(rhythm and blues)
On writing, erotica, character, soul stealers, philosophies, sensualities, and inspirations. And How To, if I can. -- www.Neale-Sourna.com, www.PIE-Percept.com, http://www.ProjectKeanu.com, www.AuthorsDen.com/nealesourna, www.CafeShops.com/NealeSourna, & www.Writing-Naked.com, www.CuntSinger.com
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Neale Sourna's Eclectic and Covers Radio – Themes by Keywords
(rhythm and blues)
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Repost: The Future of Television: Countless Options, Multiple Screens By Chris Young, Alloy Digital 09.23.13
Imagine it’s 2023 — only a decade from now, but in digital time that’s a century. What will TV be like then?
It’s Emmy Award season, so television’s future is on my mind. What sorts of shows and technologies will we honor in 10 years? I love television — and I’m one of the very lucky ones who gets to spend his lifetime living in it. As a digital executive and entrepreneur, I can make some guesses.
First of all, TV as we know it today will evolve into a multi-screen experience throughout your home. You’ll have screens in any room you want them, any size you want them.
They will be commanded by voice, and you’ll have a panoply of viewing choices. You’ll be able to choose to buy or stream any particular show or channel or brand. Ads — tailored just to what might interest you — will be delivered to you as product placements or surrounding your favorite shows and events.
So come with me to the future, and picture it for yourself. You walk into your living room, and command a screen to appear. It materializes, thin and pearlescent, on the wall above your fireplace. Admiring its sleek beauty, you command the screen to turn on.
You think for a moment: what do you want to watch? The news of the day? Nah, you’re in the mood for some light entertainment. So you tell the screen to offer you a selection of short rom-coms and a couple of even shorter comedic viral videos of the day.
You look them over, choose a few and queue them up to watch. You see that squirrel ride a skateboard and kitten napping that everyone’s been talking about, then suddenly have a hankering for an old movie: The Fast and the Furious XII (well, it is the future). Just by calling out the title, or even saying “the movie with Vin Diesel and Justin Bieber”, up comes the film—layered with hashtags and clickable product placements.
On demand viewing won’t just be an extended cable option—it will be the only way we order up programming. We can already use our digital cable boxes to search by keyword, and by 2023 we’ll be tagging every piece of content that’s streaming so we can call it up by a slew of keywords. Voice commands will be so ubiquitous by then that Siri will feel like you’re calling a switchboard operator asking to be patched through to Murray Hill-2857.
And you won’t need thousands of pre-paid channel options, either. In the end, the winner of the digital content shakeout will be the strongest, most memorable brands.
If you think we all suffer from a bad case of ‘media metonymy’ now—blurring the lines between brand, network, and show–just wait another decade when there are just so many options from the convergence of TV and web channels that the only way we’ll be able to demand a show is by calling out basic phrases like “that sci-fi thing with you-know-who in it” and letting the algorithm do all the hard work.
A classic like The Sopranos won’t require an HBO subscription anymore — the brand itself will be its own channel, complete with its own programmatic ad buys tailored to you. And I don’t mean the generic, archetypal “you” we target now. I mean you, specifically.
You’ll see ads on, in, and around the screen for things you have been price comparing on your phone, talking about on social media on your tablet, and bookmarking on your desktop at work. The old industry joke about the ads following you home won’t just be a metaphor, they’ll be creating themselves before your very eyes.
This presents a challenge for the content providers and also an exciting array of options for us eager users. By 2023 the cable provider won’t be the content hub it’s always been, simply the delivery platform. The Time Warners, Comcasts, and Cablevisions will have adjusted to being little more than the browser, just as Internet Explorer or Chrome became little more than a platform to the high-speed internet that let us shake off the shackles of AOL and Prodigy.
Don’t think you’re trapped in the living room with this incredible viewing technology of the future, though. When you’re snuggled up on the couch with your array of credit card-thin devices sprawled out around you and begging to be part of the multiscreen adventure, you’re going to get hungry.
Just get up and go to the kitchen, where the display follows you to any of the flat surfaces — the microwave, refrigerator, even the cutting board will have screens. You’ll never have to miss a second thanks to your ability to rewind, pause, capture screenshots, and share them with the world all with your voice or a simple tap-and-swipe.
That’s my snapshot of the future — convergence at its best. See you there.
Chris Young is CMO of Alloy Digital.
