Earlier this month, special effects legend Stan Winston died at the age of 62. He had been battling skin cancer, apparently in secret, for over seven years. He will be sorely missed by those who loved his work, and I include myself in that group. His special effects and make-up creations included the Terminator, the Predator, Edward Scissorhands, dinosaurs for Jurassic Park, the Alien Queen for Aliens and Iron Man's famous suit. There have been dozens more great contributions over the years. However, this is not a eulogy. I'm not a good enough writer, nor do I know enough about the man himself to compose such a piece. Plus, I don't want to get into the habit of using the Feature column for eulogies.

What I actually want to talk about is how the mainstream media struggles to keep up with so much in the world of film, and how their priorities are unnecessarily constrained. This is where Stan Winston comes into play. The last few years have seen the passing of many great actors and film-makers. Just this year alone we have lost Charlton Heston, Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack; not to mention Heath Ledger's death back in January. Whenever people with profiles this high pass away, it's no small wonder that the mainstream press goes crazy over it. We get obituaries, interviews with various people who knew them, interactive career timelines, picture galleries, and pretty much everything under the sun to help us remember the individual and their career.

Contrast this with what happened when Stan Winston passed away. Most of the mainstream press, both here and in the US, carried the story, though in a relatively minor capacity. Few publications or online news services offered the deluge of remembrance offerings that I listed above, and some relatively major sources didn't actually report his passing at all. This was a man with four Oscar wins and a further six nominations, not to mention three out of six BAFTA wins. Imagine if an actor or director with an awards haul that big, and a career as long and distinguished had been afforded the same treatment! It's actually rather hard to picture it because it never, ever happens.

Contrast this with the online response. Message boards overflowed with sympathy, pretty much every entertainment news site offered some form of tribute, and film bloggers, writers and journalists across the Internet started hammering away to produce some kind and thoughtful words. And the reason for this contrast is twofold. First of all, I believe there is a generational element to it. The majority of people who write predominantly on the Internet, and who use it the most, are aged under 55. These are people who have essentially grown up with Stan Winston's creations. For those who turned 18 in the early 1980s, Stan Winston was there from the start of their adult film-watching lives.

However, the second reason for this differentiation is that, put simply, I believe the Internet is leaps and bounds ahead of the mainstream when it comes to talking about films. If you look at a website like Rotten Tomatoes, around 80% of the review sources on there are based solely online. The newspapers do of course publish their reviews online now, but they are still in the minority. And stories are flying around about film critics being made redundant from newspapers because they just aren't needed anymore. Film messageboards are some of the busiest online, and the range and scope of knowledge that can be found on them is enormous. If you want read a proper article about films or film-making, the place to do that is online, and not the paper. People like Stan Winston are revered so much more online because that is where people get together to talk about the things in films that they really enjoy, however obscure. But people like him are ignored by the mainstream because they are only interested in headlines, and those are generated when the more standard film-makers - like actors, directors, writers, and producers - win something, do something wrong, or pass away.

You only need to watch a delayed awards show these days to see this point become a reality. The Oscars are broadcast live so don't provide the best example, but the BAFTA ceremony back in February demonstrated my argument perfectly. Around half of the awards were not shown in the proper format; with a presenter reading out the nominees, and then presenting the trophy to the winner. These were all compressed into a 10-minute segment at the end of the broadcast, where the BBC treated us to the bare essentials. This segment of the broadcast included, among others, the categories of music, special effects, editing, sound, and cinematography. These are things that require huge amounts of talent to do properly, but they don't get the attention of the other categories because they lack that fame factor.

In the past I have spoken about stunt men not getting any form of recognition at awards, but in reality it's the whole 'technical' side to film-making that is neglected to an unacceptable degree. I am glad that people on the Internet have the time, skill, passion and desire to write about the people and things that interest them, regardless of whether the mainstream media sees these things as important. Moreover, so high is the standard of online journalism and discussion, that if the mainstream media doesn't start catching on to just how dedicated and involved so many people are in films and the film-making process, they will most certainly be left behind.

© David Mercier
Discuss films and features on the FilmJudge Blog