Morning Shots: Gators, Critics, Michelin Stars, And Making Crossword Puzzles

We've enjoyed a few days off — and perhaps you have, too — but breaking news waits for no roasted turkey.

• It was a rather massive Thanksgiving weekend at the box office. (I will never get used to references to increases in "Holiday B.O." Pardon my immaturity.) In fact, it was a record-breaking weekend, by some reports, though they're hiding the ball about exactly what record.

• In a very interesting development, Jay Leno isn't losing viewers to other networks' 10 p.m. programming as much as he's losing them to people catching up on their DVRs. On the other hand, the ratings for his show have seemingly stabilized in recently weeks, at very close to the minimum levels NBC claimed it needed for the show to be successful — expectations many believed were set very low in case this very thing happened. For what it's worth, I concur with those who hold that until NBC has some other appealing option, Leno will remain right where he is, unhappy affiliates or not.

• Fans of Deadliest Catch and Ice Road Truckers will soon be treated to Gator 911, which, you must admit, is a pretty great name for a new show.

What's a critic for? And lots more, after the jump.

 

• I came across this essay about the nature of film criticism, and while taking shots at Variety doesn't rate an especially high degree of difficulty, there's an interesting discussion taking place about the proper function of film critics.

• This is actually from last week's New Yorker, but I very much enjoyed this piece about the awarding of Michelin stars. It's intense niche writing, in some ways, since the operation of restaurant rating systems doesn't necessarily have obvious and flashy appeal, but the idea that restaurant reviewing is considered strictly and scientifically objective by some in the field came as a surprise.

• Speaking of niche writing, this piece from Slate might appear to be nothing but an essay on the finer points of crossword puzzle construction (in which case it would still be interesting to me), but it's also a fine reminder that what appears to be plagiarism isn't, necessarily, and similar rules of creation in a particular form can lead to outcomes more accidentally alike than you might think.

• Also from Slate, a nice explanation of exactly how much leeway studios have to transform reviewer comments into blurbs.

• Finally, The Guardian laments the state of stage photography and how difficult it is to really capture a play in pictures — especially when there's a fixation on close-ups of whatever famous people may be featured.