Eugene Hernandez at indieWIRE is asking “filmmakers, critics, publicists and other festival organizers” to weigh in on a new rule instituted by the Tribeca Film Festival press office. Here’s the text, as it appears on the Festival’s credential application:

“Embargo” regulation for world premieres
Reviews of films that celebrate their world premiere at the Festival may only be published after the official premiere. All journalists seeking accreditation to the Festival declare their acceptance of this “embargo.”

When I applied for credentials, I saw this text and rolled my eyes, but I wasn’t really surprised. In my experience with the Tribeca Film Festival press office, it’s always seemed like they prioritize coverage of red carpets and parties far above reviews or any sort of serious consideration of the films themselves; every year, much of the program seems to be about courting the attention of Access Hollywood, rather than cementing Tribeca’s reputation as a venue for quality films. But sniping aside: really, Tribeca demanding that journalists refrain from writing about World Premieres before they screen for the public will not end in a materially different result than what happens at Sundance, where all press screenings take place either during or after World Premieres, and as press the only way to see a film before ticket buyers is to obtain a screener from a sales agent, publicist or distributor.

So I’m not exactly outraged by the embargo, but it certainly will change the type and quantity of coverage that I’ll be able to do of the festival. Basically, if I only have the ten days of the festival to publish reviews, I’m going to publish fewer of them. If I was able to write (and publish) about films as I was seeing them (Tribeca starts screening films for the press at least two weeks before the fest opens to the public), then I would be able to organically balance coverage of the Festival with coverage of other concerns, as I did during the four weeks of New York Film Festival screenings last fall. But it just doesn’t make sense from an editorial standpoint to overwhelm our audience with wall-to-wall coverage of a festival just because they show a lot of films, if it means ignoring stories that will matter to a non-New York audience.

And so I will pick and choose, and only review films that are remarkable––in a good way, but also in a bad way. I have seen remarkable films at Tribecas past––Mysterious Skin, Chris Marker’s The Case of the Grinning Cat, Rock the Bells and everything in the Restored and Rediscovered sidebars come to mind––and I’ve seen films that are infuriating enough to be worth calling out for it, but I’ve also seen a lot of films that frankly do not deserve attention from me or any other member of the press. It’s almost a relief to have an excuse not to bother with them this year. Although, the total crap shoot of differentiating what’s actually worth a look before the screenings begin is another matter entirely…