Posts by Peter Cox
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Press conference at 7.20
The Eagles are coming?
EDIT: upon which I reflect on how sad it is that I'm suggesting Gery Brownlee is an eagle... I've just been desperate to use that phrase throughout the whole thing.
EDIT 2: rather nicely timed for CloseUp/Campbell Live. Wonder if that means they have good news or bad? But it will certainly be news.
-
I just begrudge anyone telling me that I should love the film version of LOTR (or "The Hobbit) and sanctify Peter Jackson because I am a proud ANZ person.
Good point, well made!
-
I prefer to think of New Zealand identities, rather than a unitary or totalising identity
That's fine, but it doesn't change the point I'm making.
-
We seem less interested in what we are, than in what we can make the world believe. From that we get our identity, reflected back.
With all due respect, I think that's rubbish. See above comment.
And counter-productive. Increasingly, international media reports seem to portray us not as "Middle Earth", but as a country desperate to be Middle Earth. I think they're less impressed, and more bemused. Or amused.
Yeah, but who cares what they think? - which is the point of your earlier statement.
@Islander:
O, and I didnt reinforce or gain any "Pride and National Identity" from the LOTR.
But you'd begrudge someone who did?
Like this discussion much more than the other one, though!
-
@Geoff. Now, if you make the point of a NZ film having value in terms of creating NZ National identity, then why couldn't you give LOTR credit for being something that creates a sense of National Pride and Identity? Or the Hobbit?
It's a question of whether an Art Object necessarily gets it value from what it IS (impossible to say objectively), what the Artist's Intent was (again, impossible to say, and arguably meaningless), or the communication it has with the Individual Spectator (one would think so).
Which is to say: is the sense of NZ identity a NZer might get from seeing a successful LoTR film, and carry away with them, less important than what they might take away from seeing a film that might be 'set' in NZ, or whatever other set of attributes a film might have to qualify as a 'NZ Film'? And if so: who says, and under what basis?
-
In Jennifer's note to Peter and press release of yesterday, she refers to seeking a meeting with the production for over a month.
So that does, indeed, seem to mean the 17th August letter. Sigh. What a s**tstorm.
-
Thought: What the Hobbit producers really want is insurance against them making a pig's arse of their HR like they did in the Bryson case.
Plausible. How safe are they already with the way they're doing their contracts/HR now?
-
Well, if you're 1-1 on the lie ratio with a US Movie Studio, something can't be right.
-
I dunno, you writers are just so weird! :p
Didn't work very well either; kept having to go for a pee.
EDIT: got out of the bath first though, in case anyone was wondering...
Too much information? Probably too much information.
-
Yeah, it's certainly starting to look that way...
I was so furious last night I had to go drink a few beers and take a bath :/