Thursday, May 15, 2008
Trajan, The Movie Font
Food For Thought for movie graphic designers, concerning the Trajan Font.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
1 Comments
Permalink
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Funny, Hollywood, Movie News, Videos
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
No, I never slept with Diablo Cody...
...Nor did I meet her at the now infamous hangout, which I won't mention here, or people will start asking me to give tours.
I am tired of people asking though.
A: "Hey Conrad, I hear Diablo Cody wrote the screenplay for Juno at [undisclosed location near my house]! That's right near your house, right?"
Me: Sigh. "Yeah."
A: (Excitedly) "Did you ever see her?"
Me: (Not Excitedly At All) "Oh, all the time."
A: (Really Excitedly) "Really?
Me: "Yeah, at The Skyway Lounge..."
What bothers me is that people aren't able to separate "Diablo Cody, The Screenwriter" from "Diablo Cody, The Former Stripper From Minnesota Who Hung Out At [undisclosed location near my house]".
It's like people are having a hard time realizing that any talent could come from Minnesota. It's like saying she's from Atlantis or something. She's originally from Chicago anyways, not that it matters. I hope for her sake that she's able to break away from her own history, and the rest of the world can realize that there are talented people in every state, in every occupation. I suppose this *would* be news to Hollywood.
I also can't help but to think that the media coverage of Diablo Cody is designed to get a bunch of Would-Be Screenwriters down to Hollywood to flush out all those Whining Screenwriters who dared to go on strike. Nothing against Diablo Cody, she's talented and deserves credit, but it does seem strange, the timing of it.
It's like Hollywood saying, "Who needs You! We can pick a Former Stripper From....(looks at map of U.S.)... Minnesota who can writer better than you! So there!"
For the record; if Minneapolis becomes the new Hollywood, I'm moving to Atlantis.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
4 Comments
Permalink
I am tired of people asking though.
A: "Hey Conrad, I hear Diablo Cody wrote the screenplay for Juno at [undisclosed location near my house]! That's right near your house, right?"
Me: Sigh. "Yeah."
A: (Excitedly) "Did you ever see her?"
Me: (Not Excitedly At All) "Oh, all the time."
A: (Really Excitedly) "Really?
Me: "Yeah, at The Skyway Lounge..."
What bothers me is that people aren't able to separate "Diablo Cody, The Screenwriter" from "Diablo Cody, The Former Stripper From Minnesota Who Hung Out At [undisclosed location near my house]".
It's like people are having a hard time realizing that any talent could come from Minnesota. It's like saying she's from Atlantis or something. She's originally from Chicago anyways, not that it matters. I hope for her sake that she's able to break away from her own history, and the rest of the world can realize that there are talented people in every state, in every occupation. I suppose this *would* be news to Hollywood.
I also can't help but to think that the media coverage of Diablo Cody is designed to get a bunch of Would-Be Screenwriters down to Hollywood to flush out all those Whining Screenwriters who dared to go on strike. Nothing against Diablo Cody, she's talented and deserves credit, but it does seem strange, the timing of it.
It's like Hollywood saying, "Who needs You! We can pick a Former Stripper From....(looks at map of U.S.)... Minnesota who can writer better than you! So there!"
For the record; if Minneapolis becomes the new Hollywood, I'm moving to Atlantis.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: Hollywood
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Why does Network Television Suck?
Did you know that Hollywood screenwriters are on strike?
I did.
Did you know that they came Off the strike that happened in 1989 (around the time that the first reality show COPS started up)?
I didn't.
Now I will have to come up with a new theory about why Network Television Programming is so bad.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
I did.
Did you know that they came Off the strike that happened in 1989 (around the time that the first reality show COPS started up)?
I didn't.
Now I will have to come up with a new theory about why Network Television Programming is so bad.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Movie Review: Spider Man 3
Ooooh, Ouch. Swing-and-a-Miss.
Spider Man 3 had a lot going for it before anyone set foot in the theatre. Cool villains picked out, lots of money for CG, perfect casting, and best of all, it had the coattails of Spider Man 1 and 2 to ride on. All that Sam Raimi had to do was have some lame thread tying the action scenes together, and it would be a big hit.
It is with a deep sadness that I report to you that he couldn't pull it off. Spider Man 3 is a soap opera rarely interrupted with action scenes, when it should have been the other way around. What really made the first two Spider Man movies great was the pacing; there was plenty of 'day-in-the-life-drama' in 1 and 2, but it was well balanced out with plenty of action, while Spider Man 3 drowns in its own sappiness. Spider Man cries more often than he fights anyone, and every character in the movie bursts into tears at least a dozen times. I almost cried myself, because the movie should have been much better.
At this point, I would like to shatter to a paradigm in Movies-Based-On-Comic-Books:
NEW VILLAINS DO NOT NEED TO HAVE THEIR GENESIS DURING THE MOVIE.
The creation of villains is often so contrived that it would make the movie better if they just left it out. The Batman movies should have taught us this, and the makers of the X-men movies prove that it works, but the Sam Raimi hasn't figured this one out yet. The genesis' of Sandman and the symbiotic suit known later as Venom, are so silly that you will wish they left them out and made the movie shorter.
That brings me to another paradigm-shattering point that I've brought up before, but since no one reads my blog, it never gets implemented:
MOVIES RARELY NEED TO BE OVER TWO HOURS LONG!
How about you make a movie that is one hour long, and charge half the price? This goes for all movies, but especially Spider Man 3, which forgot where the hell it came from: A Comic Book, not a Danielle Steele Novel.
While I'm at it, I will add this one:
ALL WOMEN ARE NOT HELPLESS!
I would appreciate it if we saw the 'woman dangling from a high place as bait for the superhero' LESS OFTEN. In fact, a female Super Hero (Like Dazzler? Ha! LOL! or maybe Dagger from 'Cloak and Dagger') or perhaps a female Super Villain (Belladonna? Plastique?) would be much appreciated.
By the way, my guess for one of the villains for Spider Man 4 will be The Lizard, since the character of Dr Curt Connors was introduced in 3. But, I think next time, I will wait for the reviews of 4 to come out before I go see it. If Spider Man 4 turns out to be another 3, I'll just wait for the DVD, it so I can scan past the boring parts, and cut the movie length down to a reasonable time.
I can tell you funniest part of the movie is that as Peter Parker wears the symbiotic suit for a longer period of time, it makes him look more and more like the lead singer for Panic at the Disco. Hysterical.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Spider Man 3 had a lot going for it before anyone set foot in the theatre. Cool villains picked out, lots of money for CG, perfect casting, and best of all, it had the coattails of Spider Man 1 and 2 to ride on. All that Sam Raimi had to do was have some lame thread tying the action scenes together, and it would be a big hit.
It is with a deep sadness that I report to you that he couldn't pull it off. Spider Man 3 is a soap opera rarely interrupted with action scenes, when it should have been the other way around. What really made the first two Spider Man movies great was the pacing; there was plenty of 'day-in-the-life-drama' in 1 and 2, but it was well balanced out with plenty of action, while Spider Man 3 drowns in its own sappiness. Spider Man cries more often than he fights anyone, and every character in the movie bursts into tears at least a dozen times. I almost cried myself, because the movie should have been much better.
At this point, I would like to shatter to a paradigm in Movies-Based-On-Comic-Books:
NEW VILLAINS DO NOT NEED TO HAVE THEIR GENESIS DURING THE MOVIE.
The creation of villains is often so contrived that it would make the movie better if they just left it out. The Batman movies should have taught us this, and the makers of the X-men movies prove that it works, but the Sam Raimi hasn't figured this one out yet. The genesis' of Sandman and the symbiotic suit known later as Venom, are so silly that you will wish they left them out and made the movie shorter.
That brings me to another paradigm-shattering point that I've brought up before, but since no one reads my blog, it never gets implemented:
MOVIES RARELY NEED TO BE OVER TWO HOURS LONG!
How about you make a movie that is one hour long, and charge half the price? This goes for all movies, but especially Spider Man 3, which forgot where the hell it came from: A Comic Book, not a Danielle Steele Novel.
While I'm at it, I will add this one:
ALL WOMEN ARE NOT HELPLESS!
I would appreciate it if we saw the 'woman dangling from a high place as bait for the superhero' LESS OFTEN. In fact, a female Super Hero (Like Dazzler? Ha! LOL! or maybe Dagger from 'Cloak and Dagger') or perhaps a female Super Villain (Belladonna? Plastique?) would be much appreciated.
By the way, my guess for one of the villains for Spider Man 4 will be The Lizard, since the character of Dr Curt Connors was introduced in 3. But, I think next time, I will wait for the reviews of 4 to come out before I go see it. If Spider Man 4 turns out to be another 3, I'll just wait for the DVD, it so I can scan past the boring parts, and cut the movie length down to a reasonable time.
I can tell you funniest part of the movie is that as Peter Parker wears the symbiotic suit for a longer period of time, it makes him look more and more like the lead singer for Panic at the Disco. Hysterical.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Monday, February 19, 2007
Movie Review: Ghost Rider
I saw Ghost Rider on Friday. I've been a long-time fan of the comic, and still have much of the first and second series(es?). I see the movie brought around enough interest to revive the comic for a third series, start up another limited-issue series (Trail of Tears) and got them funding to release the Finale of the second series, which got pulled when Marvel hit hard times in the 90's.
I had low expectations for the movie, (as those who read my previous blog posts would attest) and I would say that helped a lot, because I thought the movie was great. I hear it is doing well at the box office, so I might have been wrong to rail on them for refusing to let critics review the movie before it's release date. That is usually the Kiss of Death for movies, but it sounds like it might have been a good strategy, because the bad reviews from the critics could have had a huge effect on ticket sales.
As it was, the review-seeking public was pushed more towards bloggers and word-of-mouth, which (arguably) would give a more-favorable-than-average review, and almost certainly a more-favorable-than-a-real-movie-critic review. I mean come on, it's a comic book movie, not Cinema. Do you really think that Donald Logue will get Best Supporting Actor? People tell me he kind of looks like me. Or maybe it's that I kind of look like him...
I didn't mind that the movie took liberties with the original story, because what movies-remade-from-comix don't? And I didn't mind Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, although I thought I would. Cage has a goofy-cool about him which is hard to explain. I know he doesn't really act much, he's just that-a-way, but I'm not sure anyone else could have done this movie with the proper level of 'goofiness'. Johnny Depp maybe? Val Kilmer? (BTW, Where IS Val Kilmer?) Maybe Edward Norton? Certainly NOT Brad Pitt, and shame on you for even thinking such a thing.
John Cusack, that's it. He would have been a great Johnny Blaze. But Cage was fine.
The bad guys were cool, but Way too wimpy. I suppose they sacrificed quality for volume. Effects were typical Hollywood-Overdone, but hey, in Hollywood they say, "You want CG with that?" like it was French Fries or something. I would expect no less than to see Ghost Rider drive up one side of a skyscraper and down the other.
