MCN Curated Headlines Archive for September, 2011

guardian

“A pregnant Charlotte Gainsbourg runs her fingers across her bump, which is encased in cashmere and discreetly wedged behind the table of a Paris hotel bar. She is trying to work out what her children might hate her for.”
Okay, Okay. Tell Me More.

“Hw’d Rule Means Audiences Lose”
Oz Academic Rues Lack Of Film Imports

telegraph.co.uk

“It’s a smashing piece of work–perhaps the most purely pleasurable movie I’ve seen all year. It should pack out every upscale cinema venue from the Curzons to the classier multiplexes, and these audiences will spill forth, like mine did, on a giddy high, swooning with pleasure, cooing over its most debonair moments and wittiest sight gags.”
Tim Robey Would Like A Word With Oscar

MCN Curated Headlines

The Pope on: "ABC’s decision to cancel 'Roseanne' feels like a gutsy move. It looks like a stand against racism, a line drawn in the sand to delineate what is reasonable and what is not. It even looks like a data point in the 'How do we separate the art from the artist?' debate, and it offers a heartening answer: We don’t have to, because, in this case, ABC will not finance that artist. It’s somehow even more heartening because it comes from a massive corporate conglomerate that might lose money by making this decision. It feels remarkably just. It feels decent. I’m thrilled that Roseanne has been canceled. It was the right thing to do. But it doesn’t feel correct to hold up ABC as a new bastion of decency, either. 'Roseanne' felt like the Titanic, a ship that seemed too big to turn around — but in the aftermath of Barr’s tweet, it also seemed like a ship that was doomed. ABC’s decision to cancel Roseanne is a good thing, but it also seems like a decision to shut down something that was about to implode anyhow. With a little more context, it looks like a network taking a strong stance against racism… in a way that also rids them of a show that was about to fall apart anyhow."

Sergio on: "Even though the Marvel series are TV shows, Netflix has become entranced by this notion of the '13-hour movie' when developing a season. This format mashup does a disservice to both mediums. Television's strength lies in episodic structure, which allows writers to explore different tones, characters, story structure and conflict. Movies allow a filmmaker to hone in on one or two central themes, attack it from multiple angles and get out. Netflix’s model takes the most incompatible parts of each and slaps them together, creating a lumbering mutant medium. The '13-hour movie' model means we don’t get the brevity of a film or the variation of television; it means we get the singular focus of movies stretched out to television length. It’s exhausting and it does these heroes no favors."

tidalmediainc on: Black Panther: $387 Million Worldwide

Frances Aubrey on: David Klion On “Unlearning Woody Allen”

Ray Pride on: 2017 FYC (For Your Consideration) Screenplays Now Up To 36 Titles

YancySkancy on: 2017 FYC (For Your Consideration) Screenplays Now Up To 36 Titles

Debbie on: 2017 FYC (For Your Consideration) Screenplays Now Up To 36 Titles

Warren on: "Whatever it is that people are reacting to in these superhero films, it’s not what they say they’re reacting to. They clearly don’t care about consistent characterization, original storytelling, or anything else they say they do, because if they did they’d be a lot more picky. What they really like is what we all like: confidence. Movies boil down to someone – or a group of someones – telling us a story. And telling a story well takes confidence. If a storyteller has a great story packed with interesting characters and exciting developments but they stumble over the order of things and mumble during the important bits, the experience is going to suck. Likewise, if the story is poor but they tell it well it’ll be a good time even if afterwards we realize it didn’t make any sense."

Amazing GBG on: "Whatever it is that people are reacting to in these superhero films, it’s not what they say they’re reacting to. They clearly don’t care about consistent characterization, original storytelling, or anything else they say they do, because if they did they’d be a lot more picky. What they really like is what we all like: confidence. Movies boil down to someone – or a group of someones – telling us a story. And telling a story well takes confidence. If a storyteller has a great story packed with interesting characters and exciting developments but they stumble over the order of things and mumble during the important bits, the experience is going to suck. Likewise, if the story is poor but they tell it well it’ll be a good time even if afterwards we realize it didn’t make any sense."

Ray Pride on: "Whatever it is that people are reacting to in these superhero films, it’s not what they say they’re reacting to. They clearly don’t care about consistent characterization, original storytelling, or anything else they say they do, because if they did they’d be a lot more picky. What they really like is what we all like: confidence. Movies boil down to someone – or a group of someones – telling us a story. And telling a story well takes confidence. If a storyteller has a great story packed with interesting characters and exciting developments but they stumble over the order of things and mumble during the important bits, the experience is going to suck. Likewise, if the story is poor but they tell it well it’ll be a good time even if afterwards we realize it didn’t make any sense."

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Because of my relative candor on Twitter regarding why I quit my day job, my DMs have overflowed with similar stories from colleagues around the globe. These peeks behind the curtains of film festivals, venues, distributors and funding bodies weren’t pretty. Certain dismal patterns recurred (and resonated): Boards who don’t engage with or even understand their organization’s artistic mission and are insensitive to the diverse neighborhood in which their organization’s venue is located; incompetent founders and/or presidents who create only obstacles, never solutions; unduly empowered, Trumpian bean counters who chip away at the taste and experiences that make organizations’ cultural offerings special; expensive PR teams that don’t bring to the table a bare-minimum familiarity with the rich subcultural art form they’re half-heartedly peddling as “product”; nonprofit arts organizations for whom art now ranks as a distant-second goal behind profit.”
~ Eric Allen Hatch

To me, Hunter S. Thompson was a hero. His early books were great, but in many ways, his life and career post–Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail is a cautionary tale for authors. People expected him to be high and drunk all the time and play that persona, and he stuck with that to the end, and I don’t think it was good for him. I always sort of feel mixed emotions when I hear that people went and hung out with Hunter and how great it was to get high with Hunter. The fact is the guy was having difficulty doing any sustained writing at all for years probably because so many quote, unquote, “friends” wanted to get high with him … There was a badly disappointed romantic there. I mean, that great line, “This is where the wave broke, the tide rolled back … ” This was a guy that was hurt and disappointed and very bitter about things, and it made his writing beautiful, and also with that came a lot of pain.
~ Anthony Bourdain