In respons to the Dogme 95 article

Reading through the Dogme 95 ideas helped me think about what I think makes a good movie, and I realized that it is very hard for me to describe what I think a good movie is in a concise manner. I think the reason for this is that film is such a huge medium of communication, and there are so many different things you can express through them. The Dogme 95 movement felt that it was important to portray realistic events, characthers, scenes etc. through their films. I can see why they would have wanted to do this. It seems like a lot of movies are completely unrealistic and don't allow for much connection for the viewer to make with what he or she sees on the screne and his or her own life. The type of movies made by the dogme group would make it easier for people to do this. At the same time however, a movie being compeletely realistic isn't the only thing that makes a good movie. Sometimes you want to just get lost in the "movies" expereince and not have to think too much. I don't believe that wanting this kind of expereience is wrong, or that movies that do this are bad.

So, the Dogme 95 movement is definitly valid, and seems to have done a lot for providing another avenue of and more characteristics for making good movies. It is an important part of the vast world of film making.