The story was just right. As a matter of fact, fighting off the elements of Air, Earth, Fire and Water is a great idea! Maybe I should write a book like that!
Oops, too late. I already did. Oh well, I guess there's plenty of room in the genre for interpretation. Besides, I think a sexy, dark, Asian female assassin who uses throwing knives and short swords is Way cooler than a biker with a flaming skull.
Way.
Sam Elliott did a tremendous job, reprising the voice and role of The Stranger from The Big Lebowski.
All in all a reasonable value for your entertainment dollar, er, eight-and-a-half dollars.
For those looking for a solid standalone Ghost Rider comic, Ghost Rider: The Road to Damnation 6-issue series is top-notch, both with art and story.
Flame on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I had low expectations for the movie, (as those who read my previous blog posts would attest) and I would say that helped a lot, because I thought the movie was great. I hear it is doing well at the box office, so I might have been wrong to rail on them for refusing to let critics review the movie before it's release date. That is usually the Kiss of Death for movies, but it sounds like it might have been a good strategy, because the bad reviews from the critics could have had a huge effect on ticket sales.
As it was, the review-seeking public was pushed more towards bloggers and word-of-mouth, which (arguably) would give a more-favorable-than-average review, and almost certainly a more-favorable-than-a-real-movie-critic review. I mean come on, it's a comic book movie, not Cinema. Do you really think that Donald Logue will get Best Supporting Actor? People tell me he kind of looks like me. Or maybe it's that I kind of look like him...
I didn't mind that the movie took liberties with the original story, because what movies-remade-from-comix don't? And I didn't mind Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, although I thought I would. Cage has a goofy-cool about him which is hard to explain. I know he doesn't really act much, he's just that-a-way, but I'm not sure anyone else could have done this movie with the proper level of 'goofiness'. Johnny Depp maybe? Val Kilmer? (BTW, Where IS Val Kilmer?) Maybe Edward Norton? Certainly NOT Brad Pitt, and shame on you for even thinking such a thing.
John Cusack, that's it. He would have been a great Johnny Blaze. But Cage was fine.
The bad guys were cool, but Way too wimpy. I suppose they sacrificed quality for volume. Effects were typical Hollywood-Overdone, but hey, in Hollywood they say, "You want CG with that?" like it was French Fries or something. I would expect no less than to see Ghost Rider drive up one side of a skyscraper and down the other.
The story was just right. As a matter of fact, fighting off the elements of Air, Earth, Fire and Water is a great idea! Maybe I should write a book like that!
Oops, too late. I already did. Oh well, I guess there's plenty of room in the genre for interpretation. Besides, I think a sexy, dark, Asian female assassin who uses throwing knives and short swords is Way cooler than a biker with a flaming skull.
Way.
Sam Elliott did a tremendous job, reprising the voice and role of The Stranger from The Big Lebowski.
All in all a reasonable value for your entertainment dollar, er, eight-and-a-half dollars.
For those looking for a solid standalone Ghost Rider comic, Ghost Rider: The Road to Damnation 6-issue series is top-notch, both with art and story.
Flame on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Friday, February 09, 2007
This is the NEW new shit
Marilyn Manson has been working on quite a few things: Fashion Shows, Art Galleries, New Album, New Religion (Celebritarian), Marriage, Lawsuits, a new line of Perfume...
...and a horror movie called Phantasmagoria.
I want to bring back the experiments in terror, which is actually a DVD that documents the attempts of 1944 filmmakers to insert subliminal elements. Whether in sound or in frames of the film, to enhance whatever tense or fear they're looking to create at that moment in the film. I think technology allows me to go much further than that. I'm going to do a lot of things that may end up being illegal. Until they are, I will do them. I think it will change people's opinion about horror films and they will realize they're not all about slasher.
No insult to Rob Zombie; People might predict that to be the type of film I would make. That's absolutely the opposite of what I want to do. That's not an interest of mine, anyway. If I had to pick, stylistically, people that I admire – it would be Ingmar Bergman, Roman Polanski, and modern filmmakers; Takashi Miike, who made the film Audition, and Gasper Noe who made I Stand Alone and Irreversible. It's kind of a return to Hitchcock-style psychological horror about letting your mind do the damage and sometimes what you don't see is scarier.
From http://www.mansonusa.com/celebritarian/?page=3
Do you SEE now why I love Marilyn Manson? This guy GETS IT! He fucking GETS IT! I'm bored to tears with Hollywood Horror movies like The Boogyman, Jeepers Creepers and all the I-Scream-While-You-Got-Stabbed-Last-Summer clones. Rob Zombie's movies top the list - they aren't worth a wad of used toilet paper, and are almost as horrific, which is to say; not at all.
Now whether M.M. can Follow Through on this big talk, or whether it turns out to be a pile of pretentious crap like Doppelhertz... I guess only time will tell. In the meantime, I would very much like to see him succeed.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
...and a horror movie called Phantasmagoria.
I want to bring back the experiments in terror, which is actually a DVD that documents the attempts of 1944 filmmakers to insert subliminal elements. Whether in sound or in frames of the film, to enhance whatever tense or fear they're looking to create at that moment in the film. I think technology allows me to go much further than that. I'm going to do a lot of things that may end up being illegal. Until they are, I will do them. I think it will change people's opinion about horror films and they will realize they're not all about slasher.
No insult to Rob Zombie; People might predict that to be the type of film I would make. That's absolutely the opposite of what I want to do. That's not an interest of mine, anyway. If I had to pick, stylistically, people that I admire – it would be Ingmar Bergman, Roman Polanski, and modern filmmakers; Takashi Miike, who made the film Audition, and Gasper Noe who made I Stand Alone and Irreversible. It's kind of a return to Hitchcock-style psychological horror about letting your mind do the damage and sometimes what you don't see is scarier.
From http://www.mansonusa.com/celebritarian/?page=3
Do you SEE now why I love Marilyn Manson? This guy GETS IT! He fucking GETS IT! I'm bored to tears with Hollywood Horror movies like The Boogyman, Jeepers Creepers and all the I-Scream-While-You-Got-Stabbed-Last-Summer clones. Rob Zombie's movies top the list - they aren't worth a wad of used toilet paper, and are almost as horrific, which is to say; not at all.
Now whether M.M. can Follow Through on this big talk, or whether it turns out to be a pile of pretentious crap like Doppelhertz... I guess only time will tell. In the meantime, I would very much like to see him succeed.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, Movie News, Ubercool
Movie Pre-reveiw - Ghost Rider
The mega-block-busting Spider Man and X-Men movies have opened the floodgates on the Comic-Book-To-Movie business, and for the last few years Hollywood has been tripping over itself to get them pumped out fast enough. Punisher, Daredevil, Elektra, The Hulk, Superman and The Fantastic Four are only the first wave; there are more to come. Spider Man 3 is on the way. Iron Man as well. Silver Surfer? Power Pack? I hear a Doctor Strange movie is in production. I am already in line.
Of all the upcoming comic-book movies, I've really been looking forward to the Ghost Rider, despite Nicholas Cage. I am still a huge Ghost Rider fan, and have almost the entire collection of the original series comics. As dreary as this article is, what it is Not telling you is that Ghost Rider was supposed to be released over a year ago, around Xmas 2005. It got bumped to Jan06, and then to summer 06, and then...well, I guess they couldn't hide the movie any longer. The foreknowledge that the producers don't want the movie reviewed by critics until After its release should help lower my expectations to a more reasonable level.
I will be seeing Ghost Rider, but you don't have to follow my example. It's too late for me, but for you there is still hope.
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Of all the upcoming comic-book movies, I've really been looking forward to the Ghost Rider, despite Nicholas Cage. I am still a huge Ghost Rider fan, and have almost the entire collection of the original series comics. As dreary as this article is, what it is Not telling you is that Ghost Rider was supposed to be released over a year ago, around Xmas 2005. It got bumped to Jan06, and then to summer 06, and then...well, I guess they couldn't hide the movie any longer. The foreknowledge that the producers don't want the movie reviewed by critics until After its release should help lower my expectations to a more reasonable level.
I will be seeing Ghost Rider, but you don't have to follow my example. It's too late for me, but for you there is still hope.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Fearless Filmmakers - Jan 07
I attended the Fearless Filmmakers last night. If you didn't go, here is a summary of what you missed:
The preview for Darkon got some MAJOR laughs. I can't wait for this to come out.
The Sleepy Eye crew were there with their latest work called 'Buzzkill'. The production was good, but it could easily have been cut in half (literally turn it off right in the middle), and made better. The movie hits the punchline, but drags that dead dog of a joke for another 4-5 min. Too long of a short? I guess you could say my attention span is that of an A.D.D. teen after a 6-pack of Red Bull.
Smokin Yogi Films showed the trailers for the pilot episode of 'Abnormally Normal'. I hated it about fifteen seconds in, and it went on for another ten minutes, the longest damn trailer I've ever seen. Makes me wonder how long the movie is. Maybe it just felt like ten minutes. I wanted to say that people with emotional problems shouldn't make movies, but then we wouldn't have movies. I also don't want to say that people shouldn't work out their emotional bullshit on film and pan it off as art, because we have got great films that were motivated by suffering and loss. I think Spoon nailed the problem; 'Abnormally Normal' is a drama. I don't think dramas work well as internet shorts, and at the very least, they can't compete with comedy in this market.
Uncle Forehead Filmworks showed "Suspension" which I thought was awesome and artsy, but a little laggy. Tension was built up pretty well, but the length could have been cut back on this one too. Good effects and mood music.
Kevin Meyers showed "Intermural Glory" a really funny thirty second spot...that went on for ten minutes. I guess this one has done really well on the net. If you like mockumentaries then you will most likely like this. What tends to make or break these is the character personalities, and whether the actors can pull them off. If they can, then you have a hit, and that seems to be the case with Intramural Glory. I am amazed at the level of work that goes into this production, they are an actual intramural basketball team, that tours and is looking for a sponsor. Clever marketing.
SER International Corp was the sleeper hit of the night, Jesus Christ Action Figure (With Water Walking Action). It actually got him death threats. It also got him the biggest laughs with the audience. SER also showed a series of commercials for Butterfinger candy bars Excellent, although you cannot credit SER with these, they simply picked the best from those who sent in homemade commercials. Cheating, if you ask me, but they were really funny.
Melody Gilbert showed some spots for Best Buy which were made for the companies internal website. Strange I thought, and she agreed during the panel discussion, as she isn't an Independent Filmmaker by any means. The spots were auditions of Best Buy Employees trying out to be in Best Buy commercials. (Sorry, they weren't Employees, we call them Blue Shirts...) It is pretty easy to make fun of people put on the spot in front of a camera, but she is getting paid to do it...
Of course, the real reason to go to this Fearless was to see the premier of Ryan Wood's Fear of Girls 2. The first installment was a work of genius and a web cult phenomenon, which attracted the attention of networks and landed Wood the funding for Fear of Girls 2 as well as the launch of a comedy website later this year. Finally, a real success story about a great moviemaker who makes entertaining movies. From the Midwest. Wow.