Friday, July 19, 2013
Hannibal by Bryan Fuller_Such subtly delicious scripts, performances and editing.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/503311#play-queued-show-by-original_premiere_date-asc
Sunday, March 18, 2012
The moment all television viewers held their breaths, then screamed, "No!"
The highly controversial ending to the episode, which has since been referenced and parodied many times, prompted an estimated 1,000-plus letters to series producers Gene Reynolds and Larry Gelbart, and drew fire from both CBS and 20th Century Fox. After the production of this episode, both Stevenson and Wayne Rogers, who played the character of Trapper John McIntyre, left the series to pursue other interests. These combined departures and their subsequent replacements signaled the beginning of a major shift in focus of the M*A*S*H series as a whole. (more...)
Monday, February 20, 2012
TV Writer / Creators Join Publicity’s Front Lines with Social Media
Creators Join Publicity’s Front Lines
Bill Lawrence, a creator and aggressive promoter of ABC's “Cougar Town.”
By JOEL KELLER, Published: February 12, 2012
IN the olden days of television — somewhere around 2005 — the executives of a veteran show that was struggling to find an audience or trying to ensure that viewers returned after a long hiatus had limited promotion options. They could rely on their networks to flood airwaves, billboards and the sides of buses with ads. Maybe they wrote a blog on the network’s Web site.
Since then social networking has opened new paths for show runners, writers and actors to tout their series. But even on those platforms, much of the communication is at least sanctioned by the network, if not outright fostered by it.
But Bill Lawrence, a creator of “Cougar Town” on ABC, is reaching out to the fans themselves. And he decided to do so without telling the powers that be at ABC first.
“I think network TV is still being dragged kicking and screaming into the realization that they’re actually cable TV,” he said, citing the small audiences now watching most network shows.
He spoke during an interview at a “Cougar Town” party for journalists attending the Television Critics Association press tour here in January. He paid for the party himself, one of several off-the-grid moves Mr. Lawrence and his fellow creator, Kevin Biegel, have made in the struggle to keep the show’s profile high as it enters its third season.
It hasn’t been easy. The show was left off ABC’s fall schedule, had its episode order cut to 15 from 22, and only recently received a solid premiere date, Tuesday, after the midseason comedy “Work It” was canceled. As soon as they found out about the reduced episode order and vague promise of a winter premiere, the two creators activated a plan they had been batting around for some time: viewing parties with the show’s fans.
“It’s a defeatist attitude from TV writers that you have to run everything up the flagpole,” Mr. Biegel said at the same party. “ABC, or whatever network you write for, pays for the show you shoot and pays for your salary,” he said. “Aside from that they don’t pay for anything. If it’s my prerogative to take the show and show it to people, I can do that.”
The plan was simple: run the first few episodes of the new season on big screens in bars around the country and give fans a chance to interact with some of the stars and writers. Starting in late December there have been viewing parties in nine locations, including Sarasota, Fla.; Chicago; Las Vegas; and on the show’s set in Culver City, Calif. More parties — in New York, Philadelphia and elsewhere — were planned for this weekend. At many of the them Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Biegel have found a sponsor to help defray costs. But all were set up without the knowledge or assistance of ABC.
This isn’t the first time the “Cougar Town” team has kept ABC out of the loop for a promotion. Last season the team worked with Dan Harmon, creator of the NBC comedy “Community,” to have characters from each show appear on the other.
Because the crossover involved rival networks, Mr. Lawrence kept it quiet, asking journalists not to publicize it. Had the creators sought permission from the networks, he said, “it wouldn’t have happened.” He tried to keep a lid on leaks because “I harbored fears that I’d get calls to edit it out,” he said, adding, “It only takes one person to say, ‘Hey, they’re promoting an NBC show.’ ” But once the episodes were broadcast, none of the show runners received flak from network executives.
In the case of the viewing parties, ABC has publicly supported them, especially the network’s entertainment president, Paul Lee. “The great thing about Bill is that he’s so open,” he said, adding later, “I used to be a show runner, and I used to do exactly what Bill is doing.”
Nevertheless Mr. Biegel said he found that “there are people at ABC who think we’re out of our minds and wasting our time.” To those people he would say, “Bill and I are going to do it, and if we’re wrong, we’re wrong.”
