tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post1549175212315307935..comments2024-03-24T13:26:57.317-07:00Comments on Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule: THE SLIFR MOVIE TREE HOUSE #4: THE BELLAMY AWARDS AND DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING AT MOVIESDennis Cozzaliohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-24308294314265373962011-01-12T13:00:36.737-08:002011-01-12T13:00:36.737-08:00I love your comments on how Jim approaches writing...I love your comments on how Jim approaches writing at his site. This "attention to the nuts and bolts of the structure" is what I value most about the film blogs I read (of which Jim's is the only one I peek at daily). We have dozens of pro film reviewers already, so I don't always find value in blogs that only focus on film reviews rather than real criticism. We need more sites like Scanners that consider those nuts and those bolts and provide readers with a new way to see a film (or a shot) instead of just a simple opinion of whether the film is worth seeing.<br /><br />Because of blogs, we have more film criticism available to us today than ever before. I believe that there is a great benefit of this criticism coming from amateur writers and former and current pro film reviewers instead of academics. Obviously, there is a lot of great criticism in academia, but the often overwrought language of many such writers acts as a barrier to the "average viewer" and even to film nuts such as us (I mean, really, if I have to re-read a passage 2-5 times to understand the author, is it actually good writing?). So, yeah, the downside is the ever-spiraling-out-of-control comments on sites like Jim's (oh, I remember the days long gone when there was the small group of about 10 of us who actually commented there; now, it's hard to keep up with the conversation). but that's probably a good thing. Even though we get some truly bizarre comments (such as the ever present "stop already with the Nolan bashing" comments), I am glad to see that more "average film watchers" are reading film criticism.<br /><br />But less I just ramble about Scanners in response to your article, let me congratulate and and applaud you, Mr. Bellamy, for your work in reviewing ESPN's <i>30 for 30</i> series. not only were you the only film reviewer that I know of to cover that great series, but you did it with great style (and quickly!) as always. Your reviews of the show were fantastic.Jason Haggstrom (haggie)http://www.reel3.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-57113450439075231552011-01-11T17:55:45.564-08:002011-01-11T17:55:45.564-08:00The opening statements from all the "Tree Hug...The opening statements from all the "Tree Huggers" are so terrific -- so intriguingly varied in perspective -- that I am simultaneously sad not to have been able to do one, and relieved not to have been, inevitably, embarrassed for not measuring up. <br /><br />I especially loved Sheila's thoughts about acting, which themselves represented a very interesting (and egalitarian) riposte to the notion of audiences' cinema illiteracy. <br /><br />I also can't wait to read exactly what Jim thought of TRUE GRIT, and I really wish Jason would give us a glimpse of some past Bellamy Award winners -- specifically, some "Worst Performance" nods.<br /><br />The Treehouse is already a terrific success. Congratulations, all!Don Mancininoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-31087104156725120632011-01-11T17:51:23.960-08:002011-01-11T17:51:23.960-08:002010 was the year in which I stopped remembering t...2010 was the year in which I stopped remembering the movies. Or at least it’s the year in which I stopped remembering them as well as I used to'... this is EXACTLY what has happened to me. And I'm still trying to figure it out!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com