Germany! The home of beer and brats! The stomping grounds of Beethoven and Bach! The only economically viable country in the Eurozone!

As some of you may know, our beloved Managing Editor Cole Abaius (me) will be moving there over the next two months, which means that we’ll be opening up the European Bureau Office of our Eastern Hemisphere Headquarters in 2012. It will, hopefully, have its own built-in sauna.

But won’t this move be debilitating for movie coverage focused on the American film scene? Just the opposite!

It will give me, the site, and you greater access to Cannes, the Berlinale, Venice, the London 24-Hour Sci-Fi Festival, Sitges and many more celebrations of film where a ton of the movies we all want to see will be premiering or making their prestigious festival rounds. Other than expanded coverage of those fests, the run of the site and what I’ll be doing will be greatly unchanged. Even from a different time zone, you can still expect a short film every day, you can still expect the editorial features you’ve come to love from the most authoritative voices on the web, and you can expect me to post news earlier because I will be living in the future.

We’ve doubled our audience in the past year, and we plan to grow even bigger in 2012 without sacrificing our independent spirit. I’ll be away from the site for a few weeks during the move, but when I return, it will be with a vengeance. This move will be a part of a greater plan as we continue doing what we do with a bit more Berliner Kindl Weisse in our bellies, a greater appreciation for European cinema, and a train pass that will take us to some of the biggest film festivals on the planet. We sincerely hope that you’ll be along for the ride. Plus, Neil will still be in Austin, and our teams stationed in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Ohio, Chicago and parts elsewhere will keep on keepin’ on Stateside (in case you’re travel-sick).

Danke fürs Lesen! (Thanks for reading!)

There is currently a leaked The Dark Knight Rises script on the internet. It’s of questionable origin and authenticity, but if you really wanted to hunt it down, you could.

In other words, if you’d like to know what might possibly be happening in a film that won’t come out for another year and a half, you have that power. The caveat of the power in this specific case is that the script is most likely a fan creation or the moronic idea of some aspiring screenwriter who thinks getting buzz for a fake script can get him or her recognition.

What’s fascinating about the way we see movies (and the way the internet has forced us to see them) is that we are seeing far more than just the movie itself. We’re seeing trailers, posters, interviews, featurettes, behind-the-scenes pictures, t-shirts, mash-up videos, speculations, rumors, outright lies, whispered development deals, short lists, and reports of filmmakers having lunch with actors more than actual discussions about movies.

It’s overwhelming, and it’s scaring some people.

From time to time, I find myself on that list. However, the most recent to write about it was CHUD site runner Nick Nunziata who penned a lamentation about what the movie business has done to movie sites. We’re on the brink of a major change, and Nunziata is half-right about it.

The heart of his problem is here:

“So many sites are falling prey to that willingness to just embrace whatever seems to be tangentially considered content. That’s not necessarily a bad thing; sites are supposed to let their audience define what the site (or blog) ultimately becomes. I just cringe when I see good and original sites falling prey to the Egotastic style of reporting. It marginalizes us and it certainly puts us even farther as a collective away from the safe, reliable, and cozy confines of the Deadlines of the world.”

While I disagree with Nunziata about many of his conclusions (especially with his assertion that the internet is making people dumber), he has an interesting viewpoint about a trend that he doesn’t quite call out by name.

The change going on here is that “film sites” are evolving into lifestyle sites.

Many of them are far more concerned now with the lifestyle surrounding movies than the movies themselves. To that end, they can point out deals on ironic t-shirts, post up a Funny or Die Twilight parody video without any added value, and call it a day.

Judge it how you will, but we seem to be on the cusp of that evolution right now. More and more, the bigger sites are putting up (and getting traffic from) bits of fluff trivia and short videos that almost sort of mention a thing that might be related to a movie. It doesn’t mean that they’ve stopped posting up content purely about films, but it does mean that a certain amount of their total efforts are going to ephemeral schlock.

In essence, the lines are blurring. Film sites are losing perspective on what should be tweeted out to friends and what should have an entire post dedicated to it for an audience to see.

This is a vitally roundabout way of arriving at the natural conclusion that the internet is poised to change the way we see movies. The Dark Knight Rises script leak is a beautiful coincidence because it’s where the film site has evolved to, but it’s also where the film site came from.

The earliest sites wrote passionately about things they loved, and created the kind of community that had to be sought out, but they also made some bread and butter by posting rumors and blurry shots of sets taken while on the run from security guards. Ultimately, it’s all led us here – to a point where we’re going through a film subconsciously (or consciously) waiting for the guy to chop his arm off and then heading home to discuss what parts of the trailer didn’t make it into the actual cut.

At the same time, but for different reasons, we arrived a point where people were talking about the latest mash-up of the Inception trailer almost as much as they were talking about the film Inception.

The memes are slowly taking over. Patton Oswalt was right even if he was joking. It is far better to solve the puzzle on your own instead of running to the Walk Through, but that’s not what we’re doing anymore. We’re all taking the wikipedia way out. A decade ago, critics thought the internet was going to infiltrate movies by delivering geeks (the classic, Dungeons and Dragons-playing kind) to a place of power. It did, but the bigger effect the internet had was delivering more culture to us than we could handle.

Like any change, there are good and bad scenarios that crop up, but there are at least two negative components being born here. One, we’re getting far too much information. Gone are the days when most films can surprise or hit theaters unspoiled. Is it possible to avoid movie spoilers? Yes, but it’s getting harder and harder, especially since search engines love great, pointed headlines with plenty of buzz words.

More than just bold-faced spoilers, we’re seeing every image from every film hitting the web alongside teasers and trailers and fan trailers and lego-based tributes. Of course we take that information into the theater with us. One of my favorite books to re-read is “The Greatest Sci-Fi Movies Never Made,” by David Hughes because it explores the alternate reality of several films by examining their development history. It’s fascinating to see how a film could have turned out (especially if it never even got made). Now, we have the privilege of seeing that in reverse. We know the dirty production history before the cameras even roll, and there’s a decently strong possibility that we might be judging Robert Pattinson up against the fictional Colin Farrell performance in our head that Cronenberg’s latest might have to offer.

If it hasn’t yet directly changed the way we view movies, then it’s definitely changed the way we talk about them. Hell, they might as well have billed “Nicolas Cage’s Hair” for Season of the Witch. (Now, someone out there is photshopping that poster. (Now, someone out there is photoshopping that fan poster into a new Kick-Ass poster.))

Secondly, we’re starting to get too much of the wrong kind of information. In transforming from movie-centric sites to general pop culture interest, some are running more and more content that has absolutely zero to do with movies. The attempts to speciously connect those types of fluff to the movie world are appreciated, but pointless.

Plus, there’s a continuum. The line is blurring, but it’s still there. News about James Cameron directing Avatar 2 is more film-based than the ten possible actors who could play Spider-Man which is more film-based than 3 of the 6 Lost lotto numbers hitting in real life which is more film-based than Bill Murray crashing someone’s karaoke party which is more film-based than a heavy-set woman’s violent reaction to the American Idol winners.

It’s all interesting for at least a nanosecond, but whether it belongs on a site that focuses on film is unclear.

That particular component doesn’t matter to me personally. If a self-proclaimed “movie site” starts running more and more content like “news” about Kevin Smith not being able to get on an airplane, I’ll just stop reading that site. Sadly, there are fewer and fewer websites that I care to go to because they’ve fallen prey to posting tangential trifles instead of sharing a genuine love or knowledge of movies.

I don’t think that means a love of movies has disappeared; it’s just harder to make money off of.

Personal digression aside, the real point here is that the internet has changed and is changing the way that we view movies, and now, some of the most influential sites out there are actively taking away from the greater conversation about movies and adding to the greater conversation about cultural detritus that will be forgotten until VH1′s “I Love The Twenty-Teens Strikes Back” goes on air and then gets edited to look like the Inception trailer.

At any rate, thanks for reading past the words “Dark Knight Rises script.”

What do you think?

This is my public retraction: Josh Olson is not an asshole.

It’s a Saturday afternoon in March, and I’m sitting in historic Black’s BBQ full of close to 3lbs of meat (sides are a waste of time) after already eating once that day at the also-historic Smitty’s right down the street. Amidst the chaos of SXSW, some friends and colleagues have decided to get away from it all with a short drive to the small town of Lockhart with the promise of great ribs and great conversation. Both promises are kept, but at the tail end of the meal while the discussion mostly turns to grunts and existential questions of why that much meat was consumed, a figure sits down next to me and sticks out his hand.

That figure is Josh Olson. Academy Award-nominated screenwriter. Man that I called an asshole on the internet.

He’s come down for the film festival (and for the BBQ), and when the seat frees up next to me, he takes it as the opportunity to sit down amidst the empty plates to speak to me about the article I wrote last year in response to his public admission that he would not read your fucking script.

With close friends and film critics like Drew McWeeny, Eric Vespe, and the entire Reject crew sitting around – there was a palpable energy like the kind found on a schoolyard where a bloody nose has been promised. Fortunately, there was no blood spilled that day – only BBQ sauce.

