technical requirements

Jose Acosta

Jose is an aspiring writer/director with some very contraverisal experemintal films, Cardinal Sin and Eraser

Your films cover some very controversial subjects, religion and abortion, what experiences or beliefs have you had that made you tackle such matters?
I didn‰t produce these films because I have a strong opinion about the subject matter, and I definitely didn‰t want to preach. I believe people should be open-minded and make their own personal choices. My inspiration to make these films actually came from their accompanying music. I just pieced images in my head with the music. I attempted to make films (actually music video/films) that were as dramatic and intense as possible. Although my work isn‰t quite mainstream, I aspire to direct music videos. Britney Spears, are you listening?

Your images and ideas are forceful, disturbing, and tense. Is it your opinion that an audience responds best to such hammering techniques?
The purpose of film, and art in general, is to entertain, educate, and/or to simply make a statement. Whatever the objective is, the filmmaker must capture the audience's attention. Those films which evoke strong emotions succeed at drawing in the audience, and by doing so, the filmmaker achieves his/her primary goal: to create art, or to make money. In my opinion, the mass media and Hollywood exist strickly for profit, by simply offering the world audience two types of entertainment: happy, sugarcoated fluff like Disney and Backstreet Boys, and desensitizing sex and violence. These are the money-making tools that the media uses to control its reluctant, but usually eager to participate, audience. My purpose in creating such disturbing films was not solely for shock value, but to express my creativity and to bring images in my head to life. I don't label myself a great filmmaker, just a creative person. When an audience sees my films, I would rather they have a negative or positive reaction from what they have seen, than no reaction at all. When it comes to film, being boring is the ultimate sin.

Define art for art's sake and then define your films and describe the difference.
Art for art's sake is art that's created with no importance, deep meaning, or emotion, and not intended to be culturally enriching. There is good art and there is bad art; distinguishing between the two is up to the eye of the beholder. My films may be "artsy", but by no means a masterpiece. There's always plenty a bigger budget and more development can improve.

If you could make disappear three filmmakers and their entire catalogue of films, who would they be and why?
I wouldn't want any filmmaker or film to disappear, no matter how awful their films are. You can learn from the mistakes of others.

Name at least three films you've seen more than 10 times and why.
Ther are four: the Star Wars Trilogy and Aliens. I haven't seen them 10 times, but it sure feels like it. I'm not obsessive about things, but I can relate as to why Star Wars is like a religion to fans. Films I grew up watching have influenced me the most.

When you're at the end of your rope, what phrase(s) do you mutter to yourself to re-center?
Re-center? I'm perpetually off-centered. The "F" word is short and to the point, don't you think?