Jump to content

Jay Edgar

Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Jay Edgar got a reaction from dafreaking in Top Gear - Clarkson contract won't be renewed by BBC. Should there be one rule for talent, one rule for "the rest"?   
    I thought I would check back on this 'discussion' again. It has helped me understand better why this website is so underwhelming to me.
    I say that as someone who has used this site for years as (one more) reference for filmmaking.
    The rot started to form a while back - before this Clarkson nonsense - when I read a post about the LX100. An amazing little camera I felt. But it got sneered on - initially.
    Soon after there was a  'rethink' - suddenly it was a super piece of kit etc etc
     
    Later after getting flamed by SleepyWill and some other old timers, I started to mentally list why this website constantly disappoints. By that I mean I spend my valuable time occasionally checking in, see nothing much, so check out again...nothing compelling here (for me) basically.
     
    So here are my gripes:
    1. The website is named after one proprietary camera system. In business terms, this is silly. Its like the kid who starts TripodsRUs - only to advertise a year later that he will also sell you a Slider, or a Monopod or whatever. It illustrates a lack of vision. A simplistic outlook. Of course it also ostracises Nikon or Sony folks, at least subconsciously, which seems unnecessary if its meant to be about filmmaking (which it isn't)
    2. The website talks largely about Consumer Purchasing Decisions. It might be better named CreditCardCameraConsiderations.com or maybe BokkehSupermarket.com or perhaps EndlessUpgrade.com
    3. The Clarkson chatter shocked me (and others here too it seems). Its almost fantastical that 'filmmakers' would defend this JC stuff. Apologies to those with me on this, but to those who are gushing forth with the latest skinny on poor JC and his downtrodden crew ...really? Is this news? for a filmmaking site? Regardless of whether people like the crap or not its EXTREMELy telling that by the end of this week it could be the most discussed topic - ever - on this site...
    4. There is damn all abstract, challenging, artistic, genuinely creative discussion initiated by Andrew Reid. As editor/writer, I would've thought thats a failing, if others agree. Some do I know, as Ive read their posts of frustration ("What About Storytelling", etc) -
    5. The reason JC+Crew gets s much focus, and Machinery From Canon et al gets focus, is perhaps because this is an Industrial News Site. Not A Creative Filmmaking Site. Its for people who are in 'the business', 'the trade' (or want to be) and therefore it seeks to Defend Jobs At All Costs. Well screw that. No filmmaker I know has a real job, whether they're swanning around Cannes or Berlin or not. They are constantly fighting broadcasters, distributors, unions, investors, bosses and banks to get their sh1t made.
    Now if this is a site for jobbing SkyNews Cameramen or, thats cool. But why not say so? And lets slot a few more articles in about staff conditions, retirement plans, commuting problems etc. But don't pretend its Cahiers du fricken Cinematograper....
    6. Seek out all the posts on Framing, Composition, Production Design, Editing Technique (not software) - there aint many folks. Why? Andrews busy? No problem, but just don't pretend to yourself that EOSHD is something it isn't. Its less useful than the Reviews Stories on BH's online  shop. Most of the time. I wish it wasn't (and don't screw with me you Clarkson-loving Etype-lusting future retirees out there) - I've paid my dues and used this site for a long time. Hell I probably accounted for 5% of its traffic.
    A good example is the 'Pinned' Topic on "Shooting Inspiration and Ideas" - Nice idea to start a discussion. Just a pity A.R. does not mention any inspiration or Ideas. Thats for the plebs i guess. This is the kind of DailyMail hack website/hipster blogger nonsense which peeves me no end. Why is it pinned? You wanna solicit some traffic on that subject? Cool. Why not put up or shut up? Is it just to try to start a conversation on 'fimmaking"? Well, too bad (for all of us) - nobodys biting. Its got 24 replies compared with Clarksons hundreds. Wonder Why...
    7. This site has all the architectural and functional finesse of a bad Themeforest Joomla site. I can buy it in India for 30 quid. To me, thats lazy. Theres lots of gifted designers out there, and they'd probably do it for free to contribute to a creative community. If there was a creative community. Sorry Everybody but a community is not just a website where a few hundred people occasionally read and post a reply. 
    8. The site's content is taxonomically random in a way that frustrates and does't invite easy reading. Looking for location documentary stories? Nope. (and don't mention TAGS please...)
    9. The sites been up for nigh on three years and It has helped build Brand Reid. Good. We all need to sell advertising. Good. Good....BUT...Out of maybe....30,000 posts, Andrew has posted nearly 7,000 it says. Thats also good, and I've read, appreciated many, slept through many more...BUT is this a place that gets my time? IS it trying hard to be a Curated and Edited Place for Filmmaking and Filmmakers - naaaah...it aint.
    10. Andrew has been downright out of line to some posters here IMO. Its my opinion, s'all, but it seems I'm not the only one who sees this. Now I know us mere readers can't be 'as equal' as the publisher. I get that. Thats fine. But easy with the entitled, patronising tones please. It seems...to insult your readership.
    11. These days everyones an expert on something. Building Your Brand Is Key, they say. I do fear that EOSHD's brand is built on exceedingly weak foundations however. The answer is to shape up and do what it promised. Or else delegate this 'content' work to another. Someone who is a good Editor. Personally I've never met an Editor in Publishing who was also a useful cameraperson or cinematographer. Or vice versa. Andrew's credentials as a cultural commentator are (for me) forever damaged after his passionate pleas that the BBC were acting like cultural fascists (or words to that effect). Really Andrew? You think that TG is "Important Work" huh? I always thought you were somewhat relevant. I was wrong. Way wrong. That doesnt mean you don't know your way around a german or japanese camera, but only a dinosaur would defend JC like you have, bless.
    12. Its not ideal to scream at the subtle racism on this site by some very few contribs, but at least it would be good to have some fun with those weirdos using this forum to take the last train to Clarksonville and defend Mr. Camerons drunk racist mate Jeremy?  Could even set up a vintage car club for any EOSHDs distraught TG Fans? The BRollers?
     
    Ok...theres my civic duty completed for another year. I trust I haven't offended anyone this time. 
    Filmmaking shouldn't be conventional. It should be brave. Different. Visceral. It should also be honest and engage with the world around us.
    Top Gear on the other hand is Prince Philip's favourite show.
    It has nothing to teach 'Filmmakers'.
    Get it Andrew?
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
×
×
  • Create New...