keepin' myself busy at the Tribeca Film Festival...
I've been running myself ragged -- but not too ragged, since I promised myself I wouldn't make myself completely crazy -- at the Tribeca Film Festival over the last few days, and that will continue through Thursday. I'm seeing some very interesting films (and missing more that I'm sure are also fascinating), and I'll have something to say about those hopefully starting tomorrow.
After Tribeca dies down, I've got a long list of things to keep me busy for quite a while:
• getting together my new book, a collection of reviews from the first 10 years of FlickFilosopher, which I hope to have finished in time for Balticon over Memorial Day weekend, though, honestly, that seems like a stretch
• launching a new site that will serve as my portfolio, a place to post fiction (including my fan fiction), an idea scratchpad, and general blog for anything not specifically related to film, TV, DVD, and related pop culture (Geek Philosophy will get incorporated into that)
• after I learn Movable Type 4 to launch that site, I'll work on porting FlickFilosopher.com over to MT 4, freshen up the design in the process, and see if there's stuff I should be doing here at FlickFilosopher that I'm not already doing.
With that last in mind, is there something you'd like to be seeing here that you aren't? More reactions to newsy stuff? More reviews? More discussions of TV? What do you expect to see here, and don't?
more below the ad... scroll down...
comments
posted by Laurie Mann (April 27, 2008 6:34 PM)
I'd like to see your Smart People review. Thanks!
posted by shoop (April 28, 2008 4:18 PM)
More: Movie reviews, "I" messages
Less: TV reviews, "you" messages
posted by MaryAnn (April 28, 2008 4:37 PM)
I don't understand what you mean by "I" messages and "you" messages, shoop.
posted by shoop (April 29, 2008 10:47 AM)
You're probably familiar with the "I"-message-"you"-message dichotomy that counselors refer to--"I feel neglected when you don't meet me on time" ("I" message) vs. "You're late, you douchebag" ("you" message). I'm guessing the next logical question would be, "What does that have to do with this site?"
Obviously, the reviews on this site are YOUR feelings, YOUR opinions, YOUR point of view--in other words, "I" messages, which is great. And that is why I said, "more movie reviews." SOMETIMES, however, there's a "watch it" post, or some rhetoric in the reviews themselves that become "you" messages--something is wrong with US (the readers and/or audience) for finding something funny or worthwhile, or, especially in the discussions that deal with faith (yeah, I had to go there), something is wrong with us (or "you") for believing the way we believe. And that's what I'd like to see a bit less of.
So... clear as crystal, or clear as mud?
posted by MaryAnn (April 29, 2008 12:34 PM)
No, I'm not.
But is it not implicit when I say things like "watch it" or "there's something fucked up in the world" that I mean "I think you should watch this" or "I think there's something fucked up in the world"? Must I preface everything with "in my opinion," or can't we leave that as a given?
posted by shoop (April 29, 2008 1:37 PM)
Mmmm...not QUITE what I was talking about. This site puts the matter more succinctly than I can:
http://www.lejardinacademy.com/NewWeb/05Middle/html/counseling/IMessages.htm
Same opinions and feelings throughout--just the difference between, say, "'Knocked Up' is childish and dimwitted" and "People who enjoy 'Knocked Up' are children," or, "I don't believe in any 'god' or 'gods'" and "You believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster because you're not thinking clearly."
Oh, and the TV reviews--more a matter of personal taste. I just wasn't on the edge of my seat wondering how you'd rate the Smurfs or Sabrina. I kinda get the Doctor Who thing--I probably won't seek it out myself anytime soon, but there's a fanbase out there. But "Battlestar Galactaca?" The 70s space show with Lorne Greene and the robot who went around saying, "Bee-dee, bee-dee, bee-dee, bee-dee?" Really?
Wait... I think the robot was on "Buck Rogers." Never mind.
posted by MaryAnn (April 29, 2008 3:05 PM)
Again, though: are they not the same thing, when it boils down? I should couch my ire in nicer terms so people aren't offended if they can't read between the very obvious lines?
I was assigned to review those for another site I write for -- that's often the case with DVD reviews -- and I don't see any point in not posting them here.
What? No, not really. The new BSG is huge. Why would I not cover a show that I love and that has the potential to bring new readers to the site? I can appreciate that not everyone likes it, but can you really not see why I would cover it?
posted by shoop (April 30, 2008 12:09 AM)
"I should couch my ire in nicer terms so people aren't offended if they can't read between the very obvious lines?"
Well, I'm guessing the answer to that one is "no." I suppose ire is best uncouched. Looks like this exchange is a wrap.
I was admittedly unaware of the new BSG and its hugeness. And of course, if you love something, you should cover it, huge or not. Personally, I'll hold out for the 21st century Love Boat: The Next Generation in Space.