The Hot Blog

Wow.

You have completely changed my opinions about internet censorship in one post.

Bravo sir. Bravo.

I'll assume Poland is drunk and/or his wife just spurned his stiff. He'd have to be in a very dark place to post sour-grapes nonsense like this.

Wrecktum: This is sad. Truly.

If you guys really have a problem with this, I earnestly, gently suggest that you stop reading me.

Believe me, I will find a way to go on without your patronage. I don't want to be responsible for causing you emotional distress for a single minute more.

Dave, some of us just don't understand how someone so hung-up on journalistic integrity like yourself could post something as cheap and snarky as this.

As U2 says in their new album:

"Choose your enemies carefully ‘cos they will define you
Make them interesting ‘cos in some ways they will mind you
They’re not there in the beginning but when your story ends
Gonna last with you longer than your friends"

Is this really a white suit in a shit storm?

It's silly, Crow... are you really that unsophisticated that you can't process the notion that I am dead serious about the work and also completely capable of being Friday afternoon goofy?

I've never had a problem with my alleged enemies defining me becuase I do the heavy lifting and I am not afraid of real criticism or disagreement. But if you want to debate me and all you are packing is patronizing crap and personal slaps... well, I would be happy to euthanize people disabled in this way, but it's really not my place... and I'm sick of the floor of my blog being
sticky with the product of their self- love/hatred.

One thing no one can say is that I do not offer reasons for my issues with the work of writers when I slam them. You can disagree, but I put up. And if you do the same, I will never have a problem with you.

Why ask a rhetorical question, Christian? Do you think it is smarter than actually saying something?

"Why ask a rhetorical question, Christian?"

It's not rhetorical if you answer. And even if you don't, a "rhetorical question" is a valid method of expression, agree with the intelligence or not.

I just don't know why you seem so angry lately. Revel in your time, Roy.

Because after a few weeks of sitting back, Christian, I am pretty clear on who is wasting this space... and I'm just not interested in lookng away.

I spend the vast majority of my day without giving it a thought. I actually spend quite a bit of time doing my work. But when I now see the monkeys throwing shit, I have less tolerance of it than ever before. It's really simple.

PS If you don't get that we are witnessing a meltdown of the media Industry and editorial standards, it's no surprise that you just think I am angry. Politeness is not the strongest currency right now. It is in these times that future generations are defined.

Okay, I will bite the bullet here:

Dave, you are so full of yourself that you are totally missing the real story here. It's not that your many crusades aren't valid - it's that you're fighting them in lame, inconsequential ways. Mocking Friedman in a Youtube video? Ooh, he's quaking in his loafers. Making fun of Finke in a Star Trek promo? She probably enjoys the attention.

As long as you insist on this level of petty snarkiness that inspires nothing but the same in your readers, you are limiting yourself as a writer.

And let me emphasize - the problem that I have with you, David, is not at all with your content - it is totally with your method and approach, which scream 'fail' to me in multiple different ways.

"I am pretty clear on who is wasting this space... "

the irony is, it's you.

here's the cure all.

Start writing about things you enjoy again.

Review some more movies.

Don't point to others about lack of standards, just maintain high standards yourself.

Personal attacks may drive traffic, but they don't do much for the soul.

Go a single week without using the following words: "Finke", "Nikki", "AICN"

If you read these posts and think we're all a bnch of negative assholes, then you don't realize that these are the opinions of readers who think you're spiraling into journalistic senility. The equivilent of an old man on a porch screaming about the God Damned hippies and how movie tickets used to cost a nickel.

Pointing them out is intended to try and demonstrate the rather negative turn the blog has taken this year.

Maybe the rise of the Finke's and the AICN's has done it's damage and you'll forever be screaming about the emporer and his lack of wardrobe. Maybe you were always this insufferable. Either way, it's not a fun read anymore. And if your advice is "stop reading", then i suppose we should just oblige.

Oh I see the meltdown as it affects my livelihood too. But is Roger Friedman the cause? Or symptom?

But if you're raging against the dying media light and yet you continue to put up endless stats as proof of value, then you're part of the cause. Or symptom. Or something.

