The End Of Longform E-Journalism?
With due respect to Anne Thompson and Premiere Magazine, the reason Premiere died (walking dead for years now) is that it didn’t do longform journalism. Instead of becoming America’s great journal on film, it became a slightly longer lead, somewhat more glossy EW, selling set visits as news.
There was a great moment, back when John Horn was actually breaking news in a monthly, where Premiere mattered. But with due respect to many fine journalists who worked there to the end, that time is a distant memory. What was great, however, was that people like Kim Masters, who are not built to work at web speed (which she proved at both Inside.com and now at Slate) had a place to work at a slower piece and to do richer work as a result.
That said, there is no reason why that cannot be something done on the web. The first company that turns that corner will have a surprising winner. The problem is monetizing it.
More importantly, I would argue that there is more good work written on film these days than EVER before. We are in a renaissance. We also have a lot of shit flying around. And as in all renaissances, the whores get more attention. But even the diaper dandies of ReverseShot are adding to the conversation in a valuable way, even if they too often lose their way and try to make points be pissing on the adult’s table. I am glad they are there. Some will mature and be very important. Others will end up selling time shares. But the mere existance of the blog is a big step.
Manohla Dargis is really the figure head for the expansion of thoughtful movie conversation. A lifelong alt queen, her ascension at the LA Times and now NY Times was driven, in my view, not just by her skill, but by the excitement she engenders in readers, love her ideas or hate them. As a result of her ideas, a different kind of thinking has now joined the mainstream. And Tony Scott, who brings a different sensibility, is better for the intellectual balance across the ink stained aisle.
The many long-standing writers who are being unceremoniously dumped by Traditional Media stil have a place on the web, often reaching more people than ever. Whether you want ALL of Roger Ebert or more form Dave Kehr or to read Amy Taubin or to follow Reid Rosenfelt or even to indulge in a big gulp of Jon Rosenbaum, you can. If you want celebrity gossip, it’s around. If you want industry gossip, it’s around. If you want some serous discussions of money or marketing or mise-en-sc
Dave I also really really miss those heady days of Premiere. They were sometimes like long form intros to books we eventually shelled out for. Sometimes mini INDECENT EXPOSURE type affairs, condensed into a 7pg spread. Now we have to go to Vanity Fair to find them. Can you recommend any other print writers that are given solid space to paint a real picture?
i have a soft spot for Fade In in print since it is pretty unique & good range of contributers–inside baseball but not too much so , but other than that, print feels Dead
While I completely agree that Premier was no more intelligent then say an EW or an US Weekly, there are still intelligent, informative movie magazines out there that practice long form journalism like FADE IN. They have been a longstanding respected publication who is rolling with the changes in journalism and have a great website.