Those searching for the irony of a man (who is irritated by being approached by strangers who bombard him about writing) approaching a stranger (to bombard him about writing) will find it, but I have to admit that the entire discussion was just about as civil as one can get. Olson was a complete gentlemen. In fact, he proved himself to be a very classy guy.

We spoke briefly about the article. He mentioned that he’d gotten loving emails from fellow pros who thanked him for writing the missive. He mentioned that the spotlight he gained from it has snagged him some job opportunities. I congratulated him on both and agreed that, yes, the original situation that sparked his editorial was pretty annoying.

I also mentioned that him getting positive feedback from colleagues was tantamount to any group of similarly-employed people grunting in agreement when one of their ranks brings up a pet peeve.

He asked why he should have to deal with it. I said it was the salt he had to take with his cake.

Then the conversation took a turn toward what the true disagreement was, and it’s something that he and I will most likely always disagree on: the definition of a writer.

Olson never called himself a writer until he got his first paycheck for doing it. He also makes no bones about sharing his disdain for people who don’t get paid yet still use the word when describing themselves – claiming that it disrespects his profession. Also, not getting paid to write makes you a schmuck. His reasoning for this is something that he could better enunciate because for all the discussion we had about it that day, I’m not really sure what it is.

Money, after all, is an arbitrary delineation point. To claim that being handed a check is what makes you what you are belittles the intrinsic value of that accomplishment (whether it be writing or plumbing), and it’s completely discretionary. Does being paid once for an article or short story make you a professional for life? Does being paid $1,000 for an editorial instead of $100 makes you 10 times more of a writer? If Time Magazine gave me a cent for a feature, does that make me any more worthy to call myself a writer than the next guy?

I prefer the simpler, more classic definition. This also happens to be the actual definition. To Write is a verb. Writer is one who writes. As far as I know, there’s no talk about money in the Oxford English entry whatsoever. If you wake up in the morning and write, then you’re a writer. It’s probably too lofty of an example, but by Olson’s definition, J.D. Salinger stopped being a professional a long time ago. Royalty checks are one thing, but Salinger wrote voluminously after publishing his last short story and stored them away forever. This, according to Olson, also makes Salinger a schmuck. Doing all that hard work and never seeing a dime from it.

The truth is that Olson is hung up on an adjective, not a noun. He sees the word “professional” as being somehow tattooed onto the word “writer” because he views it as a profession. That’s not to say that he’s not passionate about the art or that he doesn’t work until his fingers bleed (no one makes it to that level without both), but he certainly sees the task at hand as one that pays his rent. That’s all well and good, but that doesn’t mean that anyone who doesn’t buy their bread with scripts isn’t a writer. They’re just amateur writers. And that’s okay.

I see no need to provide further proof of their status as writers beyond the fact that the word “writer” is in the phrase “amateur writer.” This seems achingly obvious.

Although our discussion, like this article, disintegrated into semantics, the semantics are on the side that claims that writing is an activity that doesn’t necessarily require funding to be legitimate. Yes, it’s always nice to be legitimized by someone believing in your work, and someone investing in it with legal tender is the height of compliment, but it’s absolutely not needed to call yourself a writer. If someone asks what you do for a living, that’s a different question altogether.

The point is that if you write, then you’re a writer. If you get paid, you’re a lucky sucker who is fortunate enough to have (most likely) combined hard work and opportunity into making a living off what you love to do. If you’re still an amateur, try not to bother the pros too much (or at least avoid Olson at parties or lunch outings), and if you’re a pro, try not to be bothered when a 10th grader in a creative writing class uses the same word for herself that just happens to be on your business card.

I realize that this editorial has little to nothing to do with film, which is why I’ve posted it up in the editor’s blog. By the end of my meeting with Olson, we were smiling for photographs, and we were even cordial to each other when we bumped into each other at the closing night screening of Four Lions. The disagreement is still in tact, but it was nice to meet the man.

So I take it back. Josh Olson is definitely not an asshole. But he’s definitely got a wrong-headed view about what makes a writer.

For years now, we’ve built the success of Film School Rejects on some damn good writers. And while much of the day-to-day news and notes come from myself and Dr. Cole Abaius (mostly me), our exceptional group of contributors are the ones that deliver what I call the “heavy hitters,” the weekly columns. Taking on topics from film culture to films from around the world to that which makes them angry, these writers deliver the best content of every day. That’s just my opinion, I know, but as someone who reads every article on this site, I’m pretty confident that our columns are the tops.

With that in mind, we’re announcing a new schedule of columns — some new and some established — for 2010. Joining staples like Boiling Point and Foreign Objects are a few cool new weeklies, which I hope that you will check out. As a service to our readers, I would like to give you a bit of a preview of all of our weekly columns below. Will you join me?

Sunday:

Old Ass Movies
Dr. Cole Abaius and a staple of our other contributors bring movies out of the vault and present the best cinema of old. The rules: the film must have been released before 1960. Think of it as a weekly service, providing you with a classic film to watch so that you can show up your friends with some classic film knowledge.

The Reject Report (Weekly Recap)
Box office predictor and analyzer extraordinaire John Cairns completes your weekend with box office results and analysis. Need to know how much money Avatar made as it won the box office yet again? This is the place to go every week.

Monday:

Boiling Point
Robert Fure is mad. He’s perpetually on the edge, just waiting for Hollywood to do something worthy of an epic weekly rant. His rants are famous, and Boiling Point is our longest-running, most beloved column. The most fun? The fights in the comments. Don’t miss that.

For Science
Our first new column, written by yours truly. Every weekend, I will be taking part in some sort of entertainment-based experiment. Based on personal challenges (watching scary movies, most likely), reader challenges and dares from other staff members, I will be performing some sort of task that is outside of my comfort zone. It’s certainly something that you should check out, as I will undoubtedly be making a fool of myself.

Tuesday:

Culture Warrior
Film school graduate Landon Palmer takes a look at film as art, something the rest of us don’t always do. Once we found out he had a film degree, we locked him in a room, forcing him to spend his time identifying cultural trends in the film world. Those findings are channeled into the always fascinating column known as Culture Warrior.

This Week in DVD
Rob Hunter loves many things. Chief among these things are obscure Japanese imports that feature Asian gals in really short skirts. If you like that sort of thing as well, you’ll love his weekly look at what is out on DVD. For the rest of us, he also breaks down the mainstream releases (alongside the obscure picks) in an easy-to-follow buy, rent and avoid format.

This Week in Blu-ray
To go with Rob Hunter’s fetish for the standard home entertainment format, I also break into your home with a round of weekly Blu-ray picks. This year’s goal: write this column consistently every week. Seriously, this is the year. My affinity for high definition discs must be delivered unto the world. And your bank accounts must be emptied, slowly.

Weekly DVD Drinking Game
If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the comment section over the years, it is that many of our readers like to drink. Not all of you, but many of you. So while Kevin Carr’s weekly game of drunken debauchery isn’t for everyone, it is beloved by many. Drink responsibly, and drink often. And keep watching those movies, ya drunkards.

Wednesday:

Foreign Objects
Rob Hunter, back again. And on Wednesday, his love for all things foreign and well, the girls in skirts, is back with a look at the latest in notable films from outside the borders of the United States. Yes, they make movies elsewhere in the world. And yes, they’re just as good, if not better. So bring a notepad and take notes.

Movies We Love
Everyone loves movies. It goes without saying that we here at FSR are included in that. So to satisfy our need to share that love of movies with readers around the world, we have our staff column dedicated to the movies we love. This ranges from the obvious (we’ve got some big ones to cover in 2010) to the more interesting picks (Dr. Abaius is still living down Josie and the Pussycats). But no matter the pick, they all have one thing in common: they are loved.

Thursday:

The Coroner’s Report
There is more than one doctor hanging around the halls of Reject HQ. This time, it is our Dr. Robert Fure, the man who slices and dices the latest in horror releases with his now patented report structure. Need to know what movies will twist your stomach, excite your adrenaline fever and soak you in blood? There is no better place to go.

The Reject Report (Weekend Preview)
Another round of The Reject Report from box office watcher John Cairns. This time, John runs you through all of the weekends releases (complete with trailers) and forecasts the box office. Show up to disagree in the comments, show up to watch some trailers. Doesn’t matter why. Just show up and be better off for it.

Friday:

Kevin Carr’s Weekly Report Card
Love him or hate him (my opinion changes weekly), there’s one thing you can’t deny about Kevin Carr. The man sees just about every single release over the course of the year. This makes him the perfect go-to guy for a weekly look at what’s good, what’s bad and what is otherwise notable. Every Friday, Kevin breaks down the releases and gives you a guide as to whether or not they are worth your time and money.

Junkfood Cinema
Some columns give you old movies to watch, others give you foreign films or thrilling horror films. Brian Salisbury’s weekly slice of FSR gives you bad movies. Not simply bad, but so bad that they are delicious. So bad, even though they taste so good. It is similar to eating the junkfood items he pairs with each week’s selection. Except the movies won’t make you fat. At least, we don’t think so.

