If you purchase an independently reviewed product or service through a link on our website, Variety may receive an affiliate commission.
This morning, the NFL announced the return of “Origins: An NFL Collection” for Super Bowl LX, featuring designs from Bay Area brands Aaron De La Cruz, BLVCK SCVLE and Nostalgia. The exclusive capsule showcases each designer’s interpretation of the Super Bowl through art and design while also capturing the eclectic essence of the San Francisco Bay Area — the home of this year’s Big Game.
“‘Origins: An NFL Collection’ is about creativity meeting community,” Ashley Daniel, director of consumer products at the NFL, said in a statement. “At Super Bowl LX, we are celebrating not only football but the stories, cultures and voices that define the San Francisco Bay Area. As we enter our fifth year of the program, this collection offers fans an opportunity to proudly showcase their pride for both the NFL and San Francisco, while being part of a bigger movement that is shaping the future of sports fashion.”
The NFL will debut the collection at a single-day pop-up event in San Francisco at The Pearl on Thursday, Feb. 5. Fans are invited to the free event to shop the limited-edition products and learn more about the participating brands. To register, visit NFL.com/origins. For fans outside the Bay Area, select styles from the collection will be available to shop online at NFLshop.com/origins beginning Feb. 6.
Preview a few standout pieces below:
Aaron De La Cruz White T-Shirt
Aaron De La Cruz Black Hoodie
Aaron De La Cruz is an acclaimed artist based in San Francisco, influenced by family, graffiti, skateboarding culture and architecture. He is celebrated for his innovative yet minimal approach to structure and form, and has earned global recognition in museums, private collections and large-scale public works.
BLVCK SCVLE Presidio Thermal
BLVCK SCVLE Golden Gate Crewneck
Founded in 2007, BLVCK SCVLE tells the story of how to decipher the world objectively through fashion. As a contemporary streetwear brand, it offers high-quality, timeless pieces that embody a mysterious aesthetic combined with dark romanticism.
Nostalgia is a culture-driven streetwear label founded in the San Francisco Bay Area by Humbert Lee and Jaden Yo-Eco. Their garments are designed to spark memories and are inspired by the past but made for today. Each piece bridges cultures, generations and personal histories.
The home of a Washington Post reporter was searched by the FBI as part of an investigation by the bureau into the leaking of classified documents tied to President Trump’s efforts to trim the size of the federal government. The search, which was first reported by The New York Times and the Post itself, came […]
Some two summers past, delighting in the prospect of a post-mountain bike ride beverage, I took a seat at a high top, and thought about beer as I absent-mindedly surveyed the brewery. But something immediately caught my eye. Double-taking, I noticed a young gentleman the table over wearing something that in years prior could have subjected him to outright scorn and ridicule in any ski town.
Loudly and brightly, the young fellow’s hat read the word “TELEMARK.”
It was both refreshing and stunning. He seemed quite unlike the graying gals and dudes (myself included) I knew who freed the heel on snow–and their inhibitions at Phish or Panic (but never, ever both). In fact he didn’t seem quite like anyone I recognized in the threadbare scene that had long struggled to entice a younger cohort.
His hat was stylish–of the flat brimmed, five-panel variety. And the gent was fresh-faced; his visage untouched by the march of time that adorns many a telemarker’s face, including my own–crow’s feet.
Someone young and trendy was indeed taking part in the ancient genuflecting turn, and openly declaring it.
Is telemark getting cool again? I thought.
Telemark skiing has indeed come a long way toward acceptability–even renewed respect–and all quite recently. Not long ago I, like many free-heelers of the fraught post-millenium era, was nudged toward eschewing outright free-heel pride. When asked the most classic of questions posed in a ski town when first meeting someone–if I skied or snowboarded–for the better part of a decade, I just said I skied, and left it at that.
The cultural landscape was then a minefield for the free-heeler. Friends willingly threw me under the bus at the opportunity to be in on a stranger’s telemark joke. Random alpine skiers on the same run as me seemed to constantly make a point to try and beat me to the bottom.Thus the modest, retrograde free-heel school of the 2010s I came from relegated the notion of wearing a hat declaring one TELEMARKs fraught at best.
But something has indeed changed lately.
Not only has the tele-scorn endemic of the previous generation seemed to abate over the last several years, the telemark scene itself–while still small and insular–appears poised to rise again out of the quiet self-loathing shadows and into a modern, even cool fold. Long ignored by the mainstream ski discourse, Instagram pages of outfits like TELE COLO and skiers Will Houskamp now showcase the leading edge of telemark–both in vibe and execution. Mainstream ski publications (like the one you’re reading) are even covering The Turn again. And with the ascendance of modern gear, the sport finally seems ready to shake the old refrain telemark is dead, a trope first uttered by retailers unable to sell through their free-heel inventory during the sport’s doldrums some twenty years ago. Since then Scarpa has released their long-awaited line of modern telemark boots, pointing to a renewed demand for new telemark gear. Even ATK, the darling of the freetour alpine touring scene, has announced a telemark binding is in the works. The sport seems to be becoming not only a viable business case, but maybe–maybe–even trendy again.
But as telemark appears to be riding a fresh and chic wave, a fitfulness has marked its evolution. Often sarcastic, self-referential, and stylishly self-effacing, the coalescing telemark newschool has brought the modern free-heel vibe to a new generation plugged into both social media and a more ironic sensibility, creating an energy not seen in telemark in years. But the new movement has also been party to a muted yet present divisiveness. At times criticized for neglecting those who blazed the trail ahead of them, the new guard has in turn stood their ground, occasionally scorning a portion of the telemark scene they deem counterrevolutionary to their movement; a cohort they deride as aged, curmudgeonly, cheap, and unwilling to abdicate.
Regardless, telemark has reawakened, most evidently in this rising new school that has unavoidably been influenced by the late-coming ascendance of a modern telemark gear paradigm.
This revitalized gear landscape sprouted from seeds sown decades before. First brought to life in 2007, the sport’s modern binding platform–the new telemark norm (NTN)–was conceived of as an upgrade to telemark’s eminently skiable but feature-starved binding template; the 75mm wide Nordic norm. NTN allowed not only a stronger edging ability from its underfoot connection, the new platform allowed myriad options that before only alpine skiers had enjoyed. Thos included ski brakes, step-in functionality, release, and the eventual incorporation of the pinnacle of turn-earning features: the tech-toe.
Telemark skiers took their time coming around to the new norm with many 75mm holdouts claiming NTN poorly mimicked the soulful sensation they had long found in duckbilled boots and Nordic norm bindings. While many still feel the elder platform is ascendant for making turns, eventually bindings like 22 Designs’ Outlaw X–the world’s best-selling NTN model–became the choice of many free-heelers, including a younger, hard-skiing subset. The new bindings helped usher in not only a modern gear paradigm, but also a new world view on telemark. Its forgoing of 75mm dogma–often typecast as not just a devotion to a certain binding but also to jambands and a hippie sesnsiblity–influenced a progressive if at times iconoclastic approach that many younger skiers would pick up on via social media. They took to the park and big mountain settings on the aggressive-skiing new telemark norm. In that process, the 75mm holdouts–often cast as luddites–would become the foil against which the new school would define itself.
“When you go on the forums there’s all these old crotchety dudes who are like ‘75 is the answer’ or ‘I’m only skiing leathers, and blah blah blah blah blah,’” Adam X Sauerwein, amongst the most influential voices in modern telemark media claimed on his Pursuit podcast in September of 2022. “I think telemark skiers are killing their own sports by being crunchy, crotchety old weird, young weird guys, girls, however you identify; you’re all telemark skiers, and you don’t spend enough money on your own sport ” he opined.
