Hammond On Cannes: Robert Redford’s Brave New Role … 
Hot Trailer: Jennifer Aniston And Jason Sudeikis’ … 
Warner Bros Tells Space Story, From The Bra Designers Who … 
Brad Pitt’s Plan B Banner Promotes Jeremy Kleiner To … 
Hot Trailer: ‘Don Jon’ 
Billy Crystal-Starring Comedy From Matt Nix & Larry … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’ … 
Hammond On Cannes: A New Day Comes To The Fest As HBO and … 
Cannes: Fleming Reflects And Finds Talented Trio A Breath … 
Hot Trailer: ‘Man Of Steel’ 
Former Digital Domain CEO & Auditors Sued For Fraud By … 
ABC’s ‘Nashville’ Undergoes Production … 
CBS Wins Season & Ties Sweep In Demo; ABC Tops Adults … 
Alki David Agrees To End Name Games With Aereo And Barry … 
Next-Gen Xbox One Unveiled With Content Including … 
Cannes: Weinstein Co Acquires Keanu-Reese Sci-Fi Pic … 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Wolverine’ 
Ang Lee Departs FX Pilot ‘Tyrant’ 
How Many Times Does Seth MacFarlane Have To Say No To The … 
Cannes: Stanley Weiser To Script ‘Three Graves … 
Cannes: Deadline Crashes Palais Forum With Costa Gavras, … 
Since July 28th when the Los Angeles County Museum of Art first announced that it would end its 4-decades-old film program in mid-October because of $1 million in losses over the last 10 years, an online protest has been growing. There are now over 2,100 signers of an online petition (including top-level movie critics, artists, dignitaries, and film-lovers from around the world), an active and vocal Facebook group, Twitter feeds, a Youtube video (search save film at lacma) and an email writing campaign. Marty Scorsese jumped into the fray with an open letter to LACMA director Michael Govan and the museum. Now the protest group http://savefilmatlacma.blogspot.com/ 
has confirmed it will meet with Govan on September 1st. “This so-called “popcorn summit” has as its stated goals to convey the critical importance of the LACMA film program for our community; help find ways to reinstate and enhance the museum’s commitment to film; and present Michael Govan with our petition,” the grassroots organization says. “The meeting location is still unconfirmed. Present at the meeting will be film scholars, movie critics, film lovers and others deeply affected by the museum’s decision. We are pleased Mr. Govan committed to this meeting.”
At the same time, SaveFilm@LACMA expresses puzzlement by LACMA’s lack of response to Scorsese’s passionate letter to preserve the film program and commit to film as an art form. (The director’s personal connection to LACMA stretches back almost 40 years to when he lived in LA during the 1970s and regularly attended the film series. It was during a 20th Century Fox retrospective at LACMA that he first became aware of the issue of color film fading and the urgent need for film preservation.) “We wonder about the meaning of LACMA’s silence. Given the outpouring of dismay over the cancellation, LACMA owes it to our community to engage in open, honest, civic dialogue. So far we’ve seen form letters and boilerplates filled with double-speak from LACMA — even on their so-called Discussion Forum. Damage control is not enough. We demand to know what the museum’s intentions are for the film program.” The museum is telling news outlets it plans to find potential donors to underwrite some future film program that will be curated like the museum’s other exhibits.
Also, in case you haven’t seen it, here’s the protest video:
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
What a bunch of cry babies. “Won’t see them again if LACMA has its way?” You’ve got to be kidding me? Are there no DVDs? Are there no art house theatres? How many of these cry babies regularly attended the screenings and brought their friends. Apparently not enough. And somehow LACMA is at fault? Like it’s their obligation to continue showing films that people are not rushing out to see…because they can see them at home at any time.
@ Jack – Agreed.
Instead of whining, people should have 1. actually gone to see the movies, or 2. coughed up the dough to keep the program running.
Scorsese, actions speak louder than words. If you want to save the program, open your wallet.
And LACMA, if you bring it back, better marketing might help, I forgot the program existed for years.
Many of the films shown at LACMA are unavailable on DVD. Many studios are halting release of their classic films or doing away with their classic labels all together. Screenings at LACMA are well attended, this has to do with an agenda on the part of the leadership.
