<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics Author: yam12</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2005 00:38:07 EST</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Announcement: Short-content feeds</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<author>Phillip Winn</author><description>Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we&#039;re sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable.

Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren&#039;t favorable to duplicate content, and don&#039;t always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds.

We hope that you&#039;ll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it&#039;s only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.</description>
<category>Administration</category><guid isPermaLink="false">0@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Ventures : Underrated?</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/24/003807.php</link>
<author>yam12</author><description>I wasn&#039;t really a huge fan of The Ventures until I started listening to their music. I really admire the band and i think the guys are just plain geniuses at what they do.I totally respect them for their contribution to Rock N&#039; Roll music and their influences to today&#039;s bands.John Bush of All Music Guide calls them &quot;...not the first, but, definitely the most popular rock combo&quot;.Who can forget &quot;Walk Don&#039;t Run&quot; or the &quot;Hawaii Five-O&quot; theme (among others)? The music is so familiar to a lot of us now, yet we don&#039;t associate or credit them to The Ventures. The band is very popular yet they are not even a part of the Rock N&#039; Roll Hall Of Fame! The Ventures deserve the honor. I personally feel that they should have been on that &quot;pedestal&quot; the moment they had their very first record played on air.The Ventures are so underrated.They lack the respect and the accolades they truly deserve.The Ventures should be recognized for their music and for their contribution to the genre! 

</description>
<category>Music</category><guid isPermaLink="false">41369@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 24 Dec 2005 00:38:07 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Digital Filmmaking - The Death of the Indies</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/18/075149.php</link>
<author>yam12</author><description>To be an independent filmmaker is to make films outside of the studio or without the financing of any studios. Funding can be sourced from anywhere or anyone who is willing to support a passionate filmmaker with a very compelling story - or from a filmmaker&#039;s very own pocket by begging, stealing, or borrowing. Ten years ago it was very expensive to produce a film - heck, it was even expensive then to just plan making one.  The arrival of the digital format has totally changed the landscape of filmmaking; it has revolutionized the process and has awakened the &quot;filmmaker&quot; in every human being in the world. Inexpensive digital cameras and non-linear editing facilities have brought filmmaking to every living room with an ample electrical supply. Suddenly, &quot;artists&quot; were born - &quot;experts&quot; are everywhere. Dude! Even critics are now a dime a dozen.The film format is constantly under threat and its quality is always being compared to the ever-changing digital technology. I believe that, sooner or later, the motion picture negative will disappear and will be replaced by a &quot;better&quot; format. But the gap between the professional and consumer formats is shrinking. Hence the introduction of the word &quot;ProSumer&quot;, coined by marketing geniuses.
 
The advent of the consumer digital video system is like the first time the world got hold of an &quot;INSTAMATIC&quot;... everyone can point, shoot, and click! It&#039;s a great time to be a filmmaker or be a 10-year-old.We use to call low-budget films B-Movies. In the Philippines, low budget digital (DV) movies are now called &quot;INDIES&quot;.  The studios are now producing DV features because of the lack of funds. The studios now are playing &quot;INDIES&quot; to legitimize their commercial soft porn flicks in the guise of an &quot;art film&quot; in &quot;digital&quot; - hiring &quot;indies&quot; ready for any break in the business.We use to call independent filmmaking the Alternative Cinema. But even before the actual revolution could happen, the filmmakers were overtaken by technology. Technology has liberated everyone in the visual arts. Technology has made visual &quot;artists&quot; of anyone who can operate a digital camera. Let&#039;s take a moment of silence and pray for the death of the INDIES.
</description>
<category>Video</category><guid isPermaLink="false">41171@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 07:51:49 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Film Review: &lt;i&gt;King Kong&lt;/i&gt;(2005) : Jurassic Park IV?</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/17/025418.php</link>
<author>yam12</author><description>I did not intend to show disrespect to an Oscar-winning and very talented filmmaker, but I couldn&#039;t help leaving the screening of his latest film King Kong - even before Kong left the jungle.Peter Jackson&#039;s King Kong or Jurassic Park IV is such a huge disappointment. I know he was trying to visualize and execute a classic in his own unique style, but, putting too many characters with a lot of sub-plots makes it confusing, leaving less time for the audience to express a sense of empathy  with any of the characters. Just when you are introduced to mighty Kong himself, you are presented with a smorgasbord of dinosaurs, leaving the Kong &quot;character&quot; somewhat demystified. Obviously we need antagonists in order to create conflicts and to make a story move forward, but, these humongous and numerous dinosaurs have overpowered the story of Kong. I cannot make any conclusions, having not seen the end of the film - but my prediction was : instead of fighting off vintage planes, I was afraid Kong will make his final stand on top of the Empire State building being attacked by a flock of Pterodactyls. Did he?</description>
<category>Video</category><guid isPermaLink="false">41124@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:54:18 EST</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>