Regardless of this schism, the new equipment landscape has finally overtaken the old–and as other innovative binding platforms like the two-pin telemark tech system (TTS) have joined the fray–sales of new telemark equipment have slowly eclipsed the old norm, finally allowing eminent bootmaker Scarpa to come to market with the sport’s first fully modern, AT-comparable telemark boot–a revamped TX Pro. This, and the release of a retooled TX Comp–marks not only the first major update to telemark footwear in nearly two decades, but the ascendance of a modern telemark movement–complete in both gear and culture.
Like it ever has, telemark moves forward influenced by that duo of factors: equipment innovation and subcultural evolution. While these seemingly unrelated forces can appear to have little in common, they have together been integral to telemark’s cycles of popularity and obscurity.
Much like Scarpa’s introduction of the Terminator in 1993–the original plastic telemark boot–gear innovation has been key to driving telemark commerce, perhaps even participation and in turn further gear development, ever framing the ebbs and flows of the subculture. And while the current free-heel milieu little resembles that of the early nineties, manufacturers in the ski industry still see gear progress as integral to building sales.
“The big leaps in sales numbers really–I’m going to start with that because I think participation is a different number. Sales are really lifted by new, innovative product,” says Scarpa North America CEO Miller. “And you could go down the list of where something–a big change, not just a brand but a trend; shaped skis, alpine touring features in alpine boots. I use those as two somewhat recent changes. They really helped spike sales in those categories because there was something new to talk about.”
Miller and Scarpa hope telemark sales are ready to spike in similar fashion on the back of new, modern gear options. And the building scene seems poised to jump at the opportunity, with the new TX Pro selling out last year in its first season of availability.
Other telemark makers also see the scene evolving, in no small part because of the gear landscape. That includes Bishop Telemark–the Edwards, Colorado-based boutique free-heel brand that has long enjoyed a cult following for their modern, aggressive bindings.
Matt Share, until recently the company’s sales and marketing manager, sees a distinct free-heel newschool evolving. A forward-thinking veteran of the software services industry, Share’s scant few years of exposure to the sport brought a fresh perspective to Bishop, a firm that sees the new gear paradigm and evolving subculture as inextricably linked.
“Being the newbie and getting the lay of the land I’d say I’m not bogged down by the history and past-protection and all that stuff,” Share says. “It seems like it’s still graduating from the old school to the new school, empowered by the tech, right? The tech now has changed the sport where you really can do everything that you can do on alpine or maybe more,” he continues, hinting at the newschool’s desire for telemark to evolve into something less esoteric, something more relatable, and–for the retailers and manufacturers–something more marketable.
Share’s perspective encapsulates a telemark world that is not only finally trending younger, but seems unencumbered by a deference to the sport’s history–telemark’s scant record often leaving that narrative struggling for modern acknowledgement. But that gap has little deterred–perhaps even aided–the ascendance telemark’s fresher vibe amongst a younger cohort.
“I think that’s why the new generation is drawn to it–there’s the style of it, it’s cool and different,” Share says. “The new generation is unlocking a new and different style.”
But a previous generation was also drawn to telemark, themselves taking to a freeride-ethos on an older gear paradigm, but one that was itself revolutionary.
“Plastic boots and Cobra bindings were a pretty powerful combo,” says Dave Bouchard, who was amongst a cadre of hard skiing telemark skiers of the pre and post Y2K era who helped change the sport from what was long perceived as a mellow, overland practice to one more aggressive and brash. “Once on that gear I was feeling I could ski as well as I could on my alpine gear if not better–at least more graceful and fluid.”
And twenty-five years ago this group took on a forward-thinking if haughty ethos–not unlike the current newschool. “This was the early 2000s. This was about the time I started to feel it was my mission to show the world that tele skiers weren’t just a bunch of leather-boot, stinky granola-eating hippies,” Bouchard remembers.
It was in this milieu that telemark took off. Outfits like Josh Madsen’s Lipstick Films and Noah Howell’s Powderwhore Productions toured the country, driving stoke. The scene exploded with participants, leading to gear production of the likes the sport had never seen before and hasn’t seen since. And skiers like Nick Devore and Ben Dolenc–the latter of whom was sponsored by Nike–were hitting big airs, sliding rails, and leading a brash new vibe on the latest plastic boots and stouter 75mm bindings.
Bouchard profiled in Telemark Skier Magazine during free-heel’s rise in the aughts.
Perhaps illustrating the sport’s current growing pains, Matt Share and owner Dave Bombard note that many people still arrive at Bishop demo days with their old 75mm bindings, showing perhaps that while a loud and retail-minded subset pushes the new vibe, many still quietly embody the elder free-heel ethos; the push-pull of the future and the past being ever present in telemark’s evolution.
Regardless, Bishop Telemark has marketed their gear toward the newschool, aligning itself strongly with the movement–a scene anchored heavily by TELE COLO, a modern, movie-making, Instagrammable telemark outfit. No other group has so epitomized the newschool telemark movement and its style. Or been as visible. Many have thus gravitated to TELE COLO and its founder CJ Coccia, pointing to his films, tours, and social media as the zenith of the current telemark culture.
Not unlike the earlier modern telemark movement, amongst Coccia’s chief aims is to shake telemark from the perception that it belongs to a previous generation and reframe it as progressive, fun, and stylish. In a plug for their 2023 film THIS IS TELEMARK, what marked their first full-length feature, TELE COLO brand manager Giorgia Menetre wrote in SKI that “the perception of telemark skiing remains aged–with floppy bindings, granola diets, unkept beards, and smells of patchouli. TELE COLO is here to present the ski world with the new age of telemark culture that exists beyond the stereotype.”
Coccia echoes this, describing his modern telemark edits as aiming “to give people an understanding of kind of the differences in telemark and what sort of personalities exist versus allowing people from the outside to kind of assume that it’s an older collective of people, or people that have turned into dads or moms and they want to be interested on greens while they teach their kids again, or people that are on a granola diet and listen to Grateful Dead.”
While some jest is certainly at play in Coccia’s approach to the old guard, a kernel of truth also seems to be operative. “I say all this stuff jokingly,” Coccia says, “but also it comes from a place where I do think–weirdly enough–some people on the outside assume that telemark is a very aged thing and there’s not really a quote-unquote newschool or newer population that’s becoming interested in it.”
Tele Colo creator CJ Coccia.
A tension has arisen at this interface between the old guard and the new school in telemark. And TELE COLO’s branding often plays into the schism. Though on the surface facetious and playful, their athlete bios, magazine interviews, and more seem to unavoidably mention the segment of telemark that they do not align with–a telemark cohort they point out as aged, new gear averse, and one that has occasionally been critical of the modern telemark newschool.
In the self-referential first edition of the TELE COLO magazine, released in the fall of 2023, team athlete Greg Yearsley was asked if he had to pick a fight with telemark, what would it be over. And he redrew the line in the sand. “It always blows my mind when people get their Targas in a twist over what other people are doing,” Yearsley said, referring to the G3 Targa, a binding long used by many telemark skiers of the previous generation, and that has become a symbol of a bygone era.
Whether as action or reaction, some figures prominent in telemark’s past have taken issue with what they feel is the newschool’s implied assertion that they are the first to tread this path, with many noting a similar newschool telemark scene first existed several decades ago.