The parties have been drawing robust, enthusiastic crowds, which is satisfying for the show’s star, Courteney Cox, who is also one of the producers. “When you go and you see the fans who watch the show and care so much about it, and you’re giving back to them and in turn we’re asking them to spread the word, it just seems like a smart idea,” she said. Besides, she added, there’s no reason for the network to be upset: “Why wouldn’t they be like, ‘Oh, great, thanks for doing the stuff that we’re not doing, that we should be doing’?”
Efforts like viewing parties, Facebook pages and Twitter feeds from the stars and writers try to foster a personal connection with fans. The more people feel fiercely loyal to the show, the more they will urge their friends to watch.
“When a comedy is fighting for every single ratings point, we feel one tick up on the chart keeps you alive,” said Sam Laybourne, one of the show’s writers. “Grass roots, as crazy as it seems, can work on TV.”
That notion is relatively new in the industry. As an example, almost no one from ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy,” which its creator, Shonda Rhimes, calls “the last of the old-school shows,” uses social media, yet numerous people from that series’s spinoff, “Private Practice,” do.
Likewise “Community” — which is not currently on the NBC schedule, though the network’s entertainment president, Bob Greenblatt, assured those at the critics’ tour that the show would return — has rabid fans, and the stars and writers communicate with them via Twitter and Facebook. The same applies to other comedies with small but devoted audiences, like NBC’s “Parks and Recreation” and ABC’s “Happy Endings.”
But none have gone as far as “Cougar Town,” mainly because the other shows lack the resources and leverage of Mr. Lawrence. He left ABC Studios and signed a development deal with Warner Brothers Television in 2011 and has sold shows to three networks.
“I felt like I didn’t have the same pressure to play by any specific rules,” he said. “If I were a neophyte, I’d never do this because it would label me.”
Other show runners are watching to see how “Cougar Town” fares with its strategy. One of that sitcom’s fans is Ms. Rhimes, who will have a new series on ABC in the spring. If it needs promotional help, “I’d probably call Bill Lawrence and ask him what he thought I could do,” she said. “I’m not kidding.”
A version of this article appeared in print on February 12, 2012, on page AR20 of the New York edition with the headline: Creators Join Publicity’s Front Lines.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Chuck Lorre Vanity Cards, Y'know his TV shows closing card sayings.
CHUCK LORRE PRODUCTIONS
Thank you for videotaping "Dharma & Greg" and freeze-framing on my vanity card. I'd like to take this opportunity to share with you some of my personal beliefs. I believe that everyone thinks they can write. This is not true. It is true, however, that everyone can direct. I believe that the Laws of Karma do not apply to show business, where good things happen to bad people on a fairly regular basis. I believe that what doesn't kill us makes us bitter. I believe that the obsessive worship of movie, TV and sports figures is less likely to produce spiritual gain than praying to Thor. I believe that Larry was a vastly underrated Stooge, without whom Moe and Curly could not conform to the comedy law of three (thanks, Lee). I believe my kids are secretly proud of me. I believe that if you can't find anything nice to say about people whom you've helped to make wildly successful and then they stabbed you in the back, then don't say anything at all. I believe I have a great dog, maybe the greatest dog in the whole wide world, yes, he is! I believe that beer is a gateway drug that leads, inevitably, to vodka and somebody oughta do something about it. I believe that when ABC reads this, I'm gonna be in biiiig trouble. I believe that Tina Turner's "River Deep, Mountain High", is the greatest rock song ever recorded. Once again, thanks for watching "Dharma & Greg". Please be sure to tune in again to this vanity card for more of my personal beliefs.
1st Aired: 24 Sept 2007
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
J.C. Hutchins at Tor.com: Why the best sci-fi TV and movies don’t *feel* like sci-fi
posted Tuesday December 01, 2009 04:16pm EST
Why the best sci-fi TV and movies don’t *feel* like sci-fi
Last week, I suggested that sci-f/fantasy readers and authors could benefit from reading genres other than SFF. I contended that the quality of SFF stories can improve from exposure to mainstream genres, reduce the barrier of entry for newcomers to SFF, and create an even larger community of fans.
Today, I’d like to illustrate this by geeking out on some movies and TV shows that inject high doses of SFF elements into their stories, yet proved to be completely accessible to mainstream audiences. Some of these stories aren’t usually classified as sci-fi by norms, which is awfully cool: it shows us that SFF need not alienate audiences with a high barrier of entry, and that the surly “us vs. the world” underdog/junkyard dog attitude a vocal few SFF audiences and authors have need not exist.
I’ll then follow up with why I think these SFF-in-sheep’s-clothing stories are so successful, and what we fans (and writers) can learn from them.
