The Hot Blog

I would argue that relationship between TM and online is more like TM is the parents of a child star. It is the online version of most TM newspapers and magazines that are getting people to still read it. It's just like the kid raking in the dough so that the parents can live more fruitfully. I think the biggest difference, though, is that TM is always trying to pick a fight with the onliners or trying to compete and there is no way that it can end well for the Peter Barts of the world. He reminds me of my grandfather, who doesn't want to change with the times and refuses to use a computer and instead uses his typewriter and talks about how shitty things are on the internet, even though he doesn't really know what it is.

"Defamer breaks very little… but it is fun to read. Same with La Finke."

Ohhhhh PLEEEAAAASE!

Finke BREAKS more items than you could ever hope to Poland.

How can you think you will ever build up your own credibility - by constantly trying to break down the legitimate and very validatable and provable credibility of others?

You SNIVEL way too much Dave!

(And quit snivelling about the critic's screenings as well!)

Sooooooooooo self-indulgent you critics are!

Do you really believe you have any credibility at all with audiences ... or that your seeing the film BEFORE us and spouting your mass-ignorance has any effect on the outcome of the success or failure of the entertainment?

YOU critics are your own special genre of entertainment ... you are not scholars! You are merely political cartoonists for the movie biz!!! You are not reporters. You work FOR the studios - even when you work against them. ($$$ Cha-Ching!!!!!!)

At least Nikke Finke IS an actual reporter, and NOT a critic ... and she is definitly not just an entertainment industry volmit rehasher/remasher as you specialize in being.

You and the rest of the film critique elite are a unique entertainment genre. You always have been. Get used to being disrespected.

You are an entertainer Dave ... and you are ESPECIALLY funny!

Keep up the good work!

to whatnokiss
thanks for showing up and proving yourself to be a special sort of monkey. we established last week in detail that Finke was NOT a journalist but a petulant, unethical, seeyounexttuesday. The court ruled and that was that.

Mr. Murphy, the more interesting comment would be ... what is whatnokiss going on about? In one hand; he/she bashes Miami Heat for being bought and paid for by the critics. While in the other hand praises Nikki Finke? If you want to attack someone with some sort of rant on their blog. For the love of a higher power ... BE CONSISTENT ABOUT IT!

"whatnokiss" has commented 22 times on the hot blog, turning up for the first time in early May. 18 of the comments involved Spider-Man 3 postings. The last 4 in a row have dealt with defending Nikki Finke.

Curious.

i love how stupid we've become as a nation.

why are there only two positions? i mean, i agree with the 'critics are political cartoonists' comment. that is far more astute than it has any right to be, but to say Nikke Finke is a reporter?

Reporters check facts. Reporters corroborate stories.

Dishing gossip, rumor, and innuendo does not make you a reporter.

At least political cartoonists take a position on something. Finke is not part of the solution, but part of the problem. She is the Perez Hilton of the film community, and the saddest part is that if she got perez's traffic, she wouldn't care how worthless her positions were.

Finke is another finger in the clown glove of the circus sideshow that entertainment journalism has become.

To be fair, Crazy Nikki does break more stories than the other "journalists"/bloggers out there.

It's just too bad that at least half of them turn out to be 100 percent false.

But even operating at 50 percent, she breaks a lot of stuff.

50 percent of her stories are false? Big Deal! She's breaking stories! WOO!!! That fake celebration was sponsored by this weekend's San Diego Comic-Con. 1 and 2 day badges are still available as of post time. Hiyo.

"But even operating at 50 percent, she breaks a lot of stuff."

That is funny on so many levels.

Reporter?! Mais non. Reporters usually LOVE what they report on--that's why they get shot in combat and get ill in epidemics--they are trying to observe, cover, and be in the thick of things, and they respect the Players.

You have to love being in the thick of things for any reportage, and in entertainment, as a result, one would hope one would Respect talented people and the medium they work in. I never get any vibe that NF even enjoys movies or understands how hard it is to get Any move made.

Ms Finke isn;t the only one, but she is the most hyperbolic one and it's her own fault for drawing attention to herself.

i think you guys are giving today's reporters way too much credit. most of the stories i read or hear in traditional media, are more opinion pieces than factual. (ala david's assesment of LA Times & internet).

not to get overly political, but the top reporting award two years ago went to a woman covering the iraq war, not once leaving the hotel she was staying at.

maybe if the traditional media stopped trying to shape the message and just report the stories, they'd be able to compete.

