Anthony Kaufman polled industry folks about Michael Moore’s announced Doc Night plan in his excellent indieWIRE article today. “Reactions to the plan are largely split between documentary filmmakers, who welcome any initiative that helps get their work out to the world, and industry insiders, who are skeptical about the plan’s feasibility and disturbed by what they see as a further ghettoization of the documentary form.”

As I was reading the article, I was feeling like some of us (myself included) come across as quite snarky about the whole thing. I can’t hold back when it comes to Moore; in a typical fashion, he couldn’t bother to comment for Anthony’s article, which just adds fuel to my snark about the man. But as Thom Powers says at the end of the article, “When you have a curated event, you’re building a relationship with the audience. When they have a couple of good experiences, then they don’t have to be sold on each title individually.” I was a season pass holder for Thom’s excellent Stranger Than Fiction series in New York and would gladly promote something similar in cities across America.

Thanks to AJ for pointing out the POV blog; I remember some staffers telling me they were going to implement one, but sadly I never got an email about the launch. Some of my favorite doc folks are posting, including Simon Kilmurry. He posted a great response to David Poland who writes on The Hot Blog, about the WGA nominations for best documentary writing, “has anyone outside of the WGA seen the top doc vote-getter, The Camden 28?”Kilmurry’s response:

What Poland’s post raises, I believe, is the more problematic issue of equating box office success with the importance of a documentary—a crude measurement. Let’s get real here, the vast majority of docs have a very limited box office appeal. I can’t believe that other WGA nominees made millions at the box office—despite how much I might admire The Rape of Europa and the excellent No End In Sight. Most of them make little or no money. (As far as I’m aware, the WGA does not take box office in account in their awards, God bless them.) Read the whole article 

I’ve been slow in reading and posting lately and part of that is being busy but part of it is also boredom with what people are writing about film. Awards are great because they raise awareness among new audiences about great films that they may not have seen - The Camden 28 is a great example of that. It’s a wonderful movie. It revisits a 1960s act of civil disobedience and asks the participants to relay those events, which they do. The film is conventional in style but it is so inspiring to see the story of people who were willing risk their own liberty to send a message to the government, as that doesn’t seem to be happening now, despite widespread dissatisfaction with the actions of our government… but I digress. The issue is that so many writing about film are only focusing on box office, and seemingly ignoring anything film-related that doesn’t have to do with theatrical release.