-
Back to the Future: A time-traveling DeLorean. Often found in the comedy section.
-
Groundhog Day: A loop in the space-time continuum. Comedy.
-
Somewhere In Time: Accessible time travel. Drama.
-
The Truman Show: Super surveillance, for a society of one. Comedy/drama.
-
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?: Toons in the real world. Comedy.
-
The Road Warrior: Post apocalypse. Far more often considered action than SF.
-
E.T.: Often considered a “family” movie, but sci-fi all the way.
-
The Time Traveler’s Wife: SF packaged as romance.
-
Jurassic Park: Cloned dinosaurs. Nearly always found in the action section.
-
The Abyss: Aliens in the ocean. Typically associated with action.
-
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: Mindwipe technology. Found in comedy/drama.
-
Galaxy Quest: Funny SF movie. Found in comedy.
-
Cocoon: Biological rejuvenation thanks to alien pods. Drama.
-
King Kong: Giant ape terrorizes Manhattan. Action.
-
Iron Man, Batman Begins, X-Men, Superman: Most often found in action.
-
Contact: Sagan’s SF masterpiece, often found in drama.
-
Quantum Leap: Time-jumping. Often classified as comedy/drama.
-
Third Rock from the Sun: Brilliant show about incognito aliens. Comedy.
-
The Six Million Dollar Man: They rebuilt him. They had the technology. Action.
-
The Boys from Brazil: Hitler clones. Drama.
-
Short Circuit: Sentient robot. Comedy.
-
Ghost: Victim’s soul sticks around to solve his own murder. Drama.
-
The Matrix: We all live in a computer simulation. Action.
-
Innerspace: Submarine inside a dude’s bloodstream. Comedy.
-
Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure: Time travel. Comedy.
-
Gremlins: Muppets gone bad. Comedy.
-
Honey, I Shrunk the Kids: The title says it all. Comedy/family.
-
Deja Vu: Space-time paradoxes. Drama.
-
Sliding Doors: Parallel universes. Drama.
I’m certain there are dozens more (which you can share in this post’s comments). So why were these movies and TV shows so successful at attracting non-SFF fans—especially when the beating heart of each of these stories is a skyscraper-sized SFF conceit? Nearly all of them take place in present day, which helps: the storytellers don’t have to send much time building a brand-new world.
But I believe it’s far more than that. Examine wildly successful properties that are known as SFF, yet attract millions of mainstream viewers—Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Alien and Aliens and The X-Files. These stories sport the same successful characteristics as the list above.
Yet they rarely let the SFF elements eclipse the story or characters. They give enough information about those fantastical elements to deliver understanding and relevance for the audience, but not so much as to alienate them. They focus on characters. Their protagonists—even if they were born on other planets—are immediately grokable thanks to their very “human” behaviors and characteristics. Audiences want to emotionally identify with characters, and whenever possible, the world in which they occupy.
I believe these are the most successful traits of great SFF (and stories, period): nigh-universal appeal. To be clear: I’m not criticizing fans or writers who love to deep geek in their fiction—one of my favorite novels, Vernor Vinge’s A Deepness In the Sky, is hyper-granular in its worldbuilding and geekery. There is absolutely a place for this content, and a thriving subculture exists that will support it.
But I do believe that these movies and TV shows (and more—sound off in the comments!) can provide priceless inspiration for SFF storytellers, and opportunities to grow our community well past the SFF section of our book- and video stores. If storytellers and evangelistic SFF fans can accomplish that, then we all win. MORE, including comments at http://www.tor.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=blog&id=58311
J.C. Hutchins is the author of the sci-fi thriller novel 7th Son: Descent. Originally released as free serialized audiobooks, his 7th Son trilogy is the most popular podcast novel series in history. J.C.’s work has been featured in The New York Times, The Washington Post and on NPR’s Weekend Edition.
StoryLink: Melissa Rosenberg on Writing "Twilight" Series and "Dexter"
http://www.storylink.com/article/329
You Asked ... Melissa Rosenberg,"Twilight" Series, "Dexter"
We are thrilled to have Melissa Rosenberg as our November Featured Screenwriter.
