Response to "Introduction to Avant-Garde Film"

I agree with MacDonald's observation that many are confused after viewing an avant-garde film for the first time. The reason for this is that the population is brainwashed by traditional commercial films that Hollywood spits out every week. I'd like to take this observation further. People willingly watch traditional narrative films because it follows a clear formula (such as a 3 act structure) familiar to everyone, even if they are not aware of it; people like a clear-cut beginning, middle, and end because that is the basics of storytelling. Novels and plays were admired way before film was created, and filmmakers capitalize on film as a way of documenting a play or adapting a novel. Poems and paintings, however, are not capitalized in this way by Hollywood. Avant-garde film is, arguably, the cinematic equivalent to poems and paintings. It seems that people, for the most part, are not as interested in interpretation as they are in being told what the subject matter is precisely about. You can ask someone what an Indiana Jones movie is about and get a clear response, but it is difficult to get a response when you ask someone what Un Chien Andalou is about. It seems that avant-garde is about truly looking at what is being presented rather than just being shown or told.