anything. As I hope my comments have made clear, I objected to Blue Harvest's video and press release less as a member of the industry and more as a critical observer of the films we make -- a reviewer, yeah, but I think it's still a legitimate way to view this. The opinion piece was by no means clear on that, and several times positioned itself (inadvertently and unintentionally) as a piece of lecturing on what makes sense business-wise. That shouldn't have happened and that was sloppy of me. So while I stand by my position regarding the way the video talks about New Zealand films and about why we're making films, it was a mistake that my admittedly naive view came across as lecturing about how to get audiences. If you want to disagree with my opinion that talking about New Zealand dramas as 'grannies in wheelchairs in South Auckland' is harmful and needlessly divisive -- much in the same way that, for example, waving away genre films as not capable of having 'significant NZ content' is harmful and needlessly divisive -- or with my opinion that Blue Harvest presents itself as making films for the springboard, not the film itself ("New Zealand is a small place and we need to make films with an eye on the world market," "we're not interested in directors who want to say something about their personal life"), feel free to -- we have a comments section for a reason. But because we