I'm more upset about marketing mavens killing originality in this town than a hack Fox reviewer.

I never read Finke, Wells, Friedman, or any of the other bloggers that Poland spends so much time attacking. So I'm just hearing one side of a conversation. But I can't imagine what they write that could be so vile that Poland can post this and still consider himself better than them.

Is there any difference between a writer without standards, on the one hand, and a huge asshole who claims to respect standards on the other? Probably not much.

Also, I've only seen a few pictures of Poland, but from those I never would have thought he was in any position to mock another man's weight.

Indeed, Eric. I was going to say that for a paragon of physical perfection such as Poland to mock Friedman for being fat constituted gratuitous sadism.

There's also the distinct probability that, by now, Mr. Friedman has reached the point in life when fat jokes just don't much bother him any more.

I know, I know, I don't have to read the blog. Alas, a recent professional assignment, involving the collection of all manner of self-involved indignation, fulmination, and fatuous inanity, now obliges me to.

See you in the funny papers!

The nice thing is that you guys do herd yourselves into a group without me expending much effort at all...

And Glenn... you have never had anything much to say about any of these issues when they are presented earnestly and without any reference to any other writers. Perhaps self-involved indignation, fulmination, and fatuous inanity is what you are most interested in covering.

Thing is, DP, I believe that this is you just being goofy. Why do you think it went over so badly? Because generally-speaking, you're pretty grumpy. And when it comes to Finke and Friedman, you're downright nasty. So if its not immediately apparent that you're joking, people make assumptions.

Although its become your primary occupation, I'd like to see a month without your media watchdogging; without any analysis of other people's analysis. That crusade is a big contributor to the negative ambiance of this blog.

As usual, mystery, you seem to think that this particular group of less than a dozen define the entire readership. You don't. Very few of the commenters in question actually have a real insight into journalism or the film industry at all. Yet, they know better about everything.

I'm done with it. It's time for a change around here. As much as I would like to "be above it," I'm not. I'm not interested in being disconnected from the fray. I am on the web and have been here for so long is because I like the feedback, positive and negative. But I'm not willing to allow a small group that really isn't interested in more than a small percentage of what interests me to take up such a high percentage of my time... or to give them any more power than they deserve by way of my space.

I don't want to control the conversation AT ALL. I am never happier with this blog than when a conversation goes somewhere I do not anticipate, but is intelligent and builds amongst commenters. Thrilling.

But too often these days, people are more interested in commenting on me than the content of what I am saying. Not an interesting subject for anyone but y'all.

You know, Mystery... this is not a frat. You are guests in my house. And you act like you have a right to move the furniture around so that you can be more comfortable. Put down the fucking ottoman, man.

It's probably just time to clear the room and to start again. Maybe a couple of weeks without comments would help. I don't know.

And honestly, I am as sick of responding to this issue as you guys seem to be of whatever you guys are sick of. Happens. Bands break up all the time. And the players who want to keep playing find other people to play with.

And Christian... "endless stats as proof of value"

I write about the film BUSINESS... not the film fantasy land.

There are all kinds of values. Financial success does not define artistic success. And you have never seen me make the argument that it does.

But this particular artform is expensive... very, very expensive. And so it is tragically connected to business.

If digital video movies made by ambitious artists is your idea of what this industry should become, great. Why the hell would you ever read ME?

If you don't care that the industry looks like it could shrink by 20% - 40% in the next five years... don't read me because I am treating that like it really, really matters.

Likewise, if you don't think that swimming in a media pool that is moving quickly towards being a cesspool... don't read me... because it really, really matters to me.

Roger Friedman was mentioned on this blog total of 8 times in the year before the Wolverine thing happeend. I doubt be will be mentioned as many as 8 times in the year to come. Sorry that I don't see that as an obsession. (And sorry that people can't parse that this entry benefits Roger more than it could ever hurt him... because it announces his return to an audience that may actually go to his site... an act of generosity on my part... I know, I know, all that matters is that I am mean and obsessed.)