To Don Murphy...
(How the heck do you get the bold type thing going?)
AND PLEASE, PLEASE, READ MORE CLOSELY (you nearsighted little monkey you), before you decide to dismiss the cage sweeper out of hand! He just might have something to feed you.

I NEVER used the word "journalist" did I Don!

So whatever you "and the rest of the monkeys" decided about Finke's 'journalism' skills isn't relatable to my commnet now is it! (As if your dismissals have ever been credible.)

Reporters JUST report, (as they don't have time to check for facts, because there's just too many conflicting facts to report in a timely manner)! What they should just say nothing until the journalists have checked the facts. (Might be too late to run from the danger if it had f-actually been there to begin with, huh?)

But JOURNALISTS 'journal' (or in other words), they journal and 'keep track' of the details and f-actualities. Journalists double check and (hopefully) consistently journal the f-acts. 'Journalists' check for accuracy, but not reporters. What WERE you thinking?

I think we could agree that the term 'Entertainment Journalist' is a huge oxymoron right?.

But 'Entertainment Reporter' is true to form.
PLEEEEEEEASE! How could entertainment (especially in this town) EVER even be factual?! (Facts in Hollywood are merely an experiment in hindsight at best.) And therefore Nikke IS a reporter - not a journalist.

I would NEVER ever slandered her as being a journalist, you silly little Poland organ grinder dancng monkey!!! (So apologize...because it turns out that "That WASN'T That" now was it?)

And Anghus,
I agree with you, we are lost as a nation, especially when people expect reporters to act like journalists ... (and I think we actually agree on the diachotomy or reporting VS. journalism, but that we might be using the opposite semantics to express the same ideal.)
------------------------------------

Dear IOIOIOI...
I have no idea what you could possibly be talking about with your "MIAMI HEAT" comment.

I have never bashed Miami Heat.
Where the heck did you come up with that comment??? So, listen ... before you capital letter me about CONSISTENCY... check your own consistency first! YES??????
------------------------------------

Dear Dave,
If you would just be nice to people I know personally, I wouldn't have to comment about your sniveling so often. (But thanks for taking the time of keeping track of me.) That makes you a 'blogger journalist' as well as a critic. AWESOME!

(Now if only if you could break more reports than you criticize ... and that way you could be a reporter too!)
------------------------------------

Dear Lota,
Reporters love it so much they actually wish they could be the people they report on - and yes they LOVE what they report on. Trust me when I tell you that Nikke LOVES the entertainment business as much as anyone I have ever met or have been a friend to in this town.

Her loving passion for showbiz is Endless.
She LOVES it - and consumes it - like it was life itself.

That's why she is a reporter - and NOT a critic or critical journalist of it. She doesn't want to criticise the art or the artist, she wants to see them prosper - and her reporting on their flaws is the quickest way to bring them to light - so that they can be quickly corrected (due to an intense desire to avoid any public embarrassment that her news targets may find themselves exposed to).

That's the power of the reporter ... whether they get to report the truth or not. (They WISH they could always report the truth, and what they report they hope to be the truth when they report it ... but NO honest reporter has the illusion that everything they are breaking will always be proven to be true) ... SO WHY DO YOU?

And thankfully, there is always a journalist in the wings keeping track of the truth and ready to correct the reporter whenever appropriate.

The reporter "reports" breaking news just in case it is true, not because the facts have been proven over time and have been journalized. (That's what encourages journalist to pay closer attention to the facts.) And after journalists have established the facts, the reporter can then report the journalists findings. This way everybody does their part and it all works out.

(And of course, we expect critics like Dave to pounce on reporters for NOT being journalists.) But that's so obvious ... and sooooooooo easy. Anyone can criticize anyone for simply not being what they aren't. (Keep up the good work Dave!)
--------------------------------

And Hendhogan you are right.
We need more 'journalists' keeping track of the truth - and less critics despising fast breaking reporters for communicating the "facts and the fictions" that are the very heart of creative human entertainments.

