question of the day: How honest must nature documentaries be?
The BBC misled viewers about how it obtained footage of polar bear cubs in their den. Is such trickery acceptable if it helps tell a story?
The BBC misled viewers about how it obtained footage of polar bear cubs in their den. Is such trickery acceptable if it helps tell a story?
Or, why we probably shouldn’t be too excited that New Year’s Eve flopped…
Right-wing Christians complain that a TV show about Muslims is too nice to them, and gets an advertiser to pull its ads. All hell breaks loose…
Most of the riffs on the UC Davis pepper-spraying are satirical: the cop has been Photoshopped pepper-spraying fallen colonial soldiers of the American Revolution, little children listening to Jesus, and so on. But not all are so pointed…
It’s so glaringly obvious as something that needs to be discussed, and I don’t think we ever have here before. It’s clearly to be taken as a given that anyone reading this site is interested in film as a way of telling stories and as an entertainment, but why?
Surely something called the Boston Molasses Disaster is begging for the Coen Brothers’ treatment, no?
Apparently some stage and musical theaters in the U.S. have been offering special seats for tweeters for several years now. Can there be any doubt that “tweet seats” are coming to cinemas soon?
Who was the last really notable professional woman you can recall in a movie?
It’s probably not helping that even venerable institutions such as the New York Film Critics Circle and The New Yorker are now engaging in ridiculous fanboy First! shenanigans.
Has access to a cheap camera in your phone and easy ways to send such information around and share it with the world changed how you communicate?