This Week in Movie Posters
Another new entry into our arsenal celebrates yet another mostly unhealthy addiction of mine. I collect movie posters, almost obsessively. It drives everyone from my interior decorator to my accountant crazy, but keeps me happy. Whether it is the newest posters for the latest films or classic gems from talented artists around the web, I’m keeping an eye on it. And all of our walls will be more colorful for it.

Saturday:

Print to Projector
You may sometimes wonder why Dr. Cole Abaius doesn’t write as many articles as myself. The truth is that he’s always busy reading books. I’ve tried to tell him that he can just watch movies instead, but to no avail. He insists upon reading words printed on paper. This allows him to write about books that should be movies, alerting you to the stories of tomorrow. At least that’s the idea.

Shouting Match
Even though they’d probably do it every day if I’d let them, we let two of our writers fight it out (in written form) once a week. The topics are ever-changing, as our the combatants. In the end, it’s usually a fascinating discussion that continues on well after our own Josh Radde has put it all together and published it.

Throughout the year, we may add some new columns as new writers are brought on and new ideas are presented. But for now, we’re reasonably sure that you’ll have a good time with these.

What do you think of our weekly columns? Are there any that you particularly like or don’t like, and why?

It is likely that I will regret asking this question, but I feel it to be an important one. As an editor and website owner, I find the feelings of our readers about what we do to be the most important information available me. It is no secret that we run a business around here — we’re building the careers of writers, many of whom work for us on a basis that can only be described as volunteer.  We are also building a movement, creating a brand and trying to deliver that which our audience demands: the best content on the movie blogosphere.

Over the years, we’ve had a lot of success with our content and our design. And believe it or not, we’ve been using the current site design and content plan for over two years — a fact that seems unbelievable, considering how often it changed during our first two. And while it has served us well, we’ve gone as far as we can with FSR version 2.0. It is time to move on to something new, something updated and something that will better serve our readers.

With that in mind, we need your opinions. Our team has a long list of changes (in both design and content) that we’ll be looking at, but we also want to know what you think. It leads me to the question of the day:

If you could change one thing about your Film School Rejects (design, content, features on the site, etc), what would it be? Note: Please don’t say “get rid of ____” or “don’t let Cole Abaius write anymore articles”… Those are not productive answers, no matter how true they may be.

Good morning to everyone who dares venture out into the wilderness of the internet and visit us here in this dark corner known as Reject Land.

Okay, that was silly — but it’s early, so bear with me. I wanted to drop a quick note in our feed about a very noticable change here at Film School Rejects, one that may or may not cause some uproar in the comment section. Why? Because the change is the comment section. As you may know if you’ve been around a while, our ‘Sound Off’ section below is one of the most important features of our site. We are extremely dedicated to ensuring that our readers (that’s you) have a easy-to-use, intuitive way to provide their opinion along with those that can be seen in the articles. It is something that we take very seriously.

Over the past few months we’ve been using a 3rd party system from Intense Debate, which many of you have come to know and love. And while we love the way it looks and the user interface that it uses, we have had some major stability issues of late — mostly on the backend. And sadly, it has come to a point where a change must be made.

Swooping in to rescue us is Disqus, an alternate solution that promises to provide us with the stability and functionality that we demand from a comment system. In addition to being reliable, Disqus also includes the following features:

• Log in to comment using your Facebook profile
• Log in to comment using your Twitter profile
• Tracking of Conversations over Twitter, Digg, FriendFeed, etc.

Beyond that, Disqus features some of the same great user friendly items that Intense Debate did, including the ability to make video comments via Seesmic, conversation threading, subscription via email and voting up of comments by hitting the ‘like’ button.

In the end, we regret having to make a big change like this on such short notice, but we are very excited about the quality of the Disqus product. We hope that you too will also be excited. If not (or if you find any problems), please don’t hesitate to use the new comment system below to provide us with some feedback or email me at neil@filmschoolrejects.com.

What do you think of the new comment system? Are there any other features that you would like to see FSR add to features (or anywhere else on the site)?

It’s been a while since we’ve done a Weekly Editor’s Blog which begs the question of whether we can keep calling it “weekly.” Since no one actually cares, the answer is yes. Plus, we worked too hard coming up with that name just to let it go. I’m sure you can’t blame us.

We’ve got some serious ground to cover this week, so I’ve conveniently jammed the relevant material into three categories that will inevitably be mocked for being puns.

The News

This week is actually a pretty exciting week in the menial little inner workings of the site. Due to its wild popularity, we’ll be moving Landon Palmer’s Culture Warrior column to Mondays (reset your DVR), and we’re introducing three – count ‘em – three new columns.

• Turned On, Tuned In – Every Monday, Bethany Perryman reports on what’s turning her on this week. A sex column for the entertainment junkie. We’ve been meaning to do this for a while, but since no one that works for FSR has ever had sex, we figured we’d turn to a name that’s been written on bathroom walls from El Paso to Maine.
• The Worst Movie Ever – If there’s anything we like more than bashing terrible movies, it’s chocolate pie. Since we can’t publish chocolate pie on the internet, this will have to do. Every Tuesday, we’ll be taking another look at that week’s worst movie ever. Check it out, or you might accidentally watch something that will force you to gauge your eyes out.
• Movies We Love – We couldn’t be Rejects without bringing some balance to the force. After bashing the worst of the worst, we’ll be celebrating the stuff that made us fall in love with the big screen in the first place.

Exciting column switches, exciting brand new features, and exciting new logos. Plus, Neil has an exciting meeting with a specialist to finally check out that growth.

The Fad

It turns out that the new cultural trend is to physically attack anyone who doesn’t share your taste in movies. Apparently Twilight fan girls are throwing out verbal threats, tossing acid and leaving horse heads in the beds of detractors of the series. I’m hoping none of them have read my review of the film.

Some of you have latched onto the fad in order to launch F-bombs and empty death threats because Robert Fure didn’t like Observe and Report.

To counteract this new attitude that stems solely from fans being completely insecure in their own artistic tastes that they feel the need to insult and threaten anyone who disagrees – I’d encourage everyone to go check out Fure’s review and leave a comment telling him what a great job he’s doing and how handsome he is. Also, go hug a puppy.

But seriously, if anyone else disses Pee Wee’s Big Adventure, I swear I will choke them.

The Ugly

Speaking of Observe and Report and nonsense – there have been a lot of editorials around the internet discussing the finer points of date rape and its humor value. Major blogs have done roundups, feminist sites have given video-middle-fingers to Seth Rogen, and for some reason, no one has bootlegged the scene and set it to Meatloaf’s “I Would Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That).” Get on it, YouTube.

We’ve stayed out of the debate pool so far because, let’s face it, no one has offered any good arguments on either side so far. Some people are outraged that date rape is being displayed in a “comedy”. Some people realize that the context of the scene matters. Some people are outraged that the scene wasn’t rape-y enough.

Personally, I don’t really care where you come down on the argument. Is it rape? Is it not rape? Should date rape be shown in film by the “hero?” Does the context even matter?

These questions don’t matter because the right answer is — Tugg Speedman should have never gone full retard.

Tune in next week when we may or my not write another edition of the Weekly Editor’s Blog. Will we? Won’t we? Not knowing is half the fun!

During the past week, I’ve had the privilege of sitting down with a host of talented filmmakers and actors to discuss the process of making movies. It’s a rush built on the already-strong fever created by the festival atmosphere, and it’s probably my favorite part of my job. Early in the week, two of the filmmakers that I interviewed told me I was intelligent, had great questions and was really insightful which of course had my ego at an all time high (as if it could get any bigger). Then, I spoke with Mark Boal, the writer for The Hurt Locker, and interviewing a journalist made me realize that I had a lot to learn and a long, long way to go before I could even be considered good at what I do. It was humbling, and it needed to happen.

All this to say that between the subtle alcohol references and the absurd analogies (Mary Poppins is a lot like The Exorcist when you think about it), I take parts of my job seriously, and I have a passion for learning and growing in what I do. Still, I wouldn’t consider most of what I do journalism. In fact, there’s a running joke amongst some of the FSR staff that started at Comic-Con when we saw the creator of a personal blog refer to himself as a “legitimate journalist.” Most days, I barely consider myself literate, let alone a bona fide journo. My proof is that I almost spelled that, “bonified.”

Yesterday, Variety launched three salvos into the depths of the internet that resonated like the answer to a question nobody asked. “How I Got Blogged Down,” by Michael Fleming; “Tempest of the ‘Touldja!’ Journalists,” by Cynthia Littleton; and “Hollywood’s Blog Smog,” by the always-charming Peter Bart. I highly suggest you read them – or you can just let me poorly characterize them and stick with that.

Despite the three blatantly aimed at Nikki Finke – who must have thrown sand at all three writers on the playground last week or something – the articles do make some honest-to-god points about the gray area between traditional journalism and whole-sale blogging. The thrust of all three pieces is that the failings of bloggers and film sites are dragging down the fine profession of news-delivery. Fleming celebrates the speed of the internet but laments the existence of the undisciplined who are giving journalism a new bad name. Littleton’s piece laments the bickering between bloggers while pointlessly chronicling one such scuffle – an ad hominem attack that doesn’t even deserve to be responded to. Bart’s piece basically uses ideas that Andrew Sullivan from the Atlantic espoused to frame an argument that blogging is frantic, pathetically desperate, and not financially viable.

