During the summer of 1997, I worked in a Mom and Pop video store. We didn’t let the fact that we were small hold us back from being at the forefront. We were the first local video shop to carry a library of DVD’s while the behemoth retail chains were still hawking the soon-to-be-outdated VHS. As I first navigated the DVD format, something novel yet surprisingly intuitive emerged. Multiple languages, chapter stops, and special features introduced me to a brave new world of film. The feature that I was most enraptured by, and had the most value to me, was the audio commentary tracks.
Audio Commentary for "The Matrix."
As a young aspiring writer and filmmaker, audio commentaries provided me an unprecedented, yet conversational look into filmmaking. I was enthralled by the scholarly discourse and entertained by the production minutiae. It was like a little bit of film school attached to the end of my favorite film. It made me feel like an insider. For others audio commentary provides sheer entertainment, an expected feature of modern home video. And others still, find it as an uninteresting feature that remains relegated to the niche backgrounds of cinephiles.
Long gone from today’s commentaries is the scholarly discourse. Instead, the commentary has been replaced by insipid anecdotes and the filmmaker’s inside jokes. It seems audiences are more interested in the strict entertainment aspects of commentary, such as on EuroTrip where the director plays a drinking game. Indeed it has become masturbatory rather than informational.
So, what happened to the thoughtful and deliberate audio commentary? When did the landscape change from deconstruction and intellectualization of filmmaking to a sheer and meaningless entertainment romp?
I asked a close friend of mine, a television writer, what she thought of the state of audio commentaries for film and television. She said plainly, she’s never watched or listened to a single one because she simply didn’t care. I was surprised! I had assumed, like me, most of my peers would enjoy, dare I say, revel in the special features and audio commentaries especially with movies that are repeat viewing favorites. Why wouldn’t they want to know everything there is to know about how their favorite movie was made?
Another friend, a special effects artist feels ambivalent, “[the commentaries] always act like everything is a big happy family during production. I was just watching a dvd commentary on a movie I worked on. We [the effects team] made their movie look great. But the production was a nightmare, I wasn’t fully paid.” For him, commentary simply reminds him of the injustices of the industry.
Audio Commentary for "Donnie Darko."
Maybe there is very little usefulness of audio commentary for filmmakers. But that only makes up for a small portion of the movie-consuming public. Even today, despite its ubiquity, the value of having commentary on a film is difficult to measure. If you are an unknown, with only unsold or self produced projects there will be little interest in hearing you yap about how your uncle let you use his roller rink for the dance scene.
When an interviewer asked Woody Allen if he would like “definitive statements” on each of his films by way of commentary, Allen simply responded “No, I’m really not interested. I want my films to speak for themselves.” For him, what is important is the film’s content. Is it a good film in its own merit?
When I listened to the Director’s Cut DVD of Donnie Darko, I was disappointed when I discovered Kevin Smith, (whom was not involved in film) “stopped by” to talk on the commentary. I was far more interested in what Richard Kelly had to say about his vision and the new cut than Kevin Smith’s occasional dick joke and ramblings. It took me out of the experience; it was no longer a filmmaker and his film. I was no longer a fly on the wall, but an annoyed third wheel listening to two dudes who might as well have been chatting over a beer.
For those of you who love commentary and still feel like it has merit, there are sites that have emerged to help the film consumer navigate. Most notably is the user supported website RateThatCommentary.com. A quick look at the site and you may notice attitudes are changing. Interest in commentary that is more like an Inside the Actor’s Studio affair than a traditional audio commentary is on the rise. Indeed, one entry about the Donnie Darko audio commentary says: “I’m beginning to enjoy more commentaries where someone from outside the production of the film can sit in with the filmmaker.”
Despite this, I still love the audio commentaries and find their content mostly worthwhile. While I may get frustrated by their inelegance, or their pointless banter, it is still an inside ticket into a film. I feel more connected to it, knowing the small details that happened on set or the “happy accidents” that helped create my favorite scene. And for me, that’s what it’s all about.
Merrel Davis is a screenwriter and freelance writer for The Film Crusade.
I tend to listen to commentaries and agree with the degree of enjoyment and frustration outlined in the article. One thing in particular that has frustrated me on various commentaries – don’t wish to single one out – is when you come upon a particularly intriguing or enjoyable scene that is for some reason a standout and you can’t wait to hear what the filmmaker & co. have to say about it. It can be a brilliant moment for an actor or an inspired shot selection; it varies. You go to the commentary after the movie and instead of talking about it they are babbling inanely about themselves or some general point they started five minutes beforehand and is totally unrelated to what is clearly an interesting moment in the film. Or, as has happened, they just remain inexplicably silent. Sounds a bit odd, I know, but it has driven me batty on more than one occasion.
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it
I kind of disagree with this article
The author sites “Eurotrip” and how the director was playing a drinking game to state how director commentaries have gone down hill. It’s “Eurotrip” he should be playing a drinking game because his movie wasn’t much more entertaining than a drinking game.
If Ridley Scott is playing a drinking game while he is commenting on “Gladiator” or “Matchstick Men” than by all means complain about the decline of the quality of director commentaries (Ridley by the way gives some of the best director commentaries ever).
I think a lot of films that do have director commentary are usually right on the money.
I do agree that sometimes you hope the commentary will be insightful and instead you are treated to uninformative chatter. Like anything the director commentary can be epic or a tremendous letdown. It is almost as if you are watching a double feature because the director commentary can take the movie you just saw and transport you to new heights. Which has happened on various experiences personally, but it can also just be dribble.
My bigger concern is with the advent of instant view on sites like Netflix what will happen to the future of these amazing inside looks into the filmmaking process. I have called Netflix personally asking them to please put director commentary on their sites.
I think each filmmaker has the discretion to do what they will with their director commentary. Its an opportunity for filmmakers to let their fans in and some will take the opportunity to really educate the viewers and others will play drinking games while some will abstain from the whole process not wanting to take the magic out of what you just saw. I say to each their own!