Josh Madsen, arguably once the leading voice in all of telemark, himself took exception to Menetre’s piece in SKI via his once weekly podcast. “What this doesn’t do is act like all of this stuff existed beforehand. Because it did,” Madsen said forcefully. “It literally sounds like something from 25 years ago where it’s like ‘we’re fighting the hippies man, screw the hippies! And all the granola eating people, and let’s make cool, rad stuff.’ I mean, that’s like my era.”
Though many found much of the episode to be self-serving and antagonistic–and Madsen never recovered from that reaction, since fading from view and closing his iconic telemark-specific ski shop–the former filmmaker and newschool skier of the previous generation has been echoed by others.
In an Instagram comment regarding an article about TELE COLO’s 2024 film tour (written by the author of this piece), Dave Bouchard–himself a member of that original newschool who organized extreme skiing and park competitions for the New England Telemark club in the 2000s–noted “these guys [TELE COLO] are doing great stuff. I don’t wanna take anything away from them, but this stuff was going on in the 2000s. New England Telemark was putting on park and pipe contests and offering $3000 prizes. I had guys like Madsen…flying into New England to compete because no one else was doing anything close for telemark skiing.”
Feeling handcuffed by the expectations that they defer to the old guard, feeling its ubiquity stifling, newschool athletes and figures have often been quick to react to these comments, most typically TELE COLO athlete Greg Yearsley. In response to Bouchard’s comment, Yearsley retorted: “can one thing be posted about [TELE COLO] without someone bringing up the 2000 tele scene? Getting real old. Do we need to have the history of telemark added to every video?”
Coccia himself feels this clash has become pervasive in telemark. “It’s a very real aspect of what’s going on. You don’t really have to be in tele all that long or at all to see that friction,” he says.
“Whether it’s prompted by events that are happening, or tricks that are happening, or the gear that’s happening, those seem to be kind of the topics of friction that tends to happen on these forums and Instagram and shit.”
Much like the wider modern world, the internet has become not only the chief conduit of the telemark subculture, but also its chosen battleground, where debates over preferred gear, technique, and even approach have framed the modern discussion on the sport.
“There are repeat offenders,” says Coccia of the often anonymous online profiles who purposefully strike a counterpoint to the telemark newschool.
“But somehow you’ll see a new person that repeats the same theme, too. So you kind of wonder; is it really just like three or four people or is it a shared ideology or kind of resistance against whatever you want to call telemark at this point in time,” he wonders.
Though newschool figures often mirror Coccia and respond in measured tones, a darker underbelly to the dialogue has also emerged, where a collective defense of the modern newschool has at times been adversarial, even bullying, best exemplified by the Instagram account @freeheelwaifu–an anonymous, since deleted handle created to bash Madsen in the wake of his controversial podcast.
The account’s posts–some of which used suicidal symbolism to smear Madsen–were liked by many figures central to the newschool telemark movement, further cementing the polarized internet dialogue on free-heel skiing.
A screen grab from the since deleted freeheelwaifu Instagram account.
Fitful or not, something has indeed changed in telemark. Amidst a gear revolution that has brought the sport into the modern fold, a contemporary interpretation of the free-heel method has emerged from a nascent newschool. But while the sport now enjoys a certain cachet amongst a younger and trendier cohort, the new school and the old guard are often strange bedfellows. While more often than not the two groups are merely stereotypes, they nonetheless represent opposing notions.
How much that plays out in truly human interactions is an open question. While the newschool seems to feel the need to claim the ground they stand on, and some of the old guard appear bent on receiving a toll of respect for what they did first, much of it seems isolated to the wilds of the internet and the origin story and branding of the new wave; newschool skiing having always positioned itself as the antidote to a staid status quo. Between people, telemark may well be more harmonious than it appears.
But this online discourse now frames the telemark experience–and is widely consumed. And after years of rampant fears that free-heel gear would become more and more unavailable, and that telemark could indeed die, the existential tension surrounding the sport’s future has been replaced with an internal friction that may not embody the entire telemark experience, but is nonetheless ever-present.
Still, it seems telemark is having a moment. At last a younger generation–using the tools at their fingertips in social media–has not just joined the elder cadre that kept the flame alive through a fraught few decades; they have injected the sport with a fresh energy that has buoyed the scene and its commerce. And that has not gone unnoticed by the old guard.
“I’ve got nothing against the new crop of tele skiers, I love that they are keeping the turn alive,” says Dave Bouchard. “The turn and the fun of the turn is what has created a subcategory of skiing that lives on.”
Still, even when concluding in positive terms, a certain contrast remains. “From what I’ve seen from the TELE COLO crew is they want to have fun with the turn. But there’s nothing I’ve seen on TELE COLO social media that I haven’t seen in the last 20 years prior except for maybe gear. People still are out there getting after it and sharing the love of the turn,” Bouchard says.
A former heavyweight of French broadcasting, Gilles Pélisson arrived at Unifrance at a moment of transition for France’s film and TV promotion body. Three years after taking over the presidency — following a long tenure as CEO of leading commercial network TF1 — Pélisson now oversees an organization reshaped by structural merger with TV France International, tightening funding sources and a rapidly changing marketplace.
Forming a dynamic duo with Unifrance’s managing director Daniela Elstner, Pélisson had set clear goals from the outset. “The first priority was to consolidate the association’s fundamentals, particularly its funding,” he says in an interview with Variety just before the start of the Unifrance Rendez-Vous in Paris, pointing to the importance of securing Unifrance’s largely public financial base. Support from National Film Board (CNC) was “renewed and significantly increased, by €2 million per year,” a development he describes as “extremely important.” At the same time, Unifrance “strengthened our partnership with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs,” enabling the launch of new initiatives such as ‘Tomorrow in sight,’ a new label celebrating young voices of French cinema and television.
Pélisson, who previously headed Accor, Eurodisney and Bouygues Telecom before taking the helm of TF1, has also been able to tap into “private-sector support” to “complement public funding” in backing Unifrance. As such, Pélisson was the driving force behind the creation of the Unifrance endowment fund in 2024. The results are already tangible, with “three major partners on board: Accor Group, BNP Paribas and Champagne Pommery,” giving the organization “a more stable and resilient financial foundation,” he says.
Pélisson has also worked hand-in-hand with Estlner to expand Unifrance’s footprint at major international festivals, developing Unifrance Clubs “in Cannes, but also in Berlin and Venice.” These hubs are designed to bring together French delegations, talent and international press, with the aim of creating “exceptional conditions that encourage exchanges, visibility and a strong collective presence for French cinema abroad.”
Three years after the merger with TV France International, Unifrance is now operating “as a single team promoting both French cinema and audiovisual works.” The results, Pélisson notes, speak for themselves: “‘Les Gouttes de Dieu’ won at the International Emmy Awards,” while “‘HPI’ has also been a major international success.” Together, he says, “these successes create real pride and confirm that this strategy makes sense.”
But Pélisson is also conscious of the volatility of the box office for indie movies. Commenting on the international B.O. results in 2025, he says French films reached “around 42 million admissions,” a figure he calls “encouraging given the current context,” with standout titles including The Oscar-winning Latvian animated film “Flow,” Luc Besson’s “Dracula” and the TAT-produced animated fare “Falcon Express.” Ultimately, he sees animation and international co-productions as the two key trends bolstering the international presence of French cinema at festivals and in theaters. In the U.S. – a market he sees as “weakened” due to shorter theatrical windows — Unifrance is active with several key events such as the Rendez-Vous with French Cinema in New York, the Unifrance Trophy in Los Angeles and masterclasses in American universities.
As Unifrance enters its next phase, Pélisson is optimistic about appeal of local filmmakers, producers and talent. “The richness of French production remains intact,” he says, pointing to “The Phantom of the Opera” starring Deva Cassel and Romain Duris; a new adaptation of “Les Misérables” directed by Fred Cavayé and starring Vincent Lindon and Tahar Rahim; and Antonin Baudry’s two-part saga “De Gaulle” from Pathé. There is also a new film by Arthur Harrari starring Lea Seydoux.
What do you see as your biggest achievements at Unifrance so far?
The first priority was to consolidate the association’s fundamentals, particularly its funding, which remains largely public. Support from the CNC was renewed and significantly increased, by €2 million per year, which is extremely important. We also strengthened our partnership with the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, which enabled us to launch new initiatives such as ‘Tomorrow in sight.’ Procirep also continues to be a very strong and committed partner.
You have also diversified Unifrance’s sources of funding. Why was that important?
We wanted to complement public funding with private-sector support. That is why we created a Unifrance endowment fund in 2024. We are now seeing the results, with three major partners on board: Accor Group, BNP Paribas and Champagne Pommery. This gives the association a more stable and resilient financial foundation.
Unifrance has expanded its presence at major international festivals. What is the objective?
We have developed the Unifrance Clubs in Cannes, but also in Berlin and Venice. These spaces serve as hubs for French delegations, talent and the international press. The idea is to create exceptional conditions that encourage exchanges, visibility and a strong collective presence for French cinema abroad.
How do you assess the success of the merger between Unifrance and TV France International?
The merger process began before my arrival, and three years later we are fully into a new phase. We now operate as a single team promoting both French cinema and audiovisual works. “Les Gouttes de Dieu” won at the International Emmy Awards. “HPI” has also been a major international success, among others. These successes create real pride and confirm that this strategy makes sense.
Do the Rendez-Vous in Paris remain a key annual event?
Absolutely. They open the international year. We welcome around 500 buyers from all over the world and nearly 80 French companies, all under one roof. It is both a symbolic and highly effective showcase for French works.
You have also developed a more consumer-facing strategy with ‘MyFrenchStories.’ Why?
We wanted to speak directly to audiences, particularly younger viewers and those who do not always have access to cinemas. Digital platforms offer a powerful tool. ‘MyFrenchStories’ features short-form content — interviews, creative insights from composers and screenwriters — that explains cinema from the inside and helps reconnect audiences with the theatrical experience.
Supporting emerging talent remains a core mission?
Absolutely. The 10 to Watch initiative is a major pillar of our strategy. These talents are showcased in Paris and Cannes, then supported internationally throughout the year, from Tokyo to New York. It is a genuine visibility accelerator and a key part of Unifrance’s role.
How do you rate the international performance of French cinema today?
It requires a great deal of humility. International box office results do not automatically mirror domestic performance. Some films that perform modestly in France can do extremely well abroad, and vice versa. For example, films like “Dracula” or “Jane Austin a gâché ma vie” did not perform strongly in France but became real hits internationally. In 2025, we are slightly up on last year, at around 42 million admissions, which is encouraging given the current context.
Which films stood out internationally in 2025?
In 2025, “Flow” clearly stood out as the French coproduction film that performed best internationally. With almost 4M admissions, “Dracula” is the best French film in terms of box office in 2025, followed by “Falcon Express” with 2.3 million admissions.
What major trends are you seeing?
Two key trends stand out: animation and international co-productions. French animation, in particular, is exceptionally strong, driven by the creativity of its writers and studios. It remains an area in which France is a global leader. Films like “Arco” are archetypal of French animation: strong storytelling and creativity. Unifrance has a solid relationship with the Annecy Animation Film Festival which will continue even more in the future. We also see a good momentum around international co-productions.
You mentioned that minority French productions play an important role in the international figures. How so?
When we talk about international performance, we also have to look at films where France is a minority co-producer. These films are part of our ecosystem and contribute to the overall strength of French cinema abroad. This year, for example, you have titles like “I’m Still Here”, which is a Brazilian movie with French minority participation, “A Secret Agent” and “Sentimental Value”. These films may not always be perceived as “French” by the general public, but they are very important for us, both in terms of artistic presence and international circulation. They show that French involvement in international co-productions is significant, and that our influence goes well beyond strictly majority French films.
Streaming platforms remain a sensitive issue. Why?
Because of the lack of transparency. We have very clear data for theatrical box office and linear television, but very limited visibility for platforms, even though films are being released in over 150 countries. This lack of data is damaging for the industry, for the understanding of a film’s life cycle, and for the proper valuation of works.
Have the United States become a more challenging market?
Yes, undeniably. Shortened theatrical windows weaken cinema exhibition. Going to the movies in the U.S. has almost become a militant act. That said, theaters still play a crucial symbolic role in creating value and prestige, including for platforms, and this role has not disappeared. There are also distributors like Neon and Sony Classics that are resilient and believe in French cinema.
How does Unifrance operate in the U.S. market?
Through events. Rendez-Vous with French Cinema in New York, the Unifrance Trophy in Los Angeles, masterclasses in American universities… For one week, French cinema can truly resonate in a major city like New York. And of course, we are fully behind the Oscar Campaigns of our French productions, especially regarding the film “It Was Just an Accident” by Jafar Panahi – shortlisted for Best International Film.
Are you optimistic about the years ahead?
Yes. The richness of French production remains intact, with many first features, major upcoming projects and a very strong presence in international festivals. France remains the second most selected country after the United States. That is a powerful signal. There are also many ambitious projects coming up this year. We have films like “The Phantom of the Opera”, a new adaptation of “Les Misérables” a period film by Fred Cavayé, and the two-part saga on de Gaulle. There is also a new film by Arthur Harrari starring Lea Seydoux. These are projects with clear international reach.
ALEXANDRIA, La. (WNTZ) — Louisiana State University of Alexandria has appointed Ryan Riche as dean of the College of Health and Human Services, university officials announced this week. Riche succeeds Jeff Langston, who has served as dean for the past two years and has transitioned into the role of chief operating officer for the university. […]
Powder aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission.
Stellar Equipment has flown relatively under the radar as far as outerwear brands go, but the Scandinavian brand is not to be overlooked. Founded in 2015, Stellar EQ is fairly new to the scene and takes a direct-to-consumer approach. Their gear, however, is not to be overlooked and comes in at an almost sneaky good quality. The Stellar Free 2.5 kit sits in their lineup as a lightweight freeride shell jacket and bib and is made to be taken into all conditions, easy to move in, and look good while doing so.
Part of Stellar EQ’s ethos is to build products that truly have all the features skiers want. It’s clear how much attention to detail the brand has when it comes to things like pocket placement, bib straps, and fit. It’s also somewhat refreshing for a brand to pay so much attention to the styling of their outerwear. As baggy outerwear (a return to 2007) makes a comeback, sizing up to achieve steeze seems to be the way with most brands. However, Stellar EQ has spent a lot of time on the fit of their products to give them an inherently stylish look, while not being truly oversized. As a result, the technical details don’t get lost in all that extra fabric.
In short, if we were to give the Stellar Equipment Free 2.5 kit a yearbook superlative, it would probably be something like “Most Unexpected Success Story.”