"Just the facts Maaaaaaaam" is something to leave to Dragnet and journalists, NOT to reporters. Opinions (right or wrong) you must leave to critics, and breaking news (fact or not) you must leave to reporters. (Always consider the source. Never expect the same data from oppositely position sources.)

Never EXPECT the truth from reporters, but hope they have stumbled upon it (especially from reporters of entertainment - entertainment which is just a fantasy from the very beginning to the end).

Or Pentagon reporters, don't expect the truth from them either.

PEACE OUT!
(See ya'all next time Dave attacks another messenger assuming I can find time to expound upon it). And if there are a bunch of typos in this tyraid forgive me, I was in a hurry.

"As if your dismissal was ever credible..." you monkey you!

"That's the power of the reporter ... whether they get to report the truth or not. "

The third Reich couldn't have said it better, which makes everything else you say complete nonsense.

nice try--she isn;t a reporter and never will be. THE END.

Lota, you missed her point. You didn't watch Sunday Morning Shootout either, right?

"reporting on their flaws is the quickest way to bring them to light - so that they can be quickly corrected (due to an intense desire to avoid any public embarrassment that her news targets may find themselves exposed to).

That's the power of the reporter ... whether they get to report the truth or not. (They WISH they could always report the truth, and what they report they hope to be the truth when they report it ... but NO honest reporter has the illusion that everything they are breaking will always be proven to be true) ... SO WHY DO YOU?

And thankfully, there is always a journalist in the wings keeping track of the truth and ready to correct the reporter whenever appropriate."

whatnokiss,

yeah, i think we funamentally agree on a few issues. the standards of entertainment reporting are circling the drain, we're just arguing over which way the water is flowing.

As for Nikki Finke, she's not that hard to dissect. She falls into that group of people who claim to love the business so much but indulge in every negative aspect of it. the kind of entertainment stalker who loves the subject so much she's willing to strangle the life right out of it. She's the Mark David Chapman of the web world.

There's that weird sycophantic vibe i get from certain websites, people who idolize the business and love it so much, but their actions and words display a kind of demented 'i wish that were me' mentality that makes everything they say sound like they're tearing down the establishment because they desperately wish to be a part of it.

But really, what part of the business does Nikki Love? the box office, the pointless infighting between talent, agents and studios? I've read a lot of her work, and she seems more abusive to the industry. That's not to say she doesn't love it, but she sure as hell knocks it around a lot. Maybe she's the web equivilent of Ike Turner.

Drudge links to Nikki, which is a clear indicator in my theory. Drudge hates celebrities, hates the movie industry, and runs constant headlines about how films are 'underperforming' with links to her blog. Drudge links to Finke because she matches his disdain, whether she realizes it or not.

I think what Nikki likes is Nikki. What she does takes little talent. Regurgitating the rumors and information she gets from others may qualify under 'reporting' in the most technical of definitions, but she self admitedly doesn't go out much and doesn't entertain members of the industry, so she trolls the web and gets emails and posts rumors. I wonder what the number of visitors to her site (which she boasts about often) would be if drudge wasn't linking?

But there's a Finke that pops up every few years, makes lots of grand statements, claims to be on the forefront of exclusives, it all goes to their heads and they either sell out to a massive online conglomorate or the industry becomes tired of their particular brand of bullshit and people just stop talking to them.

i like what david said about 'dissapearing information', because that, to me, is the greatest sin of entertainment websites. They post a story without fact checking, it turns out to be false, but instead of a retraction, they just pull the story from the site and act as if it didn't exist. It appalls me every time i see it, and i see it often. Some people have the cajones to post a story and then say 'whoops, we may have spoke too soon'. Other sites, and they know who they are, will just post stories and delete content and pretend it never happened.

Ladies;

We always hurt the most - the things we love most ... especially when they don't live up to our expectations of their potential grandeur.

That's why alll of us criticize or bring to light the negativity of the things we love. The things we don't care about we ignore. (Like when was the last time you spent any time on the "Cheaky Little Monkey" blog site fervently posting your opinions?)

And by the way T.Holly - not to sound to chauvinistic - but 'whatnokiss' is a dude, not a chick. He hates chick films, although he did see NO RESERVATIONS ... and it was OK.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: