Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: Levelling the Playing Field, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
I’d pick Bill in a moment.
Though I’d have to check- still might have that contract out on him from back in the 80s, when it was apparent he had the world’s best job, and wasn’t going to give it up :)
(Not entirely relevant anecdote: visited Bill in Wellington in 1985 when I was on the Chch Film Soc committee. He was not keen on Chch audiences; we often didn't get all the weird and wonderful that went to other centres, which rankled some of us. While there I listened to a conversation between him and Frank Stark, about this crazy guy making a low-grade splatter out at Makara, and trying get Arts Council funding. Stark was especially dismissive ... but Bad Taste turned out pretty well in the end :)) -
Speaker: Levelling the Playing Field, in reply to Campbell Walker,
i’m not sure how this increased focus on marketing work will help in terms of developing NZ content.
Seems a reasonable line to me. In fact, I’d take a punt the ‘screen advisory board’ will not help anyone much do anything.
Maybe NZ can cement a place as the makers of (relatively) cheap block-busters for the world audience. Maybe we have a Cameron or another Jackson or two waiting in the wings. But how much would you bet on it?edit: this is a cynical view, to be sure. and perhaps reflects my lack of interest in block-buster films, more than any alternative ideas of where nz cinema could go. but yeah: cameron and landau are hardly the first dudes you’d pick as promoters of kiwi culture.
-
Great to hear :) (and with a smidgen of fairy-dust, MTV'll be a great home for the show)
-
Lots to think about here. Really appreciate Jonathan and Campbell's take on the state of film-making in NZ. (Looking forward to seeking out some of your films.)
It's a confusing time- it's never been so good (the technology is cheap and readily available- and distribution is almost frictionless), or so bad (money has dried up, and 'cinema culture' - at least as important- is thin on the ground.)
Music is finding a way. Cinema will too. But it's unlikely to come out the other side the same critter. -
Hard News: Mandela, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
but in their own backyard?
The '81 tour did give NZ a great lurch in the right direction, imho. Looking forward to watching Patu! again.
Meanwhile, looks like the NZ delegation has been cut to only two, Key picked Cunliffe, who has offered his seat to Sharples. Not sure where that's going, but the live coverage will go all night.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dbIhuEyo0sI -
First concert: Lou Reed at the Chch town hall, 1977. Thought I was still 16, but judging from the concert archive Oct 24th, I would've been 17.
It wasn't a great concert, musically. The band were far too loud, and you just couldn't hear Lou. He seemed annoyed by this, and got quite stroppy with them- stopping and starting til at least 'Walk on the Wild Side' started out with audible vocals- before getting louder and louder ...
I don't think me and my mate Winton really minded. We'd saved and scrimped and anticipated, listening to LPs over and over. We drove into town in his Morris Minor, quite hyped up. Like seeing Dylan a few years ago, with terrible sound and frankly, a pretty a-tonal performance of scarcely audible vocals, just being there was enough.
RIP Lou. -
We lived in 'Beeville' for a few months when I was a tyke. I seem to remember long rows of feijoas along the roadside.
-
Legal Beagle: Think it possible that you…, in reply to Danielle,
Thank you to the women who have contributed. You are wonderful.
-
Legal Beagle: Think it possible that you…, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Possibly too late in a comments thread to ask this, but…
Does anyone here think that speech like that of Willie and JT should actually be banned? In the you-commit-a-criminal-offence-if-you-say-it sense?
And for those of you who answer “no”, why not?
I have trouble interpreting this question as having been asked in good faith.
Because noone has called for such speech to be banned.
Because many people have pointed out the distinction between 'the right to free speech' and the 'the right to say whatever you want on a radio show, free from all consequences' .
Because the differences between losing one's slot on Radio Live and facing a criminal conviction should be evident to a legal beagle.
And because no matter how often they're pointed out, you've failed to address these arguments. So meh. -
{redacted}