The core argument of all three is that bloggers are so quick to post stories, they are often wrong. Despite this being true, it’s not the whole story. Just like Tylenol chose the slogan, “Nothing’s Stronger” even though nothing was weaker than it either, characterizing bloggers as the sole cause behind the construction of the rumor mill is about as outlandish as claiming Mary Poppins is a lot like The Exorcist. A quick survey in journalistic history will show a massive amount of misinformation, especially because the idea of being first had more pull than triple-checking with sources.

Still, I’ll admit that being first is a moniker most film sites and blogs want attached to their name. It’s a sign of being on the inside. Of knowing something before everyone else. Of being legitimate, in a way. And bloggers almost never run retractions when they are wrong.

However, it’s not exactly the presence of blogs that has created the instant news world. It’s the internet itself. At the root of the problem is the mechanical bias inherent in dealing with the internet. It’s also more of a double-edged sword than the article lets on. For example, FSR reminded its readers of a year-old story regarding the Coen Brothers adapting “True Grit” last week with the usual sort of fanfare. Today, Variety wrote the same story up and is blazing a trail through the internet to claim tacit credit for what’s actually a year-old story. Even when you’re slow, you’re fast. Secondly, the fatally sharp edge of that sword is that film sites garner a reputation as rumor-mongerers. Yes, there’s a problem with bloggers and sites not retracting or ever admitting they’re wrong – but audiences aren’t stupid. They know when a site has screwed up, and that site gets a big Scarlet Letter for it.

There’s also the question of whether the things posted on blogs are actually news. Specifically, should a meeting between a director and an actor make the front page of the blog when a development deal might still be years in the making? The answer is yes, because the audience deems it so. I realize the slippery slope, I do, but there are two parties at work dictating what is and isn’t news, and I traditional journalism has a major problem with allowing the audience (a completely unpredictable, uncontrollable group (except you guys who we control through subliminal messages)) to help decide what stories are important. This ties in to the previous point about posting things with speed – sometimes you’re a news-maker, and other times – when the audience proves apathetic – you’re just shouting into the void.

The only other semblance of a point that the pieces make is that there is a ton of cattiness amongst the entertainment blog world – site runners sharping at other bloggers in order to create manufactured dramatics. Unfortunately, the questions raised by Variety’s writers yesterday are completely neutered by their willingness to belly-flop right into the mud with the rest of the pigs. It’s tough to maintain even an iota of respectability when the pieces shake their fist at the endless name-calling while sniping at Nikki Finke and others childishly from the other side of the internet.

The good news is that this discussion should be an on-going one. In the same way that I hope I’m learning and growing, getting better at what I do, we all still live in a gray area that resides somewhere between classic print journalism and the Valhalla of quick, expert, professional journalism that the internet’s potential can represent. In the mean time, we need to ask ourselves and ask our audiences what we could be doing better. What do you want from us? What can we do to better serve both our readers and retain objectivity and integrity? I understand that the Variety pieces aren’t really even aimed at sites like FSR – we don’t even pretend to consider ourselves a news site. We’re an opinion site. The news we report comes with a side of opinion. Even the posters and trailers we present – which might as well be wordless posts – come with whatever snarky or celebratory language we can muster up. But we still have a stake in what should be a very worthwhile conversation.

It’s important to recognize that the line of journalistic ethics is fuzzier than ever. The new world of journalism and non-fiction reporting is inhabited by a huge swath of people that haven’t taken a journalism course. Variety is right to raise these questions, and they are right to be concerned while we’re still in this nebulous area of ethics, quality, and mean-spiritedness. But they are wrong to claim that blogs and websites are the only ones causing the problems, wrong to claim that they already see where the future is headed, and wrong to believe that they will survive in a world of new media without getting their hands a little dirty. Luckily, it seems like they don’t have a problem with doing that.

I feel like I am caught in a Willie Nelson song. In the past 8 months I have now moved my place of residence twice, one move being of the two hour variety (Columbus, Ohio to Cleveland, Ohio) and my next of the 20 hour variety (Cleveland, Ohio to Austin, Texas). But as I prepare to make the cross-country move from the Heartland to The Lone Star state, I am struck with the irony of today. You see, today is February 15th — it is the third birthday of Film School Rejects. Yes for those of you who weren’t there — which is probably almost all of you — FSR took one giant leap onto the internets and one small step toward being a legitimate online publication on 2/15/06. And since then we’ve had a lot of fun and run the gamut of changes. We’ve gone from a blog that casually reviews movie to a news site in denial of its blog roots back to the most kickass, in your face, amazing movie blogging experience on the web all over the course of 3 years. Ok, so that last part is debatable, but you all know that we are pretty awesome.

And as it turns out, February seems to always be a transitional month, both for the site and me personally. Last February I left the “real world” behind, leaving my job in the world of retail to take on FSR full-time. It was a huge risk, but thanks to the hard work of everyone of our contributors and dedicated readership of all of you it would appear as if we made it. And today I am packing up again in preparation for another big change — the relocation of FSR’s “world headquarters” to beautiful Austin, Texas.

Why Austin? You may ask yourself quietly. Why not Austin, I say. It is much more than just the capitol of Texas, it has quickly become the cultural epicenter of the midwest. Home to such gems as the Alamo Drafthouse theater, arguably the most amazing movie theater experience in the whole of this green Earth, Austin is one of the most culturally diverse and proudly weird towns that I’ve ever had the pleasure of visiting. That, and it costs half as much to live there than it does to live in Los Angeles or New York City. These are the reasons for quite possibly the biggest change of my own personal life.

But even as my personal life changes, there are also some changes happening here at FSR. Needless to say, we’ve got a lot of things planned, some of which have already been implemented. And as this is our third birthday and all, it might be a good idea for me to lay them on you. First, for all of the iPhone users out there — our site is now equipped with a special iPhone/iPod Touch formatted layout. So if you are browsing the pages of FSR on the go it will look like the picture to the right (click to enlarge). Nice and clean, easy to browse and fine tuned to load quickly and efficiently.

We have also installed a new video player that you may have already noticed. This handy little display mechanism now affords you the opportunity to take a video from our site and embed it on your own blog or MySpace profile, spreading the same goodness that we have delivered here on FSR. These are just two of the many physical site changes we have planned, so keep your hand off of that remote — you are going to want to see what we do next.

And finally, we’ve had the honor of bringing on several new voices over the past few weeks. You’ve already heard from both Robert Levin and Paul Sileo in the day-to-day news offerings, and you may have already discovered Landon Palmer’s new featured column “Culture Warrior,” which runs every Saturday. We are very excited about all three of these gentlemen, as they each bring very unique voices to the already interesting mix of contributors that we have.

So there you have it, friends. All sorts of changes and updates, movings and shakings. And as much as I would have liked to sit here and wax reminiscent about the last 3 years of FSR glory, I have a lot of packing and an equally daunting amount of driving ahead of me. I’ve got to keep moving forward, just like this fair website. So I will leave the reminiscing for all of you to do in the comment area below…

How long have you been reading FSR? And what keeps you coming back?

The Editor’s Blog is your weekly look behind the curtain here at FSR, in which members of our editorial staff take you into the not-often-interesting world of movie blogging. Ever wonder what its like to be one of the cool kids? Well, we can’t help you with that. We can however, share a few useful anecdotes from our day to day grind.

Through the course of my time on this planet, some 25 years and change, I have always kept what I like to call a “things to not do” log. It is a mental list of things that I have witnessed other people doing that I myself would not ever do. This tactic of watching others fail and adding their actions to my list has worked out quite well, both in everyday life and in the workplace. I was never the kid who touched the hot stove and learned never to do it again, I was the one who watched his mother burn her hand on the stove and took note — the stove is hot.

And since my journey into the world of film journalism began back in late-2004, there is one thing that I have realized — film journalists are naturally very good at showing their peers what not to do. Some of them are like a walking encyclopedia of bad habits and deplorable actions. So with my mental notepad in hand (or mind), I have wandered through this world of film journalism, adding items in bulk. And for this week’s column, I thought it might be fun to share some of the things I’ve learned.

First up: don’t make a complete drunken ass of yourself in front of someone with a video camera. And of course I am referring to the now infamous and mysterious video that was posted by my good friend Pete over at /Film during this year’s Sundance Film Festival. In the vid, two friends of mine — Devin Faraci from CHUD and Alex Billington from First Showing — had it out about their differing theories on film criticism, “real” journalism and the contraction of sexually transmitted diseases. And while funny at face value, it was an argument that should have taken place off-camera. Because while I’m sure that all of you find the behind-the-scenes elements of the movie blogging industry to be fascinating, it can often be misconstrued without the proper sense of context. The lesson here, at least for me, is to stay away from the camera and anyone with whom I am prone to passionate arguments after having a few drinks. And we journos do like to drink. In the end, I think we all learned that particular lesson.

But that isn’t even really the big story of the week. Next up is probably the most gross and flagrant violation of common sense that I’ve seen in a long time. It is the story of a man named Jeffrey Wells, whose work can be found over at Hollywood Elsewhere, and his trip to the quaint little town of Oxford, Mississippi. And as was so expertly chronicled by our good friend Eric D. Snider, Mr. Wells was invited to Oxford by the programmers of the Oxford Film Festival, flown out and put up in a hotel at the fest’s expense all to have him sit on a panel discussing film criticism. But after having some allegedly epic WiFi problems in his hotel room, which was documented on Wells’ blog, Wells not only made a big stink to the festival runners, he also drained his own emotional bank account so much so that he just “blew off” the film critic panel the next morning.

Now, common sense tells us that if you are invited somewhere (all expenses paid) to participate in something like a panel discussion that you should actually attend said panel, no matter what your internet connection situation might be. And to be fair, I’ve been in that “no internet” situation at a film festival — and it sucks. It sucks a lot. But it doesn’t suck so much so that I would ditch my responsibilities and make public my childish antics on the pages of this website. There is always a Starbucks, a cafe or heaven forbid, the purchase of an Aircard to help ease the pain of finding good WiFi. I learned long ago that if you are going to succeed in the world of blogging about movies, you have to be resourceful above all things. Being clever with a turn of phrase comes in third, right behind “functional” knowledge of movie history.

But there is an even bigger lesson to be learned from this little debacle with Mr. Wells, whose work I have long read and respected. The lesson is to never forget. As someone who has the privilege and good fortune to be able to work in this industry full-time (my job is, I watch movies and stuff) I vow never to forget how fucking cool that is. And in turn, I should never forget that no matter what happens, there are so many people out there who have it worse than me. The jobless, the shit-shovelers and anyone working in the retail industry (which is where I worked before). I get to travel the country, watch movies and meet cool and interesting people (and celebrities, too). And there is nothing that could possibly happen in my day-to-day in the world of movie journalism that could possibly be so bad that I would erupt in such a ridiculous way.

And sure, there are annoyances sometimes — can’t find seats at Comic-Con, publicists not calling you back, everyone and their brother (inside the industry) labeling you “one of those bloggers” and treating you like a second-class citizen — but all of those are temporary. They are not that deep. We should never allow them to linger beyond a momentary annoyance. We should certainly never allow them to make it to the pages of our blog in a childish rant — because you guys and gals don’t really care about that stuff. And nine times out of ten, all we are going to accomplish is making ourselves look like big spoiled children who have forgotten about the Utopian state of our own employment. We watch movies for a living and get paid to share our opinions with the world. It isn’t that serious a thing in the grand scheme of things. So I’ve learned not to lose perspective on things, fair readers. Because in the end, anyone on this side of things should count themselves lucky to be doing what they are doing — not angry because their hotel room has wonky WiFi.

Rule #1: Don’t Drink and Argue on Camera

Rule #2: Don’t Be an Elitist Douchebag

I think we’ve learned a lot here, friends.

And now we return you to your regularly scheduled programming…

When asked to run Film School Rejects for a week, I immediately thought, “What’s in it for me?” because I’m self-centered. Actually, my first thought was, “Where’s my car?” because when Neil made the offer to me, I was wandering around the Costco parking lot like Lawrence of Arabia that time he misplaced his car in the desert. It turns out I parked in the Blue Zone. But with my second thought, Neil promised that I could do whatever I wanted with the site while he was away covering Sundance skiing in Park City, Utah. Ergo, you may have noticed that the site has been at least 4,500% better this week.

Besides bringing some much-needed class to the site, I’ve also decided to bring back the long-dormant Editor’s Blog feature and the often-under-appreciated use of hyphens.

For this installment of the Blog, I’d like to take a look at something that’s been puzzling me: the disparity between Award’s Season buzz and the general public’s knowledge of the films.

I was on local radio station 1440 KEYS in Corpus Christi, Texas for Joe Hilliard’s Weekend Magazine, talking about films and making a general ass of myself when he asked me a very important question. The question was essentially this, “Movies like The Wrestler, Slumdog Millionaire, and The Reader have gotten massive buzz for the Oscars – why haven’t audiences had a chance to see them?”

It’s an incredible question. As a film critic that is forced to see every film good or bad that comes out, I often forget that a lot of smaller markets, mid-sized markets, and markets that aren’t New York City and Los Angeles tend to hear (in this global internet-tastic world) the buzz about movies before they are actually released – if they get released at all.

This quirk has to do with the Academy’s simple rule for eligibility requiring that film’s only a) play theatrically in Los Angeles County for b) at least seven days in c) one of the accepted formats and d) is advertised in a customary fashion. Whatever a customary fashion is.

Basically, a film must only be seen in one city for a week in order to qualify.

This creates an interesting situation where indie films and movies otherwise more difficult to market to a larger release have a shot at winning the big award, but where a huge amount of the population hasn’t had a chance to see the movie that ends up winning.

So it’s a win for little films that could, but in a way, it’s a loss for the movie-going public. It furthers the gap between the critical elite and movie fans by setting up a scenario wherein the critics and the Academy members proclaim the best of the year to a giant swath of the populace that hasn’t even seen the films.

Shockingly, I have no solution for this. I’m not even sure it’s a problem, but it seems like a problem for people like my friend Joe, a huge movie fan who won’t get a chance to see The Wrestler until March when its press campaign uses its Oscar wins to sell the public on a wider release. However, any solution or change would make it even harder for indie films to be recognized for their brilliance.

So that’s it. My rambling thought for the week. Now, where’s my car?

A few years ago I found myself in one of those generic, convention-center chairs situated near the front of the grand hall at the Driskill Hotel in Austin. It was the kind of chair created solely to keep someone comfortable for exactly an hour, the kind that makes you want to leave the conference room as soon as a panel is over. The rest of the room was built with the same intent. The lights, too bright against the walls, kept the mood completely sterile. I imagined countless dentists, realtors and traveling salesmen sitting in the same seats, listening to whatever their bosses or the industry had sent them down to Austin to learn about.

That environment seemed perfect for them. It did not, however, seem perfect for me and several hundred other Austin Film Festival attendees listening to Michael Ian Black and Jake Kasdan talk about the return of the R-rated comedy. There was nothing funny about the discussion – there was a short history of the genre, a few attempts at dissecting the humor and some honest talk about where it was headed. Aside from a few quick non sequiturs from Michael Ian Black, the conversation could have been about the technical specs for a new root canal drilling instrument.

Two years later, Paramount is realizing that it shouldn’t go full retard.

It didn’t take a rocket surgeon to see that the rise of R-rated comedies would be followed by the parallel outrage of the communities who felt slighted in the process. After all, it’s impossible to make an R-rated omelet without cracking a few racist jokes. Or misogynistic jokes. Or religion jokes. Personally, I’ve weathered the slew of outraged protests and calls for boycotts with a roll of my eyes. For the most part, it’s been knee-jerk reactions clothed in a tone that seeks more pity than communal understanding. Now, on the edge of groups calling for a national boycott of Tropic Thunder because of its portrayal of the mentally handicapped and use of the word “retard,” I find myself having to rethink my positions a bit.

Here’s why.

Although there have been some outlandish reactions and demands, the argument that most are making seems solid. The question of whether the scenes and dialog in Tropic Thunder are offensive is up for debate. The fact that they have offended people, is not. Unfortunately, despite the differences, those people have been lumped into the same groups that always protest, no matter the cause. The main difference is that these groups – groups like The Arc and The Special Olympics – are raising their voice for a group of people that often cannot speak for itself. And while I think I could summarize the main concerns, it would be much easier to hear it directly.

“I am hearing the word ‘retard’ used more and more – on TV, in movies and by kids and young adults,” says Executive Director of The Arc of the Capital Area Susan Eason. “Certain words have a lot of power. . . I believe that, as a society, we have become much more sensitive about how other groups of people are portrayed, but people with disabilities seem to be fair game.”

Pretty simple. The root of the argument is that “retard” is an offensive slur which most who have cognitive disabilities and those with family members who do deem utterly unacceptable. Eason reiterated this point by saying that she’d “never spoken to anyone who works in the field or has a family member with a disability, who thinks calling someone a ‘retard’ is ever ok.”

I’ve said it before elsewhere, but the offended group gets to define what offends them, not the majority. When a black person tells me she’s offended by the word “nigger,” I accept it. When someone with a cognitive disability tells me he’s offended by the word “retard,” I accept it. No questions asked. What’s even more disappointing is that the same people who were shocked that I just used the word “nigger” (instead of the incredibly infantile “N-word”) probably didn’t bat an eye the five times I used the word “retard” previously in the article.

I’ll agree that some groups, including as reported by Patricia Bauer (who launched a lot of this discussion), are demanding too much of the film and too much of Paramount. That the company is in talks at all with these groups should be a breath of fresh air, but it’s a bit presumptuous to ask for all the scenes involved to be cut from the final print. It illustrates a misunderstanding of how the system works, but the reactions to Bauer’s response have been almost as absurd.

