Hard Rain
I'm sorry to read about L.A. Times film critic Carina Chocano getting the hook over at the L.A. Times. Tough deal, but it's going this way for so many good critics, reporters and editors these days. I'm not sorry for my good fortune in owning a respected site that can only grow and strengthen, putting me for once on the right side of the equation with a truly secure foothold, but I've been through layoff traumas and know what it feels like. My heart goes out to all print people suffering through the Big Implosion.
When Chocano first got the gig she was seen by some within LAFCA (the Los Angeles Film Critics Association) as not "Catholic" enough. She hadn't gone to catechism, wasn't really and truly "of the cloth," etc. But she's a good writer, she has a passionate heart and, for my money, knows movies well enough. I hope she lands somewhere or figures something out soon.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 27, 2008 at 4:45 PM
comment #1
shawn
says ...
More names, including two cultural/arts editors, here: http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2008/10/list_of_la_times_departur.php
The new model for arts coverage will be "freelance-driven."
Bad day.
Bad day.
Posted by shawn
at October 27, 2008 5:15 PM
comment #2
lawnorder
says ...
I cry no tears for Chocano. I thought she was a mediocre critic who never failed to express her disdain for genre films. Her opinions always felt forged from the Manohla Dargis Academy of Elitist Film Criticism. Three hours of a lone figure wandering a static, wintery wide landscape with industrial drone soundtrack = four star review. A 100 minute, stylistic ass-kicking = pan. I don't think she was a good fit for a mainstream newspaper. More suited to the LA Weekly or Filmmaker Magazine.
Posted by lawnorder
at October 27, 2008 5:55 PM
comment #3
actionman
says ...
She championed The New World. Called it a masterpiece if I'm not mistaken. She's cool in my book.
Posted by actionman
at October 27, 2008 6:38 PM
comment #4
frankbooth
says ...
She's cute and she's a film critic. She's the wet dream of every guy here.
(Except for Lex. She's too old for him.)
Posted by frankbooth
at October 27, 2008 7:09 PM
comment #5
erniesouchak
says ...
She stunk. Still, the idea that Los Angeles' most significant newspaper can't sustain more than 1 full-time film critic is a little shocking. What's with Turan? I hardly ever see his byline anymore....
Posted by erniesouchak
at October 27, 2008 8:44 PM
comment #6
YRG
says ...
I blame blogs. Especially blogs about Hollywood that make most of their money from advertising and have commenters with strong opinions.
Posted by YRG
at October 27, 2008 8:48 PM
comment #7
TVMCCA
says ...
My guess is that Mark Olsen, who sometimes writes in a wiseguy style, will be the most prominent film critic in the TIMES, with Turan being a defacto second (though not in title).
Not really a Chocano fan, but sorry to see her go. Mark Olsen isn't a fair trade.
Posted by TVMCCA
at October 27, 2008 10:35 PM
comment #8
Luke Y. Thompson
says ...
"the idea that Los Angeles' most significant newspaper can't sustain more than 1 full-time film critic is a little shocking."
It's ridiculous. Especially considering they fill a whole regular supplement with endless awards predictions.
Posted by Luke Y. Thompson
at October 27, 2008 10:35 PM
comment #9
TVMCCA
says ...
To add: Chocano dealt with the indignity of coming back from maternity leave to face the TIMES job-cut cleaver.
Posted by TVMCCA
at October 27, 2008 10:40 PM
comment #10
The Lord of Misrule
says ...
It would be a cool (albeit unlikely) thing indeed if all of these poor unfortunate critics could, somehow *all* band together under the auspices of one mighty web-site, sort of like Rotten Tomatoes for the elite.
I'd bookmark for sure
Posted by The Lord of Misrule
at October 27, 2008 10:42 PM
comment #11
The Lord of Misrule
says ...
it!...I'd bookmark *it* for sure.
(Last time I post late at night.)
Posted by The Lord of Misrule
at October 27, 2008 10:44 PM
comment #12
LexG
says ...
