August 20, 2004

{ The Royal Magazine }

Offering a high quality art magazine for free is an accomplishment. Offering a high quality art magazine with very little ads and a print run of 20,000, available in Detroit, Chicago, London, NYC, LA, San Fran, Manchester, Miami, Philly and Tokyo is beyond me. But these guys do it, and they do it well. All while repping the midwest (they are based in Detroit.) If you dont live in one of these cities and you dont want to read the online version (which is great) you can order a copy for only $5. Only in to issue 3, this quarterly is definitly going places. They are working on getting distro for Thailand, Singapore and Indonesia, and if that doesnt impress you then maybe the fact that the art director is only 20 will. Check this magazine out.
Its worth the loot. - Contributed by Dustin Hostetler: DustinAmeryHostetler.com

» The Royal Magazine

By Alan Smithee in Reading | Comments:

Comments

Wow...that is one amazing magazine.

Posted by: Brad Steiper at August 20, 2004 6:42 PM

I thought his review on Garden State was idiotic.
He didn't even talk about the movie.

He only hated it because everyone else liked it, and he couldn't keep it his very own.

Posted by: Karl at August 24, 2004 6:16 AM

yeah. that review is pretty terrible.

Posted by: upso at August 24, 2004 7:10 AM

I'm going to take the counterpoint on this "Garden State Review" discussion.
Maybe I'm just a sucker for some trash-talkin', but I really enjoyed the review.
I think by discussing the audience he was able to contextualize the film, it really has been marketed as-
1.A hipster indie-flick with TODAY'S HOTTEST SOUNDTRACK
2.A DIY guerilla-produced situation comedy
3.An award-winning piece of profound filmmaking
I'm not saying a film can't be all three of those things, but I will argue that there is no way this film lives up to that level of hype. By the time you add in the mainstream press coverage (because it was directed by Zach Braff, the star of NBC's "underdog" comedy hit Scrubs, after all) and this film suddenly has to be better than anything I've ever seen just to break the hype-barrier.
It's a sad fact that expectation and context are as much a part of the way we view a film these days as the film itself. We don't live in a vacuum, and very rarely do we get to keep anything for our very own.

Posted by: Adam at August 24, 2004 7:50 PM