Why really low budget film didn't interest people

I think I understand it now. I'm embarrassed that it took me until now.

Thirty-five years ago, I talked with a guy at work. We were both dishwashers. He said he was a film major. I asked him what he planned to do and was shocked when he said, "I'm going to go to Hollywood and direct movies." He said it with such conviction that I half believed him.

It was the '80's, before digital video, before even Hi8 video. I had just learned that people were making 16mm features for a few thousand dollars---Jon Jost was in the Guinness Book of World Records for his $2,000 feature. It was something that fascinated me, but not him even though it was probably his only serious hope of ever making a feature film. I thought that, for him, it was all or nothing, Hollywood or bust; if he couldn't be Steven Spielberg, he'd keep washing dishes.

But that thing Eric Rohmer said, "It was a type of cinema hated by even amateur filmmakers. They admire professional-looking films in 35mm with special effects, etc." that made it come clear to me.

We were talking about two different things. It's like if he wanted to write graphic novels and I was enthusing over Gasoline Alley. There may be some overlap, but they weren't on the same continuum. 

And, realistically, ten thousand dollars back then was about $20 thousand now. It was still a vast sum of money for most of us and you'd be throwing it away on something no one would watch even if it came out well.

Things seem to be different now. I talked to a penniless film student who showed me the camcorder he managed to get his hands on. As far as I could tell, he only liked superhero and zombie movies, but he was going to start filming.