I agree Benton.
No film school still has some really great articles, but it does seem to lean more and more toward the "indie" film crowd. That sort of uppity edgy arthouse festival crowd of films that have budgets most of us could only dream of and even A list actors sometimes.
Personally I'm more interested in the Joe or Jane building a spaceship in their backyard out of PVC pipe and shooting a feature for $5,000-$15,000 with their buddies on a GH4. Things that are actually within the realm of something I'm capable of doing myself.
If I see that an indie film is shot on an Alexa I zone out, because I know the budget for the rental alone is well beyond what I would have as a budget for an entire feature.
So glossing over the other cameras is a sort of subtle nose up in the air to all the other indie filmmakers who aren't part of the cool kids club at Sundance.

The Lawnmower Man is underrated. It's not good in the classical sense of good (because it's cheesy) but the concept it presented at the time was solid. I own three copies of it on VHS, two still in the wrapper and a copy on DVD. The Directors Cut, which is the only version worth its salt is sadly only available on VHS. I've met a few others (in real life) who also feel the same way about the movie.

What films have been shot on this camera?

Cool. I think these film companies can be sustainable today. They just need to manage expectations and act like smaller companies rather than the behemoths they used to be. Their glory days are never coming back, but they can always fill a smaller niche.

My only beef is that (with the exception of some B&W stocks and the latest rerelease of Ektachrome) it's mostly newer film stocks. Which is not bad. But part of the appeal of film for me is the vintage look that older stocks can offer. They aren't really around anymore. A lot of those older looks I have never seen anyone recreate in digital. At least in a convincing way. Despite many saying it's possible, I haven't seen it. So it would be great if they could release a few more of these older less accurate color film stocks. But again, they have to manage expectations so I don't expect it to happen. Same with with a ton of new labs. I don't expect Kodak to open one in Detroit anytime ever, but NYC is no more local to me than anywhere else in the country.

"paralysis of analysis"
I'm so guilty of that. Especially in the writing phase.
For years I was writing sci-fi films I planned to make into my own indie films. I was always asking myself "is this something new and groundbreaking, will this cause the audience to have some kind of epiphany?" In the end I would back burner the script or abandon it completely because I was never satisfied enough with where it was going. Always trying to put it on a pedestal I could never reach up high enough to place it on.

MP3 isn't going anywhere. Why do people keep writing articles like it is?
It's not like VHS because it's not a physical format that requires a physical player that can break down over time. That said I still have a VHS payer.

MP3 was so widespread there will probably always be software to open them. Just like Microsoft Word Files and PDFs.
As for quality, most people can't tell the difference. That's one of the big reasons it became so popular. I even know a couple of audio pros who have done some recording in MP3 in a pinch, because again, most people can't tell the difference and not all video productions are shown in Dolby Atmos theaters to a bunch of audiophiles. Many videos are just simple web videos that will be heard on crappy PC speakers or earbuds by your average person.

The death of the MP3 is greatly exaggerated.