Nikki Finke is a major problem for both the film industry and the journalism game. Everyone I know who has actually had to deal with her gets it. Almost everyone I know who hasn't actually dealt with her does not. I will not be the one to put Nikki down. She will do that to herself. But I do have a role in speaking out, occasionally, about just how insidious and false she so often is. And when a journo grad school guy like Kris Tapley doesn't seem to get it at all... that means that I need to write more about it, not less. Because he isn't dumb... but he's blind about this.

If you don't like what I write, you are welcome to:
1) refute it
2) ignore it
3) ignore me
4) go to another entry that does interest you

You are not welcome to:
1) tell me what to write
2) poorly psychoanalyze me
3) patronize me
4) do any of the above to anyone else in here

It's not complex. You are in my living room... by your choice. I'm not going anywhere because I live here. If you don't like how I decorate, there are literally millions of other places for you to hang out on the web. But sitting in my living room whining endlessly about my taste is a worthless exercise for both of us.

PS - I am kind of amazed, actually, that mentions of Nikki Finke have actually been fewer than one a week on this blog in the last year... obsessions just aren't what they used to be.

Let me get this straight David, so that -- seriously -- I'll understand the rules of the game: The next time you write something that we consider drama queenly to the max, or just too bitchy for belief, we should discuss you on someone else's blog? Fine. OK, folks, where should we meet? Glenn, your place?

Oh, one last thing to ponder, or not: You'll notice, David, that when you write something bitchy, as you have here, or something santimoniously self-serving (see "White Suit in Shit Storm"), few if any of your zillions of readers seem in any hurry to rush in and defend you against criticism. I know, I know: Posters comprise just a small percentage of your readers. But, gee whiz, you'd think at least one person might have made an unsolicited comment in your favor by now. Unless, of course, the zillions of other readers are averting their eyes in embarrassment, as they might if a beloved uncle got too drunk and pissed his pants at Thanksgiving dinner?

David, you've turned into Jeff Wells. And if others make a comment on YOUR comments, i.e., the purpose of a blog, then what is the problem? I don't trash talk, unless you consider engaging in lively discussion as a negative. Your response to my comment and others here is over-reactive and patronizing to the extreme.

And this whole "living room" analogy is for the birds. Without guests, you have no party. So I'll take my leave since you ignore the times I've called out the name-callers and praised your work here. But you invite controversy and expect no feedback? On a blog with comments? That shows an EPIC FAIL in understanding this brave new media.

peace.

Christian: You're always welcome in my living room. Just as long as you use a coaster when you set down your drink.

Christian... this one response to your one response may seem extreme or too broad... and in that context, it probably is.

I thought I was pretty clear... if you want to engage in lively conversation, you - and anyone else - will always be welcome. If you - or anyone else - want to engage in constant backbiting, not welcome.

If I am specific, I am accused of going overboard. If I am not specific, I am accused of withholding or not speaking to issues. Sorry... I can't do what I need to do with everyone constantly commenting not on what I am saying, but how I am saying it. Just can't. Just won't.

And Joe... you win again... you are much, much smarter and kinder that I am... you are a real parent figure to me... please... tell me more about how wrong I am and how you can show me the way... I so enjoy it and it is so kind of you...

And Eric... it's not about me being better... it's about the work... it's always been about the work. I saw this silly video, it made me laugh, I got a note that Friedman's blog had launched, I made a silly connection that made me laugh.

It never really occurred to me that I would spend a day going down this road, but it's not that surprising. Maybe it's where I needed to go today.

I really wish I could just do my work and not care what was written in here. But I can't.

I seek an answer that works for me and others. Getting closer, I hope.

But no matter what I do, it doesn't change the issue of what Roger or Nikki or anyone else does... the moral or immoral behavior is not measured by me... I am not the standard... I am an observer, a reporter. But then again, you are still claiming I write about Wells when I haven't written an entry about Wells since 2007... no way to win with facts in these arguments...

"If I am specific, I am accused of going overboard. If I am not specific, I am accused of withholding or not speaking to issues. Sorry... I can't do what I need to do with everyone constantly commenting not on what I am saying, but how I am saying it. Just can't. Just won't."

