There’s a thing we point at now and call “television,” even though it doesn’t look or arrive like television, but we don’t have a better word for it. HOUSE OF CARDS, BLUE, name your own. But “film” seems to still specifically denote something in a cinema, on a big screen, even though I don’t think that’s how we consume most film any more. I’m coming to think that maybe “film” is a word we will begin to use to simply denote a form of narrative container. If it’s between one and two hours long and a closed narrative experience, we’ll call it a film, no matter what sceeen we watch it on — or what screen it was shot for. It’s not like people don’t know how to shoot cinematically for a smaller screen. Look at TRUE DETECTIVE. I am concerned that going to see a film that isn’t a summer blockbuster is going to become an arcane thing, that will require special secret knowledge and critical travel to go and see. And that regionalisation for the sake of getting on ten screens is going to make it harder, not easier, for people like Shane Carruth to continue to make films.

I should make this last sentence on these pieces available for rent or sponsorship.