Stellar Equipment Free Shell 2.5 Kit Specs
Sizes: S, M, L, XL, XXL (men’s only)
Fit: Loose & baggy fit
Material: 3L Dermizax NX
Colors Available: Olive, Khaki, Black (men’s and women’s)
Sizing and Fit
Like we mentioned before, Stellar EQ basically built the “baggy freeride” look into the Free Shell 2.5’s sizing. I wore both the jacket and pants in a size medium, which, while definitely on the larger side for me at 5’5” and 120lbs, still had my preferred amount of roominess without feeling unusually oversized. Our 6’0″ 195lb Gear Editor Max Ritter tested the kit in XL and found the kit fit similarly baggy, and loved it. The bibs have velcro adjustable shoulder straps, which also helps with the age old problem of backpack strap-buckle rub on bib suspenders. When worn by a friend who is 5’8”, the jacket was long enough to cover her bum due to the extended fabric in the back.
If you’re someone who prefers less fabric, you could stick true to size in this kit and still have a bit of steeze, or even size down if you’re hoping for something truly fitted.
Nice and baggy, but not too oversized.
Mckinley Pillsbury
In the Field
I tested the Stellar Free 2.5 kit on a couple of stormier, windy days at Mt. Bachelor as well as on a couple short tours in mild weather. Based on the out-of-the-box (actually, the cool little mesh bag this kit comes in!) quality of the jacket and pants, I felt confident quickly that the PFAS-free membrane would be notably waterproof and durable. Not only was it both of these, but the fabric showed no signs of affect from snow or water at all. I’d have few qualms about skiing in the rain in this kit, except for the normal qualms of skiing in the rain. The bibs were also particularly durable, especially around the cuffs and the gaskets were plenty stretchy without feeling like they’d wear out or over stretch over multiple seasons. I wouldn’t recommend doing so, but I did put these on while already in my boots (in a particularly dire situation) and didn’t have much worry or difficulty doing so.
A pass pocket makes this a suitable jacket for in-bounds or backcountry skiing.
Mckinley Pillsbury
The Stellar Free 2.5 Jacket was packed with features alongside the great fabric that made it stand out as a high-quality, dependable shell jacket for any condition. It has two deep chest pockets as opposed to hip pockets, which I’ve loved in other jackets as well and always find myself happy to have. Large, two way pit zips are a bonus to this jacket’s breathable fabric when it comes to warmer days or touring in it. Although this jacket has no issues for big backcountry days, it also has an RFID pass pocket on the sleeve for resort skiing. The main zipper is a two-way zipper, which proves handy, but can be a bit hard to zip up and occasionally comes undone from the bottom. The jacket’s hood also doesn’t quite fit over a helmet, even a small one, for full protection, but is certainly better than nothing on super stormy days.
The hood comes up a little short when worn over a helmet.
Mckinley Pillsbury
The Free 2.5 bibs stood out a bit more than the jacket as a truly fantastic piece of gear. Waterproof fabric covers as much as a pair of pants would and then extends into a meshy upper piece that stops mid-chest. There are belt loops if you prefer to wear a belt with your bibs, but the aforementioned velcro straps are also great. Both legs have roomy slant pockets as well as thigh pockets with a beacon hardpoint and little meshy inner pocket on the right leg. For walking uphill, the fabric was super breathable and even in a bit of an oversized fit, I never felt like I was inundated with extra material. Most importantly, the 2.5 bibs have a zippered bathroom flap–whoever designs bibs without that feature in 2026 should be imprisoned. I truly loved these bibs and they will undoubtedly remain a staple ski piece for me.
Max skied with this kit during the rainiest early season he’s ever experienced in nearly a decade of living in Jackson Hole, and was VERY impressed by both the waterproofing and breathability of the Dermizax fabric, saying “this really gives Gore-Tex Pro a run for its money.”
Velcro, lots of pockets, meshy uppers, check.
Mckinley Pillsbury
What Type of Skier is the Free 2.5 Kit Best For?
The Stellar Free 2.5 Shell jacket and bibs are for hard charging freeriders who are looking for a kit to do it all for years to come. Both pieces come in at a fairly high price point (jacket $679 USD, bibs $579 USD) and in a few muted color options (black, olive, khaki). If you are going to drop the cash on this kit planning to really use it for years to come, know that this kit will hold up and the quality is well worth the price. This kit will take you as deep into the backcountry as you want and similarly keep you cozy and sheltered on resort storm days.
“One Battle After Another” has further strengthened its long-touted position as the movie to beat this awards season, landing atop the lineup of longlisted titles following the first round of voting for the 2026 BAFTA Film Awards.
Paul Thomas Anderson’s epic, scathing and increasingly topical political satire about U.S. extremism and polarization came away with 16 nods after voting across 25 categories — the highest since the longlist round was first introduced in 2021. Predictably, alongside best film, director and adapted screenplay, it dominated the performance lists, with Chase Infiniti, Leonardo DiCaprio, Teyana Taylor, Benicio Del Toro and Sean Penn all making it through to the next round.
Following on its heels, a tight pack of films is led by Chloe Zhao’s “Hamnet” and Ryan Coogler’s “Sinners,” which landed 14 longlist slots each. Right behind, Josh Safdie’s “Marty Supreme” earned 13 nods, with Yorgos Lanthimos’ “Bugonia” and Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein” all receiving 12. Meanwhile, “Sentimental Value” and “Wicked: For Good” both found spaces on eight lists (down from the 10 the first “Wicked” earned last year, with Jon M. Chu again missing out on director but Cynthia Erivo in the mix despite recent SAG and Critics Choice snubs).
Alongside the expected big names in the race, there was good news for British films too. “I Swear” and “Pillion” landed on six lists and “The Ballad of Wallis Island” on five, including the performance categories. Robert Aramayo and Peter Mullan from “I Swear,” Harry Melling and Alexander Skarsgard from “Pillion” and “Wallis Island’s” Carey Mulligan all got through to round two.
“Wallis Island” and “I Swear” also managed to earn enough love from BAFTA voters to find themselves on the 10-strong best film longlist, as did “Nuremberg,” which earned six slots overall.
When it comes to snubs, some may be surprised that Jafar Panahi’s Palme d’Or-winning “It Was Just an Accident” didn’t manage more than two longlist mentions beyond original screenplay and film not in the English language. “The Secret Agent” landed in the same lists as “It Was Just an Accident,” but notably walked away empty handed for lead star Wagner Moura, still considered an Oscars potential. And for all its growing buzz, “Sirāt” also managed just two, for casting and film in the English language (and not, as many might have expected, for sound).
Meanwhile, many major films tipped early on for awards glory came away with even fewer nods. “The Smashing Machine” found space solely in make-up and hair list, “Jay Kelly” landed a supporting slot for Adam Sandler, while “Hedda” emerged with a leading actress slot for Tessa Thompson. Despite acclaim and multiple award nominations on home soil, local titles “Urchin” (the directorial debut of Harris Dickinson) and “My Father’s Shadow” also earned just one longlist space each (Akinola Davies Jr.’s “My Father’s Shadow” unexpectedly didn’t even make the outstanding British film list). As for complete shut-outs, “After the Hunt” and “The Testament of Ann Lee” were entirely absent.
As ever, all may change dramatically when the full list of nominations is announced on Jan. 27 (minus the Rising Star award nominees, which are unveiled on Jan. 14). Then it’s over to the BAFTA Film Awards ceremony itself, which will take place Feb. 22 at London’s Royal Festival Hall with Alan Cumming on hosting duties for the first time.
See all the longlists below.
