Hollywood loves more than anything else to make films about Hollywood. There may be some trivial economic reasons for this, films about films taking place mostly in film studios are easy to make in film studios. There is a more deeper reason however, and this is the Hollywood fascination for movies and for itself. It may be considered self-serving, but when the fascination is shared by audiences the result is good movies. Actually, some of the best movies made at Hollywood take place and are about making films (in most cases in Hollywood). ‘s ‘The Disaster Artist’ belongs to this category, but there is an increased risk as its topic is the making of ‘The Room‘ considered by many the worst film in history and its principal hero is its director, producer, script actor and lead actor,

 

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3521126/

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3521126/

 

The Disaster Artist’ tells the true story of the making of a film which many consider so bad that it should never have been done. Yet, this film is born of the passion and of the desire to prove themselves of two aspiring actors who were rejected by the Hollywood system. We know that Hollywood is a capitalist jungle, that one in a hundred or a thousand make it, that in order to succeed one needs talent and luck. But if talent and luck are missing, can money replace them?  tried to prove it by making ’The Room‘. The result was surprising, just because the film was not mediocre, it was awful. Superlatively awful, to the point to become a success and a legend.

 

(video source A24)

Viewing  ’The Disaster Artist’ asks some troubling questions about what is a ‘good’ film, and what it takes for a film to become a ‘cult film’. Are we living in times of such confusion of values that nothing does really matter? If bad is good, than ‘The Room‘ is the best because it was the worst? What turned it into a ‘cult film’ and what does this mean? I would not say that all these artistic and philosophical questions found answers in ’The Disaster Artist’. The film is well made and it entertains,  does a good job as a film director and as an actor, but I cannot claim that I understand his character (yes, he has passion, but passion is just one component of film or any other art making) or what a ‘cult film’ is. I can however say that I witnessed an episode of the ‘cult of ‘The Room” as the cinema hall at the cinematheque in my city was more populated than in an average evening, most of the spectators were young people who knew and voiced text loudly, in chorus and in sync with the actors, and brought with them spoons. Why spoons? You need to come and see the movie to learn the answer.