Kevin Smith has been quoted saying that ‘every film is someone’s favorite film’. For young independent filmmaker, Sav Rodgers, that film would be Smith’s own “Chasing Amy.” In this case, “Chasing Amy” was a talented lumberer, aggressive, and sexual comic that a heterosexual comic book artist strikes with a self-professed lesbian. The store was adored a long time ago as a border-pushing indy darling and even contains the Criterion Collection. As culture and queer politics have advanced, so has this film. For precociously Rodgers of young age queer was living in Topeka Kansas as a bullied kid without a friend, his mother’s DVD of this movie, almost saved his life. Its info bio states that He fed it. Now He is supposed to make a new one called “Chasing Chasing Amy”. It begins as another in a long line of disposable auto-docs from people who overly want pop culture idols to hold more significance only to the bit more complex during its back half.
“Amy,” alongside a lot of other works in the industry, has undergone a notable cultural transformation in the past years and it is this very thing that attracts a considerable portion of Rodgers’ attention during the first part of “Chasing Chasing”. It’s the usual assortment of the movie’s talking heads (Scott Mosier, producer, and actor/indie filmmaker Guinevere Turner), as well as cultural commentators in more contemporary settings (Princess Weekes and Chris Gore) who criticize the movie’s “problematic” aspects. In doing so, we cover a range of topics such as Smith’s glorified niche in the indie film industry of the 90s or the more controversial ways in which it perpetuates, but depending on your perspective represents biphobia and bi-erasure.
Is it fair to say that “Amy” is biased because the cis white male director wrote it using his perspective when at least a prejudice or lack of understanding about queerness is c) interlaced within the character of Affleck who is deeply flawed and b) is still relevant to the queer audience who experienced it in that case? What do you think is Rodgers’ view on it – Yes or No? No, it’s not; after all, he waxed rhapsodic about the film’s role in helping him come to terms with his own sexuality and gender identity in a TED talk that would eventually draw the eye of Smith himself. The man would become an erstwhile mentor to the starry-eyed filmmaker- Smith it appears, especially loves having such a fan child who is still interested in his works.
“Chasing Chasing Amy” is caught between the critical assessment of Amy’s standing in the context of the queer indie film sphere and Sav’s interview. In this example, they chose Lavoe’s romance with Smith that’s more intriguing. In many respects, this feels like an idea that Rodgers has pursued all along that this doc is his chance to finally submerge into the world and narrative of his favorite movie: meeting Smith, visiting locales from the film, and finally, engaging in role plays with his girlfriend, Riley (whose fate, happily, seems destined to not have a dark twist like those of Holden and Alyssa). Its wider context within the history of queer cinematography reminiscent of ‘the single guys’ response to Turner’s Go Fish, or to ‘The Watermelon Women’ by Cheryl Dunye of ‘The Watermelon Woman’ is not so significant as its being part of Sav’s heart.
Even if it’s straightforward to accuse ‘Chasing Chasing Amy’ of being an egregious example of uncritical worship, it won’t be much more than a glorified PowerPoint, with a lot of tacky edits and terrible transitions in video form. But as a sociological study, that’s the irony it works surprisingly well. When Smith begins to explore the making of Amy, he is thrust into an amorphous parasocial echo chamber populated by his rabid fans. As cherished and formative as it remains for him, Rodgers’ indefatigable penchant does face hurdles.
Well, never mind the Harvey Weinstein element here, Smith understands well the duplicity of being wooed and told that the very man who was instrumental in setting up his career was in a hotel room, during Sundance’s US premiere of ‘Amy’, assaulting Rose McGowan. Harsher letters come out when Rodgers finally brings in Adams herself the co-writer of the Smith dui-db and Smith’s lover, whose short-lived romance with Smith somewhat gave rise to the script. Instead of the picturesquely focused compilation of retrospectives we’ve had until now, Adams shares with Smith the retelling of her different experience of watching the said movie and her relationship with him from the past.
It’s fascinating to see the director’s conflicting thoughts present in the style of the film, especially regarding his backstory and relationship with ‘Chasing Amy’. Whether young Rodgers likes or dislikes the notions behind the film’s main love story, at the end of the day, he believes himself to be an empathetic person, which exposes him to immense distortion. Considering how he believes his purpose derives from portraying Amy as a reasonable protagonist, the final act contradicts his perception. Many such questions now arise: If a director has deep resentment in making a film, then why is there such strong emphasis on their mistakes? Are the artists that participate in the movie merely acting as blindfolds preventing the audience from grasping its true message? Or is it the audience furiously trying to find hidden morals in a movie regardless of its flaws?
It’s structured around one filmmaker’s devotion to their beliefs, however, there is still ample room left to analyze fandom, queerness, and the 90s indie movie scene in ‘Chasing Chasing Amy’. Yet the difference between ‘Chasing’ and ‘Chasing Chasing Amy’ is that during sincere moments, sometimes a filmmaker decides not to act certain. This difference in approach can assist us in discovering and understanding our relationship with the art we hold dearly.
It is quite unfortunate that instead of staring with wide eyes at the collapse of Sav’s fan bubble, we seek what lies beneath the surface.
Watch free movies on Fmovies.
