Deadline27%

Simon Field Dies: Former Rotterdam Film Festival Director Was 80 43%

By Zac Ntim0%

7/20/2026, 4:05:57 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Availability Heuristic, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 25.7% saturation with 84 hits. Analysis detected 345 faulty-reasoning hits from 327 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.5% and a BS Rank of 43% (12,603 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 57.60% of the article peer group.

Simon Field, the pioneering film programmer and champion of filmmakers such as Wang Bing, Apichatpong Weerasethakul, and Christopher Nolan, has died. 
He was 80. 
Field died on July 16. 
The news was confirmed by the veteran film critic Geoff Andrew, who posted an obituary of Field on his blog. 
Andrew was shortly followed by the Rotterdam Film Festival, which shared a tribute to Field over the weekend. 
Field was Festival Director and Co-Director at Rotterdam from 1996 to 2004. 
During his tenure, filmmakers who passed through the festival’s Tiger Competition and won awards include Lou Ye, Christopher Nolan, Hong Sang Soo and Pablo Trapero. 
Before Rotterdam, Field was a Film Studies writer and lecturer. 
He was the founding editor of the radical film journal Afterimage, and in 1988 served as the Director of Cinema at London’s Institute of Contemporary Arts (ICA), a position he held until joining Rotterdam in 1996. 
After Rotterdam, Field joined Keith Griffiths’ Illumination Films, where he produced titles by filmmakers such as Tsai Ming-liang, Apichatpong Weerasthakul, and Garin Nugroho. 
Field continued to work closely with Weerasethakul over the years and produced his Palme d’Or winner Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives (2010) and his most recent title, Memoria (2012). 
Weerasethakul shared a tribute to Field in an Instagram post. 
Weerasethakul wrote: “I have lost an important companion, with whom we built the films together with love, over many years. 
I cannot dream of a more caring and supportive producer, and a kind gentleman. 
We were up against changing practices in filmmaking and film funding. 
But Simon never gave up, nor compromised.” 
Weerasethakul’s tribute ended: “I will carry him in gratitude, and in the work we still have to finish. 
Our bond through images will continue to bind others. 
He is in the light that touches the leaves, young and old. 
We will continue our journey with the love he showed me.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.1%Zac Ntim: 0.7%Deadline: 2.4%Confirmation Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.8%Zac Ntim: 3.3%Deadline: 3.1%Availability Heuristic9.8%This article: 7.6%Zac Ntim: 2.5%Deadline: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic7.6%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 6.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.8%Zac Ntim: 0.9%Deadline: 2.5%Optimism Bias2.8%This article: 3.4%Zac Ntim: 1.1%Deadline: 0.8%Pessimism Bias3.4%This article: 6.1%Zac Ntim: 2.0%Deadline: 6.7%Negativity Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 2.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 21.7%Zac Ntim: 26.9%Deadline: 6.1%Halo Effect21.7%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.5%Zac Ntim: 1.8%Deadline: 1.3%Recency Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.1%Zac Ntim: 4.1%Deadline: 3.9%Appeal to Authority6.1%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 3.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 25.7%Zac Ntim: 8.6%Deadline: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion25.7%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 2.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 8.6%Zac Ntim: 5.0%Deadline: 6.7%Biased Writer Voice8.6%This article: 6.1%Zac Ntim: 2.0%Deadline: 1.0%Indoctrination6.1%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zac Ntim: 0.0%Deadline: 2.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

327 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers46%attributed speech177writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageGeoff Andrew • 20 words • 0.0% coverageRotterdam Film Festival • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 10 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 20 words • 100.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 14 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 11 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 7 words • 100.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 18 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 9 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 12 words • 0.0% coverageApichatpong Weerasethakul • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
81%flagged-word coverage
112 attributed words75% of attributed speech64% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Indoctrination+17.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Apichatpong Weerasethakul: 17.9%17.9%Biased Writer Voice-5.6 ptsWriter: 11.9%Apichatpong Weerasethakul: 6.3%6.3%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.