Just as a matter of clarification to some who think that movies can uniformly be watched on DVD — the appropriate way to watch and appreciate film as an art form is in the theater. The number of theaters that show art films and other non-Hollywood movies, is dwindling rapidly in L.A.
Kathleen, exactly. I don’t think anyone would suggest it’s okay to shutter the galleries because we can look at the paintings at home in a book. I guess you either accept the fact that movies are art or you don’t.
Jack’s point is well taken. But nobody is suggesting that LACMA close down its poorly-attended galleries because “nobody is going to the Etruscan exhibits.”
The difference between seeing a film on a big screen and seeing a film on DVD can be illustrated by a viewing of “2001: A Space Odyssey” in both circumstances.
Film, to be properly seen and appreciated, should be viewed on a large screen in a dark room full of people.
If you don’t want to go, don’t. Nobody is telling you that you should see the Etruscan exhibits either. But they should be available.
–t
Totally agree with others here. If you like the LACMA Film Series, PAY FOR IT! Or launch a competitor…. I’m sure there are lots of wealthy but ashamed film stars who would be happy to contribute some money as penance for the execrable remade crap they have been hurling at moviegoers in the past few years.
The reality is, Hollywood does not respect cinema — it respects the almighty dollar. Sounds cynical, but we all know it is true, which is fine, as it puts food on our plates. Fortunately, true cineastes will celebrate celluloid in their own way, alone or together. I’m not crying.
The activists are infuriating. I agree with the popular common sense consensus here: wealthy Hollywood loudmouths should pay for keeping the program running. I love Martin Scorsese, but how dare some New York-centric multi-gazillionaire tell Los Angelenos what to do? If you care so much, PAY FOR IT!
Movies SHOULD be treated as art. They are a precious commodity for the city, like art in the museums. But it has to make money to exist. So i hope at this September 1st “popcorn summit” that the activists send around a collection plate – televise it on the web – and shame themselves into donating money.
I don’t see a “popular common sense consensus” here – seems to be running about half and half. I attended the program regularly, 1-2 times a month, and it was always crowded. Where else could you see films ranging from Stroheim’s GREED to MR. MAJESTYK, a Charles Bronson vehicle written by Elmore Leonard? It’s a venue well worth saving. And if LACMA dumps it, they won’t get a single penny from me in the future.
I find it hilarious that people who have nothing to lose and everything to gain from a LACMA film program are threatened by LACMA members and activists who are sending a message to the institution that we treasure their film program and don’t want to see it canned. It’s totally absurd to suggest that only people with millions of dollars of spare cash should have a voice in public affairs.
Besides that, throwing money at LACMA is obviously not the issue given the fact that LACMA has not adequately demonstrate its support for the film program for many years, nickel-and-diming it to a slow death. Audience are attending and buying tickets in droves–Govan has gone on record saying they average 250 people per screening, which is a very respectable crowd for repertory/art film programming. Money isn’t the problem, LACMA’s priorities is.
@Doug
Taking a page from your blog,
People seem to be misunderstanding the issue. It’s clearly not about the money.
As Kenneth Turan put it in his LA Times response to LACMA’s announcement:
“Take the question of the program’s million-dollar loss. That’s a nice round number, but it turns out to be a cumulative loss over a 10-year period. Broken down to $100,000 a year (and several museum sources tell me it has been more like $70,000 in recent years), it’s a drop in the bucket in an annual budget of more than $50 million. Especially in a city with the powerful connection to film Los Angeles has.”
(http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-critic-lacma30-2009jul30,0,5900670.story)
And, as you’ve mentioned before: let’s not forget the “Renzo Piano-designed $450 million transformation” that the museum is currently undertaking.
LACMA’s announcement is not only an insult to the film community and Los Angeles, but itself, as this once fine museum seems to be on the verge of suicide.
Normally I love to see people gather together to defend the arts and pool their resources to keep a certain program going. But I like what Jack said in his comment. “How many of these cry babies regularly attended the screenings and brought their friends.” I mean, that’s the main issue here, right? LACMA was losing money on it. So clearly not enough people were attending.
Whenever I go to see films at LACMA the attendance is pathetic, it’s never more than a third full. I went to the Oshima series in April and it was even less. It’s the same at all the art houses in LA. A couple weeks ago I went to see Tokyo!(Gondry) at the New Beverly and there were about 5 people there. Some of the seats were broken and had caution tape blockading them off. It was depressing. Last month I went to a night of the Italian Grindhouse series at the Egyptian…same thing…a handful of people. In LA, folks don’t want to go to these movies.
I want LACMA to keep the program going…but for who??
Nice attempt to twist what people are saying, Doug, but your argument falls flat. What people are complaining about are the millionaires who want other people to pay for their pet projects. If people want the movies to stay, then cough up the money to support it. Don’t whine and expect other people to pay for something you aren’t willing to support yourself.
I know this might be hard to fathom for you Hollywood types, but schockingly not everything in life needs to be about making money! Take a look at LACMA’s mission statement, their first goal is serving the public, not making a profit off them.
Did you ever notice in the art galleries all the people clustering around the Degas and Monets, and all the empty galleries in the Japanese Pavillion? Yet the museum houses it all, on offer to the public, not on a “headcount” basis or on a “for-profit revenue generating” basis, but because it’s all part of a big picture and that big picture is art. (note that Mr. Govan is fond of describing LACMA as an “encyclopedic” museum.) As a long time attendee of LACMA film, I’ve actually noticed an actual uptick in attendance — granted, for the more accessible, popular shows. Those shows act as gateways into the more obscure stuff. That’s the way it works in the art galleries and that’s the way it works in the Bing. Let’s not point fingers and blame people for going or not going, giving money or not. Let’s focus on getting film in its central, respected role in the museum’s ponoply.
I was a projectionist at LACMA for 10 years and observed the film department up close under both Ron Haver and Ian Birnie. Besides missing programming designed for a museum instead of a multiplex, Angelinos will also be losing opportunities to see movies in a truly great cinema venue. The Bing Theater is equipped to show film in a number of special formats such as 70mm six track magnetic, Todd-AO, variable speed silent, and nitrate stock prints; capabilities limited to a handful of existing screening facilities today.
The Japanese Pavilion at LACMA was designed to showcase the artwork in the manner it was originally meant to be seen. The Film Program also strived to present its programs as the filmmakers intended their audiences to experience them. Will future viewers be seeing “Lawrence of Arabia” on an iPhone?
Even the words “Lawrence of Arabia on an iPhone” upset me. Thank you, Mark DQ, for this comment. With your permission we may use this in our campaign. From Save Film at LACMA. p.s. excuse my misspelling of panoply, above
Perhaps LACMA board of directors and MPTF board of directors can get together… they have so much in common!
is this fishing for a benefactor?
Last week, Govan said about $5 million would endow a basic film program; today he upped the ante. “I’d love to see $10 million.”
I’m perplexed by two types of comments listed above. The first is that those of us who support LACMA’s program should be paying for it. Besides the fact that many of us are museum members and pay in that way, we do pay every time we go to the film series. Most of us can’t afford to fork over a large amount of money and is not the point of a museum is to provide art of all sorts for a reasonable price? The museum already has a huge operating budget of 50 million or so. We’re asking that about $200,000 of it go to continue the long-running program.
The second comment asks how many of us attend the LACMA series. Many of us do but even if one doesn’t, who cares, the point is to support the museum in showing film in the way it should be seen. I don’t go to many exhibits at the museum but I support them being there. Places like museums are wonderful even if you never go to them because many others do. By the way, it’s sometimes poorly attended at LACMA or other theaters but sometimes its crowded as well.
My wife and I used to go very often. For some periods we went to every screening, but even when we didn’t, we’d go at least once or twice a month. There was a guy who was ALWAYS there. ALWAYS. We used to call him “the guru.” Then we had a child and were unable to go anymore. It’s been a few years, but we remember the screenings and “the gury” very fondly. AND HE’S IN THE VIDEO!!! So I can attest that at least one person on the video is no poser. He’s the fucking guru.