For the most part, the main argument including some from our very own Neil Miller and rage-a-holic Robert Fure has been that people just need to lighten up, man. The basis, if I can characterize their arguments as well as they’ve characterized their opposition, is that it’s just not cool, you know, for people to complain about anything. However, there have been a few decent arguments amongst the pile of of bad, reactionary ones.

The strongest argument seems to be that Stiller and company are making fun of actors, not the mentally disabled. Taken in context, the joke only uses the word “retard” as a vehicle for making a larger point about the lengths that actors will go to in order to tempt the Academy. The joke is on actors. Not on the mentally handicapped.

My Downey-esque response to that: can’t it be both? The two options are not mutually exclusive, and humor, when not focused well can hit multiple targets. I think while Stiller is obviously lampooning actors, anyone would be hard-pressed to claim that his cartoonish depiction of the mentally handicapped in Simple Jack doesn’t also land squarely on the butt of the joke. It seems reasonable to assume that many in the audience won’t be chortling and remarking in low tones about how charming the high-minded satire of the situation is – they’ll be laughing at how silly Stiller is being. More so, whenever a human being is reduced down to a flat image or single concept for the purpose of humor, it’s a safe bet that they are the punchline.

But the people in the audience will all be of age since the film is rated R. It’s not even an issue of the film influencing a younger crowd negatively, as some have pointed out.

Leaving aside the obvious point that younger people will sneak into the theater and have perfectly easy, context-free access to the clip where Stiller and Downey, Jr have their infamous dialog about “going full retard,” it seems as though the college crowd is certainly still susceptible to a certain type of influence. It’s inevitable that “You never go full retard” will enter into the culture as a meme, making its way to the front of t-shirts and in frat house conversations alike. It’s that inevitability that has cognitive disability advocates worried – the proliferation of a slur being hoisted so highly in the public mind while being made cool to say by two highly revered actors. Is this going to lead to World War III? No. But for a certain section of the population, it’s a disheartening reality to see a word they cringe at being thrown around without much consideration.

Branding the groups that are bringing this boycott to fruition as “whiny” profoundly misunderstands the issue. In fact, The Special Olympics is not without a sense of humor, giving its blessing to the film The Ringer during its production and after its release. It’s also not a case of freedom of speech – everyone’s speech is protected. Tropic Thunder is free to use the dialog. People are free not to see it. People are also free not to commercially support products made by Paramount in response. Until the Federal Government threatens to arrest people for making Tropic Thunder or for decrying is as offensive, freedom of speech doesn’t factor in. At all. Ever.

It’s also not a situation where claiming those that are offended can solve their own issue by simply not seeing the film. If it were personally offensive, that would be enough, but the complaint is such that the film’s content is offensive on a cultural level – that it helps in perpetuating and most likely increasing the use of a broad-based slur against a group of people.

So what happens now? What do people want to happen now? For Susan Eason, it’s straightforward.

“The civil rights movements in the sixties and seventies were, among other things, about awareness. It would be awesome if Paramount, and others in the business of making movies, would use this as a wake-up call.”

No death threats to studio executives. No outlandish demands to have most of the movie on the cutting room floor.

As long as there are slurs, there is going to be a question of how to use them in art. It’s not always going to be a comfortable conversation, but the conversation will evolve. If there is a silver lining to this situation, it’s that a discussion is taking place out in the open. Whether audiences agree or not, Paramount is learning a powerful lesson. They capitulated almost immediately on taking down the Simple Jack advertisements for the film, and are going to see the effect of this boycott. It might be strong. It might not. But it will be present.

The R-rated Comedy is still young in its revival, but it’s clearly entering it’s rebellious years. A while back, it was content to make low-brow sex and defecation jokes to get the soccer moms riled up. It was happy to point out the hypocrisies and absurdities of some religious doctrines. Now, it’s pushing its boundaries, and at least a certain part of the population is pushing back. This time, with good cause. If it doesn’t seem like a good cause or it seems unruly that they are taking offense to a piece of art – my suggestion is to either think more critically about the situation or lighten up.

As you have probably already noticed, our coverage of Comic-Con 2008 in San Diego spilled over well into the following week. And now, a full 7 days removed from the heart of the event, we are finally bringing our coverage to a close. As it is with every event we do around here, it is a mixed bag of emotions. On one hand, by the end of the event we were all tired, worn down from long days and sleepless nights, transcribing interviews and trying to dig news out of sometimes extremely news-less press conferences. But we made it, all together. And for the most part — at least in my mind — we delivered some damn good coverage. 

Yes, thanks to the hard work of Brian Gibson, Cole Abaius, Robert Fure, Rob Hunter, Kevin Carr and Cody Miller, otherwise known as our Comic-Con Attack Squad, I’d say we gave you what we set out to give you, some of the best damn Comic-Con coverage on the web. Seriously, these fine gentlemen worked their asses off to make Comic-Con 2008 our best event in the history of FSR. Then again, I’m a little biased. It’s my nature.

On the final night of the Con we headed out to dinner with the entire team in tact (with the exception of Rob Hunter, who had to leave earlier in the day). And as luck would have it, the person planning the operation picked a quaint little restaurant in downtown San Diego, a little steakhouse that didn’t seem like much of a challenge. So there we joined our friends from Slashfilm.com, FirstShowing.net, ScreenRant.com, GeeksofDoom.com and our own Kevin Kelly (who was covering the even for Spout.com) to have a nice meal. And as “the boss,” I was going to get stuck with the check.

The only problem was that after perusing the menu a bit, we decided that any establishment that sells $27 meat loaf that doesn’t even come with a side order of mashed potatoes must be out of their mind. So we ordered some appetizers (one single crab cake went for $15, but it was delicious), socialized with the good people of the movie blogosphere and headed out early. And in true Reject fashion, we stopped to pick up some pizza, some beer and some cigars on our way back to the hotel to get some work done. In the end, the Rejects conquered Comic-Con… We laid down the law in the land of the Geek. Or at least, we hope so. Either way we got some great pictures, including the following candid shots from our final victory dinner:

Brian Gibson and Kevin Carr

Kevin and the Robert Fure

Cole Abaius and Cody Miller

That’s me… Probably still working… Okay, maybe not…

A room full of movie geeks… A truly dangerous and altogether wonderful thing.

And finally, one last treat from our Comic-Con 2008 arsenal. This is a little video that the FSR team has been waiting for since we left San Diego. The following video is the gag reel from all of the footage that was shot. And just like any good B-movie, you won’t believe how it ends…

This video is also available on Daily Motion and YouTube. Feel free to spread the love.

Until next year, you stay classy, San Diego…

As you already know, the staff here at Film School Rejects had a damn good time at Comic-Con International last weekend in San Diego. We saw some cool footage, met throngs of great people, talked to some people who are some-bodies and we drank… a lot. And in order to bring our coverage to a close, I asked the attending staff to put together a list of the 12 things that made it all worth while. These 12 things made the lines, the painful crowds and the sometimes difficult world of being press at such an event worth it. So lets have a look and see what they had to say. Note: Each author’s name appears below the items that they wrote for this piece.

12. Learning Some Lessons about Twilighters

We learned that not all Twilighters are whiny little girls (and their boyfriends angling for handjobs) who attack anyone with an opinion that differs from their own. Some are intelligent, funny, and reasonable human beings (and a few are actually pretty damn cute too.) So thank you Natalie and the unnamed girl we met in Hall H on Thursday before the 20th Century Fox panel, and thank you two unnamed girls I met in line outside on the patio waiting for Joss Whedon on Friday. I still think Twilight (the movie) looks lame, but I won’t be generalizing the fanbase any longer. Well, I’ll try not to anyway… - Rob Hunter

11. Watching Other Journalists Embarrass Themselves

It seemed that this year, there were alot of rogue outlets that slipped through the cracks of the con. I had been using the fake domain “www.PuppiesandKittens.com” as an example all throughout the event to vent frustrations. There was a journalist who got too caught up in his own narcisistic sense of self importance to realize that he was mistaking one acrtress for another during an interview. There were several “legitimate journalists” who acted ignorant and belligerent throughout the Con, acting as if their press badge was indicative of some secret society membership. When you could stop laughing at their behavior and sneak a peak at their badge, you would find that they were reporting for PuppiesandKittens.com. When G4 can’t get access, neither can you… shut up and wait like everyone else. Normally something like this would bother me, but it was really funny to see how important other people make themselves out to be. - Brian Gibson

10. The RocknRolla Presentation

“While some panels at Comic-Con are full of actors and actresses smiling blindly and claiming they “just totally had to do” a certain movie and that it’s “just so, so awesome” with as much enthusiasm as toilet bowl cleaner, Guy Ritchie and the rest of the gang of RocknRolla – Jeremy Piven, Gerard Butler, Idris Elba, and Ludacris – seemed genuinely electric about the whole thing.” – as reported by Cole Abaius