BEST FILM
“The Ballad of Wallis Island”
“Bugonia”
“Frankenstein”
“Hamnet”
“I Swear”
“Marty Supreme”
“Nuremberg”
“One Battle After Another”
“Sentimental Value”
“Sinners”
OUTSTANDING BRITISH FILM
“28 Years Later”
“Ballad of a Small Player”
“The Ballad of Wallis Island”
“Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy”
“The Choral”
“Die My Love”
“Goodbye June”
“H Is for Hawk”
“Hamnet”
“I Swear”
“Mr. Burton”
“Pillion”
“The Roses”
“Steve”
“Warfare”
OUTSTANDING DEBUT BY A BRITISH WRITER, DIRECTOR OR PRODUCER
In December 2012, POWDER magazine released the fourth issue of its forty-first volume, marking the first full season of publication for the eminent title since the devastating, paradigm-shifting avalanche at Tunnel Creek, Washington, an event that fundamentally changed skiing.
The accident just outside the boundary of Steven’s Pass ski area was sweeping in its scope. Sixteen individuals from disparate backgrounds—professional skiers, ski media luminaries, freeride comp pioneers, and local skiers—were involved. The tragedy would take three lives, and quickly reverberated through the ski world. Tunnel Creek was so impactful, its influence so wide-reaching, that it not only shifted the discussion on safety and mortality in the modern backcountry skiing movement, but its coverage by John Branch of The New York Times in a sweeping multimedia piece would win a Pulitzer Prize. The accident and the media surrounding it together marked an inflection point for the skiing culture.
And in that issue of POWDER (known as ‘the black cover’), editor and writer Matt Hansen would contribute his own sprawling exploration of skiing’s then seemingly all-too-close relationship with death in “Nature’s Feedback: Why Are So Many of the Best Skiers Dying?”POWDER had found itself not only covering the accident at Tunnel Creek; fellow editor John Stifter was a member of the party involved in the avalanche. The publication that had long touted itself as the core skier’s magazine had come to a crossroads after Tunnel Creek and a wider rash of deaths in skiing, and looked within.
“Even before last winter, the ski industry had been quietly grappling with a troubling trend: Too many of its best athletes were getting killed. Memorials and remembrances were becoming all too frequent,” Hansen wrote. “Every fall, magazines like this one roll out yet another tribute to another dead skier—the editors trying to balance paying respect to a hero and a friend while celebrating the search for deep powder, big air, and the next phenomenal athlete willing to go bigger, faster, farther than the last guy.”
From the loss of freeride innovators Jamie Pierre and Sarah Burke, who both passed away just months before Tunnel Creek, to the rise of the modern but often more risky forms skiing was taking in the backcountry, Hanson dissected not only the break-neck progression in all avenues of skiing—including a revolution in backcountry equipment and the seemingly limitless progression in park and air—he wondered how the skiing culture at large, including POWDER, had perhaps contributed to what seemed like a brinkmanship affecting skiing writ large.
“Throw in the fact that resorts, ski brands, and media—including this magazine—actively promote the cool factor of skiing beyond the ropes, plus the influence of social media—the constant game of over-sharing, self-promotion, and one-upmanship—and it seems that if you’re not out there killing it every day, you risk being left behind,” Hansen wrote.
The spate of deaths, perhaps not least of all the accident at Tunnel Creek, and the subsequent reflection by the media of what may have contributed to them together marked a seminal moment for skiing. Articles like Hansen’s and Branch’s were rare and poignant contemplations in a ski world often prone to escapism, and looked at the mosaic of factors— from approaches to avalanche safety to the rising impact of social media and the role sponsors played—and broadly wondered how the ski revolution, complete with modern gear, skiing, and ethos, had come to such a juncture.
Shane McConkey.
But POWDER’s attempt to inject ski culture with a perhaps needed dose of metacognition reflected the still complicated endeavor of discussing death in skiing. Some readers were taken aback by Hansen’s article, expecting stoke and perhaps lighter fare from the core title, long known for celebrating the skiing lifestyle. Regardless, that year marked a sea change in ski media, forever altering how publications would approach weightier subject matter; topics that were then, and remain, divisive in skiing.
“It was a really important story about a lot of the tragedies of the most well-known professional skiers of that time,” prominent outdoor writer and long-time POWDER contributor Megan Michelson, who was present at the Tunnel Creek avalanche, remembers of “Nature’s Feedback.” “But it was a real downer, and so readers were angry about it. They get their POWDER magazine because they want to read about fun trips and cool people and new gear. They don’t want to read about ‘skiing is killing everybody.’”
POWDER’s ‘black cover’ would mark an early step in what would be a transformation at the magazine. And the complicated response to that issue would mirror the complicated topics at hand. “I think the response was pretty mixed,” John Stifter, former editor-in-chief at POWDER, now a licensed physiotherapist, who was invited to ski Tunnel Creek that day in 2012 with photographer Keith Carlsen while working on a piece on night skiing, says. “I think some people wanted us to continue to kind of be chicken soup for the skier soul and not get into kind of more political stuff, especially climate change. And then other folks were like ‘right on,’ you know, like ‘way to be honest and way to point the mirror back at yourselves and realize your role in this.’”
Writer Matt Hansen recalls the article as being surprising for readers, but along different lines. “I can’t speak for readers obviously, and if I remember correctly, I think it kind of shocked people, and we put it right on the cover,” he says. “I think people appreciated the fact we were taking on these hard topics instead of just writing fluff all the time.”
Speaking over the telephone from Jackson, Wyoming, by way of a Steamboat Springs cell phone number, Hansen, who was a writer and editor at POWDER for over fourteen years, reflected on what was a pivotal time in skiing and at POWDER. “We had come through and were seeing a troubling trend in skiing. We were celebrating all of these amazing achievements and the pursuit of life in the mountains, which is super worthy, and yet we were being hit–it seemed quite frequently–by a lot of skiers not coming home and dying in the mountains,” Hansen noted in the call. “And we were trying to grapple with this on the edit staff. How can we continue to celebrate skiing without recognizing the very real dangers and the very real and tragic consequences that sometimes come with it?”
Ski media was then grappling with giving their reader base what would drive them to subscribe and read, versus a cycle of hard news that many publications felt was their responsibility to report. And skiing had then endured a rash of tragedy.Beyond professional skiers like Burke and Pierre, and in addition to the seismic impact of Tunnel Creek, multitudes of local heroes and luminaries had also recently died skiing, including skiers like Steve Romeo, a long-time Jackson, Wyoming local and creator of the seminal backcountry skiing blog TetonAT, who himself and his skiing partner Chris Onufer passed away in an avalanche just weeks after Tunnel Creek. As the modern skiing experience coalesced along technologically ascendant lines, where equipment, films, and social media had together reached a tipping point of progression, something seemed amiss as many notable skiers were losing their lives. Part of the challenge for ski media was to present the topic to an often escapist skiing world.
“That’s an age-old dilemma for journalists, but especially ski journalists,” Michelson says, before detailing the importance and nuance of reporting and consuming deeper topics in skiing. “If we don’t talk about the hard stuff, whether it’s climate change or affordable housing or politics, then obviously we’re not fully participating as responsible humans in this activity because skiing is fun and it’s an escape, but it’s also part of this much bigger ecosystem,” she notes.
That ecosystem includes a skiing world where those difficult topics often struggle to find purchase, and where the discussion is often met with negative reaction. Hansen noted in “Nature’s Feedback” that the late Robb Gaffney, a prominent skier and filmmaker in 1990s Tahoe who later became a psychiatrist, was interviewed for an NBC segment in early 2012 that reported on the spate of deaths occurring in skiing. Gaffney noted that the death of Shane McConkey—a trailblazing skier who died in a ski BASE/wingsuit accident in 2009—was perhaps not unrelated to the pressure he felt to push the envelope for his sponsors.
