Comments on: Notes from the NYU Film Conference, Pt. 5 – Q&A hosted by Girish Shambu

By: LawsonOrtauy8

LawsonOrtauy8 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:57:13 +0000

i would love to read more from you on this

regards
james orel
______________________________________________
watch one tree hill online | watch lost online | watch west wing

By: BattlesRuckerNi999

BattlesRuckerNi999 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:46:54 +0000

I subscribed to your blog when is the next post

Thanks
poly banger
______________________________________________
buy cheap warcraft accounts | wa state dui penalties | all natural skin care products

By: ABIBA99967052

ABIBA99967052 — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:27:56 +0000

I think a few pictures might help this blog

Have a nice day
paul krichoff
______________________________________________
Vacation Homes Sonoma | cheap aion online item | buy cheap aion pl

By: David Peck

David Peck — Wed, 21 May 2008 05:31:20 +0000

Hey, I licensed my film to this company, they pay actual cash and are super easy to deal with. They are generally interested in high quality comedies.

Thanks,
David

http://www.minimovie.com

By: alsolikelife

alsolikelife — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:00:56 +0000

I agree it’s impossible to separate the two as they feed each other, but still it’s refreshing to assert that art can stand for something independent of its advancement of a sociopolitical agenda. Otherwise David Walsh would be the ideal film critic.

By: HarryTuttle

HarryTuttle — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 07:56:03 +0000

I’d agree to art vs. agenda, but how do you distinguish cinema-politics and real-world-politics? To me, the cause of cinema is hardly “social” in a political sense (or it’s only a confusing metaphor).
The “cause of cinema” maybe suits Straub-Huillet, but then they have a real world agenda.

By: alsolikelife

alsolikelife — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 01:24:14 +0000

I’d would say, promoting thinking about cinema as an artform rather than a subset of a socio-political agenda, such that it becomes its own political movement, advancing the cause of cinema. My own personal example would be Henri Langlois.

By: HarryTuttle

HarryTuttle — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 23:36:08 +0000

“cinema activism on behalf of cinema itself as a political or social movement, as opposed to being a function of political or social purposes”

What does this mean?

By: alsolikelife

alsolikelife — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:32:06 +0000

Hi Gareth – I think the comment Adrian made following Jonathan’s built on one of the points JR made, that the internal filters of human decorum seem to disintegrate with online interaction. I’m certain that Jonathan’s opinion about online interactions are heavily influenced by his experience on the Reader blog, as well as a cinephile list-serv that he used to be regularly involved with before it was damaged by some spectacular flame-baiting among colleagues who in most face-to-face interactions would normally treat each other with great respect. I’ve logged years on chatrooms and have witnessed this behavior firsthand, as well as have been subjected to it by people who at times I thought were sociopathic – only to have my impressions thoroughly overturned upon meeting them in person. The instantaneous environment of the internet creates a strange social tunnel vision that can bring out the worst real-time reactive behavior in people.

(Incidentally talked with Dave Kehr yesterday and he admitted that his pooh pooing of Jonathan over on Dave’s blog was in some respect just a good natured effort to goose him – but he was amazed that Jonathan issued a response within minutes of his post.)

By: Gareth

Gareth — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:36:51 +0000

Kevin – as with others, I’d like to thank you for posting all of these notes, which I’ve found fascinating. I know that in some cases you are summarizing much lengthier discussions, but I was wondering if there was any response to Jonathan Rosenbaum’s comment along the lines of “People on the blogosphere seem to write before they think, and get into family spat-like exchanges with others.” I can see many instances of silliness in comments on blogs, but that does seem to me balanced against some exceptionally thoughtful writing by both blog hosts and commenters.

I’m struck by what seems on occasion to be an extrapolation – perhaps a natural one, though not necessarily an accurate one – from his experience with the commenters on the Chicago Reader blog, who I would agree often seem to bring the tone down.