The head writer and producer for Showtime's Dexter, Rosenberg also wrote the screenplays for the Twilight series (from the novels penned by Stephenie Meyer). Dexter is currently in its fourth season. Twilight: New Moon, the second in the saga....http://www.storylink.com/article/329When adapting a novel for the screen, especially one as loved as Twilight, how do you determine what parts go into the film and what parts don't? Especially under the potential wrath of crazy fans? – Kelsey
The most important element to bring from the book to the screen is the emotional journey of the characters. That should never be sacrificed. There are important scenes and plot points that enable those characters to go on that journey, and they become the framework of the story. As to what parts don’t make it in… I guess I’d say… in a novel, conversations that last for chapters can be utterly compelling. Certainly that’s true for the Twilight books. But film is a visual medium, and you want to keep it engaging visually. So it’s probably those conversations that tend to get pared down the most, condensed or cut.
So much of the way Dexter is written is internal thought processes, and the "dark rider" who seems to be an alter-ego of Dexter operates almost as an additional character. I'm wondering how difficult it was to write to this character (the dual-faceted Dexter)? – Deborah
I love writing for Dexter’s character because he’s so complex, and has such conflicting elements to his personality. His secret, alter-ego is the source of so much of the show’s humor. But his voice-over can also be the hardest part to write – it often distills a scene or an episode or an emotional arc down to its most minimal form. It’s like writing haiku; the fewer words the better. But those words need to say so much.
When creating smoldering romantic chemistry between characters, what are some of the most magical/powerful equations between dialogue and action that absolutely "grabs, locks and loads" the female audience? What the heck is the secret to writing romantic chemistry? – Joann
For me, I guess it’s about what’s not said in a scene. The subtext. It’s also the conflict between two characters; the obstacle keeping them apart, together with the longing drawing them together. But of course, you can’t actually write chemistry. I could write the sexiest scene ever, but if two actors were cast who didn’t have chemistry, the scene would still fall flat. I – we – got very, very lucky with Rob [Pattinson] and Kristen [Stewart] for Twilight]!
When did you start feeling the inspiration to....http://www.storylink.com/article/329...As a writer who has written for both film and T.V., what do you see as the main differences in writing for those two mediums? As a writer, how do you have to jump mentally and technically from T.V. writing zone to feature writing zone? – Bill
T.V. writing is much more collaborative. You have a staff of writers who sit around in a room all day inventing a story. It’s energizing, exhausting, inspiring, hilarious, and frustrating. It’s a little like being on a submarine together. At one point you’re going to hate each person in that room, and they’re going to hate you. It’s like family that way. In the end, you love them all, but it takes navigating a lot of personalities, and that takes energy.
Writing features, it’s just you alone in your little office with your keyboard. You don’t have to listen to anything but your own creative voice. There are no office politics to deal with, no feelings to hurt, no one to piss you off. Then again… there’s no room full of talented, creative people at the end of the hall that you can run to any time you’re stuck.
I love doing both equally, but both come with their own sets of challenges. Jumping back and forth has been perfect for me. Just when I need a break from the writing room, I get to go home and write a feature. Just when I start getting lonely in my little office, I get to go back into that writing room with some of my favorite people in the world - writers....http://www.storylink.com/article/329
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Watching TV: There is overlap and learning, and if you have to ask....
It's okay to love TV, film, oh, and novels/short stories.
I think TV watching, if you actively watch and question it as you view, is not a problem in an of itself. Except in whether there are too many hours in it versus a deadline you have. And yes, I am guilty there, but so are all of us spending just a little more extra time reading all the replies to that Absolute Write forum thread.
It is interesting that no one questions whether your new Harry Potter or finally sitting down to read War and Peace will eat up just at much time, or more.
And yes I watch, a lot, and DVD seasons, etc. But also, I often find better writing and character execution with Joss Whedon, or on Smallville. More freshness in how to tell a story and just put a smile on a face with a Pushing Daisies, and the like.
Because there are some novels and books I own or have read for genre research and the like and they are not that good; they need editing, proofing, another revision or two or three. I mean, really, Bridges of Madison County could not be handed in as first class classwork to the teacher who wrote it, and expect to get a good grade, and yet it was published and filmed, to boot, with hall its unfinished, illogical bits just lying there like old, clumpy oatmeal. Unpalatable, but it hit a wave and rode to shore.
TV is not always some kind of waste, think how many people must subliminally accept Barack Obama as presidential material, because two very tall, very black and smart men have been president on 24; giving us a new way of seeing ourselves in the future we make now.
It is--my keyboard is not letting me make contractions, and it is killing me!!--reboot.
