***IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED LEVERAGE, THERE ARE SPOILERS AHEAD!!!***
I love you, and Kung Fu monkey is one of my favorites, AND leverage is a quality show shot on the Red, which I respect. I qualify those statements to say this.
Leverage is a poor man's Hustle. Hustle is a British show that aired on AMC for four seasons dealing with a group of "scrupulous" thieves who steal from degenerate human beings. Except instead of giving it back, they keep it to fund their operations. It's one of my favorite shows of all time, canceled before it's time. (*correction: Hustle will air a fifth season on AMC starting in January)
Here is my major concern. There's no real conflict except for the A story. If you look at shows that work about do-gooders, they always have a crux. In A Team, the team was always being chased, fearing for their lives...not that BA feared anything. In Hustle, the fear was not having enough money to continue. In Burn Notice, the fear is not being able to solve the case of who burned him.
However, there is not that conflict in Leverage. In the first episode, the "team" gets a windfall of money, enough to retire on. However, in the end, they decide helping the good guys was too much to fun to pass up on. They all want Nathan, Timothy Hutton, to lead them into helping the good guys.
They no longer have to worry about being caught, or needing money, or any of those things that drive other shows. Their initial conflict about who set them up in the pilot was resolved by the end of the pilot.
While it is easy to say the A story is compelling enough to watch, which it is, there is no urgency in the group for a bigger purpose. And, for me, that makes it a watered down Hustle. On a side note, Jaime Murray, we hardly knew ye on Valentine. I wanted to watch it just for you, but I couldn't do it.
As for John Rogers, I read the blog, I know what you've done, and I respect the hell out of it. As far as a show goes, I'll keep watching.
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Slumdog Millionaire
I hate movies. I usually see about 10 movies a year, and of those maybe one is acceptable and another 1 is transcendent. The other 8 are garbage and make me want to gouge my own eyes out. Last night, I saw Slumdog Millionaire, and I loved it, except the last 10 minutes are kinda cheesy. As I was walking out of the theater, I realized why. It's because I didn't recognize ANYONE in the movie, and it was refreshing.
Why was it refreshing? Because the movie was about...the movie! It wasn't about the star, or the director, or some producer even. It was about the script. The words on the page carried the story, and the directing worked to complement that. The opposite of Slumdog is Valkyrie, which is Tom Cruise...not even attempting an accent, which really toads my wet sproket. It's self-serving, and instead of worrying about making a good movie, it became about marketing to the most people. News Flash: TOM CRUISE SHOULD NEVER BE IN A GERMAN WORLD WAR II MOVIE! And that is my diatribe about Hollywood movies. In my opinion, Hollywood movies are about actors and marketing, while the movies I like have either people you've never heard of, or Ellen Page pre-Juno.
About the movie, it was really excellent. There was action, adventure, love lost, excitement, feelings, thrills, and generally it functioned much like a hollywood film, not the "typical" independent movie. There were absolutely amazing effects, chase scenes that would have felt perfectly at home in a much larger film, and a generally enjoyable story arch, which is more than I can say for Get Smart, X Files, etc. It would make Blake Snyder and James Cameron proud. Most importantly, even though it took to December, it renewed my faith in making movies. If you haven't seen it yet, go!
Why was it refreshing? Because the movie was about...the movie! It wasn't about the star, or the director, or some producer even. It was about the script. The words on the page carried the story, and the directing worked to complement that. The opposite of Slumdog is Valkyrie, which is Tom Cruise...not even attempting an accent, which really toads my wet sproket. It's self-serving, and instead of worrying about making a good movie, it became about marketing to the most people. News Flash: TOM CRUISE SHOULD NEVER BE IN A GERMAN WORLD WAR II MOVIE! And that is my diatribe about Hollywood movies. In my opinion, Hollywood movies are about actors and marketing, while the movies I like have either people you've never heard of, or Ellen Page pre-Juno.
About the movie, it was really excellent. There was action, adventure, love lost, excitement, feelings, thrills, and generally it functioned much like a hollywood film, not the "typical" independent movie. There were absolutely amazing effects, chase scenes that would have felt perfectly at home in a much larger film, and a generally enjoyable story arch, which is more than I can say for Get Smart, X Files, etc. It would make Blake Snyder and James Cameron proud. Most importantly, even though it took to December, it renewed my faith in making movies. If you haven't seen it yet, go!
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Disastrous...
...movies. They happen. Not every good movie is a huge success. Not every huge success is a good movie.
I was surfing around the 'net this morning and saw an article discussing the 10 worst box offices of all time. I'm not sure this list is 100% accurate, and it obviously doesn't go into deep detail about the depth of the financial problems each movie caused (Like how Cleopatra actually forced 20th Century Fox to sell off a large portion of their lot. That's right. All of you residing in Century City, thank Elizabeth Taylor's first dollar gross deal for your domicile). Still, it was an interesting read.
Of all the movies on the list, my favorite has to be ZYZZYX Road. This is a movie that cost 2 million dollars to make, features one of today's hottest actresses, Katherine Heigl, and made a whooping $30 at the box office. Not $300,000, $30,000, $3,000, or even $300. No, it made a theatrical gross of $30. The movie DID only screen at one theater in Texas for ONLY a week, but that averages out to just over $4.25 A DAY!
Now, I should mention that the article does not discuss the success of the film in ancillary markets (DVDs, Internet, Pay TV, Cable, etc). However, usually the formula is roughly 3-5x theatrical is the expected profits on DVD. So, on the high end, their expected return should be no more than $150 (that was a joke). To be fair, right now there are films being screened in NY and LA to empty houses just to qualify for Academy Award consideration. In addition, movies do sometimes find their audience on DVD. Filmmakers like Kevin Smith depends on DVD sales. So, theatrical does not ALWAYS dictate home video sales.
The director, John Penney, claims that this was a deliberate move. He was forced to screen the film domestically to fulfill his obligation to SAG regarding theatrically released films. He did not want to domestically distribute the film until after a successful foreign release. So, he rented out a theater for one week and screened the film once a day, without publicity. How successful was his plan? From Wikipedia "The film was released in twenty-three countries and by the end of 2006, had earned about $368,000. As of today, the film has not yet received the legitimate domestic distribution that was supposed to follow its foreign release."
In the filmmaker's defense, losing $2 million dollars is FAR less than any of the other films on that list. And, you have to applaud the independent spirit. He did go on to direct another film, which is more than most people ever get. At least it wasn't THE ADVENTURES OF PLUTO NASH. Wow, I started out to bash the film, and ended up realizing a deep respect for the filmmaker's independent spirit. Weird how that works out, huh?
On a final note, Disaster movie has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes through it's first weekend. I've been reading rotten tomatoes for a long time and I've never seen a 0% for a major studio release. If you have, leave a comment so I can check it out.
I was surfing around the 'net this morning and saw an article discussing the 10 worst box offices of all time. I'm not sure this list is 100% accurate, and it obviously doesn't go into deep detail about the depth of the financial problems each movie caused (Like how Cleopatra actually forced 20th Century Fox to sell off a large portion of their lot. That's right. All of you residing in Century City, thank Elizabeth Taylor's first dollar gross deal for your domicile). Still, it was an interesting read.
Of all the movies on the list, my favorite has to be ZYZZYX Road. This is a movie that cost 2 million dollars to make, features one of today's hottest actresses, Katherine Heigl, and made a whooping $30 at the box office. Not $300,000, $30,000, $3,000, or even $300. No, it made a theatrical gross of $30. The movie DID only screen at one theater in Texas for ONLY a week, but that averages out to just over $4.25 A DAY!Now, I should mention that the article does not discuss the success of the film in ancillary markets (DVDs, Internet, Pay TV, Cable, etc). However, usually the formula is roughly 3-5x theatrical is the expected profits on DVD. So, on the high end, their expected return should be no more than $150 (that was a joke). To be fair, right now there are films being screened in NY and LA to empty houses just to qualify for Academy Award consideration. In addition, movies do sometimes find their audience on DVD. Filmmakers like Kevin Smith depends on DVD sales. So, theatrical does not ALWAYS dictate home video sales.
The director, John Penney, claims that this was a deliberate move. He was forced to screen the film domestically to fulfill his obligation to SAG regarding theatrically released films. He did not want to domestically distribute the film until after a successful foreign release. So, he rented out a theater for one week and screened the film once a day, without publicity. How successful was his plan? From Wikipedia "The film was released in twenty-three countries and by the end of 2006, had earned about $368,000. As of today, the film has not yet received the legitimate domestic distribution that was supposed to follow its foreign release."
In the filmmaker's defense, losing $2 million dollars is FAR less than any of the other films on that list. And, you have to applaud the independent spirit. He did go on to direct another film, which is more than most people ever get. At least it wasn't THE ADVENTURES OF PLUTO NASH. Wow, I started out to bash the film, and ended up realizing a deep respect for the filmmaker's independent spirit. Weird how that works out, huh?
On a final note, Disaster movie has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes through it's first weekend. I've been reading rotten tomatoes for a long time and I've never seen a 0% for a major studio release. If you have, leave a comment so I can check it out.
Friday, July 25, 2008
Watchmen Trailer
Hopefully it's not as piss-poor as 300, otherwise, I would be pizzed.
http://watchmenmovie.warnerbros.com/
http://watchmenmovie.warnerbros.com/
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Juno
Okay, so I know it's passe to talk about Juno and "Real film people" have to jump off the bandwagon because it's opening in wide release. But since I just started my blog a day project yesterday, I have to catch up with my favorite movies of last year.
For about 6 months of the year, my favorite movie was Waitress, I even wrote a blog about it on my production musings blog and reposted it here. I thought it had everything and renewed my faith in movies for another year.
However, in the last part of this year, we have hit several snags with the projects I am working on, and I could use another boost to my film tank. In comes Juno. Yes, another movie about pregnancy. This is the year of the PREGGOS. From starlets to the screen, everyone's getting Knocked Up. However, I have to applaud the movie, specifically Jason Reitman, who is becoming one of my favorite directors with Juno and previously with Thank you for Smoking.
This is exactly my kind of movie. I really only like a very small subset of movies, with few exceptions. QUIRKY, FUNNY, CHARACTER-DRIVEN, INDEPENDENT, COMEDIC, DIALOG HEAVY, films. There are exceptions like Kill Bill, Dawn of the Dead, and many others. But I have found a subset that I like, and basically any movie that comes along in that category I like.
However, I must say, I LOVED Juno. It had everything a movie should have, and takes a storyline we've already seen throughout the year, and just does it better than everyone else. The dialog was simple, understated, and hilarious. The art direction was classy, but not overpowering. The cinematagraphy didn't try to be more than it is. I would think Michael Bay would loath this movie because it's puts substance over style. It doesn't have 50 different angles of a scene. In most scenes they follow an incredibly simple formula: wide, 2 shot, singles. Then they sprinkle in some dolly moves, steadicams, and coverage shots.
It was really nice to see a movie succeed for the right reasons. It came from nothing, expected little, and changed the year. And to to the filmmakers out there trying to break in, it uses a tried and true formula.
If you are producing a script for little or no budget, all you have that can compete with studio projects is FINAL DRAFT. Everything else will be out of your control. Even a movie like Juno was produced for several million dollars. However, every movie begins with a script. Every script is written with a script writing program. And script writing programs cost $150-$200. Or you can download a free one like CELTX.
However you think about it, this movie could be shot on a handicam or DVX100, with the same dialog, same shot list, and still gotten into Sundance. However, your horror movies or action films won't go anywhere, except possibly direct to video.
Regardless of the genre, the most important thing in any movie is the script. Action film, horror movie, character-driven indie, all need you to write good dialog, know how to move a plot along, and know how to create a story.
I wrote a script a couple of months ago called, Johnny's Black Flag, based on a draft a client of mine had, showed it to a studio, and they are looking to develop it. However, the script is completely against character for me. I'm an indie-writer and it was a horror script. But since I knew how to get things done, I was able to write it well.
For more information about JBF, check out the BNS media blog.
Pee Sout.
For about 6 months of the year, my favorite movie was Waitress, I even wrote a blog about it on my production musings blog and reposted it here. I thought it had everything and renewed my faith in movies for another year.
However, in the last part of this year, we have hit several snags with the projects I am working on, and I could use another boost to my film tank. In comes Juno. Yes, another movie about pregnancy. This is the year of the PREGGOS. From starlets to the screen, everyone's getting Knocked Up. However, I have to applaud the movie, specifically Jason Reitman, who is becoming one of my favorite directors with Juno and previously with Thank you for Smoking.
This is exactly my kind of movie. I really only like a very small subset of movies, with few exceptions. QUIRKY, FUNNY, CHARACTER-DRIVEN, INDEPENDENT, COMEDIC, DIALOG HEAVY, films. There are exceptions like Kill Bill, Dawn of the Dead, and many others. But I have found a subset that I like, and basically any movie that comes along in that category I like.
However, I must say, I LOVED Juno. It had everything a movie should have, and takes a storyline we've already seen throughout the year, and just does it better than everyone else. The dialog was simple, understated, and hilarious. The art direction was classy, but not overpowering. The cinematagraphy didn't try to be more than it is. I would think Michael Bay would loath this movie because it's puts substance over style. It doesn't have 50 different angles of a scene. In most scenes they follow an incredibly simple formula: wide, 2 shot, singles. Then they sprinkle in some dolly moves, steadicams, and coverage shots.
It was really nice to see a movie succeed for the right reasons. It came from nothing, expected little, and changed the year. And to to the filmmakers out there trying to break in, it uses a tried and true formula.
If you are producing a script for little or no budget, all you have that can compete with studio projects is FINAL DRAFT. Everything else will be out of your control. Even a movie like Juno was produced for several million dollars. However, every movie begins with a script. Every script is written with a script writing program. And script writing programs cost $150-$200. Or you can download a free one like CELTX.
However you think about it, this movie could be shot on a handicam or DVX100, with the same dialog, same shot list, and still gotten into Sundance. However, your horror movies or action films won't go anywhere, except possibly direct to video.
Regardless of the genre, the most important thing in any movie is the script. Action film, horror movie, character-driven indie, all need you to write good dialog, know how to move a plot along, and know how to create a story.
I wrote a script a couple of months ago called, Johnny's Black Flag, based on a draft a client of mine had, showed it to a studio, and they are looking to develop it. However, the script is completely against character for me. I'm an indie-writer and it was a horror script. But since I knew how to get things done, I was able to write it well.
For more information about JBF, check out the BNS media blog.
Pee Sout.
Friday, January 4, 2008
RePost: Perspective Changing Movies
This is a post from my short story musings blog from my last film.
With the movie on hiatus until august/when we find a useable deck, I decided to convert this into a sort of behind the scenes of my mind for the month. It will be back up to a production blog with other tidbits soon, don't worry.
But, I wanted to talk about independent film for a moment. A little background on me first. Surprisingly, I don't go to the movies much. Everyone will say the same thing to me when I tell them...don't you love movies? You make them. To them I say, yes I do love movies. I deeply, passionately, and unabashedly love movies. I love them enough to know when NOT to go to the movies. I know enough to know when NOT to get my heart broken.
In all the time I've studied film, I can usually tell a good movie from a bad one, in any genre. And, to be honest, there may be 4-5 movies a year that really spark my interest. I'm not one who only likes independent films or will only go watch blockbusters. Instead, I have to feel it. The soul of the film has to speak to me. If I really connect with a film, then I'll go. But, that so rarely happens.
Usually, I will find one film a year that I can really get behind. A film that "restores my faith in filmmaking". I'm always felt that while studio flicks are going for commercial appeal, independents are trying to be obtuse, gritty, and "nichey". But, there's usually one film a year that can break through all of that, and just be honest. A movie that doesn't need hollywood money or indy "cred" to tell a story. They just take an amazing concept and tell it better than anyone could at that moment in history.
Last year, that movie was "Little Miss Sunshine" for me. I was down pretty low after directing two short films I wasn't happy with. I was broke, broken, and depressed. My fiance couldn't pull me out of it, friends couldn't pull me out. I was simply miserable. I was seriously considering ditching film and going into something safe, like finance. But, "Little Miss Sunshine" turned me around and gave me the second wind.
This year, I just finished my first feature project. I've been rejected from two festivals from my short. I have yet to see one second of digitized footage, and I'm not quite sure what my next step is. Once again, I was in limbo. Then, I saw "Waitress" and it all turned around again.
I know its cliche to talk about "Waitress". Everyone loves it, raves about it, and talks about the tragedy. In will admit, I went into the movie with all of this information. I did not think it could possible meet the expectations others held for it. But, every since I heard about it the first time, I wanted to see it. I didn't even have to see a preview. I didn't even have to hear about Adrienne Shelley. I don't know what compelled me to see it. But, the moment I heard about it the first time, I knew I had to see it.
That visceral feeling is what I remember drew me to film in the first place. The feeling of not just wanting to see a movie, but needing to see it. It sort of tugs at your gut strings until you can't let up and you cave. It almost never happens to me. Sure, I would like to see a lot of movies that come out, but I don't usually have that gut reaction. In fact, I often go through the movie listing, hoping for one to tug at me, but hardly anything does.
What I loved most about it was the simplicity of the film. there were very few camera angles, but each was so meticulously crafted it looked amazing. The acting was subtle, understated, but still powerful. Even though each pie she made was innovative, the humble thought of the pie is so simple, and pure. The story was so relatable, even though I've never been through anything similar. It really grounded me.
With the movie on hiatus until august/when we find a useable deck, I decided to convert this into a sort of behind the scenes of my mind for the month. It will be back up to a production blog with other tidbits soon, don't worry.
But, I wanted to talk about independent film for a moment. A little background on me first. Surprisingly, I don't go to the movies much. Everyone will say the same thing to me when I tell them...don't you love movies? You make them. To them I say, yes I do love movies. I deeply, passionately, and unabashedly love movies. I love them enough to know when NOT to go to the movies. I know enough to know when NOT to get my heart broken.
In all the time I've studied film, I can usually tell a good movie from a bad one, in any genre. And, to be honest, there may be 4-5 movies a year that really spark my interest. I'm not one who only likes independent films or will only go watch blockbusters. Instead, I have to feel it. The soul of the film has to speak to me. If I really connect with a film, then I'll go. But, that so rarely happens.
Usually, I will find one film a year that I can really get behind. A film that "restores my faith in filmmaking". I'm always felt that while studio flicks are going for commercial appeal, independents are trying to be obtuse, gritty, and "nichey". But, there's usually one film a year that can break through all of that, and just be honest. A movie that doesn't need hollywood money or indy "cred" to tell a story. They just take an amazing concept and tell it better than anyone could at that moment in history.
Last year, that movie was "Little Miss Sunshine" for me. I was down pretty low after directing two short films I wasn't happy with. I was broke, broken, and depressed. My fiance couldn't pull me out of it, friends couldn't pull me out. I was simply miserable. I was seriously considering ditching film and going into something safe, like finance. But, "Little Miss Sunshine" turned me around and gave me the second wind.
This year, I just finished my first feature project. I've been rejected from two festivals from my short. I have yet to see one second of digitized footage, and I'm not quite sure what my next step is. Once again, I was in limbo. Then, I saw "Waitress" and it all turned around again.
I know its cliche to talk about "Waitress". Everyone loves it, raves about it, and talks about the tragedy. In will admit, I went into the movie with all of this information. I did not think it could possible meet the expectations others held for it. But, every since I heard about it the first time, I wanted to see it. I didn't even have to see a preview. I didn't even have to hear about Adrienne Shelley. I don't know what compelled me to see it. But, the moment I heard about it the first time, I knew I had to see it.
That visceral feeling is what I remember drew me to film in the first place. The feeling of not just wanting to see a movie, but needing to see it. It sort of tugs at your gut strings until you can't let up and you cave. It almost never happens to me. Sure, I would like to see a lot of movies that come out, but I don't usually have that gut reaction. In fact, I often go through the movie listing, hoping for one to tug at me, but hardly anything does.
What I loved most about it was the simplicity of the film. there were very few camera angles, but each was so meticulously crafted it looked amazing. The acting was subtle, understated, but still powerful. Even though each pie she made was innovative, the humble thought of the pie is so simple, and pure. The story was so relatable, even though I've never been through anything similar. It really grounded me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
