----------------------------Original message----------------------------
David
Reviewers are provided with "press kits" to assist them identify cast &
credits, to provide them with background to the film etc. These kits
generally run to about 12 to 16 pages.
N
Neil Pollock
Australian Film Television and Radio School
On Wed, 8 Feb 1995 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Finally! Heavenly Creatures has arrived in Switzerland. It's been a
> long time since I was so emotionally involved in a film. The terribly
> sad scream with which the film ends would seem to describe the pain
> caused by the severing of such a beautiful intense friendship very
> well. I seem to remember something like that ... A part of me, albeit a
> foolish, reckless part, cannot accept that such a powerful friendship
> could be severed by common law, given that they seemed to have lived by
> their own rules until the real world started to intrude.
>
> My curiosity about the 'true' story of Juliet Hulme and Pauline Parker
> led me to search for the last 100 references to the film in the press.
> As could be expected, the range of qualitative crticism is broad. But I
> was quite surprised to find a few discrepancies in the facts about the
> film, at least as far as my recollection of the narrative goes. So how
> do film reviewers/ critics get all of the facts, such as character
> names, actors, producer, cinematographer etc., for their articles? Do
> they take notes whilst watching the film, dodging round the heads of
> people standing up to leave as the credits roll, or are leaflets
> distributed before or at the showing? Or do the reviewers, rather like
> the girls in Heavenly Creatures, snuggle up to the poster outside for
> the details?
>
> David Moon
>
|