ways, I think there are obvious downsides. There's a limit to things you can express with visuals and audio. Your access to a talented pool of people such as actors, composers, etc... goes way down. All of which can result in an experience that totally kills immersion.
No matter how you create a film, it's going to have its constraints and problems. But with this film, Joel chooses to plead ignorant to that idea. Instead, he'd rather make a film with the thesis that essentially boils down to "to heck with the haters." First of all, I wouldn't be able to stomach ANY film where the director just cries about criticism for an hour, regardless of how much money was put into it. But more importantly, if you're going to address that criticism, at least do it sincerely. Joel's deflection of criticism for his approach reads as completely disingenuous. I think there are very few people on this planet who watch a Joel Haver film and think that he needs to be working with Scarlett Johanson or Chris Pratt. It's a completely absurd and hyperbolic point to make.
What is so wrong with acknowledging that time can often lead to stronger projects? In this film, Joel says the 12 features project is cool because it's never been done before. And sure, that's neat, but what is that in service to? Just to say that you did it? That is a beyond shallow and self-indulgent reason.
I don't know. For me, Joel's creative mission always spoke for itself with his previous output. But here, he's quite literally spelling it out for us in a way which feels like a giant ego-stroke. He's repeating things we've heard him preach multiple times before. And I believe in those things he preaches. But when you make something that shows such little self-awareness, something that feels so deflective and resentful, something that feels so driven by ego, I am immediately turned off.
The cast did a great job though, they all bounced off each other's energy incredibly well. I just wish it wasn't surrounded by a film that feels so gross.
