Talk:Indiewood

This entire article needs to be redone

By definition, the films and filmmakers listed in this article should all be part of the American independent film movement. This article should not include films that were produced without any American involvement (Japan, France, Australia, the UK, etc. are not part of the American independent film movement). Furthermore, just because someone has made an independent film does not mean that that film is part of Indiewood nor that the director is therefore a notable "Indiewood filmmaker". Please do not confuse "independent film" with "Indiewood". They are not the same thing. The overwhelming majority of these incorrect additions appear to have been made by User:Espngeek, who is conflating "indie" with "Indiewood" and automatically assuming that anyone who has ever made an independent film is therefore a notable "Indiewood filmmaker". I would like to kindly ask this user to go through the additions and remove all of the non-American films and filmmakers that were incorrectly added. Nicholas0 (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't say "American independent film movement", just "Indiewood" which also includes international fare... but for your sake, I just deleted them. Espngeek (talk) 16:29, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to the aptly titled Indiewood, USA, the concept of "Indiewood" refers to a crossover between Hollywood and independent filmmaking, i.e. films that may be partly financed or produced through the American studio system even though they are working outside of the traditional big-studio "Hollywood" system. The article at https://studentfilmjournal.wixsite.com/blog/post/indiewood-where-independent-cinema-and-hollywood-combine seems to draw a clear connection between the two. This is not to say that it is the same thing as the American independent film movement, so I would remove that from the lead paragraph. There may also be films included in the article that are simply American independent films and not necessarily "Indiewood" films. The provided references sometimes simply state that a film is an "independent" film, which may not necessarily always mean that it is "Indiewood". If you can find some clearer references defining this term or lists of films specifically defined as "Indiewood", then it would be easier to determine what films and filmmakers should be included in these lists in this Wikipedia article. Right now I don't see the term "Indiewood" being used in most of the references provided for films in these lists, even the American ones, so it's difficult to determine whether or not they belong in these lists. Right now it seems more like the article is largely a "List of independent films" rather than a list of films considered to be part of "Indiewood", but hopefully we can find some further references and create a clearer definition for the lead paragraph as the basis for determining what films should be included in the lists. Nicholas0 (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

100% agree with Nicholas0. Rebecca (1940 film) and Some Like It Hot are included based on a source that never mentions the term Indiewood and explicitly excludes United Artists films from consideration. The Background section seems to distinguish Indiewood from avant-garde cinema, yet Bruce Conner and Robert Breer are getting lumped in (with a source that only calls them "independent"). Any one of these should have been a red flag that this was going off the rails. As it is, the lists are full of entries like that, and the article has gone way into WP:SYNTHESIS and WP:OR. hinnk (talk) 06:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, someone who understands that there are major problems with this article overall. The problems start right in the first sentence with the fact that the article's author states that "Indiewood" is the same as "indie". Most of the mistakes in the rest of the article stem from that incorrect claim. The whole article is being written from the perspective of someone who thinks that "Indiewood" is simply another term for "indie", but if that were the case then this whole article would be unnecessary and superfluous. Nicholas0 (talk) 09:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not retitled the article "American independent cinema" as opposed to "Indiewood" which was a nickname for a certain collection of 1990s/2000s indie films? Espngeek (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it with lists of both "Indiewood" and "Pre-Indiewood" films Espngeek (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We already have an Independent film article which almost exclusively covers American independent cinema. Indiewood is a distinct business model and merits its own article. I am opposed to using the term "pre-Indiewood". A Google search suggests that it's effectively being coined specifically for this article.

I don't see how establishing any kind of link between Indiewood and filmmakers/works cited to sources only using the word "independent" but not discussing Indiewood meets the standard set in WP:OR. I plan on going through these lists and removing entries like this. hinnk (talk) 02:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]