I've ranted about it before, but TURAN is the KING OF FUCKING DOUCHE -- boring, old, stuffy fossil who doesn't like anything remotely flamboyant or transgressive or especially violent. Old fart is more squeamish than Michael Medved, and I get almost as sick of his condescension and pomposity as I do of his penchant for PLAGIARIZING HIS OWN REVIEWS WEEK AFTER WEEK.
Seriously, note how many times Turan claims a movie (as if a movie is a person) IS NOT AS (smart, clever, profound, etc) AS IT WANTS TO BE.
Old Man Turan uses that line CONSTANTLY, then complains about violence, then regurgitates the press notes, then COMPLAINS ABOUT VIOLENCE SOME MORE.
TURAN SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS.
Posted by LexG
at October 27, 2008 11:19 PM
comment #13
frankbooth
says ...
Nobody here has strong opinions, YRG. Nobody -- AND THAT'S A FUCKING FACT!
Posted by frankbooth
at October 28, 2008 12:06 AM
comment #14
corey3rd
says ...
why buy the cow when you can force the farmer to just sell you a cup of milk? Does a newspaper really have to have a film reviewer as a full time staff member? Why pay them benefits and give them office space? You can easily find a sap willing to work for $100 a review. No insurance, work man's comp or obligation to a union.
Let 'em teach at a film school.
Posted by corey3rd
at October 28, 2008 5:33 AM
comment #15
btwnproductions
says ...
$100 a review? That sounds like paradise.
Posted by btwnproductions
at October 28, 2008 6:07 AM
comment #16
Joshua Mooney
says ...
Hey, man: Craig Modderno has to eat too! So does Michael Dare, for all I know.
[shawn says ...
The new model for arts coverage will be "freelance-driven."
Bad day.
Bad day.]
Posted by Joshua Mooney
at October 28, 2008 7:19 AM
comment #17
Joshua Mooney
says ...
Agreed, LexG. Most of Kenny Turan's reviews aren't as smart, clever or profound as they want to be.
Posted by Joshua Mooney
at October 28, 2008 7:26 AM
comment #18
K. Bowen
says ...
In my book, Chocano was insanely right in two important instances - the first her praise for The New World, the second in going against the grain and calling out Judd Apatow for his sexist attitudes, I think in her Sarah Marshall review.
Posted by K. Bowen
at October 28, 2008 9:45 AM
comment #19
PhilVillarreal
says ...
Print film criticism is a circle of musical chairs that are being yanked away in between each verse. Everyone - readers, publications, even studios - loses as the circle continues to shrink.
Posted by PhilVillarreal
at October 28, 2008 10:17 AM
comment #20
crsryan
says ...
I agree with what an earlier commenter said, that at some point there should be a Marvel Team-Up between all of those free-floating luminaries like Glenn Kenny who have become Web-bound. They could create some new site that would have deep credentials on day one, and if it was successful enough, maybe someday they could even reverse-engineer a new print magazine out of it.
Posted by crsryan
at October 28, 2008 10:40 AM
comment #21
Luke Y. Thompson
says ...
They could create some new site that would have deep credentials on day one
It would be a great site, but would never be profitable enough to pay everyone. This site here is probably a decent example of how many ads can be squeezed onto a movie site, and it makes a living for exactly one person.
The only way to do it would be if a larger company like IGN or AOL deemed it worth paying for.
Posted by Luke Y. Thompson
at October 28, 2008 12:03 PM
comment #22
Luke Y. Thompson
says ...
"$100 a review? That sounds like paradise. "
Yes, especially in LA, with 12 or so new releases a week. But Turan also does interviews, festival write-ups, etc...if you paid him per piece, it would probably work out similar to an annual salary. I guarantee they get their money's worth of work from him, and will probably work him harder now.
Posted by Luke Y. Thompson
at October 28, 2008 12:05 PM
comment #23
janee
says ...
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of sql server high availability
Posted by janee
at May 18, 2011 6:51 AM