[Filmfestivalresearch] Size matters
Greg DeCuir
gdecuir at yahoo.com
Sun Sep 22 03:17:21 CEST 2013
Dear Michael:
I understand everything you're saying and agree. It wasn't really my intention to attack or question the trades. I know their function well and appreciate it for what it is. I worked in Hollywood for 10 years and the first thing I did every morning at my desk was read Variety from cover to cover. The second thing I did was read the Hollywood Reporter from cover to cover. Plus I originally come from a journalism background, so I know what it means to write for a wide audience and to service an industry, to pound a beat. Nothing inherently lazy about hitting deadlines at all. I think it's easy for us researchers to be insular at times and look askew on anything that doesn't adhere to our rigorous standards. We get caught up in our world and I often wonder if we spend too much time talking to ourselves, preaching to the choir, so to speak. But also, particularly those of us in film festival studies, we tend to wear a lot of hats. There are a lot of sites of
convergence. Many of us research, but also program, perhaps also write journalistic pieces, or even make films and videos. A sensitivity to this fluidity is key. Indeed, the connections are important. And I always try to remember one of the best pieces of advice I ever received regarding my writing and research: look up.
Best,
Greg
________________________________
From: Michael Gubbins <michael.gubbins at gmail.com>
To: Greg DeCuir <gdecuir at yahoo.com>
Cc: "filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org" <filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2013 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Filmfestivalresearch] Size matters
Greg,
As a former editor of Screen International and Screen Daily, I think it is important to understand the position of the trade press.
The trades are in Toronto and at other festivals and markets as representatives of their industry subscribers, not as means of explaining the festival to the wider world.
At the markets, their business model is predicated on convincing those in sales and distribution to advertise their films in their daily papers, based on a critical mass of industry readers at the event.
This role is central to Screen International's existence.
Beyond the festivals, it has to keep up international subscriber levels, largely by covering the subjects that interest those subscribers.
Sometimes those issues can seem superficial. I can tell you though that screening times and the workload at festivals are very high on the agenda.
For researchers, the importance of Screen and Variety may be in the way that they reflect the superficial concerns of the industry, rather than any inherent laziness.
Having said that, you do allude to an important point. The business model was once based on print advertising, which paid for higher staffing levels, allowing more critics to go to festivals and more journalists in more places able to look in more depth at issues that we felt the industry ought to be more concerned about.
When I was editor (2004-2009), Screen was a weekly publication and now it is a monthly.
As Greg rightly points out, there are great benefits in the breadth and range of publications now available to researchers.
And speaking as a supporter of the growing body of brilliant academic work on film festivals, the work of people in this forum is adding really valuable knowledge.
Perhaps the key issue is the connection between the industry and these new sources of knowledge.
In drawing conclusions about publications, it is necessary to remember that Screen and Variety exist because the industry thinks they are essential, and remember they have influence, even if you question their insight.
Michael Gubbins
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Greg DeCuir <gdecuir at yahoo.com> wrote:
>It depends where you look. Not all of it is superficial. Maybe Screen Daily can be at times, ditto for Variety - but Variety is the classic model for superficial entertainment journalism. It's more about trade news and insider speak than anything else. Indiewire is a different story. They have a lot of great content and great writers, and many affiliated with the academic world are peppered throughout the various pages. Then you can take a publication like MUBI Notebook as another example. They publish a lot of hardcore theory-cognizant film criticism, also mixed with academic writers, and their festival coverage is excellent if a bit in a poetic and crusading journalistic style. Film Comment publishes a lot of great online festival coverage from many of the usual suspects, as does Cineaste.Ditto for Artforum, but they tend to play the snooty/sarcastic role a bit too heavily. There is a new online journal called The Dissolve that has a lot of detailed
> and smart writing, with some in-depth festival coverage. The only academically-inclined resource I will mention is NECSUS, which has a dedicated festival review section edited by our very own Skadi Loist and Marijke de Valck. Of course there are more. For example, Senses of Cinema flirts with both sides of the boundary, and they have great festival coverage. And forget about mentioning the various blogs run by both professional journalists and academics alike.
>
>
>It's a golden age. Whatever (and whoever) you want is out there for the finding.
