The New Yorker at 100: Netflix documentary dives inside a groundbreaking magazine

A Century of Curiosity: How The New Yorker Remains Relevant in a Shifting Media Landscape

When it comes to crafting a compelling documentary idea, young filmmakers often face the daunting task of finding stories that can capture audiences' imaginations. For Marshall Curry, director of the new Netflix film "The New Yorker at 100," this conundrum proved particularly acute. As Curry himself noted in an interview, some ideas are inherently suited for shorter forms like articles or even films, rather than longer, more immersive documentaries.

Curry's own fascination with The New Yorker began when he was a child growing up in New Jersey, devouring the magazine's witty cartoons and insightful features alongside his parents. This lifelong affection for the publication ultimately led him to pursue "The New Yorker at 100," which delves into the magazine's rich history and its enduring role as a cultural touchstone.

One of the most striking aspects of Curry's documentary is its thoughtful exploration of how The New Yorker has evolved over time. While many films focus on sensational or attention-grabbing moments, Curry instead opted for a more nuanced approach, tracing the magazine's development from its early days as a pioneering humor publication to its current status as a respected and influential voice in contemporary journalism.

A key to understanding The New Yorker's remarkable longevity lies in its unique blend of intellectual curiosity and editorial rigor. Rather than chasing fleeting trends or pandering to mass appeal, the magazine has consistently prioritized thoughtful, in-depth reporting on a wide range of topics. This commitment to quality and substance has fostered a loyal readership that values the magazine's distinctive voice and perspective.

Despite this, concerns about The New Yorker's future remain evident. With its long-time editor David Remnick set to step down in the near future, some worry that the magazine may lose its editorial direction or succumb to commercial pressures. However, Curry's documentary offers a reassuring message: even as the media landscape continues to shift and evolve, The New Yorker remains committed to its core values of intellectual curiosity and journalistic excellence.

Ultimately, "The New Yorker at 100" is less a film about the magazine than it is about the enduring power of great storytelling. By exploring the intersection of journalism, culture, and community, Curry's documentary offers a compelling tribute to the publication that has captivated readers for nearly a century. As one reviewer noted after the film premiered at Telluride, "I feel like I was watching the biography of an old friend."

man it just feels like nobody makes documentaries like this anymore... remember when documentaries were like, super in-depth and stuff? nowadays they're all about getting those likes on YouTube . curry's doc is like a breath of fresh air, you know? the new yorker's been around for 100 yrs and it's still got that magic. i love how he explores their evolution over time, like they didn't just suddenly start being 'respectable' or anything. it's all about the content, not just the trendiness

The thing is, I think what makes The New Yorker so relevant is its ability to adapt and evolve alongside the times. They're not afraid to take risks and tackle topics that might be considered taboo or uncomfortable, which is super refreshing in today's media landscape. Plus, their commitment to in-depth reporting and thoughtful analysis is really admirable. It's like they're saying, "Hey, we know the world can be a complicated place, but let's try to make sense of it together." I also love how Curry's documentary celebrates the magazine's rich history without getting too caught up in nostalgia – it's all about finding that balance between honoring the past and embracing the future.

The fact that The New Yorker has managed to stay relevant all these years is actually pretty fascinating. I mean, think about it, a lot of publications have come and gone, but The New Yorker is still around . They've been able to adapt to changing times while still staying true to their core values. That's gotta be the key to their success in my opinion . Plus, they're not afraid to take risks and publish articles that might be a bit contrarian or thought-provoking. It's definitely not just about churning out fluff pieces . And I think that's what makes "The New Yorker at 100" such a great documentary - it's not just about the magazine, but about the power of storytelling and journalism in general .

So I'm thinkin' about The New Yorker and how it's still goin' strong after all these years... 100 yrs is a big deal! I mean, most mags would've gone outta style by now. But they're still makin' content that resonates with ppl. That says somethin', right? And I love how the doc highlights the importance of intellectual curiosity and journalistic integrity. It's like, these things aren't just important for The New Yorker, but for society as a whole. But it's also real to acknowledge that there are concerns about the mag's future. Like, with new leadership comin' in, will they still prioritize quality over clicks? Only time'll tell...

I think what really sets The New Yorker apart is its willingness to take risks and tackle complex topics in a way that's accessible to everyone . It's not afraid to challenge people's opinions or go against the grain, which is something we could all learn from . Plus, it's been around for so long because it's built on a foundation of quality over quantity - they're not trying to be everything to everyone, but rather staying true to their unique voice and vision . That's what makes me think it'll stay relevant for another 100 years

The New Yorker's secret sauce is defo its ability to balance being hip & having depth. Like, they're not afraid to tackle big topics but also know how to make you LOL. It's this weird combo that's made them last so long. And I feel like Marshall Curry did a great job showcasing that in his doc. It's not just about the magazine's history, it's about why we still care about it today. That's what's gonna keep us hooked for another 100 years

The problem with this documentary is that it oversimplifies The New Yorker's history and significance . It's great that Marshall Curry wanted to explore the magazine's evolution, but he glosses over some pretty significant moments in its past. Like, what about the whole Time Inc. debacle? That was a huge turning point for the magazine, and it's kinda glossed over in this doc .

And don't even get me started on the editorial direction . David Remnick stepping down is a big deal, but I'm not sure Curry fully acknowledges the implications of that change. It's gonna be interesting to see how The New Yorker adapts and evolves in the future.

But overall, I do think the doc highlights some really important themes about journalism and storytelling . And I love how Curry explores the intersection of culture and community – it's so important for publications like The New Yorker to stay connected to their readers and the world around them .

I think what I love most about The New Yorker is how it's always stayed true to itself, even as the world around it changes. They're not afraid to tackle big topics or challenge people's assumptions - they're still willing to take risks and push boundaries. And that's what makes their storytelling so compelling. It's like they say: you can't fake curiosity, but The New Yorker has been practicing it for 100 years! I also think their commitment to quality over quantity is really refreshing in an era where so many publications are more focused on clicks and attention-grabbing headlines.

I'm tellin' ya, this doc is more than just a love letter to The New Yorker... it's a case study on how they've managed to stay relevant all these years. I mean, think about it - 100 years is a big deal! That's like, a whole century of observing society and shaping our culture. You gotta wonder what's behind their formula for success. Is it really just a matter of good old-fashioned journalism? Or is there more to it? Maybe they're onto something with this "intellectual curiosity" thing... could be a recipe for staying ahead of the curve in a world that's constantly changing

I don’t usually comment but... I think The New Yorker is still doing something right . It's crazy to think about how they've managed to stay relevant for so long. They're not afraid to tackle tough topics and publish stories that might be considered "unpopular" by some people, which sets them apart from other publications. And it's clear that the filmmakers behind "The New Yorker at 100" really understand their audience - I mean, who wouldn't want to watch a documentary about a magazine they love? But what I think is even more impressive is how the documentary highlights the importance of quality journalism in today's fast-paced media landscape. In an age where everyone seems to be churning out clickbait content left and right, it's refreshing to see someone like Curry exploring the value of thoughtful reporting and editorial rigor .