Film, media and art links
Photographing a 300foot tall, 1500 year old tree.
Eric Bana on “the black helmet” and otherwise being rather funny.
Report arguing that the digital revolution will continue to put consumers more in control in film and media industries. Hollywood is having a very bad time, with lots of box-office bombs.
Survey finds only a small percentage of newspaper reading occurs online.
The US FTC wants to regulate bloggers (with lots of links). Key problems in a nutshell.
About the RBA backgrounding journalists.
Perhaps the NYT might choose to act a little less like Pravda reborn?
Hint to CNN: fact-checking a comedy skit is probably not somewhere you want to go.
How to write screenplays, with The Kid as an example. Part of a series.
Going apocalypse all the way-and maybe beyond.
Question: Did Michael Moore use non-union labour in making his latest film? We all know what the answer is going to be … Anti-capitalist chic is such a profitable business. Finding the movie not very funny, coherent or clever but a bit worrying.
Making the point that Hollywood collectively apparently feels that ideological crimes are worse than abusive underage sex crimes. Pointedly YouTubing Roman Polanski, and identifying another reason to like Luc Besson. Being clearly somewhat appalled by Hollywood’s support for Polanski. A bunch of narcissistic folk who think the rules do not really apply to someone like them? It may be appalling but it is hardly surprising. A list of petition signers. But, there is an upside:
And that’s the main reason I am grateful for this controversy. It is a dye marker, “lighting up” a whole archipelago of morally wretched people. With their time, their money, and their craft, these very people routinely lecture America about what is right and wrong. It’s good to know that at the most fundamental level, they have no idea what they’re talking about.
About Hollywood’s lack of moral compass:
Earlier bad boys - Lord Byron, say - were obliged to operate as "transgressive" artists within a broader moral order. Now we are told that a man such as Polanski cannot be subject to anything so footling as morality: He cannot "transgress" it because, by definition, he transcends it. Yet all truly great art is made in the tension between freedom and constraint. In demanding that an artist be placed above the laws of man, Harvey Weinstein & Co. are also putting him beyond the possibility of art. Which may explain the present state of the movie industry.
About the recent spate of Hollywood films normalizing children as erotic participants.
Worrying over the incivility on the American Right. Being unimpressed with media disdain for Gordon Brown. Noting a case both pieces overlook. About media double-standards and hypocrisy over incivility.
About Law & Order and politics:
The quality of the production and acting remained, but the politics slowly shifted to the far left almost without my noticing. And it wasn’t the actual politics that first became apparent; it was the negative effect of those politics on the quality of the storytelling.
The fun of the show, especially in those early seasons, was that you never knew how the story would end. Certainly, there were political moments, but the overriding theme of every episode was the determination of smart, dedicated people who carried a respect for the law doing their best to bring the guilty to justice. This was what the show was “about,” the agenda was to tell a helluva story, therefore the plot could go anywhere, and did.
But as the year 2000 closed in, this agenda slowly turned more towards the political, making the plot-twists predictable to the point that once the detectives interviewed a white businessman or anyone wearing a crucifix, the game was pretty much over. This all-too common phenomenon in all branches of fictional storytelling today is what I call the “Liberal Tell,” and the “Liberal Tell” sucks the suspense out of everything. Simply put: Once you understand the politics of the entertainment industry, you know the story can only conclude one way.
Eric Bana on “the black helmet” and otherwise being rather funny.
Report arguing that the digital revolution will continue to put consumers more in control in film and media industries. Hollywood is having a very bad time, with lots of box-office bombs.
Survey finds only a small percentage of newspaper reading occurs online.
The US FTC wants to regulate bloggers (with lots of links). Key problems in a nutshell.
About the RBA backgrounding journalists.
Perhaps the NYT might choose to act a little less like Pravda reborn?
Hint to CNN: fact-checking a comedy skit is probably not somewhere you want to go.
How to write screenplays, with The Kid as an example. Part of a series.
Going apocalypse all the way-and maybe beyond.
Question: Did Michael Moore use non-union labour in making his latest film? We all know what the answer is going to be … Anti-capitalist chic is such a profitable business. Finding the movie not very funny, coherent or clever but a bit worrying.
Making the point that Hollywood collectively apparently feels that ideological crimes are worse than abusive underage sex crimes. Pointedly YouTubing Roman Polanski, and identifying another reason to like Luc Besson. Being clearly somewhat appalled by Hollywood’s support for Polanski. A bunch of narcissistic folk who think the rules do not really apply to someone like them? It may be appalling but it is hardly surprising. A list of petition signers. But, there is an upside:
And that’s the main reason I am grateful for this controversy. It is a dye marker, “lighting up” a whole archipelago of morally wretched people. With their time, their money, and their craft, these very people routinely lecture America about what is right and wrong. It’s good to know that at the most fundamental level, they have no idea what they’re talking about.
About Hollywood’s lack of moral compass:
Earlier bad boys - Lord Byron, say - were obliged to operate as "transgressive" artists within a broader moral order. Now we are told that a man such as Polanski cannot be subject to anything so footling as morality: He cannot "transgress" it because, by definition, he transcends it. Yet all truly great art is made in the tension between freedom and constraint. In demanding that an artist be placed above the laws of man, Harvey Weinstein & Co. are also putting him beyond the possibility of art. Which may explain the present state of the movie industry.
About the recent spate of Hollywood films normalizing children as erotic participants.
Worrying over the incivility on the American Right. Being unimpressed with media disdain for Gordon Brown. Noting a case both pieces overlook. About media double-standards and hypocrisy over incivility.
About Law & Order and politics:
The quality of the production and acting remained, but the politics slowly shifted to the far left almost without my noticing. And it wasn’t the actual politics that first became apparent; it was the negative effect of those politics on the quality of the storytelling.
The fun of the show, especially in those early seasons, was that you never knew how the story would end. Certainly, there were political moments, but the overriding theme of every episode was the determination of smart, dedicated people who carried a respect for the law doing their best to bring the guilty to justice. This was what the show was “about,” the agenda was to tell a helluva story, therefore the plot could go anywhere, and did.
But as the year 2000 closed in, this agenda slowly turned more towards the political, making the plot-twists predictable to the point that once the detectives interviewed a white businessman or anyone wearing a crucifix, the game was pretty much over. This all-too common phenomenon in all branches of fictional storytelling today is what I call the “Liberal Tell,” and the “Liberal Tell” sucks the suspense out of everything. Simply put: Once you understand the politics of the entertainment industry, you know the story can only conclude one way.