>
>Best,
>
>Greg de Cuir, Jr
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Dina Iordanova <dina.iordanova at st-andrews.ac.uk>
>To: "filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org" <filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org>
>Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 4:31 PM
>Subject: Re: [Filmfestivalresearch] Size matters
>
>
>
>Great to see these references -- thanks Ger and Skadi.
>
>But I admit -- reading all this stuff, the Screen Daily, Variety,
>Indiewire etc. -- which is undoubtedly essential for us to follow, also
>leaves me routinely underwhelmed. These guys are always saying valid
>things and their observations are valid. But it is just leaving me wanting
>for some more depth. It is all extremely superficial -- perhaps the format
>does not allow for anything else?
>
>The Archival Film Festivals book which we recently released has a great
>interview with Tom Luddy -- check it out. I think it says more about
>Telluride's special position on the calendar than many other texts I have
>seen.
>
>Jeff, are you subscribing to this list? You must have been at Telluride
>just recently. Maybe you will say something for the benefit of all of us?
>
>Dina
>
>Prof. Dina Iordanova FRSA
>Chair in Film Studies
>Director, Centre for Film Studies
>Publisher, St. Andrews Film Studies
>University of St. Andrews, Scotland
>
>--
>
>
>
>
>
>On 20/09/2013 15:21, "Skadi Loist" <skadi at filmfestivalresearch.org> wrote:
>
>>And here was another one chipping in on the Telluride positioning...
>>
>>How the Telluride Film Festival Cheats the System
>>by Eric Kohn
>>http://www.indiewire.com/article/how-the-telluride-film-festival-cheats-th
>>e-
>>system
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Skadi Loist
>>Co-Founder / Admin
>>Film Festival Research Network (FFRN)
>>www.filmfestivalresearch.org
>>skadi at filmfestivalresearch.org
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>Von: Filmfestivalresearch
>>[mailto:filmfestivalresearch-bounces at listcultures.org] Im Auftrag von ger
>>zielinski, ph.d.
>>Gesendet: Freitag, 20. September 2013 15:52
>>An: filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org
>>Betreff: Re: [Filmfestivalresearch] Size matters
>>
>>
>>Very interesting, Dina. This one caught my eye earlier "Can Telluride
>>Continue to Steal Venice and Toronto¹s Thunder?" by Peter Debruge.
>>http://variety.com/2013/film/news/telluride-film-festival-wrap-2013-oscars
>>-1
>>200596759/
>>
>>All kinds of issues and claims going on.
>>
>>cheers, ger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Dina Iordanova <
>>dina.iordanova at st-andrews.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Over the past days Screen Daily run an interesting exchange which I
>>> think would be of interest to people subscribing to this list.
>>>
>>> See Wendy Mitchell's article Toronto, Just Too Big
>>> http://www.screendaily.com/comment/toronto-just-too-big/5060444.articl
>>> e
>>>
>>> And artistic director Cameron Bailey response:
>>> http://www.screendaily.com/5060507.article
>>>
>>> Dina
>>>
>>>
>>> Prof. Dina Iordanova FRSA
>>> Chair in Film Studies
>>> Director, Centre for Film Studies
>>> Publisher, St. Andrews Film Studies
>>> University of St. Andrews, Scotland
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Filmfestivalresearch mailing list
>>> Filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org
>>>
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/filmfestivalresearch_listcult
>>> ures.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Ger Zielinski, PhD
>>Assistant Professor of Film and Media
>>Cultural Studies Department
>>Catherine Parr Traill College, Scott House 202 Trent University 300 London
>>Street Peterborough, ON K9H 7P4 Canada
>>
>>T: +1 705 748 1011 X6113 (Office: Catherine Parr Traill College, Wallis
>>Hall
>>113)
>>F: +1 705 748 1826
>>http://trentu.ca/culturalstudies/Zielinski.php
>>_______________________________________________
>>Filmfestivalresearch mailing list
>>Filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org
>>http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/filmfestivalresearch_listcultures
>>.o
>>rg
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Filmfestivalresearch mailing list
>Filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org
>http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/filmfestivalresearch_listcultures.org
>_______________________________________________
>Filmfestivalresearch mailing list
>Filmfestivalresearch at listcultures.org
>http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/filmfestivalresearch_listcultures.org
>
--
SampoMedia
www.sampomedia.com
More information about the Filmfestivalresearch
mailing list