I believe this is what those internet kids like to refer to as "comedy gold."

I'll bet that the end of this thread will find poor David shrieking something along the lines of "They're trying to turn me into Simone Choule!"

You want some advice from gramps, sonny? From the old timer who was already established in journalism back when you were still trying to nail cheerleaders at Ransom-Everglades High? OK, how about heeding what the great pianist Van Cliburn once told me: "If I have talent, it's a gift from God. But I have a career, it's a gift from the audience, because they don't have to come see me."

And of course, the killer irony is, while we're frittering away our time with this nonsense, God may have the nastiest of all nasty surprises up His sleeve for us:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30398682/

Uh... Joe... as a guy who has spent over a decade living in the world of visitor counts, that's advice that I understood and have been dispensing for over a decade. But again, the half dozen people - besides me - who make this blog a less pleasant place to be are not the audience that matters, though like the religious right, are disproportionately loud.

And Glenn... I would probably take you seriously if you had ever had ANYTHING to say on this blog that wasn't about sniping at me. You don't have the cred of someone like Joe, who can be an ass, but who also offers a lot of actual thought and insight on a wide array of subjects in any give week.

If I had any indication that you were remotely serious about discussing what is difficult about dealing with this, I would be happy to engage you. There is a long history. And I take it very seriously, since it is my space and my responsibility. But you appear to be the kind of guy who only shoots what you think are fish in a barrel.

Damn! Joe Leydon "offers a lot of actual thought and insight on a wide array of subjects in any give week." This goes on top of my blog. Now. Thanks.

OK, it's up. Thanks again.

http://movingpictureblog.blogspot.com/

You do, Joe... I just wish you wouldn't patronize me and others when you do.

This is true of pretty much every one of the people I find so problematic. Crow and Christian and Mystery and yes, even J-Mc offer terrific stuff often. Even Anghus! Even Wrecktum! But when the smug, patronizing, group narrative launches... I just have no patience for it.

If, as some of you do, actually offered a thought about the content, aside from the context of the fact that I posted it, it wouldn't bother me so much.

And yeah, Christian probably got caught in the net others were already in today. But fighting words for me - such as "drunk" or "sad" - or referring to my wife or any patronizing, bar stool psychoanalysis... not okay. Never okay.

The rule is simple... would you say it to my face and if you did, would you expect to get a fist in your mouth? If the answer is "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second, shut the fuck up.

I understand the price of keeping after Nikki or the NY Times... I have been doing this for a long time. I am not learning on the job. People and companies have come and gone and gone and come. I don't need advice on what to post and what not to post, thanks. If I needed the advice, I would ask for it.

Oddly, the nasty comments about my weight... they don't seem very unreasonable to me. That, I set myself up for. And those questioning whether it is reasonable for me to run something as dumb as this while fighting about quality... reasonable. The rest of it is just a waste of time and energy and I have lost patience for it.

P.S All of the inside baseball stuff bores the crap out of people who read it and tell me about it. The LexG Drunk Era seemed to amuse some for a while... until it didn't. But LexG has been great about not going there again and being a valued contributor, even when he is ALL CAPS and silly.

I am, obviously, seeking a solution so we can all share ideas and not become a completely dysfunctional family... to even encourage others who don't want to get into the dysfunction they see in here to comment.

The fighting about me must stop. The fighting about ideas must continue. That is my hope.

Is that comedy gold, Glenn? Hope you enjoy it.

Okay, last post.

"If I had any indication that you were remotely serious about discussing what is difficult about dealing with this, I would be happy to engage you."

You got me there. I'm not serious, and I have no interest in engaging you. Because it's my opinion that as a writer you're a puerile joke and as a human being you compare poorly to most insects. Given your view of my "cred"—and Christ, what a typical sports-announcer asswipe word that is, huh?—I'd imagine you feel the same about me. So we're even!

That said, if one wants to fight the Friedmans and Finkes of the world, one might want to start by doing better work than they do. Which, despite your "heavy lifting," you can't.