It is your life, your time, some stories must be written NOW, others need time, lots of time to get down to their juicier, more subtle bits. There is stuff like that on TV, and well done too. And the good actors with the good scripts oft times give you better stuff on TV than in feature movies; think Battlestar versus Starship Poopers.
And then, again, there is the WWE and Stargate(s) things--guilty pleasures that make you happy. Happy is good. Plus, it is THE medium, other than the third world war of WWW that has to be accepted and used, ignoring it makes you an extinct dinosaur.
Besides more people waste more time away at work, commuting, getting bagels, talking to cubicle mates, and emailing friends, than half of us foruming, TVing, and multitasking our writing careers from home, with two novels, a client project or two, and a new proposal all in the works and open on our PCs.
__________________
Neale Sourna
=====================================================
Overlap. Whether watching TV, films on DVD (on tv), live theatre, reading books (that you're not editing or writing), etc. are all the same time wasters. As are forums, Google, Wikipedia, etc. And yet, there is a necessity for them, and a conscious or unconscious manner of getting lost in them.
Learning. No where, except on TV, can you have so many time eras visualized (and the hard work or enforced segregations of various people and castes, how even Queen Victoria thought girls should not be educated, which I find reprehensible, inconceivable, and hypocrisy, but, then, she was royalty and we are not).
TV (broadcast, DVD, cable, satellite) places all of this before you, giving you, well, me, insight into how different and the same we are between us now and now, and now and then, or the chance to pop in disc after disc to see how "Little Women" (and attitudes toward women and starlets' capacity) has been handled, and changed considerably, from decade to decade in Hollywood Film. --I use this in my writing; Victorian era, servants/masters, mistreatment of....
TV's better than life. Sometimes. It's more concise in telling a story of certain kinds, well and badly. Both good and bad are useful to me. Actual language between people on buses and in malls, seldom gives me anything useful for dialog or situations; besides, we write film, TV, novel, theatre dialog not REAL dialog, which is boring, inane, and babbles on forever about nothing.
Did I mention that I hate cell phones on public transportation?
And insight. I think a lot while watching. And think a lot while not watching. And while trying to sleep.
"Letting it wash over" me, is more than a bath of visuals and sount, it's zen. And, yes, if you have to ask if you're using too much time for it, it's the same as asking, "Do you think Terry loves me, what do you think, BFF?"
A few insights for me this week, while watching broadcast (recorded or "live") and DVDs, plus misc. other media and thoughts and family comments coming together in divine moments:
* solid and attractive actor Rufus Sewell (U.K.) now on CBS-TV's version of "Eleventh Hour"--why doesn't he get more leads to front movies and stuff, has been my question since "Dark City", and I knew, but now I get it. I get how THEY must see him, when highering. It's his eyes, they're an odd color on screen, whether in color or b/w, and more specifically he looks a bit haunted, and has sharp, lean cheekbones, so casting souls see him a certain way, negatively; where I've mentally cast him for a lead actor because of those eyes, positively.
* PBS's "Secrets (or whatever) of the Inquisition" taught me that school had misled me into thinking the Inq. only existed during medieval/renaissance days. While it lasted, officially, until 1870, making the last who were actively harmed by it lived to see my grandmother and John Kennedy born. And:
o That it answered that 9-1-1 question noncolored Americans asked a lot in Sept 2001, "Why do they hate us (U.S.A.) so?" Well, watching TV/PBS tied in with a book from Cleveland Public Library on "Defiled Professions...Outcasts" in medieval/renaissance times answered it sharply. Yeah, THEY like our stuff, and our pour are richer than their poor, that THEIR religion isn't getting them ahead of us, blah-blah-blah. It's hard for Americans because we never were like any of them. The closest who were, were enslaved, and never asked "Why do they hate...?"
The answer, to me: Citizens of the US don't know their place. Fiddlers on roofs know their place. Upstairs/Downstairs people know theirs, but Americans were one thing yesterday, are something or someone else today, and tomorrow will move physically again, or shift themselves inside, and rewrite their whole universe again. That frightens people about the US, while they still try to live some life they imagined worked for some dead ancestor thousands of years ago: before phones; cars; voting for ALL citizens of age, regardless of sex or ownership, and education for same, for all.
It's not a special badge of honor to be wholly ignorant of such a powerful medium, nor great to be wholly enslaved to it. But it keeps us off the streets, starting wars, and stuff. And do you think the new special guest star on "Heroes" is...?
__________________
Neale Sourna