Hansen noted how an anonymous user vehemently disagreed with Gaffney (and perhaps NBC’s characterization of Gaffney’s points) in a comment posted on the topic on Steve Romeo’s TetonAT. The user hurled a pejorative at Gaffney before continuing: “I remember him growing up and have now lost respect for him,” the user wrote of Gaffney. “A bunch of awesome people have been dying and trying for a very long time; skiers, climbers, boaters, surfers, soldiers, etc… What has changed is the widespread publicity and shear (sic) numbers willing to try. The line in the sand is most of this (sic) people would have done their passions despite the camera and glory. Personal enjoyment, progression and responsibility can’t really be measured at the f-ing news desk!”
HBO’s Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel, the venerable sports television newsmagazine, itself covered backcountry skiing and the rise in accidents in April of 2012, with correspondent Jon Frankel interviewing Tanner Hall, Chris Davenport, J.T. Holmes, and Elyse Saugstad, who had just months earlier survived the Tunnel Creek avalanche. While the segment was informative, it was also produced for wider consumption outside of the skiing nucleus. The prominent display of Tanner Hall and his ski-bro persona seemed to be used as a vehicle for novelty for a general public unlearned in ski slang and vibe. Frankel also described backcountry skiing in somewhat sensationalist terms, saying in a monologue that “for Hall, and a lot of diehard skiers these days, the ultimate test isn’t at a ski resort or in a halfpipe, it’s here, in what’s called the backcountry; the steepest, most daunting mountains on earth.”
While Real Sports’ coverage of backcountry skiing was notable, some felt its tone and analysis leaned heavily into characterizing professional skiing as perhaps reckless without grounding the discussion in the reality of what backcountry skiing entails for most, leading skiers, and ski media outlets, to criticize their coverage. In reaction, SKI, perhaps the most mainline ski magazine, noted in a review of the episode that “Last night, HBO’s look at backcountry skiing on Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel lived up to our predicted expectations by grossly sensationalizing backcountry skiers as reckless, Red Bull-fueled adrenaline freaks with a death wish.”
McConkey’s death, which was referenced in the Real Sports segment and preceded Tunnel Creek by several years, was part of the rash of losses then occurring in skiing, and similarly, if in perhaps less directly relatable ways, brought to the fold questions of limits and safety in skiing. But the wider discourse on McConkey’s death coalesced along different lines than Tunnel Creek would, reflecting a ski culture’s typical coming to terms with fallen heroes.
Matchstick Productions, the core skiing movie house that McConkey was long affiliated with, subsequently produced a documentary released in 2013 that was distributed by Red Bull Media, the energy drink-turned extreme icon arbiter who was perhaps McConkey’s most notable sponsor. Hero worship was deserved for the skier who not only pushed the limit in extreme skiing but also played a significant role in the modern ski equipment paradigm. But while accolades were deserved, a deeper treatise on the topic—outside of articles like Hansen’s—is often little discussed in such instances, especially in a branded ode to the departed.
In differing ways, media from the likes of POWDER and Matchstick Productions marked a response from the skiing nucleus; a perhaps more introspective reflection from the subculture itself on what was then occurring. While the spate of deaths received additional, at times illuminating coverage from media like NBC and HBO’s Real Sports, the mainstream media’s treatment of core ski culture is often taken up when that news is provocative, and many in skiing recoil at such coverage, feeling it rarely includes requisite nuance.
But the continued loss of skiers and subsequent introspection that occurred changed the discourse in skiing in a way only a careful, expert analysis could. “We felt like it was time to address it,” Hansen says. “And we weren’t the only ones at the time. The ski community was starting to sit up and be like ‘okay, well all of this progression we’re seeing, all of these amazing things, there’s a very real consequence to it if you make a mistake or if you have a tiny misread of the conditions.’”
And perhaps the most thorough discussion of danger and death in modern skiing—especially in the backcountry—ironically came from the mainstream media in John Branch’s seminal, Pulitzer Prize and Peabody award-winning New York Times multimedia article “Snow Fall,” which was released contemporaneously with Hansen’s piece featured in POWDER.
Speaking to the paradigm shift then occurring in skiing and ski marketing, Branch poignantly touched on the broad mechanisms present in the culture’s relationship with danger, echoing Matt Hansen of POWDER when he noted that “marketing shifts have coincided with a generation raised on the glorification of risk. From X Games to YouTube videos, helmet cameras to social media, the culture rewards vicarious thrills and video one-upmanship. This generation no longer automatically adheres to the axiom of waiting a day for safer conditions. The relative placidness of inbounds skiing is no match for the greater adventure of untamed terrain.”
But aside from astutely detailing snow science, the rise of back- and sidecountry skiing (and the problematic nature of the latter term), and his brilliant treatment of the role decision making plays in any group taking to a dangerous endeavor, “Snow Fall” was notable for its intimate portrayal of the individuals who were impacted, interviewing those involved in the rescue effort and loved ones who lost partners in the accident, giving the discussion on paying the ultimate price skiing unique nuance. Branch’s inclusion of desperate 911 dispatch recordings, texts from loved ones checking in after hearing of the slide, and candid video interviews by gutted partners added complex hues to the discourse on risk and death in skiing, perhaps never quite captured before, or since. It marked an intimate, difficult reality seldom encountered in ski media. Something POWDER would continue to lean into in the coming years.
Branch had accomplished not only a seminal article touching on human nature, decision making, and why people take to seemingly trivial, dangerous, yet deeply meaningful pursuits—an almost Homeric approach to skiing akin to works on climbing—his piece stands as amongst the modern ski movement’s most metacognitive literature, not least of all in regards to loss and death.
Former POWDER editors Matt Hansen (left) and Mike Rogge (right), 2011.
Still, the scope of covering serious topics in skiing remains a fraught endeavor. Readers often expect more aspirational stories from ski media, and perhaps they should consider the sport’s foundation in fun and escapism. And, through social media, readers now have more ability than ever to circulate snippets showcasing that perspective, while the platform also grants an ability to criticize how a publication might take to weightier issues, especially considering the devolved political discourse.
Still, skiing is unavoidably impacted by broader topics like mortality.
“I do think it’s super important that we have people…who are covering these hard topics,” writer Megan Michelson says before noting the challenges of chasing these stories. “There’s less people doing that nowadays because it’s harder to make a living doing it. So I think you have to dance the fine line through. Maybe for every five stories you write about something hard, you also pick a fun piece just so that you remember why you got into this in the first place. And because readers need that break.”
Further elaborating on the shift in content that occurred at POWDER, and the consensus for moving that direction, former editor John Stifter notes that “when I became editor [just two months after Tunnel Creek], it was pretty obvious we couldn’t continue to ignore our culpability in that as POWDER. We’re publishing these photos; we’re celebrating these trends of people getting out there, and so it was just a real, personally for me, it was a real pause and reevaluation.”
Moreover, former POWDER editor Mike Rogge, whose tenure at the magazine coincided with both Hansen’s and Stifter’s, asserts that the magazine shifted its stance markedly after the accident at Tunnel Creek, and that the title’s focus on safety presaged a pivot to a broader, perhaps more thoughtful approach that, in his mind eventually doomed the magazine in its previous iteration.
“The Steven’s Pass avalanche is kind of what really changed everything at POWDER,” Rogge told Mike Powell on The Powell Movement podcast in December of 2021.