After the films, the moviemakers held a panel discussion about the 'viral market'.
The discussion was disappointing for me. The pitch was that these people had a grasp on the viral market, and were manipulating it to make money off internet short films. When asked about how they did it, they said, "...Um, we just put it on the interweb, and uh...got lots of hits...then Hollywood called, and we partied with Kevin Spacey. It was cool..."
Thanks. I suppose that was helpful if you don't know what viral marketing is. It occurred to me later that they never did define or explain how viral marketing works. Since I already knew, it didn't bother me.
Not one mention of SEO, Technorati, or Digg. If you're trying to schlepp your .mov on the internet, then you better be a master of all three. As far as online distribution, they mentioned Revver, YouTube, and Google Video. That's it. But that is not all that there is.
All in all a good time, a few pits to spit out, but the fruit was worth it. I think what really set apart the good from the bad here was pacing, and Ryan Wood even mentioned it. Someone asked what the 'standard' length of a 'short' was, he said it doesn't matter so much if the pacing is correct. Amen. Online video shorts are new territory, and you can tell the moviemakers are having a hard time trimming their projects down. I think they need to have the mentality of advertisement commercial makers, but make sure they are boiling down a good plot into a short with good pacing, and leaves the viewer wanting more, instead of fluffing up a funny idea into a short that is way too long.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The preview for Darkon got some MAJOR laughs. I can't wait for this to come out.
The Sleepy Eye crew were there with their latest work called 'Buzzkill'. The production was good, but it could easily have been cut in half (literally turn it off right in the middle), and made better. The movie hits the punchline, but drags that dead dog of a joke for another 4-5 min. Too long of a short? I guess you could say my attention span is that of an A.D.D. teen after a 6-pack of Red Bull.
Smokin Yogi Films showed the trailers for the pilot episode of 'Abnormally Normal'. I hated it about fifteen seconds in, and it went on for another ten minutes, the longest damn trailer I've ever seen. Makes me wonder how long the movie is. Maybe it just felt like ten minutes. I wanted to say that people with emotional problems shouldn't make movies, but then we wouldn't have movies. I also don't want to say that people shouldn't work out their emotional bullshit on film and pan it off as art, because we have got great films that were motivated by suffering and loss. I think Spoon nailed the problem; 'Abnormally Normal' is a drama. I don't think dramas work well as internet shorts, and at the very least, they can't compete with comedy in this market.
Uncle Forehead Filmworks showed "Suspension" which I thought was awesome and artsy, but a little laggy. Tension was built up pretty well, but the length could have been cut back on this one too. Good effects and mood music.
Kevin Meyers showed "Intermural Glory" a really funny thirty second spot...that went on for ten minutes. I guess this one has done really well on the net. If you like mockumentaries then you will most likely like this. What tends to make or break these is the character personalities, and whether the actors can pull them off. If they can, then you have a hit, and that seems to be the case with Intramural Glory. I am amazed at the level of work that goes into this production, they are an actual intramural basketball team, that tours and is looking for a sponsor. Clever marketing.
SER International Corp was the sleeper hit of the night, Jesus Christ Action Figure (With Water Walking Action). It actually got him death threats. It also got him the biggest laughs with the audience. SER also showed a series of commercials for Butterfinger candy bars Excellent, although you cannot credit SER with these, they simply picked the best from those who sent in homemade commercials. Cheating, if you ask me, but they were really funny.
Melody Gilbert showed some spots for Best Buy which were made for the companies internal website. Strange I thought, and she agreed during the panel discussion, as she isn't an Independent Filmmaker by any means. The spots were auditions of Best Buy Employees trying out to be in Best Buy commercials. (Sorry, they weren't Employees, we call them Blue Shirts...) It is pretty easy to make fun of people put on the spot in front of a camera, but she is getting paid to do it...
Of course, the real reason to go to this Fearless was to see the premier of Ryan Wood's Fear of Girls 2. The first installment was a work of genius and a web cult phenomenon, which attracted the attention of networks and landed Wood the funding for Fear of Girls 2 as well as the launch of a comedy website later this year. Finally, a real success story about a great moviemaker who makes entertaining movies. From the Midwest. Wow.
After the films, the moviemakers held a panel discussion about the 'viral market'.
The discussion was disappointing for me. The pitch was that these people had a grasp on the viral market, and were manipulating it to make money off internet short films. When asked about how they did it, they said, "...Um, we just put it on the interweb, and uh...got lots of hits...then Hollywood called, and we partied with Kevin Spacey. It was cool..."
Thanks. I suppose that was helpful if you don't know what viral marketing is. It occurred to me later that they never did define or explain how viral marketing works. Since I already knew, it didn't bother me.
Not one mention of SEO, Technorati, or Digg. If you're trying to schlepp your .mov on the internet, then you better be a master of all three. As far as online distribution, they mentioned Revver, YouTube, and Google Video. That's it. But that is not all that there is.
All in all a good time, a few pits to spit out, but the fruit was worth it. I think what really set apart the good from the bad here was pacing, and Ryan Wood even mentioned it. Someone asked what the 'standard' length of a 'short' was, he said it doesn't matter so much if the pacing is correct. Amen. Online video shorts are new territory, and you can tell the moviemakers are having a hard time trimming their projects down. I think they need to have the mentality of advertisement commercial makers, but make sure they are boiling down a good plot into a short with good pacing, and leaves the viewer wanting more, instead of fluffing up a funny idea into a short that is way too long.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, movie reviews
Friday, January 26, 2007
Blood and Chocolate
Looks like someone is trying to make a movie that's worse than Bloodrayne.
Blog on,
-CZ
3 Comments
Permalink
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: anti, Hollywood, Movie News, movie reviews, new release
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Fear of Girls 2
Hopefully, you have all seen Fear of Girls I
Fear of Girls 2 should be kicking about soon, and I just got to see it last weekend. Way, way funny. The talent behind this project is amazing, the writing, the acting, the direction, sound and lighting... but the best part is the timing. No, I take that back. The best part is that it is an indie film made here in Minnesota. Sadly, if you don't know what 'Hit Points' or 'Alignment' are, you might miss out on some of the humor.
Alright, so making fun of people who play D&D is easy (like cow-tipping), but after hearing multiple reviews of what a horseshit movie Eragonwas, I wish more indie films like Fear Of Girls 1 and 2 would rise up and tip the cow that is Hollywood right into the ocean of obscurity.
[Potential reality, years from now]
"Daddy, what is a Hollywood?"
"Well, you know how when we go to the zoo, and see all the wierd and interesting animals?"
"Sure, so Hollywood was like going to the zoo?"
"Kind of, except it was really expensive, and not as interesting; just wierd."
"Did they throw their own poo? (giggle)"
"They certainly did! They threw it all over the world, and they even named it; Star Wars - The Phantom Menace, Bloodrayne, King Kong, Eragon..."
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Fear of Girls 2 should be kicking about soon, and I just got to see it last weekend. Way, way funny. The talent behind this project is amazing, the writing, the acting, the direction, sound and lighting... but the best part is the timing. No, I take that back. The best part is that it is an indie film made here in Minnesota. Sadly, if you don't know what 'Hit Points' or 'Alignment' are, you might miss out on some of the humor.
Alright, so making fun of people who play D&D is easy (like cow-tipping), but after hearing multiple reviews of what a horseshit movie Eragonwas, I wish more indie films like Fear Of Girls 1 and 2 would rise up and tip the cow that is Hollywood right into the ocean of obscurity.
[Potential reality, years from now]
"Daddy, what is a Hollywood?"
"Well, you know how when we go to the zoo, and see all the wierd and interesting animals?"
"Sure, so Hollywood was like going to the zoo?"
"Kind of, except it was really expensive, and not as interesting; just wierd."
"Did they throw their own poo? (giggle)"
"They certainly did! They threw it all over the world, and they even named it; Star Wars - The Phantom Menace, Bloodrayne, King Kong, Eragon..."
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, Movie News, movie reviews
Monday, December 11, 2006
The new fez of Horror!!!
If this is the new trend in Horror movies,
http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/primeval/
http://www.tribute.ca/player/enhancePlayer.asp?isWM=1&isQT=1&filePath=Trailers&fileName=blackchristmas
Then somebody stop the fucking planet and let me off. Thanks to movies like The Grudge and The Ring and The [Fill in the blank] we now have to sift this crap off the shelf to get to the good horror movies.
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/primeval/
http://www.tribute.ca/player/enhancePlayer.asp?isWM=1&isQT=1&filePath=Trailers&fileName=blackchristmas
Then somebody stop the fucking planet and let me off. Thanks to movies like The Grudge and The Ring and The [Fill in the blank] we now have to sift this crap off the shelf to get to the good horror movies.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Director Review: Sam Raimi
Sam Raimi is a good director. I really liked his TV work (Xena, Cleopatra 2525, Hercules, Jack of all Trades, were all fair shows, (let's skip right by M.A.N.T.I.S., shall we?) But those were TV *action* shows.
Sam Raimi has no concept of Horror. NONE. The little naked kid dipped in flour and wearing mascara and dark contact lenses (typically played back with dropped frames) was pretty spooky...back when I first saw it in The Ring. But then it was done. And like any fad, that one got beat to death. I don't think there is a single video from Asia Tartan Extreme at Hollywood Video that Doesn't have a pic of the spooky kid on the cover. I've seen it so much now, that if I woke up in the middle of the night and saw the spooky kid hanging from my bedroom wall, I would tell him to piss off, roll over and go back to sleep. Sam still thinks it's scary, and bases entire movies around his No-Trick-Pony.
However, Sam has learned about the Sting. Sam knows that there is an instinctual thing that makes you jump, or gasp or scream in reaction to sudden visual or audio cues (Stings). This will always work, but it is NOT HORROR. It is a tool used in Horror Movies, but by itself it is no more Horror than a cup of flour is a pancake. (For example, The Forgotten, relied on Stings throughout the movie to keep the audience from falling asleep). No matter how many times I pretend to punch you in the face, and stop an inch from your eyes, you will blink. You can't not blink. Like I said, it is instinctual. Sam knows this, and he thinks this is Horror.
But it is not.
Because it ain't scary no more. That's right Sam. Not scary Sam. Like Crazins. Not Scary. Like Aspartame. Not Horror.
Of course Sam Raimi will probably never realize this, since he doesn't read my blog, and since he made about a bazillion dollars off the most unhorrifying horror movies ever made. The Boogyman and The Grudge. Yes, I saw them both. I even gave The Grudge the proper environment, watching it late at night with the lights off. Not Horror. Annoying perhaps, like being on hold with Comcast Tech Support, but not Horror.
Using stings as a crutch to make your unscary Flour-Boy seem scary is not Horror. It is Startling. It is Jarring. It is going to cause even normal people to launch into an epileptic seizure. Of course it is also going to make him another bazillion dollars when he does it again in Grudge 2. Check out the trailer here. Warning: May induce epileptic seizures.
We need to come up with a different genre for this dogshit. When I go to the Horror section to rent a Horror movie, I want to see something Horrific. Startling alone is not Horror, and does not count. Put it in the Jumpy section.
Hey Sam, here is an idea for Grudge 3, just run a black slate for 90 min, and randomly drop in a couple still pix with a giant audio hit. Watch the crowd jump! Best part is the pictures can be of anything at all, and the crowd will still jump!
"Oh my God, an Ostrich!"
"AAA! Crazins!"
"Holy Shit! A little boy dipped in flour! Did you see that?"
"Oh! I think I'm having a seizure!"
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
Sam Raimi has no concept of Horror. NONE. The little naked kid dipped in flour and wearing mascara and dark contact lenses (typically played back with dropped frames) was pretty spooky...back when I first saw it in The Ring. But then it was done. And like any fad, that one got beat to death. I don't think there is a single video from Asia Tartan Extreme at Hollywood Video that Doesn't have a pic of the spooky kid on the cover. I've seen it so much now, that if I woke up in the middle of the night and saw the spooky kid hanging from my bedroom wall, I would tell him to piss off, roll over and go back to sleep. Sam still thinks it's scary, and bases entire movies around his No-Trick-Pony.
However, Sam has learned about the Sting. Sam knows that there is an instinctual thing that makes you jump, or gasp or scream in reaction to sudden visual or audio cues (Stings). This will always work, but it is NOT HORROR. It is a tool used in Horror Movies, but by itself it is no more Horror than a cup of flour is a pancake. (For example, The Forgotten, relied on Stings throughout the movie to keep the audience from falling asleep). No matter how many times I pretend to punch you in the face, and stop an inch from your eyes, you will blink. You can't not blink. Like I said, it is instinctual. Sam knows this, and he thinks this is Horror.
But it is not.
Because it ain't scary no more. That's right Sam. Not scary Sam. Like Crazins. Not Scary. Like Aspartame. Not Horror.
Of course Sam Raimi will probably never realize this, since he doesn't read my blog, and since he made about a bazillion dollars off the most unhorrifying horror movies ever made. The Boogyman and The Grudge. Yes, I saw them both. I even gave The Grudge the proper environment, watching it late at night with the lights off. Not Horror. Annoying perhaps, like being on hold with Comcast Tech Support, but not Horror.
Using stings as a crutch to make your unscary Flour-Boy seem scary is not Horror. It is Startling. It is Jarring. It is going to cause even normal people to launch into an epileptic seizure. Of course it is also going to make him another bazillion dollars when he does it again in Grudge 2. Check out the trailer here. Warning: May induce epileptic seizures.
We need to come up with a different genre for this dogshit. When I go to the Horror section to rent a Horror movie, I want to see something Horrific. Startling alone is not Horror, and does not count. Put it in the Jumpy section.
Hey Sam, here is an idea for Grudge 3, just run a black slate for 90 min, and randomly drop in a couple still pix with a giant audio hit. Watch the crowd jump! Best part is the pictures can be of anything at all, and the crowd will still jump!
"Oh my God, an Ostrich!"
"AAA! Crazins!"
"Holy Shit! A little boy dipped in flour! Did you see that?"
"Oh! I think I'm having a seizure!"
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, Movie News, movie reviews, Ubersuck
Friday, August 11, 2006
Movie Review: Guardian of the Realm
[Ed Note: This movie review is dedicated to pattonjr5. See? I don't just watch blockbuster movies...]
Xtina and I were walking through our local Hollywood Video, and the cover of this DVD caught her eye.
"Oh my Gawd," she said, "Would you *Look* at this!"
"Ewww," I said, and made the face I usually reserve for people who put vinegar on their French Fries.
It was pretty bad. Scratch that - it was Mega-Bad. In a bad way. The cover was something I would never have even picked up off the shelf, a screaming blue face with poorly CG-ed hooks pulling on the skin. Whatever picture you have in your head right now, this was worse.
Not wanting to judge a DVD only by its cover, I immediately read the back. Turning the DVD over revealed a much Much MUCH better graphic, Tanya Dempsey (whom we All remember from The Coven, right? Um, Right?) holding a wicked looking shiv, in a total hero pose. I read the blurb on the back - a group of cultists unwittingly release a demon into LA, and two demon-hunters have to track it down.
Hmm, sounds familiar, since that's the basic premise of the book I'm currently writing, with the exception that my story is set in Minneapolis. I'm certain that there are plenty of demons walking around LA right now, but that town is so fucked up that no one notices. If a demon popped up here in flyoverland, we would be rolling out that giant semi truck with the big lightning-beam-gun-thing, and those trucks with the fifty or so rockets on it, that you see in the Godzilla movies (Yes, we have those.)
But I digress.
The plot outline alone was worth the three dollar rental; call it 'research' if you like, but honestly I'm always game for quality indie horror, although I know that sounds as much of a oxymoron as Jumbo Shrimp or Reality TV. But, I assure you it is out there, you just need to be brave, and take chances, and not be afraid to slog through a lot of shit to find the good ones. (They aren't even Crap, they are Shit, plain and simple).
So J-manand Spooncame over, and bravely volunteered to give 'Guardian of the Realm' a right proper MST3K viewing with the obligatory 2-drink minimum.
Wow. I was more than just pleasantly surprised. The movie refused to accept indie-mediocrity, and strove for a standard movie formula. They refused to let their own shortcomings hold them back, as so many B-grade horror films do. (By adding in Laughably Bad Effects or dialog, preposterous plot jumps, breaking the fourth wall, etc...) This is the movie I think a lot of indie horror filmsters wish they could make, and I wish more of them would try. Not that all indie filmers should take themselves seriously, but rather, the specific genre of B-Horror films could do better with their budgets, and remember that fake blood and bad jokes are no substitute for good writing.
This isn't to say that the movie was not funny. I mean, come on; when the demon-slayer is yelled at by his boss for wearing too much black leather? When the slain demons dissolve into Styrofoam packing peanuts? Spoon had a good point, "why didn't they use kitty litter?" Good question.
The acting varied, but the main characters were solid, likeable and even more-or-less believable. I was able to hold the dialog in check with a small suspension of disbelief.
The plot was really good, and well thought out. Maybe a touch contrived, but then again, if the plot involves supernatural beings, you gotta contrive a bit.
The music throughout the movie was bad. Not really bad, but just plain, lower-case-b bad. The music over the end credits was phenomenal, and made me want to bust out all my Enigma and Delirium CDs... Sound as a whole was OK, a little quiet overall, and when the demons talked it sounded like someone used every single audio effect plug-in at once.
The makeup job for the demons is better than I expected. I have always preferred monster-type monsters (Aliens, The Thing, etc...) to humans wearing masks, but I realize how difficult this is to pull off without blowing the HokeyMeter off the charts, and I have come to accept the contacts/mask/fangs/makeup as a reasonable 'monster' facsimile in lower budget films. I am not as forgiving for bigger budgets (you heard me, Star Trek...)
The CG deserves special mention, because the movie has plenty of After Effects in it. Mostly the FX were OK, but the elevator scene was unnecessary and overdone, and the ending turns a little 'ghostbuster-ish' with the sky and all.
The fight scenes were top notch. Tasteful wire-work, and short, solid bursts of fighting, which accentuated the story without becoming the story, like in many martial arts flicks. (...which is what makes them "martial arts" flicks, I suppose.)
...And what of the cover? The screaming blue face with the hooks through it? It had NOTHING to do with the movie whatsoever. (Although it looks the way I imagine Hollywood would look if I told it that 'Guardian of the Realm' was a better movie than 'King Kong'...) So the lesson of this sermon is not to judge movies solely based on the cover art.
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Xtina and I were walking through our local Hollywood Video, and the cover of this DVD caught her eye.
"Oh my Gawd," she said, "Would you *Look* at this!"
"Ewww," I said, and made the face I usually reserve for people who put vinegar on their French Fries.
It was pretty bad. Scratch that - it was Mega-Bad. In a bad way. The cover was something I would never have even picked up off the shelf, a screaming blue face with poorly CG-ed hooks pulling on the skin. Whatever picture you have in your head right now, this was worse.
Not wanting to judge a DVD only by its cover, I immediately read the back. Turning the DVD over revealed a much Much MUCH better graphic, Tanya Dempsey (whom we All remember from The Coven, right? Um, Right?) holding a wicked looking shiv, in a total hero pose. I read the blurb on the back - a group of cultists unwittingly release a demon into LA, and two demon-hunters have to track it down.
Hmm, sounds familiar, since that's the basic premise of the book I'm currently writing, with the exception that my story is set in Minneapolis. I'm certain that there are plenty of demons walking around LA right now, but that town is so fucked up that no one notices. If a demon popped up here in flyoverland, we would be rolling out that giant semi truck with the big lightning-beam-gun-thing, and those trucks with the fifty or so rockets on it, that you see in the Godzilla movies (Yes, we have those.)
But I digress.
The plot outline alone was worth the three dollar rental; call it 'research' if you like, but honestly I'm always game for quality indie horror, although I know that sounds as much of a oxymoron as Jumbo Shrimp or Reality TV. But, I assure you it is out there, you just need to be brave, and take chances, and not be afraid to slog through a lot of shit to find the good ones. (They aren't even Crap, they are Shit, plain and simple).
So J-manand Spooncame over, and bravely volunteered to give 'Guardian of the Realm' a right proper MST3K viewing with the obligatory 2-drink minimum.
Wow. I was more than just pleasantly surprised. The movie refused to accept indie-mediocrity, and strove for a standard movie formula. They refused to let their own shortcomings hold them back, as so many B-grade horror films do. (By adding in Laughably Bad Effects or dialog, preposterous plot jumps, breaking the fourth wall, etc...) This is the movie I think a lot of indie horror filmsters wish they could make, and I wish more of them would try. Not that all indie filmers should take themselves seriously, but rather, the specific genre of B-Horror films could do better with their budgets, and remember that fake blood and bad jokes are no substitute for good writing.
This isn't to say that the movie was not funny. I mean, come on; when the demon-slayer is yelled at by his boss for wearing too much black leather? When the slain demons dissolve into Styrofoam packing peanuts? Spoon had a good point, "why didn't they use kitty litter?" Good question.
The acting varied, but the main characters were solid, likeable and even more-or-less believable. I was able to hold the dialog in check with a small suspension of disbelief.
The plot was really good, and well thought out. Maybe a touch contrived, but then again, if the plot involves supernatural beings, you gotta contrive a bit.
The music throughout the movie was bad. Not really bad, but just plain, lower-case-b bad. The music over the end credits was phenomenal, and made me want to bust out all my Enigma and Delirium CDs... Sound as a whole was OK, a little quiet overall, and when the demons talked it sounded like someone used every single audio effect plug-in at once.
The makeup job for the demons is better than I expected. I have always preferred monster-type monsters (Aliens, The Thing, etc...) to humans wearing masks, but I realize how difficult this is to pull off without blowing the HokeyMeter off the charts, and I have come to accept the contacts/mask/fangs/makeup as a reasonable 'monster' facsimile in lower budget films. I am not as forgiving for bigger budgets (you heard me, Star Trek...)
The CG deserves special mention, because the movie has plenty of After Effects in it. Mostly the FX were OK, but the elevator scene was unnecessary and overdone, and the ending turns a little 'ghostbuster-ish' with the sky and all.
The fight scenes were top notch. Tasteful wire-work, and short, solid bursts of fighting, which accentuated the story without becoming the story, like in many martial arts flicks. (...which is what makes them "martial arts" flicks, I suppose.)
...And what of the cover? The screaming blue face with the hooks through it? It had NOTHING to do with the movie whatsoever. (Although it looks the way I imagine Hollywood would look if I told it that 'Guardian of the Realm' was a better movie than 'King Kong'...) So the lesson of this sermon is not to judge movies solely based on the cover art.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, movie reviews
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Solstice Film Festival
The Solstice Film Festival begins today, and continues through the 25th. I think it is way overdue that Minnesota has it's own celebration of film, for the following reasons
1-There are many talented local people here in 'flyoverland'. Actors, filmmakers, musicians, audio producers... And there are even a few without issues and egos who can put together a decent film.
2-The world should be made aware that Minnesota is NOT LIKE ICELAND. In Iceland, all there is to do is drink, fish, and write progressive rock music. In Minnesota, we drink, fish, write progressive rock music AND make independent films. If you ever get confused, just remember Iceland has Bjork, Minnesota has Anna Lee (and that purple symbol guy, but we don't really talk about him anymore...)
3-Network television is a pitiful abomination. Watching it should make you either angry or depressed. Except maybe Public Television Channel 2.
I know Devin Halden and Bobby Marsden (ringleader of the local Fearless Filmmakers showings) have worked their tails off to help bring the Solstice Film Fest together.
I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in independent film check it out, and pretty soon the rest of the world will be calling Minneapolis "MinneWood" (wait a minute, that isn't such a great name after all.) OK, maybe Minnesota can be known as "New Hollywood" or "WinterWood" or something. Fine, maybe it should just stay Minnesota, but at least we can be known for having some talent other than tolerating temperatures of -1 degree Kelvin.
Blog on,
-C
0 Comments
Permalink
1-There are many talented local people here in 'flyoverland'. Actors, filmmakers, musicians, audio producers... And there are even a few without issues and egos who can put together a decent film.
2-The world should be made aware that Minnesota is NOT LIKE ICELAND. In Iceland, all there is to do is drink, fish, and write progressive rock music. In Minnesota, we drink, fish, write progressive rock music AND make independent films. If you ever get confused, just remember Iceland has Bjork, Minnesota has Anna Lee (and that purple symbol guy, but we don't really talk about him anymore...)
3-Network television is a pitiful abomination. Watching it should make you either angry or depressed. Except maybe Public Television Channel 2.
I know Devin Halden and Bobby Marsden (ringleader of the local Fearless Filmmakers showings) have worked their tails off to help bring the Solstice Film Fest together.
I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in independent film check it out, and pretty soon the rest of the world will be calling Minneapolis "MinneWood" (wait a minute, that isn't such a great name after all.) OK, maybe Minnesota can be known as "New Hollywood" or "WinterWood" or something. Fine, maybe it should just stay Minnesota, but at least we can be known for having some talent other than tolerating temperatures of -1 degree Kelvin.
Blog on,
-C
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, Minneapolis Event
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Book Review: $30 Film School
I just finished Michael W Dean's $30 Film School. The subtitle is "Write, Finance, Direct, Produce, Shoot, Edit, Distribute, Tour With, and Sell Your Own No-Budget DIGITAL Movie." The target market is absolute newbies, (like myself) who don't know the difference between a producer and a director.
The Bad:
If you cut out every "I" in this book and taped them together they would circle the Earth. Twice. I wish authors would get their damn credentials, near-death-drug-rehab-and-how-it-changed-their-life-forever experience, and the worthless name-dropping out of the way in Chapter One so I can skip it and get to the 'how to' stuff I picked up the book to read about.
I didn't like the way Michael would beg people to work for him for free, and then piss and moan when they didn't come thru for him. Publishing the pissed off letter to someone who let you down is Childish, especially when the person was working for free (or not working for free, which makes as much sense).
Later in the book, he says "Film is built on relationships..." and "...it's all about people". Right. I have a feeling this man is good at making movies by himself, because no one will work with him.
The Good:
If you can sift thru the self-important bullshit, the rest is surprisingly good and chock-full of useful information. It has lots of useful tips on creating a movie yourself, everything from camera angles to format conversions, to duplication and distribution, clever methods for getting your film 'out there' and a good intro to contracts, copyrights and such.
I thought the best part of this book was the motivation. Michael W. Dean is clearly about the art, and wants you to be as well. Not quite Anti-Hollywood, but more Un-Hollywood. He doesn't mind living meagerly as long as he can make his art and get it out to people. He is one of the few people whose marketing practices I agree with: start by making talented art, and with a little legwork and some flyers, the world will bring an audience to you. Film it, and they will come...
The very very very best advice of all: Don't do art for the money. While Michael might be an arrogant flake, I must admit he is an arrogant flake with artistic integrity.
The last chapter of his book made me want to make an independant movie. (Wait a minute, I just did. Almost forgot) OK, it made me want to make another.
I give the book an 8 of 10. It could have been a 9 if he had taken out all references to himself (then it could have been shorter and named "$25 Film School"). It could have been a 9.5 if he didn't live in California, thriving in the center of the very industry and people he makes fun of.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The Bad:
If you cut out every "I" in this book and taped them together they would circle the Earth. Twice. I wish authors would get their damn credentials, near-death-drug-rehab-and-how-it-changed-their-life-forever experience, and the worthless name-dropping out of the way in Chapter One so I can skip it and get to the 'how to' stuff I picked up the book to read about.
I didn't like the way Michael would beg people to work for him for free, and then piss and moan when they didn't come thru for him. Publishing the pissed off letter to someone who let you down is Childish, especially when the person was working for free (or not working for free, which makes as much sense).
Later in the book, he says "Film is built on relationships..." and "...it's all about people". Right. I have a feeling this man is good at making movies by himself, because no one will work with him.
The Good:
If you can sift thru the self-important bullshit, the rest is surprisingly good and chock-full of useful information. It has lots of useful tips on creating a movie yourself, everything from camera angles to format conversions, to duplication and distribution, clever methods for getting your film 'out there' and a good intro to contracts, copyrights and such.
I thought the best part of this book was the motivation. Michael W. Dean is clearly about the art, and wants you to be as well. Not quite Anti-Hollywood, but more Un-Hollywood. He doesn't mind living meagerly as long as he can make his art and get it out to people. He is one of the few people whose marketing practices I agree with: start by making talented art, and with a little legwork and some flyers, the world will bring an audience to you. Film it, and they will come...
The very very very best advice of all: Don't do art for the money. While Michael might be an arrogant flake, I must admit he is an arrogant flake with artistic integrity.
The last chapter of his book made me want to make an independant movie. (Wait a minute, I just did. Almost forgot) OK, it made me want to make another.
I give the book an 8 of 10. It could have been a 9 if he had taken out all references to himself (then it could have been shorter and named "$25 Film School"). It could have been a 9.5 if he didn't live in California, thriving in the center of the very industry and people he makes fun of.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Book Review, Hollywood, indie movies
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Movie Review: Star Wars Episode IV - A New Hope
While I have seen Star Wars IV less than a dozen times throughout my life, I thought it would be fun to rewatch/rereview it.
Let me start by saying Star Wars IV should have won an award for the most preposterous cover art of all time. The rippling chest of the Luke Skywalker with the light saber held aloft like an Olympic Torch is some kind of bad joke. The supposedly sexy exposed leg of Princess Leia is more like looking at nude pictures of your sister. Not a single picture of the Death Star, the Millennium Falcon, Han Solo or Chewbacca. But, let me not judge a movie too harshly on its cover.
The story is really good, possibly one of the best. The plot traces the beginning of the classic "Hero's Journey" by Campbell adapted into a well-conceived Sci-Fi universe. The history and mythos of the Star Wars universe was developed before this small story of Luke Skywalker and Friends, and that adds a richness and depth the the story seldom seen nowadays. This is the kind of plot movies used to have before the Hollywood Writer's Strike, and the advent of 'reality' media.
The characters are all strong, and interesting with their own motivations, and distinctive personalities that develop quite well. (For instance: The tension between Skywalker/Leia/Solo.) Don't get used to this.
Unfortunately, the pacing is something George Lucas will fight with through the remainder of this series and never perfect. Some parts drag on forever, and then some parts blast by so fast that you will look to see if someone isn't sitting on the remote control, and mashing the FFWD button. Plot jumps in this movie would set Olympic records. The time between Princess Leia's rescue and the arrival of the Death Star at the Rebel Base is about, oh, thirty seconds or so. And how exactly does the Death Star follow the Millennium Falcon through hyperspace? No time to dwell on that, Scramble the X-Wings!
The CG is top-notch for a movie made in 1977. What was the competition? Dr Who? Lost In Space? They had nothing on this movie. Any glitches in Episode IV are negligible when compared to what it must have taken to make the FX in this movie happen. This is exactly why it is hard to rate this movie now, because it was so ahead of it's time then, but the technology is so outdated now. I heard an interview with George Lucas where he said one reason he started with the fourth movie in the series was that it was the least technical in terms of FX, and that the technology just wasn't there to pull the other movies off, but that's a load of donkey bollocks. I suspect that Episode IV was just a better plot than Episode I (come to think of it, I'm certain of it.) and more likely to pull in some funding.
If I time-warped back to 1977, I would have given Episode IV a 10 out of 10. The minor issues are heavily outweighed by the originality of the story and the good use of FX. If this movie were released today, probably an 8, mostly because it would lose it's +2 bonus for being ahead of its time.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Let me start by saying Star Wars IV should have won an award for the most preposterous cover art of all time. The rippling chest of the Luke Skywalker with the light saber held aloft like an Olympic Torch is some kind of bad joke. The supposedly sexy exposed leg of Princess Leia is more like looking at nude pictures of your sister. Not a single picture of the Death Star, the Millennium Falcon, Han Solo or Chewbacca. But, let me not judge a movie too harshly on its cover.
The story is really good, possibly one of the best. The plot traces the beginning of the classic "Hero's Journey" by Campbell adapted into a well-conceived Sci-Fi universe. The history and mythos of the Star Wars universe was developed before this small story of Luke Skywalker and Friends, and that adds a richness and depth the the story seldom seen nowadays. This is the kind of plot movies used to have before the Hollywood Writer's Strike, and the advent of 'reality' media.
The characters are all strong, and interesting with their own motivations, and distinctive personalities that develop quite well. (For instance: The tension between Skywalker/Leia/Solo.) Don't get used to this.
Unfortunately, the pacing is something George Lucas will fight with through the remainder of this series and never perfect. Some parts drag on forever, and then some parts blast by so fast that you will look to see if someone isn't sitting on the remote control, and mashing the FFWD button. Plot jumps in this movie would set Olympic records. The time between Princess Leia's rescue and the arrival of the Death Star at the Rebel Base is about, oh, thirty seconds or so. And how exactly does the Death Star follow the Millennium Falcon through hyperspace? No time to dwell on that, Scramble the X-Wings!
The CG is top-notch for a movie made in 1977. What was the competition? Dr Who? Lost In Space? They had nothing on this movie. Any glitches in Episode IV are negligible when compared to what it must have taken to make the FX in this movie happen. This is exactly why it is hard to rate this movie now, because it was so ahead of it's time then, but the technology is so outdated now. I heard an interview with George Lucas where he said one reason he started with the fourth movie in the series was that it was the least technical in terms of FX, and that the technology just wasn't there to pull the other movies off, but that's a load of donkey bollocks. I suspect that Episode IV was just a better plot than Episode I (come to think of it, I'm certain of it.) and more likely to pull in some funding.
If I time-warped back to 1977, I would have given Episode IV a 10 out of 10. The minor issues are heavily outweighed by the originality of the story and the good use of FX. If this movie were released today, probably an 8, mostly because it would lose it's +2 bonus for being ahead of its time.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Monday, April 17, 2006
Movie Review: Brick
It was refreshing to see a movie that took longer to write than it did to film. (Don't worry though, I'm sure that any day now, the writer's strike in Hollywood will be over...) Anyway, the genre of pseudo-noir-mystery-set-in-modern-day-California-high-school was needing a boost, and this film does it justice.
Like 'Clerks' the dialog in Brick was so articulate and fast-paced (In other words: contrived) as to be ridiculous, but original enough to be interesting. For instance, after a short chat with the principal, the main character (a student tracking his missing ex-girlfriend) is telling the principal to 'keep off his back for a few weeks, no matter what happens...' to which the principal says, '...sounds reasonable.' Right. I was able to use my Suspend Disbelief skill at +6 (+4 for indie film, +2 for the two Newcastles I had before the show) and I was only merely annoyed.
The dialog was peppered with the dialect of SoCal Coolspeak. My two favorites were 'Tell so-and-so I want words...' which means 'Tell so-and-so I want to speak with him, and 'where does so-and-so eat lunch...' which means, 'where does so-and-so eat lunch...' as though lunch rituals were a defining personal characteristic like hair color or the car you drive. (maybe they are, I just never thought of lunch that way...)
Great acting by the way, I am told the lead character used to be the leader/kid in the TV sitcom, Third Rock From The Sun, but I wouldn't know. I saw him as a young Agent Moulder from the X-Files, with mad deadpan skillz. As a matter of fact, everyone in the movie had mad deadpan skillz. Plenty of dry humor and witty banter to go round.
Brick never got boring, a perfect pace for a slow revealing of the layers in this well-thought-out mystery. Don't try to solve the mystery yourself, they don't give you the info you need. And don't let the snappy dialog or Coolspeak throw you, the movie is very interestingly shot and well put-together,(According to IMDB, it won the Sundance Film Festival's Special Jury Prize for Originality of Vision, whatever that means)
I give Brick an 8 out of 10. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to lunch. In the basement of a nearby abandoned factory. Alone. Nude.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Like 'Clerks' the dialog in Brick was so articulate and fast-paced (In other words: contrived) as to be ridiculous, but original enough to be interesting. For instance, after a short chat with the principal, the main character (a student tracking his missing ex-girlfriend) is telling the principal to 'keep off his back for a few weeks, no matter what happens...' to which the principal says, '...sounds reasonable.' Right. I was able to use my Suspend Disbelief skill at +6 (+4 for indie film, +2 for the two Newcastles I had before the show) and I was only merely annoyed.
The dialog was peppered with the dialect of SoCal Coolspeak. My two favorites were 'Tell so-and-so I want words...' which means 'Tell so-and-so I want to speak with him, and 'where does so-and-so eat lunch...' which means, 'where does so-and-so eat lunch...' as though lunch rituals were a defining personal characteristic like hair color or the car you drive. (maybe they are, I just never thought of lunch that way...)
Great acting by the way, I am told the lead character used to be the leader/kid in the TV sitcom, Third Rock From The Sun, but I wouldn't know. I saw him as a young Agent Moulder from the X-Files, with mad deadpan skillz. As a matter of fact, everyone in the movie had mad deadpan skillz. Plenty of dry humor and witty banter to go round.
Brick never got boring, a perfect pace for a slow revealing of the layers in this well-thought-out mystery. Don't try to solve the mystery yourself, they don't give you the info you need. And don't let the snappy dialog or Coolspeak throw you, the movie is very interestingly shot and well put-together,(According to IMDB, it won the Sundance Film Festival's Special Jury Prize for Originality of Vision, whatever that means)
I give Brick an 8 out of 10. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to lunch. In the basement of a nearby abandoned factory. Alone. Nude.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, movie reviews
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Movie Review: V for Vendetta
I was beginning to worry the The Wachowskis had lost it. They had a monster hit with The Matrix, and managed to mangle it with parts 2 and 3. So I tried really hard Not to be impressed by the flashy trailer for "V"
The movie V for Vendetta is quite good. Well paced, and well spoken, although at times it tries a bit too hard to be clever. (The "V" monologue in the alley, for instance, actually made me roll my eyes).
From "V" I discovered that Natalie Portman's hideous acting abilities in Star Wars were only a passing phase! Or is it possible (dare I even suggest!) that giving her a real role with some real lines actually... Um, never mind.
I could have done without Natalie's character constantly running to different men, asking for help/protection. The times she spends not under the care of others is...uneventful. She didn't seem that helpless to me, and it would have been refreshing to see her kick some ass to save the hero (and I don't mean tapping guards on the shoulder and spraying them with mace), or perhaps take up his mask to help him fight the good fight.
I would say the future in "V" did not look so futuristic. Do you really think that in the future everyone will be walking around with RAZR phones? Doubt it. UltraViolet had a much better futuristic look and feel to it.
Aside from these minor trivialities, the plot is really, really good. Not surprising, since the movie is based on a comic book. (Don't worry, I am sure that any time now the Writers Strike in Hollywood will end, and they can start making original movies again.) The complicated plot is well-done without taking a 15-min break in the middle of the movie to explain it, (the way Underworld:Evolution did.) If this movie don't make you want to overthrow the government, then nothing short of listening to 'Rage Against The Machine' will. Let's just hope the plot is not 'timely' or 'visionary' to any degree.
Speaking of 'Rage Against the Machine' I am surprised nothing from them showed up on the soundtrack. The soundtrack for the movie was fairly innocuous, more of a score, really, with few actual songs which in itself was a nice change.
Could it be that Hollywood has put out so much utter shite for so long, that finally releasing something unique and refreshing like "V" earns a 8 out of 10 from yours truly?
Let's just hope that the Wachowski Brothers don't try to make a "V" part 2 or 3. Leave well enough alone.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The movie V for Vendetta is quite good. Well paced, and well spoken, although at times it tries a bit too hard to be clever. (The "V" monologue in the alley, for instance, actually made me roll my eyes).
From "V" I discovered that Natalie Portman's hideous acting abilities in Star Wars were only a passing phase! Or is it possible (dare I even suggest!) that giving her a real role with some real lines actually... Um, never mind.
I could have done without Natalie's character constantly running to different men, asking for help/protection. The times she spends not under the care of others is...uneventful. She didn't seem that helpless to me, and it would have been refreshing to see her kick some ass to save the hero (and I don't mean tapping guards on the shoulder and spraying them with mace), or perhaps take up his mask to help him fight the good fight.
I would say the future in "V" did not look so futuristic. Do you really think that in the future everyone will be walking around with RAZR phones? Doubt it. UltraViolet had a much better futuristic look and feel to it.
Aside from these minor trivialities, the plot is really, really good. Not surprising, since the movie is based on a comic book. (Don't worry, I am sure that any time now the Writers Strike in Hollywood will end, and they can start making original movies again.) The complicated plot is well-done without taking a 15-min break in the middle of the movie to explain it, (the way Underworld:Evolution did.) If this movie don't make you want to overthrow the government, then nothing short of listening to 'Rage Against The Machine' will. Let's just hope the plot is not 'timely' or 'visionary' to any degree.
Speaking of 'Rage Against the Machine' I am surprised nothing from them showed up on the soundtrack. The soundtrack for the movie was fairly innocuous, more of a score, really, with few actual songs which in itself was a nice change.
Could it be that Hollywood has put out so much utter shite for so long, that finally releasing something unique and refreshing like "V" earns a 8 out of 10 from yours truly?
Let's just hope that the Wachowski Brothers don't try to make a "V" part 2 or 3. Leave well enough alone.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Pray For Boredom
See that blog post below? The one about the Oscars? That is about all I did this weekend. After several weeks of Drama, Death, and Expensive Car Repairs, I wished for a weekend of Pure Boredom, and I got it.
I laid on the couch for most of Saturday. Got dressed long enough to eat some Tibetan Soup in Uptown, and take in NightWatch at the Uptown theatre. Pretty good (the soup and the movie). Kind of disjointed, and non-Hollywood. (That's a Good thing). Laid on the couch for almost all of Sunday. Slept on-and-off, and worked on the Handbook on-and-off. Got dressed long enough to get a haircut, and visit quickly with my neighbor. Here are some other things I did Not do:
I didn't watch video of any kind (TV, DVD, Video Games)
I didn't even step foot inside my studio
I didn't do any bills, laundry, or dishes
I didn't study any German for my Exam on Monday
I didn't clean anything (Although I did clean the fridge out of Diet Coke)
I Did however, sleep for about 40 hours, and wrote about 12 pages in the Handbook, and proofread about 100 more, bringing my totals up to 300 proofread pages, and 544 pages total.
All in all a freaking dream weekend. I think this is what I will shoot for in my retirement. Boredom is good.
Sometimes.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I laid on the couch for most of Saturday. Got dressed long enough to eat some Tibetan Soup in Uptown, and take in NightWatch at the Uptown theatre. Pretty good (the soup and the movie). Kind of disjointed, and non-Hollywood. (That's a Good thing). Laid on the couch for almost all of Sunday. Slept on-and-off, and worked on the Handbook on-and-off. Got dressed long enough to get a haircut, and visit quickly with my neighbor. Here are some other things I did Not do:
I didn't watch video of any kind (TV, DVD, Video Games)
I didn't even step foot inside my studio
I didn't do any bills, laundry, or dishes
I didn't study any German for my Exam on Monday
I didn't clean anything (Although I did clean the fridge out of Diet Coke)
I Did however, sleep for about 40 hours, and wrote about 12 pages in the Handbook, and proofread about 100 more, bringing my totals up to 300 proofread pages, and 544 pages total.
All in all a freaking dream weekend. I think this is what I will shoot for in my retirement. Boredom is good.
Sometimes.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: A Day In The Life, Hollywood, movie reviews
Oscar The Grouch
I guess you have to ask yourself if you really care what a bunch of people in Hollywood think is important.
Actors are actors because they don't have any other marketable skills. Their skills rate slightly above Models, and slightly below Stand-Up-Comedians (since *they* actually write their own material). If they had any real talent, they would be in theatre, where there is no ADR, no retakes, no CG, (ie: no Post Production)!
And if actors all want to move to the coast, and band together and call their work meaningful and important...
What-ever. No different than if a bunch of avid role-playing-gamers decided to move to Duluth, MN and look back over the year 2005 in review. I can see the awards now...
Best L.A.R.P. Death
Best Dungeon Trap
Best Dungeon Puzzle Room
Best New Monster
Best Elvish Character Name Not Swiped From LOTR
Best Female Gamer in A Non-Traditional Role Play
Best Sci-Fi Roleplay Game Plot
...You get the idea
As far as comparing movies, it is so subjective the concept doesn't even make sense. Was the Sound Design in Memoirs of a Geisha better than King Kong?
Please.
It is very American to want to pick The Best from all the categories. This is because Americans are very Simple, and *The Best* is a concept for them that is easy to understand. One Winner. Everything else = Loser.
I would rather see a year in review, where they touch on all the movies released, the good and the bad. The High-Budget Blockbusters and the Low Budget Independents. No need to proclaim any of them Winners or Losers. Show me the highlights and lowlights and the memorable performances; that is entertainment.
But showing me what top three of anything that Hollywood thinks is important?
I couldn't care less.
BTW: Isn't California supposed to slide into the ocean any day now? Man, it's taking for-ever...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Actors are actors because they don't have any other marketable skills. Their skills rate slightly above Models, and slightly below Stand-Up-Comedians (since *they* actually write their own material). If they had any real talent, they would be in theatre, where there is no ADR, no retakes, no CG, (ie: no Post Production)!
And if actors all want to move to the coast, and band together and call their work meaningful and important...
What-ever. No different than if a bunch of avid role-playing-gamers decided to move to Duluth, MN and look back over the year 2005 in review. I can see the awards now...
Best L.A.R.P. Death
Best Dungeon Trap
Best Dungeon Puzzle Room
Best New Monster
Best Elvish Character Name Not Swiped From LOTR
Best Female Gamer in A Non-Traditional Role Play
Best Sci-Fi Roleplay Game Plot
...You get the idea
As far as comparing movies, it is so subjective the concept doesn't even make sense. Was the Sound Design in Memoirs of a Geisha better than King Kong?
Please.
It is very American to want to pick The Best from all the categories. This is because Americans are very Simple, and *The Best* is a concept for them that is easy to understand. One Winner. Everything else = Loser.
I would rather see a year in review, where they touch on all the movies released, the good and the bad. The High-Budget Blockbusters and the Low Budget Independents. No need to proclaim any of them Winners or Losers. Show me the highlights and lowlights and the memorable performances; that is entertainment.
But showing me what top three of anything that Hollywood thinks is important?
I couldn't care less.
BTW: Isn't California supposed to slide into the ocean any day now? Man, it's taking for-ever...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: americans, anti, Hollywood, Movie News
Monday, January 16, 2006
2005 - The Year of Poop Movies
This post is in response to latest post from Missmollygrue over at blogspot.
I think the primary reason why most movies right now are poop is due to overload. There are more movies available than ever before at any given time. 16-screen mega-theatres? Cable/Dish-On-Demand/Netflix/BitTorrent? DVD players in laptops and cars? This massive mass-distribution causes the industry to kick out product that is cheap-plastic-shiny-on-the-outside-but-not-too-expensive-on-the-inside. They spend more time talking about which special-effects to use than they do working on the script. They go for the marketing-department-approved-R.O.I., which has a rubber stamp of approval for crap like 'The Dukes of Hazzard' or 'Home Alone 8', or Anne Rice [Fill in book title here] or Harry Potter [Fill in version number here].
[Editors Note: Do people ever make movies based off books that Weren’t best sellers?]
Regardless, this business model is the Wal-Mart method of movie production, which stresses Quantity of sure-returns over Quality pieces of artwork. (I suggest we call them Wal-Movies...)
Because of the ridiculous volume of media available, it will take time for the cream of the crop to rise, and all of the overhyped poop to sink to the bottom. My point is - it is difficult to see what will stand the test of time until some time has passed. We know now that The Police were doing good music, because you still hear it today, and we know that Air Supply was garbage, because you don't. We know that Dashboard Confessional is dogpoop squared, but it will take some time before the lustre of overhyped prodution, product placement, and the kickbacks to magazines and radio stations wear off, and the public is left with simply the product.
This does not change the fact that the majority of movies made right now truly are poop, and you won't see a single movie from the year 2005 mentioned in 2010 when they highlight the current decade. My theory is that there are some gems being made (or at least written), but they aren’t being made by the people with the $$$ to get them onto the big screen.
To those who would say that movies suck simply because Americans have nothing to say (Josh), I would say that is not entirely true, but rather that 99 percent of Americans have nothing NEW or INTERESTING to say, and they get a large budget to say it with. Americans have become quite adept at repackaging other people's ideas and selling them, or in more motivated cases, putting a spin on the original idea, but that requires original ideas, and those 1 percent have to come from somewhere, and they are not all imported from foreign countries with subtitles.
I would argue that much of that 1 percent of clever, original, genre-breaking-movie-making is an untapped resource known as Independent artists. The audio industry is discovering this now, and the video industry is sure to follow. As the living-room entertainment center gets more tightly connected to internet distribution methods, and as websites (like video.google.com, youtube.com etc) start doing for independent video what they currently do for audio (garageband.com, mp3tunes.com, magnatune.com etc..) The volume of video media available will increase exponentially.
I predict that at first, this will be video Nirvana. A rennaisance of filmmaking creativity which will make Hollywood shrivel up and die like the testicles of a bull being casterated. Unfortunately, this utopia will not last, as the market floods, and suddenly, video of someone's girlfriend's breast augmentation surgery is deemed 'art', alongside a 12-hour security camera tape of SuperAmerica titled, 'A Day In The Life Of Johnny' in which nothing happens. Toss in some payoffs to websites for a link, which raises their social network ranking, and suddenly, we have the video version of 'Dashboard Confessional' - Dogpoop cubed. Suddenly, that 1 percent becomes .01 percent.
And the cycle Lathers, Rinses, and Repeats.
Hopefully, someone is working on a computer program which can watch a movie for me and tell if I will like it or not before I watch it. What would that be like, to only watch good movies? Weird...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I think the primary reason why most movies right now are poop is due to overload. There are more movies available than ever before at any given time. 16-screen mega-theatres? Cable/Dish-On-Demand/Netflix/BitTorrent? DVD players in laptops and cars? This massive mass-distribution causes the industry to kick out product that is cheap-plastic-shiny-on-the-outside-but-not-too-expensive-on-the-inside. They spend more time talking about which special-effects to use than they do working on the script. They go for the marketing-department-approved-R.O.I., which has a rubber stamp of approval for crap like 'The Dukes of Hazzard' or 'Home Alone 8', or Anne Rice [Fill in book title here] or Harry Potter [Fill in version number here].
[Editors Note: Do people ever make movies based off books that Weren’t best sellers?]
Regardless, this business model is the Wal-Mart method of movie production, which stresses Quantity of sure-returns over Quality pieces of artwork. (I suggest we call them Wal-Movies...)
Because of the ridiculous volume of media available, it will take time for the cream of the crop to rise, and all of the overhyped poop to sink to the bottom. My point is - it is difficult to see what will stand the test of time until some time has passed. We know now that The Police were doing good music, because you still hear it today, and we know that Air Supply was garbage, because you don't. We know that Dashboard Confessional is dogpoop squared, but it will take some time before the lustre of overhyped prodution, product placement, and the kickbacks to magazines and radio stations wear off, and the public is left with simply the product.
This does not change the fact that the majority of movies made right now truly are poop, and you won't see a single movie from the year 2005 mentioned in 2010 when they highlight the current decade. My theory is that there are some gems being made (or at least written), but they aren’t being made by the people with the $$$ to get them onto the big screen.
To those who would say that movies suck simply because Americans have nothing to say (Josh), I would say that is not entirely true, but rather that 99 percent of Americans have nothing NEW or INTERESTING to say, and they get a large budget to say it with. Americans have become quite adept at repackaging other people's ideas and selling them, or in more motivated cases, putting a spin on the original idea, but that requires original ideas, and those 1 percent have to come from somewhere, and they are not all imported from foreign countries with subtitles.
I would argue that much of that 1 percent of clever, original, genre-breaking-movie-making is an untapped resource known as Independent artists. The audio industry is discovering this now, and the video industry is sure to follow. As the living-room entertainment center gets more tightly connected to internet distribution methods, and as websites (like video.google.com, youtube.com etc) start doing for independent video what they currently do for audio (garageband.com, mp3tunes.com, magnatune.com etc..) The volume of video media available will increase exponentially.
I predict that at first, this will be video Nirvana. A rennaisance of filmmaking creativity which will make Hollywood shrivel up and die like the testicles of a bull being casterated. Unfortunately, this utopia will not last, as the market floods, and suddenly, video of someone's girlfriend's breast augmentation surgery is deemed 'art', alongside a 12-hour security camera tape of SuperAmerica titled, 'A Day In The Life Of Johnny' in which nothing happens. Toss in some payoffs to websites for a link, which raises their social network ranking, and suddenly, we have the video version of 'Dashboard Confessional' - Dogpoop cubed. Suddenly, that 1 percent becomes .01 percent.
And the cycle Lathers, Rinses, and Repeats.
Hopefully, someone is working on a computer program which can watch a movie for me and tell if I will like it or not before I watch it. What would that be like, to only watch good movies? Weird...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: consumerism, Cultural Observation, Culture, Hollywood, indie movies, Movie News, Predictions
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Movie Review: The Devils Rejects
I tried to watch Rob Zombie's newest movie on DVD 'The Devils Rejects' I couldn't make it all the way through and I can only say that about three movies I have seen in my lifetime.
But this was by far the worst.
Hell, I even sat through 'From Dusk Till Dawn', 'Event Horizon', 'AVP' and most of 'Kill Bill Vol 1'. I even sat through all of 'Freddy Got Fingered' which held the former title of "worst movie ever made", but I couldn't stand more than half an hour of this shit.
Don't misunderstand, I enjoy ridiculously, ultra-violent films, but something was missing from The Devils Rejects, which made it the worst of the worst. After about 20 minutes of intense detailed instruction that women are only for being tortured, then screwed, then killed for no reason, (or sometimes tortured, then killed, then screwed for no reason) I simply had to shut it off. I went to IMDB.com to check user opinions and guess what? I'm the only one on the fucking planet who does not like it, and everyone else thinks Rob Zombie is a Gorram genius.
Remember those *trick* questions on the final exam, like, 'What color was George Washington's white horse?' or 'What year was The Battle of 1812?' The Devil's Rejects is a trick movie.
The movie was a test, people. A test for you to recognize crap and call it. If you failed to walk out of the theatre, you failed the test. If you failed to eject the disk before the movie was over and say, 'Hey, this is dogshit!' then I'm sorry but you failed. If you saw the movie and think it was even *ratable* on a scale of one to ten, then you failed, but don't feel too bad. A very very high percentage of people failed as well, so at least you have some company. I guess that fact was more disappointing to me than the movie its self.
Later the same day, I watched Eternal, an independent Canadian movie about the Countess Elizabeth Bathory in modern times, and her lust for young female blood. The woman is downright Evil, and has near-intercourse with her victims before taking their lives. Lots of Lots of LOTS of female/female eroticism, and shot on nice locations in Quebec and Venice. The plot is nearly awful, and the acting almost as bad as the production.
So I had to ask myself why Eternal was a stinker, but The Devils Rejects was a non-movie.
What was missing was motive. What was missing from the horrible but not horrifying hillbilly hicks in The Devils Rejects was any intelligent design (sorry, I had to do that) any real sense of motivation. Without it, the characters actions have no basis, and we, the audience, cannot judge them, or relate to them, or care about them one way or another. Perhaps an example would help:
Conrad - Hey Reid, why the hell does your dog keep trying to hump my leg?
Reid- I dunno. That's just what he does.
Conrad - Well its completely ungrounded, and without any discernible motivation. Not to mention it's stupid. So tell him to knock it off before I kick him in the balls.
(Alright, it is a poor example, although I suspect watching Reid's dog hump someone's leg would be more interesting to watch than The Devils Rejects.)
Meanwhile, in Eternal, the countess has a motivation (there are some who would call this motivation part of the PLOT) and once we understand why the countess does what she does, we can relate, and judge her and her motivations because of it. In other words, it gives us a reason to react to the film. Can there even be a plot without motivation? Bittorrent the Devils Rejects and find out.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
But this was by far the worst.
Hell, I even sat through 'From Dusk Till Dawn', 'Event Horizon', 'AVP' and most of 'Kill Bill Vol 1'. I even sat through all of 'Freddy Got Fingered' which held the former title of "worst movie ever made", but I couldn't stand more than half an hour of this shit.
Don't misunderstand, I enjoy ridiculously, ultra-violent films, but something was missing from The Devils Rejects, which made it the worst of the worst. After about 20 minutes of intense detailed instruction that women are only for being tortured, then screwed, then killed for no reason, (or sometimes tortured, then killed, then screwed for no reason) I simply had to shut it off. I went to IMDB.com to check user opinions and guess what? I'm the only one on the fucking planet who does not like it, and everyone else thinks Rob Zombie is a Gorram genius.
Remember those *trick* questions on the final exam, like, 'What color was George Washington's white horse?' or 'What year was The Battle of 1812?' The Devil's Rejects is a trick movie.
The movie was a test, people. A test for you to recognize crap and call it. If you failed to walk out of the theatre, you failed the test. If you failed to eject the disk before the movie was over and say, 'Hey, this is dogshit!' then I'm sorry but you failed. If you saw the movie and think it was even *ratable* on a scale of one to ten, then you failed, but don't feel too bad. A very very high percentage of people failed as well, so at least you have some company. I guess that fact was more disappointing to me than the movie its self.
Later the same day, I watched Eternal, an independent Canadian movie about the Countess Elizabeth Bathory in modern times, and her lust for young female blood. The woman is downright Evil, and has near-intercourse with her victims before taking their lives. Lots of Lots of LOTS of female/female eroticism, and shot on nice locations in Quebec and Venice. The plot is nearly awful, and the acting almost as bad as the production.
So I had to ask myself why Eternal was a stinker, but The Devils Rejects was a non-movie.
What was missing was motive. What was missing from the horrible but not horrifying hillbilly hicks in The Devils Rejects was any intelligent design (sorry, I had to do that) any real sense of motivation. Without it, the characters actions have no basis, and we, the audience, cannot judge them, or relate to them, or care about them one way or another. Perhaps an example would help:
Conrad - Hey Reid, why the hell does your dog keep trying to hump my leg?
Reid- I dunno. That's just what he does.
Conrad - Well its completely ungrounded, and without any discernible motivation. Not to mention it's stupid. So tell him to knock it off before I kick him in the balls.
(Alright, it is a poor example, although I suspect watching Reid's dog hump someone's leg would be more interesting to watch than The Devils Rejects.)
Meanwhile, in Eternal, the countess has a motivation (there are some who would call this motivation part of the PLOT) and once we understand why the countess does what she does, we can relate, and judge her and her motivations because of it. In other words, it gives us a reason to react to the film. Can there even be a plot without motivation? Bittorrent the Devils Rejects and find out.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews, Ubersuck
Sunday, November 06, 2005
The (long overdue) death of the Music Industry
It is simply not possible to put into words HOW MUCH I hate/loathe/detest/despise/abhor the band Dashboard Confessional. They are the quintessential example of just how out of touch the music industry is with music. Dashboard Confessional is the proof that if you take a piece of Dogshit, spraypaint it gold, and put many, many layers of lacquer on it, and shine it up, then people will buy it. Sheryl Crow is another gleaming example, but for some reason she doesn't disgust me as much. Kid Rock, and everything Metallica has done since the Black Album...et-shitera... Is it any wonder that even your averagely talented 'Indie' band like the White Stripes can make it big?
I, for one, am glad to see the end of the music 'industry', and good riddance. Instead of being told what is good, we can find out what we like for ourselves. Now we can look towards resources that indiscriminately mark, tag, sort, parse, grep, query, and list all the independant sources, and we can make our own decisions. Isn't that part of the fun, to sift through recordings of bands you never heard of, and find some piece of art that 'clicks' for you?
Oh, I forgot, here in America, we need to be told what is good. Usually by the people who are selling it.
A trend to note is how trends in the video/movie industry tail along behind the audio/music industry, usually by about 5 years, give or take. But already I can say 'Is it any wonder that even your averagely talented 'Indie' films like Clerks, Napoleaon Dynamite, and Shaun of the Dead can make it big?'
Hmm. It gives one pause, but it also makes one think...
We can follow the path of consumer audio format from tape to CD to mp3, and the path of video from VHS/Beta to Laserdisc to DVD to DV. We can see a shift in the distribution of audio moving away from the large conglomerates, and back to the hands of the artists where it rightly belongs, through websites like www.garageband.com
Hey Hollywood, guess who's next? (Smile)
Of course, Hollywood will not be destroyed by the Indie Filmmaker Invasion of 2008, because many Americans still need old, fat, rich, white men to tell them what is good. But there will be significant pressure to increase the quality and entertainment value of the finished products, and to do things that Indie films cannot do, or cannot afford to do. (3D projection and interactive viewing of the finished product comes to mind.)
I'm looking forward to it. But in the meantime, we will have to suffer through movies like 'The Dukes Of Hazzard', 'Aliens Vs Predator', 'Alone In The Dark'...
...et-shitera...
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I, for one, am glad to see the end of the music 'industry', and good riddance. Instead of being told what is good, we can find out what we like for ourselves. Now we can look towards resources that indiscriminately mark, tag, sort, parse, grep, query, and list all the independant sources, and we can make our own decisions. Isn't that part of the fun, to sift through recordings of bands you never heard of, and find some piece of art that 'clicks' for you?
Oh, I forgot, here in America, we need to be told what is good. Usually by the people who are selling it.
A trend to note is how trends in the video/movie industry tail along behind the audio/music industry, usually by about 5 years, give or take. But already I can say 'Is it any wonder that even your averagely talented 'Indie' films like Clerks, Napoleaon Dynamite, and Shaun of the Dead can make it big?'
Hmm. It gives one pause, but it also makes one think...
We can follow the path of consumer audio format from tape to CD to mp3, and the path of video from VHS/Beta to Laserdisc to DVD to DV. We can see a shift in the distribution of audio moving away from the large conglomerates, and back to the hands of the artists where it rightly belongs, through websites like www.garageband.com
Hey Hollywood, guess who's next? (Smile)
Of course, Hollywood will not be destroyed by the Indie Filmmaker Invasion of 2008, because many Americans still need old, fat, rich, white men to tell them what is good. But there will be significant pressure to increase the quality and entertainment value of the finished products, and to do things that Indie films cannot do, or cannot afford to do. (3D projection and interactive viewing of the finished product comes to mind.)
I'm looking forward to it. But in the meantime, we will have to suffer through movies like 'The Dukes Of Hazzard', 'Aliens Vs Predator', 'Alone In The Dark'...
...et-shitera...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Business Phenomena, consumerism, Hollywood, indie movies, Music Industry, Predictions
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Fight Scenes and Rings
So I'm up trying to write a barfight scene, and it is Just not working. How come it makes perfect sense for barfights to erupt in movies and on television, but I can't envision one happening at Psycho Suzi's here in "friendly" Minnesota?
The (stereo)typical bar fight is like dropping a match into a can of gasoline; one punch, and everyone is swinging. In Minnesota, two people could shoot it out with rifles in a bar, and everyone would either a)leave or b)break out their cell-phone-cameras to take pictures. Hmm. Might have to ditch the cause-and-effect logic and reach for the smoke-and-mirrors...
Saw Ring2 last night, it was surprisingly good. For a movie which has the lamest plot concept in the history of plot concepts, (watch a videotape and die 7 days later) it is still pretty good. Not as creepy or artistic as the first, but also nice in that the poor-decision-making-teens are notibly removed from the movie after the first five minutes. Refreshing, although the director did watch "The Sixth Sense" too many times. I am not a fan of shocking your audience just to shock them (IE: The Grudge, a terrible movie by the way) but the "spooky kid" thing totally creeps me out...
Ring on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The (stereo)typical bar fight is like dropping a match into a can of gasoline; one punch, and everyone is swinging. In Minnesota, two people could shoot it out with rifles in a bar, and everyone would either a)leave or b)break out their cell-phone-cameras to take pictures. Hmm. Might have to ditch the cause-and-effect logic and reach for the smoke-and-mirrors...
Saw Ring2 last night, it was surprisingly good. For a movie which has the lamest plot concept in the history of plot concepts, (watch a videotape and die 7 days later) it is still pretty good. Not as creepy or artistic as the first, but also nice in that the poor-decision-making-teens are notibly removed from the movie after the first five minutes. Refreshing, although the director did watch "The Sixth Sense" too many times. I am not a fan of shocking your audience just to shock them (IE: The Grudge, a terrible movie by the way) but the "spooky kid" thing totally creeps me out...
Ring on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews, The Demonslayers Handbook, Writing
Blog Feeds
Subscribe to this Blog by E-Mail
Zero Links
Jagged Links
Search
Blog Archives
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