"The rule is simple... would you say it to my face and if you did, would you expect to get a fist in your mouth? If the answer is "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second, shut the fuck up."

Try me some time, tough guy.

Glenn: I would watch it if I were you. I have it on good authority that, back when he was in high school in Miami, David earned pocket money by wrestling alligators to solicit tips from tourists. (How else do you think he got that "Fijian Wrestler" nickname?) Even I can't compete with that, and, mind you, while I was in high school, I used to help a TV repairman pick up and deliver TV sets in the Desire Housing Project of New Orleans.

Thanks, Glenn. Your clarity is refreshing and saves me the effort. I expose my thinking in here, ad nauseum... but you don't have to... and I appreciate the even playing field.

I am always fascinated when people who don't know me think they know who I am "as a human being." It makes it pretty evident what their standards of truth are. It also explains your embrace of hacky gossips.

I have no idea of what you are as a human being, having heard opinions kind and cruel, and taking none of them to heart. I try to judge people based only on first-hand experience and stories that I actually know are real. But you certainly seem determined to make me think you are an asshole.

Wish I could trade swipes about your writing, but I don't have enough information to have a strong opinion about it. I do know that we have liked many of the same films over the years, but I've never really had a clear read on your overall vibe.

Sorry to confuse you with the non-threatening "rule." I'm no tough guy. I haven't had to swing a fist in anger in well over 3 decades. I deal with conflict with words and ideas and usually, empathy. But if you hate me so much for whatever mysterious reason and you need to hit me next time you see me - what, once or twice a year - do what you must. I'd be curious to see how I would react.

It's Dave's blog, he'll have fun if he wants to!

Well, if you're open to suggestions, this is mine: don't turn off comments for the whole site. But you could perhaps turn off comments for the occasional post that you know will generate this sort of "inside baseball" discussion. (And I mean before you post it, not after the discussion starts-- cutting it off would lead to spillover in other threads.)

I don't think you'd have any trouble figuring out ahead of time which ones those would be.

It seems the really negative discussions these days typically start with negativity at the top, i.e. those about Finke et al. I think you could still write those posts and the other, more productive threads wouldn't be affected.

Snark without rhythm... and it won't... attract... the worm.

Um, you're the guy who brought up the "fist in your mouth," David. But I suppose there's never an implicit threat in evoking it, right? But since you've decided, after bringing it up, to do a reversal, allow me to assure you that I have no intention of ever confronting you physically. I know I said the above was gonna be my last comment, but given as you've twisted shit around—and that one really can't be too careful on the internet!—I just wished to make that point clear.

HAW-HAW! Seriously.

Damn those evil, puerile internets!!!

So wait, are you guys saying that's not Roger Friedman?

No. It's not Friedman. It's....

"I saw this silly video, it made me laugh, I got a note that Friedman's blog had launched, I made a silly connection that made me laugh."

And people balked because all you've ever shown toward Friedman is righteous indignation. Naturally, this topic was seen as mean-spirited.

In this case, you might consider that this minority of vocal readers DOES represent the sentiment of the majority of your readership. Did ya get a bunch of "OMG Friedman LOL!" emails today? Believe it or not, the comments from regular commenters here might not reflect personal vendettas-- maybe we're just a diverse group of regular people reacting. Your marginalization of us may be unfair.

You set the tone here, and you're as condescending, snarky, and snide as anyone here who comments. So when people are unfairly rude and hypercritical of you (which happens regularly), its hard to muster much sympathy.

And for the record, if those "psychoanalysis" comments were directed at me, then they're off-base. I just said you're a grump. I have no idea why, and didn't posit a theory.

While movie audiences lap up Beyonce Vs Ali Larter in Obsessed us internet movie blog watchers have to put up with When Journos Attack One Another! Poland V Kenny (with special guest appearance by Leydon) only on The Hot Blog.

Sorry, Kami. If I put on a spandex dress, would that make you happier?

Does anyone else think the guy in the video looks like a cross between Nick Frost of Hot Fuzz and Preston Lacy of Jackass?

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: