On a personal writing note, I am disappointed, upset, and even bewildered. At the time I did not see it, but my older film reviews were following a train of thought (not ideal), at GiveWay, and Transmission, both Christian magazines by the same publisher, Nutzworld, Challenge Weekly, Daystar, Kid’s Highway, Faces (Baptist), Anglican Taonga, Amazon.com (not as a contributor), and Beliefnet.com. Most of these were great opportunities for me in writing film reviews. Yet stringing a review together in a train of thought I realize is not as effective as holding the writing together. Live and learn as they say.
Stringing a piece together (perhaps that is one reason why freelance reporters are called stringers as it is quick and efficient and less expensive for the publisher) is good for getting one’s thoughts down, albeit in a coherent way, but not for publishing, ideally. From those thoughts, though, to create a better piece that holds together with one over arching view of the film.
Once this is mastered, in terms of the writing, I may cater my film writing towards the needs of the publisher, which may mean I have other ideas for different publishers, depending on their need, but the same approach to the writing. This may mean compromise is involved. However, in film writing, two ideas can be of the same worth. It depends on me if I go this far, because I may not want to go along with another publisher. Even so, the one idea one has in reviewing a film may be the most genuine, the truest impression. So, that is why I like to be genuine above all else.
At any time, the ideas, the point of view, and the writing, all comes down to the writer and what is going on with them. I think I am moving away from a stringer to someone holding the writing better together.
