This draft article about the way business is portrayed in movies by a University of Illinois law professor proposes that the movies tend to portray businessmen (and women) as bad guys, though they don't do much to promote the idea of workers as the good guys. "Filmmakers’ main problem with capital being in control seems to be that the filmmakers are not."
SoundtrackNet - the art of film and television music is a site to get lost in for hours.
Sometimes the Titles Designed by Saul Bass were the best part of the film.
The Washington Post's Desson Thomson has a good beginner's guide to independent films.
Movie ads are supposed to reveal the movie's rating. But as this article shows, many billboards have "not yet rated" designations. The same artwork is not just on billboards meant to be glimpsed while traveling but also on posters on buses and subways, so the claim that it isn't important whether the rating information is there or not is as specious as the claim that they don't intentionally delay submitting the movie for review so they can leave the rating information ambiguous for as long as possible.
The Health Section of the Washington Post reports that a study of cigarette smoking in 447 popular movies from the 1990's showed that 35 percent of bad guys smoke, while only 20 percent of the good guys. R-rated and independent movies are especially smoke-y.
The follow-up to my Chicago Tribune column on children's books has responses from readers, including my own 6th grade teacher.
The two dumbest things about this story?
1. You don't have to make up a critic to get fake raves, while people like Earl Dittman will obligingly call any movie brilliant, hilarious, and thrilling.
2. The studio actually tried to argue that creating a fake critic was the exercise of its First Amendment rights. Hey guys? If the First Amendment does not protect those who falsely shout "fire!" in a crowded theater, it doesn't protect those who falsely shout "brilliant" to get people to crowd the theater.
 | |
|
