I've searched around for good places to get movie and television news and have found some good places, like Screen Rant and /Film. But a lot of times information will be mentioned, such as, "it's widely known that Chris Evans signed a 6 picture deal to play Captain America", and once I know that information it's easy enough to research further on it, but where did they find that information to begin with? Are there good sources for information that people within the industry use?

I realize this may come across as an opinion based question (I'm open to rephrasing help), but I'm really looking for a consensus based answer. Similarly to how people would probably agree that the Wall Street Journal is a good source for financial news.

UPDATE (5/9/2014)

I've continued looking around and it seems like Vulture and The Hollywood Reporter are both good sources, as well as Screen Rant and /Film.

  • 6
    This question appears to be off-topic because it is about site recommendation. – Ankit Sharma May 6 '14 at 9:25
  • 1
    I can understand that. As I stated in the question, I'm really just asking to see if there is an industry wide source that is known to be of high quality to people working in the industry, but may be unknown to outsiders.. – Ryan May 7 '14 at 0:12

I would argue it largely comes down to good journalism and connection to inside sources.

My sister is the editor for a very high profile UK gossip magazine. All of their information regarding celebrities comes from a mixture of sources, including friends/family of the celebrity, leaked information from their agents, leaked information from the celebrity themselves, "open" information from the celebrity through interviews and even the likes of Twitter and Facebook (they have crawlers that will automatically alert them when celebrities of interest post anything on social media).

They also spent A LOT of time reviewing other news sites, so they can use stories from there (and credit them obviously).

The point I'm making is that when it comes to the film world, it's going to be very similar. Magazines/news sites will know about a celebrity featuring in a particular movie as that celebrity or more likely his team will have alerted the magazine to the information. It suits both their purposes - the magazine gets a story, the celebrity gets publicity for himself and the movie.

It's also worth pointing out that an awful lot of information that is printed it known well in advance. Things like movie reviews can be written weeks before the actual premiere if advance copies are given out (again, this would happen at my sister's magazine). The review is typed up, stored, and finally released on an agreed date with the publishers. So if it ever appears like a magazine/news source suddenly has new information, the truth is they could have been sitting on it for a while.

Then, there's also information that is widely known in media circles, but it just hasn't necessarily been released or "officially" confirmed. Take things like celebrity implants - these celebrities are being tracked every single day. ANY changes are noticed and so things like implants are easily spotted, even if not confirmed by the celebrity in question. The same goes for films. Leo DiCaprio may not need to confirm he's in a new relationship or something like that if his movements/whereabouts are being tracked ALL THE TIME. This information just becomes "known" throughout the media.

So in summary, most information comes from either the celebrities themselves or sources close to the movie, whether that be family, agents, publishers, etc, or from good investigative journalism.

  • Very well written. I've had others ask me things like this and I generally just recommend blogs and sites I use, but tell them that the blogging and online news world is fairly full of shared and regurgitated info anyway, so just find one you enjoy and stick with that until you no longer enjoy it. – MattD May 6 '14 at 13:36
  • @MattD: Certainly from my sister's point of view, it's totally shared. As long as one paper/magazine publishes a story and are happy to stick by it, the others can all publish and credit the source without fear of reprisal for printing inaccurate/untrue stories - the onus is on the original printer. Their world is very, very shared. – Andrew Martin May 6 '14 at 14:50

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .