Camp Cult

In the ‘60s and ‘70s, a phenomenon occurred that changed exploitation cinema and helped mould films that would eventually become cult classics—Midnight Movies. Midnight movie screenings were the start of filmmakers including more sex and violence in their films, an era of provocation. This era gave birth to Blow Job, Sins of the Fleshapoids and El Topo

Trailer for El Topo
Scene from Pink Flamingos.

The ‘60s were also the time where the term “camp” became well known. Camp is an aesthetic style that is regarded as appealing because of its bad taste and ironic value. Camp aesthetics were popularized by filmmakers such as John Waters in films such as Pink Flamingos (1972). Films with camp aesthetics can be closely linked to films that fall into the category of paracinema. Paracinema refers to film genres that are out of the mainstream. Jeffery Sconce, the person who wrote the defining article on paracinema, has described paracinema as, “badfilm, splatterpunk, mondo films, sword-and-sandal epics, Elvis flicks, government hygiene films, Japanese monster movies, beach party musicals, and “just about every other historical manifestation of exploitation cinema from juvenile delinquency documentaries to … pornography.” 

What makes these films cult—a crucial aspect of cult cinema—is reception, which I will dip into very briefly. Cult cinema can be a number of different experiences. Cult cinema can be a phenomenal experience—an aesthetic one that is sought for its own sake or a spacial relationship (both geographical and mental). Cult cinema can be a bad experience, one that constitutes as poor or distasteful filmmaking. Cult cinema can be a collective experience, one that forms community. Ernest Mathijs describes this as, “a commonality of congregation that sees itself at odds with normalized culture.” Cult cinema can also be a connected experience, where a “network of relationships” is created, whereby this creates a feeling of belonging. Lastly, cult cinema can be a surplus experience. This is what Paul Ricoeur describes as a, “surplus of meaning and of value which is qualified but not exhausted by analysis.”


This week’s screening was a 1945 American film noir directed by Edgar G. Ulmer, Detour. The film follows a piano player, Al Roberts (Tom Neal), as he hitchhikes from NYC to LA to go to California to marry his girlfriend (Claudia Drake). During his trip, he is forced to make a few detours which, ultimately (with a couple of bad decisions), lead to his downfall.

Trailer for Detour

Detour is a “B” movie. This means that it was made on a low-budget, did not make use of very famous actors and was made over a very short period of time. During the Golden Age of Hollywood, “B” movies were intended to be the less publicized half of a double feature.  Detour was relatively well received when first released, it was a “B” movie that was worthwhile. Overtime, it became a primary example of film noir. Film critic Roger Ebert has written that Detour was, “from Hollywood’s poverty row, shot in six days, filled with technical errors and ham-handed narrative, starring a man who can only pout and a woman who can only sneer, should have faded from sight soon after it was released in 1945.” Detour was, however, far from this. Ebert continues, “it [Detour] lives on, haunting and creepy, an embodiment of the guilty soul of film noir.” 

4 thoughts on “Camp Cult

  1. ChelseaRae's avatarChelseaRae

    Your incorporation of the readings from class is amazing. I really like how you quoted from the reading and really brought in the culture of the time, which would influence the film. I agree that Al’s guilty soul will live on. Detour was definitely a haunting and creepy film for its time. Even though it is a “B-Movie” I think it went above and beyond that class and is truly enjoyable, even if Al is the most unreliable narrator of his time.

    Like

    Reply
  2. miaa's avatarmiaa

    Tallula! I liked the quote you inserted “it [Detour] lives on, haunting and creepy, an embodiment of the guilty soul of film noir.” It sums up why this movie is considered a cult film, and explains a lot about the movie. Your brief definition of camp was easily understood, and helped me understand how it relates ands works in different films.

    Like

    Reply
  3. spencerwickert's avatarspencerwickert

    Camp movies are different and are for someone who is looking to really branch out to new ideas. Sometimes with those films I felt as if the director looked for ideas that no one would dare to put on a screen. You talk about the film Pink Flamingos and we spoke a little on this one last year and some of the boundaries that were push. Your use of a gif on one of the grossest things to ever be added into a movie was a little unsettling but show what made the camp movies so great.
    You are dead on with what makes a cult movie a cult film, it is up to the viewer and what makes it memorable to them. So many of these are made on a small budget and don’t get the benefit of Hollywood type money. They use what they can get and don’t have waste with filming. This is why so many cult films may look cheesy, but everyone can watch and say that there was a screen that they will not forget.

    Like

    Reply
  4. zanescott13's avatarzanescott13

    Groovy! That was an awesome overview of camp and paracinema. I really liked your explanation of camp and it’s aesthetics. Also, what a great gif! I totally agree that cult movies are given that status from its fan reception.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to ChelseaRae Cancel reply