“I think, unfortunately, we went too far in the direction of safety, we got a little preachy, and I think ultimately the downfall of the magazine was that we had decided pretty clearly that we wanted to focus more on big issues affecting skiing,” Rogge said on the podcast. “And not on the reason why we all got into it, which is the love, and the joy, and the hilarity, and the absurdity of what it means to be a skier. And that was what made POWDER what it was, not making it The New Yorker or The Atlantic of skiing. That was our downfall.”
Stifter disagrees with characterizing that period as a downfall, though he agrees with Rogge generally. “In my twelve years at the magazine, we went through four buyouts. So, I don’t really think it’s too much to do with specific coverage,” Stifter says. “I do think that people may have started to roll their eyes a bit at some of our coverage and just thought, ‘hey, like look, you guys are a ski magazine at the end of the day. You’re not investigative journalists. Stick to skiing more.’”
“I think where he’s totally right is I think the business model led to the downfall. But that’s not to say that coverage didn’t have an impact on that. I mean it was definitely a different magazine than what you picked up in 2006. I would say that.”
While Rogge’s own Mountain Gazette occasionally delves into larger topics, it also focuses heavily on story-telling, while the mainstream skiing discourse continues toward a social media and gear listicle-leaning nature (though audience-facing models seem to be gaining traction there), perhaps showcasing that while articles like Hansen’s and Branch’s changed the narrative around mortality in skiing, it could only go so far in a ski world whose very essence is perhaps a counterpoint to metacognition.
In a line from “Nature’s Feedback,” one that used a refrain the late Steve Romeo long used, Matt Hansen cognated on threading the needle between skiing’s experiential side and the occasional need for deeper reflection:
“With so many fatalities and near misses, some people are starting to think skiers need to change their approach, maybe take a step back from the edge,” Hansen wrote. “Romeo’s mantra, which he often quoted on TetonAT, was ‘Live to Ski.’ But in a time that’s seen so much tragedy, maybe it’s time to live to ski…another day.”
Stevens Pass, Washington.
Shutterstock/Cascade Creatives
Today, the discussion on safety in skiing is integral to the discourse. And ski media’s response to events like the accident at Tunnel Creek has had a lasting impact on its inclusion. Avalanche centers and classes have made articles like the POWDER multimedia piece “The Human Factor,” a broad exploration of safety in skiing, required reading. Even heavier nonskiing topics like mental health have become mainstays in the ski media narrative.
But while the sport has always been quick to eulogize those lost skiing, a deeper reflection on mortality is still often missing. Mirroring the broader culture’s typical approach to the topic, skiing continues to hold death at arm’s length, often retreating to the comfort of hero worship and fond memory over analysis and reflection when in its shadow.
But writers like Matt Hansen poignantly note that those seemingly opposing discussions in skiing are not mutually exclusive. Speaking of the late Robb Gaffney, who similarly picked up the mantle of reflecting on what was then happening in skiing around 2012, Hansen notes that Gaffney “was saying just because we are having these conversations doesn’t mean that we can’t celebrate our heroes and it doesn’t mean that we can’t love them as much as we’ve always loved them, but let’s try to be honest about how people die in the mountains so that the rest of us can learn and so that we can pass those lessons on to other skiers so that we don’t go through this heartbreak of losing loved ones and friends.”
And though the current paradigm in ski media is little poised for diving deeply into thoughtful topics with its heavy lean on social media, gear, and experience, Tunnel Creek and the response to it forever affected skiing. “Our coverage totally changed from not only more responsible coverage of just avalanches, and also the decision-making, terrain, and all of that. But also looking at climate change and its impacts on mountain communities and what that looks like for the future,” Stifter says.
Still, it is perhaps only natural that the ski culture is often averse to discussing death and broader topics. Skiing is rooted in the moment and enjoying it. But while the sport and its lifestyle are based on that whimsical nature, a counterpoint of seriousness does lie at the terminal end of the experience. And, to many, avoiding those topics leaves the discourse incomplete.
Tunnel Creek may mark the seminal moment in modern skiing. It was but one in a slew of accidents then occurring in skiing, but was enormous in scope—both in how large and varied the group involved was—but also in how relatable the event continues to be. Many skiers, then and now, take to skiing like that group did. And the resulting metacognition and dissection of risk—and the reaction to it from the core skiing culture—has impacted not only how avalanches and safety are broadly discussed; it also showcased the complicated nature skiing publications face when diving into deeper subjects, and the complicated way the subculture’s readership reacts to those topics. With the success of many larger ski publications being tied to an internet-facing platform and its metrics, these articles, long-form and analytical, may find less avenue for discussion as time goes by.
But regardless of that, thoughtful writers like Matt Hansen and John Branch changed the narrative in skiing. No matter how quietly that legacy lives on, no matter how complicated its readership takes to those topics, it has indelibly influenced the skiing subculture.
“I get asked about that piece still,” Hansen says, nearly fourteen years on.
About The Brave New World of Skiing Column
This article was written by POWDER writer Jack O’Brien for his bi-weekly ‘Brave New World of Skiing’ column. Click below to read the previous column, ‘Your Favorite Outdoor Brand is Probably Struggling Right Now’.
Disney’s “Avatar: Fire and Ash” held the No. 1 position at the U.K. and Ireland box office for a third consecutive weekend, adding £4.4 million ($6 million) and lifting its cumulative total to £31.6 million ($42.8 million), according to Comscore.
Lionsgate U.K.’s erotic thriller “The Housemaid,” starring Sydney Sweeney and Amanda Seyfried, remained a strong second, pulling in $5.2 million in its sophomore frame to reach $16.7 million after two weekends.
Entertainment Film Distributors’ “Marty Supreme,” starring Timothée Chalamet, climbed to third place with $3.7 million, pushing its total to $8.1 million after two weeks in release. Disney’s “Zootopia 2” followed in fourth, grossing $2.8 million to bring its six-week total to $37.2 million.
Paramount’s “The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants” rounded out the top five, earning $1.6 million for a total of $8.1 million in its second weekend.
Further down the chart, Universal debuted Craig Brewer’s Hugh Jackman–Kate Hudson vehicle “Song Sung Blue” with $1.3 million and Sony’s “Anaconda” added $1.1 million for a $5.3 million running total.
Universal’s long-running hit “Wicked: For Good” continued its endurance run in eighth, grossing $820,000 and reaching a robust $62.9 million after seven weekends.
Trinity Filmed Entertainment’s Hong Kong action title “Back to the Past” debuted in ninth with $341,000, while Mubi’s “Sentimental Value” rounded out the top 10, adding $247,000 for a $821,000 cumulative total.
Upcoming releases begin on Thursday with Telugu-language title “The Raja Saab,” starring Prabhas, from Prathyangira Cinemas.
The first notable wide release of the new year arrives with Universal Pictures’ “Hamnet,” which rolls out to more than 300 locations. Directed by Chloe Zhao, the adaptation of Maggie O’Farrell’s bestselling novel stars Jessie Buckley and Paul Mescal, with Emily Watson and Joe Alwyn in supporting roles.
Also opening on Friday is Jim Henson’s fantasy classic “Labyrinth,” returning to cinemas for its 40th anniversary via Park Circus. The David Bowie–Jennifer Connelly title is set for a broad reissue across 100-plus sites.
On the specialty side, True Brit Entertainment releases boxing docudrama “Giant,” starring Pierce Brosnan and Amir El-Masry, while Dartmouth Films brings documentary “Becoming Victoria Wood.” Directed by Catherine Abbott, the film features contributions from Dawn French, Jennifer Saunders, Maxine Peake and Joan Armatrading.
