The Los Angeles Times -- which likes to fancy itself as the "paper of record" for the entertainment industry -- has officially jumped the shark. Wednesday it inaugurated a weekly column by Jay A. Fernandez called Scriptland, which is to be dedicated to "the work and professional lives of screenwriters." What this means, evidently, is that the L.A. Times is now in the business of providing free script coverage for the studios, because the first column features a gushy mini-review of a draft of a script by Charlie Kaufman ("Being John Malkovich," "Adaptation."). I could barely make it past this without gagging:
I have the new Charlie Kaufman screenplay on my desk.In other words: "Hey, I got ahold of something I'm not supposed to have and I feel kinda bad about it, and I don't have any good reason to write about it, but I just had to tell you! Ain't it cool?!?!"I've read it — no, lived it. I've been moved and astounded by it. And I'm tortured by the dilemma of what I should or should not say about it here. I feel a bit like Frodo palming the One Ring. [...]
But many people, beginning with Kaufman, do not want me to have the script, do not want me to read the script, and without question do not want me to write anything about the script. Words like "super-sensitive," "invasive" and "freaked" have been cautiously leveled at me as I've reached out to those involved with the project to get their thoughts on it.
No. It's not. Fernandez isn't a journalist and he isn't a critic; he's a leech, on the level of those self-aggrandizing amateur web trolls who think their premature, uninformed opinions about an unfinished work are "news." If the L.A. Times is going to play by these rules, it will be publishing its writers' opinions about leaked manuscripts of books before they are edited or revised by the authors, and unmixed rehearsal tapes of recording sessions. In the interest of fairness, the paper should also run commentary on early versions of L.A. Times stories before they appear in print, so we can see how that sausage is made. Everything needs to be pre-digested, doesn't it? Meanwhile, expect Times employees to spend a lot of time going through showbiz garbage cans. I'm sure readers will find all this extra groundless speculation -- and spoilers -- terribly useful and informative.
I hope that movie critics, and actual journalists, will protest. Loudly. This really is a new ethical low, tarring the efforts of the paper's real reporters by sticking their work with gossip and innuendo. What is newsworthy about a work-in-progress -- unless (like Emilio Estevez's "Bobby" in Toronto) its makers have decided to screen it for the press and ticket-buying public? Fernandez hasn't seen the movie in any form. Kaufman is set to direct it himself, but hasn't even finished casting it yet. "Meanwhile," Fernandez concludes his item (after telling us an image that appears on "Page 1"), "I feel terribly sick to my stomach." Yeah, he's not the only one. What a self-serving piece of crap. I have a great idea, L.A. Times: Why don't you go put your Calendar entertainment coverage behind a web subscription wall again?
(Tip: Hot Blog.)
"(Page 1 features a 4-year-old girl having her butt wiped)."
Kaufman should rewrite the scene and have her butt be wiped by something written by Jay A. Fernandez.
The constellation of frivolous cottage industries surrounding actual film criticism has now officially become the norm, and it's a sad thing. Everyone seems ready to talk about every single aspect of moviemaking, except for the actual movies themselves. We get to hear all about the stars' romantic and family lives, what movie made how much, who's cutting deals with who, what script by who was bought by which studio... and these on-the-set reports and script analyses from the hemmorhoids at Ain't It Cool News (that is the most polite term I could think of) are the cherry on top of a huge layer cake of superficiality. It's like getting all the calories with none of the flavor.
I guess I can understand the appeal. Box office tallies and wheeling-dealing and celebrity gossip are largely objective and quantifiable, and thus damn easy to talk about. You don't have to think too hard about it; it's all there in hard numbers. They also make a person feel like an "insider." Talking about the films themselves, as complete entities worthy of study and interpretation, is much murkier ground. That makes it less sexy, I guess.
But I like to believe there was a time when the subjective experience of movie-going was actually positive, and made the whole thing worthwhile. Interpretation, discussion, debate, critical thinking -- these don't have to be intimidating prospects. They are, believe it or not, actually kind of fun.
Shame on the L.A. Times for running in the other direction.
I didn't go look at the rest of the article, because I want to know nothing about a movie I'm sure i'll be interested in, before it even gets made (witch it of course could end up not being).
That said, the parts you posted are ridiculous and if Kenneth Turan has any self-respect he'll find another paper to write for.
At least with the "Aint-it-cool" crowd, you get some kind of passion. Take Harry Knowles out of the equation and you have some sweet, if uninformed, honest movie loving guys (no women) who, for all the speculatory crap they post, I think genuinely love the movies, even if they're bad ones, and there's something to be said for that.
The LA Times piece is just that bragging bullshit that populates the worst of movie "news."
Shameful.
News of this sickens me. Plain and simple.
I gag everytime I see one of the LA Times commercials before a movie in LA. Just seeing them pretend to be the backbone of the movie industry keeps me a million miles away. Anyone who claims so loudly to be so important usually is not. I'm glad to know now that I have made the correct choice by having nothing to do with them.
Astounding and actually disheartening. What useless tripe from LA Times, they should take a page from LA WEEKLY. Pre-digested indeed, and there IS lemmings in the'Wood that urgently believe Fernadez' type of drivel is part of the LA talent pool. On behalf of Southern California, I apologize Jim. There must be bad Paxil floating around Jay Fernandez's "hood" in the Fairfax District.
Again and again JIm, you make such enlightening observations, and then backhand these whack upstarts like a Sensei-- and please dont be shy to post this testimonial for other readers.
Strong work Mr. Emmerson.