enough with the adverbs

You mentioned Kubrickian stuff, which a lot of times the answer is a simple, "To make you feel x" where x could be hopeless/frustrated/ashamed/woeful, etc. If that's what you are going for, then cool. A fine reason for a piece of work.

There was a recent episode of Scriptnotes where they discussed the implications and phrase "Central Dramatic Arguement".

http://johnaugust.com/2012/the-happy-funtime-smile-hour

They mention a thread at some screenwriting forum that went on forever concerning the topic that Craig, a host, was involved in, which starts off as relevant by tangent and evolves to relevancy:

http://messageboard.donedealpro.com/boa … hp?t=65889

But if this is stuff you have an acute interest in, the best starting place I can recommend is Aristotle's Poetics. It's fuuuuuuulllllllllllllllllllllll of this shit.

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/poetics.html

Regarding "literally", figured as a writer you would be interested in not fooling with words. 

KARINA'S THE BEST

Artist spoilers I guess? Double spoiler: This article is more important than spoiling the movie.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/arts/2012/02/ … nstein.php

Master Collection is a waste unless you're also very into in web, print, and mobile software design.

Yeah! A toast!

I left a sweet set up in New York to move to Los Angeles and work in an unrelated field with zero leads for employment. Figured if I was going to fuck up I might as well get that out of the way as soon as possible. A month later I was working more than what's considered a full time job, responsibilities and stress in tow. Didn't matter though, since I was deriving an immense satisfaction from the new work I was doing. That tends to be the Most Important Thing.

Do you want the job? What about it excites you? Your post sounds very negative. Just chalk that up to being consumed with anxiety?

Buzz off, clouds.

edit: Oh yeah! That rightmost mountain thing in Teague's picture is the same mountain as the one behind those leftish low palm trees in mine. But from the other side. GEOGRAPHY.

Oh, and the part where they list the addresses of every In-n-Out of Los Angeles County.

That book rocks. Everyone go buy it.

Story goes, when his father died he went and made this with a million bux of inheritance.

It's mindblowing in the sense that it's really patient and deliberate (which I love), has a very simple story except for one key twisty thing (which I love) and despite referencing every other sci-fi movie before it (without turning to a pastiche hackjob) HAUNTS you for days afterwards.

Blah blah blah go see it dudes for real.

SPOILEY, forewarned.

Liked it. Thought all the kids were well conceived. Could have used a little more emotional development with Andrew's arc from mousy abuse victim to god-complexed love child of Carrie and Magneto. The one soliloquy we get during his descent into madness is almost reading the wiki entry onthe food chain. Bummer. 

Speaking of, appreciated that it wasn't dripping with pop culture references – only one I noticed was Matt's Nostromo t-shirt.

Conceit of the found footage thing burnt too many mental cycles and was annoying. It's not a movie about how clever they can be with cameras, it's about the kids. Some of the best moments in the film were a couple of the cheated shots at the end. All I could think about during the final act was how many other, better places the camera could have been to more clearly tell the story of a shot. 

It would have been much stronger if it bounced back and forth from diagetic to non-diagetic camera work, and made the most out of the advantages of each.

What was the scripted ending?

BUMMED TO HAVE MISSED, looks like quite the time. Did Fruitimentary Lathe manifest?

As I understand it, (and I could be TOTALLY wrong, just basing this all on observations of public material) AMC took a gamble by letting talented people make the shows they wanted to make, and gave up the creative input almost every other channel has over its programming. The shows they've been putting out: Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead, etc. all got SUPER popular, relative to a small cable network, but they fucked their bargaining power against the shows since they never really helped develop the shows.

The longer a scripted show is on the air, they tend to cost more and more. And the increased cost of production might not coincide with the amount of subscribers or the ad dollars they can get for their shows. Hence this drawn out holding pattern where contracts are hashed out, showrunners butt heads with channel execs, and we see a year or more while shows cycle into and out of higher and higher cost productions.

Could anyone with a better knowledge of the production company-channel-advertisers dynamic speak any truth or corrections to this reading of the situation? Just curious to know if I'm talking out of my ass.