The A.O. Scott/Richard Brody debate about (neo-)Neo-Realist--I shudder at the term--has been somewhat inescapable in the circles I run in, both internet and otherwise.
Am I the only one that thinks this is a non-issue? While I'm not really comfortable with the birth of movements in general, I can't help but acknowledge the actual grouping of "hyperlink films" coined several years ago. However, this idea of a new Neo-Realist movement seems silly. When did this aesthetic ever go away entirely? Don't we arbitarily "rough up" the look of our films when when want them to be taken seriously? How is any of the American independent (hello, Jim Jarmusch) of the past different from these new films?
On the other hand, I think Brody is a jerk. (Did he really just admit to not liking those films in a rhetorically formal list?) Maybe I'll just throw my towel in with Tony--I like granola and I like cinema and they are two great tastes that taste good together, so I'm glad somebody is championing them.
Speaking of tastes, I like the fact that the Slanted Door is getting press (example: this months Saveur) but I really don't need the competition getting a reservation for their deliciously smoky crab glass noodles. I've only been able to eat there at the bar during lunch carrying my Farmer Market's score.
Lastly, I've clearly been spending too much time on the internet (it's very very rainy outside in the Bay) but I think I have a new crush: Winston. Sorry honey but I am totally enamoured of that tiny speaker of yours. Is that wrong?