Markus Stromiedel (Zwillingsspiel) hat in der FAZ den Artikel “Wie das Fernsehen seine Autoren vernichtet” über seine Erfahrungen als Drehbuchautor veröffentlicht:
Der Erfolg und die Qualität eines Filmes – und nur der wird am Ende beurteilt – ist beim Fernsehen entkoppelt von der kreativen Leistung des Autors. Die Produktionsgesellschaften und Sender sehen sich während des Entstehungsprozesses eines Drehbuches nicht als Geburtshelfer einer kreativen Leistung, sondern als Lenker und Entscheider. Anders der Lektor eines Buchverlages, mit ähnlich viel Macht ausgestattet wie ein Producer: Er versteht sich als Begleiter des Autors bei der Suche nach der Geschichte, er steht ihm fördernd zur Seite.Ein Producer oder Produzent im Fernsehgeschäft hingegen ist der Kutscher, der sich vom Autor den von ihm vorgegebenen Weg hinaufziehen lässt. Lahmt ein Pferd oder kommt es vom ausgetretenen Pfad ab, wird es gewechselt. (…)
Es müsste nur – so wie in den Vereinigten Staaten – die Bereitschaft geben, Autoren Verantwortung zu überlassen. Und es bräuchte den Mut, Projekte an den Start zu bringen, die anders sind als das, was bisher erfolgreich war. Möglicherweise irre ich mich, und das Programm würde nicht erfolgreicher. Aber eines wäre es nicht: langweilig.
-
Sara Paretsky fragt “What happens to the novel in the Age of Fragmentation?”:
We need stories to make sense of our journey from beginning to end, of our times of loss, of our times of joy. We need stories to give us hope, and to give us understanding.
I have been wondering, lately, what kind of stories will survive the age of the Internet, which could also be called the Age of Fragmentation. (…)
If we live only with sound bites, then we are at the mercy of the person who creates the most compelling narrative out of these jostling fragments,. This happened with the narrative about Saddam Hussein, 9/11 and the Weapons of Mass Destruction. When we don’t check for facts, when we don’t pay attention to the whole arc of an event long enough to build a reliable narrative, we end up being controlled by unreliable narrators.
-
As a novelist, I can’t help my fascination between the campaigns’ respective grasp of effective communication, of text and subtext. When you’re writing dialogue, “text” means what’s actually said, which in art as in life is largely discounted; “subtext” means what’s meant and actually communicated. Obama’s people understand the distinction. Obama’s text consisted of many things: discussion of his health care plan, his plans for the economy, etc. It was all in the service of his subtext, which was what he really wanted to communicate: “I’m serious. I’m presidential. I’m not a radical. You can trust me in the White House.”
By comparison, McCain seems to believe text and subtext are the same. He believes that when he expresses contempt for Obama, viewers will be encouraged to feel contempt, too. In fact, the contempt text reveals an unhelpful subtext: angry, thin-skinned, insecure, cranky old man. Three debates, and McCain never once demonstrated that he or the people around him understand the distinction. If you think effective communication is an important skill in a president, McCain offers few grounds for confidence.
-
Max Allan Collins beantwortet einige Fragen von Tom Piccirilli zu seinem neuen Roman “The first Quarry”, warum seine ersten Seriencharaktere Gangster und Killer waren, seinen posthumen Mickey-Spillane-Bücher und dem ganzen Rest.
PIC: What do you miss most about Mickey?
MAC: His voice on the phone. Just having the phone ring, and it’s Mickey Spillane, just calling to talk. He didn’t do that with many people, and it still seems surreal to me that I was his friend.
As far as Mickey in person, it’s this sly, devilish, little kid’s smile he would share with me, when he’d gotten away with some piece of b.s. for a reporter or even a fan. It said so much about him, that smile, and so much about our relationship that he let me in that way.
My fondest memories are late nights talking late into the night about writing. He didn’t have any other friend to talk about writing with, and that is a big part of why he valued our relationship. These were the times he would roam his office (usually the third-floor one) and start spinning the endings of various in-progress Mike Hammer stories. It was like having Mickey Spillane telling you Mike Hammer stories around a campfire. Unreal. Unbelievable. And that’s why I know the endings to all these unfinished novels!
-
Bei Cinema Retro gibt es eine informativen Artikel über “French Connection II”:
Though French Connection II is one of the bleakest pictures Frankenheimer made, it is also one of the most thrilling, thanks to spectacular sequences like the burning of the slum hotel and the final chase, when Doyle runs after Charnier along the Marseilles harbor. The director realized that the exaggerated quality of these scenes could arouse disbelief and thus he tried to make them seem as authentic as possible.
Der Film läuft Samstagnacht um 01.30 Uhr bei Sat.1.
-
Und Noir of the Week nimmt Steve-O sich “The Bank Job” (Yep, der lief erst vor wenigen Wochen im Kino.) vor:
The Bank Job is a wonderfully sleazy film. It’s filled with enough sex and violence that, if made years before, would have made Sam Fuller smile (and review Crowther probably blow his top). The thing I love about The Bank Job is the fact that the criminals who actually pull off the crime know they aren’t all that clever.
Und vergleicht ihn mit dem in Deutschland nicht gelaufenen “Armored Car Robbery” (USA 1950, Regie: Richard Fleischer):
Two excellent crime films. The two would make a great double feature for film noir fans craving heist movies.
Verfasst von AxelB 