9. A Photo Opportunity with Katie Morgan

After a panel on Zack and Miri Make a Porno, I suddenly found myself on the wrong side of the security door, sharing the same patio with the likes of Judd Apatow, Seth Rogen, and Jason Mewes. A few other stars from different movies were also out, mulling around and sipping on what looked to be Coke, but no doubt probably had some rum in it. It was at this moment I realized I had an opportunity I would never have again. In that moment I had a chance to do what every red blooded fan longed to do. I ignored Apatow, Rogen, and the rest and cozied up to porn star Katie Morgan, slipped an arm around her and asked for a photo. Great success. - Robert Fure

8. Watching Alex Billington Get Ejected from Hall H

First off, who is this Alex Billington guy, anyway? I love Alex, and his site (His Bob Stencil coverage is priceless), but this is a case of press vs. fans. When there are almost 4,000 press badges given, versus the 100,000+ fans… you don’t want to go up against 25:1 odds. This is also a lesson in self humilty. Maybe only if Alex would have shown more love to Twilight, he wouldn’t have had to miss the Wolverine trailer. Alex, if you are reading… when the world cried out for more seats, you should have whispered… yes. (Editor’s Note: In Alex’s defense, he didn’t actually get ejected. You can see him talk about it over on Slashfilm…) - Brian Gibson

7. Interviewing the Cast and Producers of Friday the 13th

As a huge horror fan, I can’t really describe how awesome it was to talk to these guys. They were really fantastically nice and friendly, as well, and the producers knew my alma matar was well known for doing blow. For people who are out to make a Hard-R rated blood splatterfest, they’re really the nicest guys you know. Derek Mears is a complete gentlemen and didn’t even press charges when he found out I’m the guy trying to jump his security fence. - Robert Fure

6. Meeting Comic Legend Dave Gibbons

Despite my geek tendencies, I was only really excited about the Watchmen events. There were a lot of awesome things that took me by surprise, but meeting Dave Gibbons was still the best thing that happened during the week. Shaking the same hand that created one of the most influential novels of my life is definitely an experience I won’t forget. To think – just over 25 years ago, that same hand was drawing Rorschach – pretty incredible. And to top it all off, he was a really nice, bright guy. - Cole Abaius

5. The Awe Inspiring Size of the Con

he incredible feeling of being in awe. As an adult I don’t often find myself being impressed, surprised, or ‘wowed’ like I did when I was a kid. But Comic-Con is actually the closest thing I know to a fountain of youth, bringing all those feelings back on an almost daily basis. From the pleasant surprise of how incredible a certain movie looks (Terminator Salvation, Ninja Assassin)… to the nerdy joy of playing footsie with Simon Pegg beneath the interview table… to the awesome accomplishment of suggesting a potential DVD feature to the Pineapple Express gang and seeing them seriously consider it… to being alternately impressed and aroused by the creativity of some fans’ costumes… to the utterly surreal feeling of petting and playing with Ron ‘Hellboy’ Perlman’s dog (while someone else threatens to fuck it.) You can’t find these experiences anywhere else. - Rob Hunter

4. Meeting Fellow Geeks (and hot ladies) on the Show Floor

On the Comic-Con show floor it didn’t matter who you were, who you worked for, what you looked like, what you were dressed up as, what you could buy, everyone just came together to share the entire experience. It was like being surrounded by the largest group of geeks, but no one cared because they all knew they were in the same boat. Everyone got along, even the free hug gangs didn’t seem worn down on the last day. I think the Banana said it best, “We are all rejects.” Oh, and all the hot ladies of Comic-Con. - Cody Miller, Photographer

3. The Rejects, the Wrath of Con and other Camaraderie

For me, the guy who came away from the Con with no real swag to speak of and nothing but a bill to pay, I still found it all to be a thoroughly enjoyable experience. What makes it such a wonderful time, and the reason we keep coming back each year, is the people behind-the-scenes; all of those friends who run other websites that we got to hang with at the Wrath of Con party. And of course, having such a large chunk of the FSR team in one place, working together and having plenty of laughs was worth more than any collectible off the show floor. Needless to say, we all deserved those victory cigars on the last night. - Neil Miller

2. Watching the Watchmen

“Throughout these conversations it became clear that I wasn’t sitting down to talk to actors who had been hired for a job, but true “Watchmen” fans – whether they had even read the novel before signing on or not – who invested a huge amount of themselves into creating beautifully rounded, intensely human characters. After seeing the extended footage earlier, and hearing the way these actors approached this film – like a passion project that happened to be backed by millions of dollars – this fan is even more sold on how fantastic Watchmen is going to be.” - as reported by Cole Abaius

1. The Terminator Salvation Presentation

“… after the Hall H presentation forTerminator Salvation, the movie is looking incredible. Spirits weren’t high after McG was announced as director, with fans feeling the series was doomed to extinction in a cheese-fest of nuclear holocaust proportions. I was one of those fans, but now I’ve seen the light, or the McG in this case. The new footage looks slick, epic, and breathtaking, and the crowd absolutely loved it.” - as reported by Rob Hunter

For more of our coverage, check out our Comic-Con 2008 Homepage.

Last year at Comic-Con we needed photos to prove that we were part of the in crowd. We displayed these photos in a feature that we called We Know People. This was our way of showing all of you who we met — you know, to back up all the stories we would tell later and to make you think that we were cool.

Now, you would think that all of that insecurity would go away after another year’s worth of working in the business they call show-business. It didn’t. So of course we are back this year with another round of We Know People. And this year, we went all out…

Brian caught up with Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg

… and accosted producer/director Judd Apatow (Nice Shirt, Judd)

… and Judd’s lovely wife, actress Leslie Mann

… and one of Judd’s favorite stars, Seth Rogen

Robert Fure and Brian with Katie Morgan (Not familiar with her work…)

Fure also got just as excited about John Cho and Kal Penn

Meanwhile, I partied with Ron Perlman (Note the idiots in the background — Rob Hunter to the left and Cole Abaius to the right.)

… and I had a few drinks with the ladies of Bitch Slap

Meanwhile, our photog Cody went in search of a date…

But was held up by a visit from Master Chief…

… and he had to battle some Spartan Warriors …

… but he went ultimately back to looking for the ladies

… including, but not limited to Wonder Woman

… and the last time we saw him, he was leaving with this one

And finally, Kevin Carr found his own date for the weekend…

For more of our coverage, visit our Comic-Con 2008 Homepage.

And while this year’s Comic-Con has not even begun, we can already see that it is going to be just as exciting and grand as years past — which makes it all that much more fun to cover. And cover it, we shall. We will be bringing you all the happenings Live From Hall H, including first reports on films such as Watchmen, Frank Miller’s The Spirit and Fox’s Max Payne. We will also have some great exclusive interviews lined up, including chats with the stars of the upcoming Friday the 13th remake, the cast and crew of Underworld: Rise of the Lycans and maybe, just maybe, a little time with Paris Hilton to talk about her upcoming flick Repo! The Genetic Opera.

As well, we will have our video crew roaming the show floor, talking to fans and random leggy blonds in an attempt to create some comedy. Ultimately, if we entertain ourselves we will be just fine.

But before we get to all of that, it can’t hurt for all of you to get to know the Rejects who will be on the ground in San Diego. This should give you a good idea as to what we all will be looking out for at the Con. Even more importantly, this will give you some faces to look for, just in case you are going to be in attendance and you feel the need to stop us and say hello — or in the case of Kevin Carr, talk about Tijuana hookers. In order to get you up to speed, we’ve each filled out a little pre-Con questionnaire — a little “getting to know you” sort of thing. And as you will notice, this year’s theme has something to do with facial hair.

That said, lets do this thing:

Neil Miller

The Dude in Charge

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

Two — in a row.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

Watchmen, The Spirit, Battlestar Galactica, the Starship Troopers 3 panel, kickin’ it old school with my Princess Leia outfit on and accosting Frank Miller at a party… again.

What is your area of expertise?

Keeping Brian Gibson out of trouble, making sure the site stays up-to-date, security detail for Cole Abaius during all Twilight-related events. Also, taking hot, C-list actresses back to my hotel room — to play Scrabble.

What is your beard type?

I like my beard like I like my women, smooth on the outside, party down the middle. (That doesn’t make any sense, does it?)

Brian Gibson

The Secret Weapon

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

Second time.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

The collectibles that I will buy — a lot. Also, the Hasbro Transformers 2 panel, to see how close to naked Olivia Munn can get and Watchmen.

What is your area of expertise?

We are still figuring that out…

What is your beard type?

Chubby face-shield.

Kevin Carr

The Celebutant Stalker

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

I’ve been to 3 Comic-Cons so far. This is my 4th.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

The Stargate: Continuum press event. They have a f–king flight simulator!

What is your area of expertise?

Sci-fi television and general fanboy movies. Also, the art of the inappropriate.

What is your beard type?

Evil Fu Man Chu.

Robert Fure

The Ladies Man

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

Comic-Con Virgin.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

Hot nerd girls in skimpy costumes, Terminator: Salvation, Battlestar Galactica.

What is your area of expertise?

Horror, Rage, Comics

What is your beard type?

