...that Andrew O'Hehir has no business writing about cinema. Books, yes, but not movies. The fact that Sundance has "lost its indie cred" is almost five-years-old. Geez, the fact has even been featured in prominent books about indie cinema in the last three years.

Please re-direct Mr. O'Hehir's energies to subjects about which he knows something more than nil. Thanks.

So Sundance is problematic because some of the films shown there, though excellent, are not "the ones we're still talking about a year from now"? Who's "we"? I Netflixed The Woodsman (one of the Sundance films that, according to O'Hehir, "vanish[ed] with scarcely a trace") and talked about it a lot. Whereas I've never heard of Breakfast on Pluto, a non-Sundance film that O'Hehir seems to imply is a greater cultural touchstone.

O'Hehir doesn't dispute that the films shown at Sundance tend to be of high quality. Rather, he says that Sundance lacks "indie cred" and is not a "signifier of hipness." I don't understand why "indie cred" or "signifiers of hipness" would be of interest to me or any other film viewer. If "it did well at Sundance" reliably translates into "it's worth a look," what's the problem?

the Daphne du Maurier novel was titled Rebecca.

Watching Oldboy was the most rewarding movie experience I've had in years. It's a real masterpiece. But apparently, it didn't leave much of a "cultural ripple". Is that even important?

And hasn't the author heard of Bryce Dallas Howard before? Reading her name, followed by a sentence beginning with "she and her sinister dad" threw me for a second, since her real-life father hardly seemed sinister to me long ago, on Tuesday nights, when I could always count on him to keep The Fonz out of trouble.

Mr. Tortoise

She generally looks confused. She is so lacking in brains, aura, intrigue, anything sexy.

Has Hollywood decided that since her tits started to sag and she lacks any other qualities besides the hair they can just recycle her into Sundance and all the indie geeks will be grateful for a non-nerdie girl?

Reminds me of the 40+ divorced women who realize they can no longer date the studs but think they are worthy of muff-eating worship from college-age dweebs who they presume can't do any better.

Um, so not right. Send her back, please. We are all insulted.

I saw Primer. Three times, back to back - it was one of the few movies I have seen in ages that really made you think. And it probably would never have made it to Blockbuster's shelves if it weren't for Sundance.

Looking forward to An Inconvenient Truth...

Primer is a very good thinking movie. Watch it--it's a lot better than "king Kong." I can't believe we have a money reviewer (supposedly an 'expert' on movies who hasn't seen Primer and loved King Kong.

MOVIE reviewer

Just for the record this did get released. It played in Atlanta for a week or so several months ago and is now available on DVD. I know Atlanta is not exactly Bumfuck, ND, but it's not NYC or LA either. And if you're going to call yourself a movie critic you should check out "Primer" on DVD.

I stuck with this article, five whole pages and although I'm not so versed in the cinema, I'm smart enough...what was the article about anyway? I'm going to pretend that it was about Sundance and its indie cred. The way I see it, Sundance fullfilled its ultimate mission: the world has access to different sorts of films. Now indie is so popular that it isn't indie anymore? So? I felt like that about U2 once...and REM...and my favorite neighborhood restaraunt... Did you have to take me five long, meandering pages for that?

Jeez.

SXSW was conceived in 1986 as a music festival, to entice A&R reps from NY and LA to come to Austin and check out a great music scene, in hopes of getting Austin acts signed. At the time, artists from Lucinda Williams to Townes Van Zandt, Daniel Johnston and Glass Eye were playing for pass-the-hat in beer joints. The idea was brilliant -- fly IN the record company people and show them what Austin, which at the time was affordable, hip, laid-back and creative, could offer in terms of sign-able talent. The event succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams -- for the promoters; they all live in mansions now instead of the crummy apartments they had at the time; SXSW is on the map, and along the way they have added a film festival (lots of movies get made in Texas lately because -- surprise -- there are no union requirements in Texas; it's a right-to-work state). The acts above-mentioned got deals, or didn't, starved, died, went broke or (like Williams) succeeded, but none of them I can think of due to SXSW. Williams finally got signed, and deservedly so, by moving to LA where her demo ended up with a punk label in NY. Now, at SXSW, people like Neil Young and other firmly established artists come and give free concerts; that's awesome; but the "showcases" are pretty much reserved for acts who already HAVE record deals (hello) and come from places like Cleveland or Norway. In fact, bands from Europe, already bankrolled by government subsidies, fly to Austin to "showcase" at SXSW. Eventually SXSW added their film festival segment (the week before the music festival) and a "media" festival was kind of the buzz for a while (I dunno, computer stuff?). But the only people who make out are the promoters, the hotels and airlines. Because of the influx of Hollywood labor law evaders, some demi-pro cinema related businesses have sprung up in Austin as well (like, caterers) and there is now supposedly a "film scene." But make no mistake -- SXSW is NOT for the little guy. Everything you say about Sundance is 100 times more true for SXSW. Back in the Revolution (anyone remember the Revolution? It was lost at Kent State) a great man said, "There are no hip merchants." By conceiving an event to celebrate "cutting edge" art, whether film or music, Redford et al. did a great thing, as did those who created SXSW. But the minute SXSW became successful, the underrdog became the overlord. And the independent, creative artists who don't fit the mold? Good thing "that's not why we do it" (for the deal). While I agree (sadly) from the little I know about the film world, re: Sundance (although it's ludicrous to put down, for any reason, someone who has done as much creatively, environmentally and politically as Robert Redford), please don't think you'll turn to SXSW and find anything "indie."