Call for Essays About Any Aspect of Popular Culture, Present or Past

 
Bookmark and Share
Text:AAA
Monday, Jan 13, 2014
The Golden Globes have proven once again that, instead of clarifying the year-end Best-ofs, the HFPA does a decent job of muddying already cloudy waters, just like they do every year.

As a predictor of future Oscar glory, we have long since given up on the Golden Globes. Thanks to their desire to bifurcate categories (Picture, Actor, Actress) in order to get more famous butts in their phony Awards Show seats and often puzzling nomination and voting ideals, the HFPA and the AMPAS are now functioning in two completely different worlds. The Academy Award is now more easily predicted based on Guild support (Writers, Directors, Producers) and actor acknowledgement (SAG) than it is on what a bunch of boozed up foreign press people (if, indeed, they are members of ANY legitimate press) think. Yes, there is cross over, but for the most part, the Golden Globes are like a bad TV psychic. They get so much wrong that their often “correct” predictions seem specious as well.


Bookmark and Share
Text:AAA
Wednesday, Jan 8, 2014
The Directors Guild of America has announced its nominees for their 2014 Awards, and as usual, there are insights and snubs o' plenty.

If it’s January, it’s Award Season and with the various critics groups and cinema organizations announcing their Best-ofs, it’s also the time when various Guilds give it up for their membership. The Producers have already weighed in, as have the writers, and now it’s time for the Director’s to dole out their annual accolades. As a predictor of Oscar glory, winning the DGA has been fairly accurate (it’s rare that its winner doesn’t go on to take home the Academy gold), but the group of filmmakers and friends has been known to go way off base at times in favor of efforts that few would really consider quintessential trophy fodder.


Bookmark and Share
Text:AAA
Monday, Dec 16, 2013
With his passing on 12 December, writer/ actor/ director/ activist Tom Laughlin leaves behind a complicated legacy filled with maverick moves and industry defiance. Here is the truth behind his role in bringing what we now call "the blockbuster" to movie screens across America in the early '70s.

It was the original blockbuster. It was helmed by a heretofore unknown moviemaker who had a couple of successful projects under his otherwise novice belt. It was based on incredibly popular material that many in popular culture knew about and followed faithfully, and it introduced a series of innovations to both the marketing and distribution of films, creating the wide release strategy that started the entire opening weekend/multi-screen approach we know today. And it had absolutely nothing to do with a great white shark, the seaside city of Amity, or a director who would go on to be perhaps the most accepted cinematic voice of the last 40 years. No, no matter what you heard, Steven Spielberg and Jaws did not set the benchmark for future popcorn movie fortunes. Indeed, it was a manic maverick filmmaker and the third installment in his ongoing ‘spiritual vengeance’ franchise that first cracked the boffo box office code.


Bookmark and Share
Text:AAA
Thursday, Aug 29, 2013
Like a nosy parent who swears only they know what's best for you, Harvey Weinstein is once again telling established, award winning filmmakers what HE believes an American audience will tolerate.

The makers of movies in other parts of the world have a bigger problem than Harvey Weinstein. Their work, often far superior and riskier than what Hollywood hopes will connect with the great unwashed, barely gets a release beyond their borders, the allure of exciting subject matter and approaches trumped by a general dislike of subtitles and a feeling that foreign films are nothing more than the same old tired Tinseltown takes with a decidedly different vocabulary. Still, Weinstein is also a thorn in said cinema’s side. He is a ruthless businessman and a protracted fan of such arthouse fare, or so he would have you believe. Yet, recently, a notorious nickname associated with the former Miramax chief has come back to haunt him—“Harvey Scissorhands”—and it’s a reminder that, aside from differing dialogue, international efforts have a bigger barrier to aesthetic acceptance.


Bookmark and Share
Text:AAA
Monday, Aug 19, 2013
Money matters to audiences because you made it matter to them. You thrust dollar signs and the discuss of same like it's an important part of the artistic process.

In the last couple of days, I have read two very interesting articles about the state of Hollywood. One centers on the current beef between the cast and crew of The Lone Ranger and a ragtag group of pre-biased critics who were out to get the movie even before it opened. According to Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, director Gore Verbinski and producer Jerry Buckheimer, the prerelease buzz over Disney’s desire to cut costs and the ballooning of the budget to near $250 million (rumored) resulted in a bull’s eye on the film’s back. Even before a single frame was unveiled to the public, these underpaid, jealous pundits had their reviews ‘prewritten,’ ready to dump all over the movie before the people got a chance to weigh in (funny, I always thought that was that the box office was for).


Now on PopMatters
PM Picks
Announcements

© 1999-2015 PopMatters.com. All rights reserved.
PopMatters.com™ and PopMatters™ are trademarks
of PopMatters Media, Inc.

PopMatters is wholly independently owned and operated.