Stylish Scruff

Cole Abaius

The Intellectual

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

First time.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

Ray Bradbury, Watchmen and Robert Fure dressed as Samus.

What is your area of expertise?

Sci-fi, egotism.

What is your beard type?

The Beard of Extraordinary Gentlemen

Rob Hunter

The Connoisseur

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

Two.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

Kevin Smith, Joss Whedon, Max Payne, Clive Barker’s Midnight Meat Train and the Masters of the Web party.

What is your area of expertise?

Foreign films, horror, discerning quality cinema.

What is your beard type?

Inner-thigh approved.

Cody Miller

The Dude with the Camera

How Many Comic-Con’s is this for you?

First time.

What are you looking forward to most this year?

Kevin Smith and seeing Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder.

What is your area of expertise?

Snappin’ pics, paparazzi style.

What is your beard type?

Patchy and undefined. A.k.a Wannabe Amish.

Stay tuned all this week as we bring you coverage from Comic-Con International. Not only will we be roaming the floor in search of love, but we will have the latest news Live from Hall H, great interviews with some of Hollywood’s hottest stars and random convention shenanigans, courtesy of our Comic-Con Attack Squad! To keep tabs on all of the happenings, just head over to our Comic-Con 2008 Homepage.

First we brought you all of the goods on Indiana Jones at the beginning of the summer, then we introduced you to a familiar face with The Incredible Hulk, and we even brought you into the world of espionage with Secret Agent Week. And this week we continue our romp through Summer Movie Season 2008 by introducing our biggest, most epic feature yet: our Official Guide to The Dark Knight.

Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale are back, hot off the success of 2005′s franchise reboot Batman Begins to bring us back to Gotham City. In a new Batman-led era, violent crime has broken out in the streets of Gotham, courtesy of The Joker, played by Heath Ledger. With his penchant for violence and his unapologetic committment to pure anarchy, The Joker might just be the greatest threat that Gotham has ever seen.

It is a film that critics across the country have already called “epic” and “unlike anything you will see this year,” so why shouldn’t we spend some time on it. By clicking the banner above or the one below, you will be taken to our official homepage for The Dark Knight. There you will find articles chronicling the history of Batman, both on-screen and in comics. As well, we will have reports all week from The Dark Knight press junket, including interviews with the cast and filmmakers as well as behind-the-scenes features that you won’t want to find anywhere else.

But enough talk, it is time to get ready for The Dark Knight!

And here… we… go…

Normally I use the Editor’s Blog column to wax poetic (or not so poetic in most cases) about what is going through my mind every single week — the politics of online movie journalism, my love for “Battlestar Galactica” and whatever else has been keeping me from writing other, more interesting articles about the world of film. But as we reach the midpoint of 2008, I think it is time to take a look back at some of the changes we’ve made here at Film School Rejects and gather some opinions from you, the readers, as to where we still need to go.

On January 1, we launched our new design, which seems to have been received well — at least, as far as I know. Since then, we have continued to make changes in the way we deliver content in order to keep things interesting and attempt to set ourselves apart from other movie websites. We’ve added some great columns, brought some great new talent onto our team and continued to deliver more interesting news stories. At least, this is theoretical world in which we live — a fact that has led me to this article. The truth is that in order for us to grow as much in the next 6 months as we did in the previous 6, we are going to need some feedback from all of you.

That said, I have some questions for our faithful readers. Please feel free to drop your answers, as well as any other suggestions, comments or feedback that you may have in the Sound Off section below:

1. What is the one thing about Film School Rejects that keeps you coming back for more?

2. If you could change one thing about Film School Rejects, what would it be?

3. What would you like to see more of from FSR? Less of?

Thank you in advance for all your feedback. As always, please don’t ever hesitate to drop us a line if you have have something to say. Just send an email over to editors@filmschoolrejects.com.

And just as a heads up, keep an eye out for a few kick-ass features that we will be unleashing in the month of July:

On July 13th we will begin our Official Guide to Batman in preparation for the release of The Dark Knight. This will include a look back at the origins of Batman in comics, film and pop culture as well as an exclusive preview of The Dark Knight.

Later this week we will be launching our official Live at Comic-Con 2008 homepage, which will serve as the official spot for our extensive coverage of Comic-Con International, which will take place from July 23 to July 27 in San Diego.

Talk about a surreal 24-hour stretch — I awoke this morning still trying to process the unbelievably epic nature of The Dark Knight, which I had a chance to see last evening. And while I am not ready to put together a full review, both because Warner Bros. probably doesn’t want me to do so and because I have not yet found the words to describe what I saw, I will say this: The Dark Knight is unlike any film you will see this year, and perhaps this decade.

Moving on, it was also very surreal to wake up to see that director Kevin Smith, who we all know and love, had updated his Personal Blog with a brand new image from his upcoming film Zack and Miri Make a Porno, which hits theaters on October 31. The photo shows the supporting cast, including Tracey Lords, Jeff Anderson, Craig Robinson and Jason Mewes looking intently at something off-screen. We can only imagine what sort of depraved shenanigans are happening to the left of this picture.

As well, Kevin also blogged a bit about his experience seeing The Dark Knight last night with Slashfilm’s Peter Sciretta. How cool is that? The even cooler part was that I too, was there, hanging with Pete, Alex from First Showing and Mr. Smith himself. I cannot begin to describe how cool it was to not only see The Dark Knight, but to do so sitting next to one of my all-time favorite filmmakers — that folks, is a surreal experience. We also got a chance to hang out after the flick, chatting about the awesome experience had by all. In his blog entry, Kevin had this to say about the film:

Without giving anything away, this is an epic film (and trust me: based on the sheer size and scope of the visuals and storytelling, that’s not an overstatement). It’s the “Godfather II” of comic book films and three times more earnest than “Batman Begins” (and fuck, was that an earnest film). Easily the most adult comic book film ever made. Heath Ledger didn’t so much give a performance as he disappeared completely into the role; I know I’m not the first to suggest this, but he’ll likely get at least an Oscar nod (if not the win) for Best Supporting Actor. Fucking flick’s nearly three hours long and only leaves you wanting more (in a great way). I can’t imagine anyone being disappointed by it. Nolan and crew have created something close to a masterpiece.

I could not have, nor will I probably be able to say it better than that. As I have found time and time again in this business, there are some people who are genuinely cool people to be around, and Kevin Smith is certainly one of them. I cannot begin to describe the relaxed, fanboyish conversation that took place outside of the screening last evening — it was just a small group of geeks in awe. It was also very funny that even on a night when I got a chance to meet one of my idols, Christopher Nolan and his film still stole the show — now that is saying something.

It goes without saying that you should be pumped for The Dark Knight. As well, you should also be pumped for Zack and Miri Make a Porno — because that film looks like it is going to be pretty damn good in its own right.

Those of you who read Film School Rejects on a regular basis may have noticed that we have begun doing more and more weekly features, everything from our Official Guide to Indiana Jones to our Kung Fu Preview to last week’s very special Guide to The Hulk, which hopefully helped you get in gear and see Universal’s The Incredible Hulk. And based on the feedback that you’ve given us through emails, the comment section and by participating in the discussions and polls, you have been telling us that you would like to see these sorts of features continue. And we are happy to oblige, as we have found these features to be a lot of fun.

As we roll through the summer you will continue to see more and more special features, including Animation Week next week in anticipation of the Pixar release WALL-E and FSR’s Official Guide to Batman in the week leading up to The Dark Knight. But before we get to those, we have a very special treat for all the fans of the spy genre out there: Secret Agent Week. Yes, we are dedicating an entire week of feature articles to our favorite sneaky spies and sexy femme fatales, everyone from James Bond to Jason Bourne to Austin Powers.

And in addition to taking a look at all of our old favorites, we will also be giving you our official preview of the upcoming film Get Smart, starring Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway and Dwayne Johnson. We will have some cool articles that take you deep into the production, tons of images and video and a special report from the Los Angeles press day that includes a special one-on-one chat with director Peter Segal. So stay tuned to our Secret Agent Week page as the week goes on, as I am sure that you will love what we have planned for you.

The whole Secret Agent Week thing, along with the announcement of the new iPhone 3G last week at the Apple WWDC in San Francisco did get me thinking, however, about super secret agent gadgets. No matter the secret agent, no matter the story, these resourceful folks always seem to find a way to come out on top, sometimes by using only using the things they have around them. As well, not every great secret agent has a gadget-maker like Q making all sorts of sweet custom gadgets to help them with their missions. Sometimes they must used real-world items or even better, go MacGyver and make stuff themselves.

That got me thinking — the new iPhone 3G (and the previous iPhone for that matter) would probably be a good choice for any real world super spy, wouldn’t it? Solid built-in camera for doing recon, GPS for helping track their worldwide position and a host of other useful features. In fact, I am sure that there are all kinds of real world consumer devices that could be useful, should you decide to go off and become a Secret Agent. Therefore, I think that will be our Sunday topic of discussion:

What real world consumer products do you think would be useful if you were a secret agent? What would you take with you as you went out into the world to thwart (or perpetrate) evil?