![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mbarrick
From the short hair I presume this scene takes place after Patience Price's near-death experience. She goes back to the house again, at dusk, and this time she "storms" (haha - X-Men pun!) up to the house obviously upset about something. |
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
yummymommy.livejournal.com - My opinion but a good onecheaza.livejournal.com - (no subject)mbarrick.livejournal.com - (no subject)cheaza.livejournal.com - (no subject)mediavictim.livejournal.com - Okay.. this might be flame bait but hear me outmbarrick.livejournal.com - First, it was a joke, but...mbarrick.livejournal.com - (no subject)mediavictim.livejournal.com - (no subject)mbarrick.livejournal.com - (no subject)
My opinion but a good one
Date: 2003-09-28 08:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-28 09:31 pm (UTC)Hey didja yell at her to show ya her tits? hehehe! these pictures kick ass!
no subject
Date: 2003-09-28 10:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-29 06:36 pm (UTC)Okay.. this might be flame bait but hear me out
Date: 2003-09-30 09:53 am (UTC)You detest it when some fucker walks into your frame and ruins the shot. You line up the photo , you adjust the zoom , and the apeture you adust the shutter speed and wait until the right moment .. and then some fucker thinks its his "right" to walk in front of you. You invested a LOT to get this shot , camera, time , money - now it is ruined
Yes a film set is a little disruptive, but so is a traffic , construction , concert lineups , crowds , screaming kids , fireworks
The difference is that the film crew paid the city for the privilage - so blame the city hall
The difference is that the film crew is employing local people
and putting a huge chunk of change in the economy
The difference is that the film crew is promoting the city for future films, MOW, PSA, or Series.
The difference is that the film crew is creating a work of art
(to a degree) .. it is in the process of creation , not destruction.
When I cycle around the seawall , I respect that people taking pictures don't want my stupid face in them so I don't cross the frame.
But when I was filming eQUILIBRUM (www.darkdance.org/~ryan)
every fucker and their mother thought it was their mission in life to deliberately fuck up my shot , walk in front of my camera, or generally give me shit for having a camera in my hand
and daring to actual hit the REC
"If you DON'T want me to take your soul DON'T walk in front of the camera"
So that is why these crews PAY the city so they can block off streets. They wouldn't have to if everyone didn't think it chic
to sabotage the filming. They wouldn't have to if everyone thought that they were entitled to 40% of the film budget becasue their blurry left leg was on screen in the R/P for
2 seconds.
Personally , I don't think destroying art , or disrupting someone elses thing is cool. Even if they have more money or equipment than you do
Anyway thats my $0.02
First, it was a joke, but...
Date: 2003-09-30 11:21 am (UTC)This is the largest media corporation on Earth (Time-Warner, owners of DC Comics) spending $100 million to obstensively create a T&A grab at the pocketbooks of socially awkward 18-35 comic book nerds who don't have anything better to spend their discretionary income on. They are worried that Marvel has been lapping up all the coin in this market. The buzz about this movie is that the script has already been rewritten to death, the has project nearly died several times, the only reason it's gone into production is a "we need to get something out there" mentality. This isn't Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, Amélie, or even an admirable attempt at art like Titanic - It's lowest-common-denominator pap designed by marketing weasels to make money, period. It's one step away from porn.
Disruption?
Additionally, what gives the city the authority to grant these rights? Holding a camera confers no right. Certainly the street is the city's to rent, who is to be courteous to whom? The tenants of my building and the building on the other side of the house weren't asked but rather told, only two days before the shoot, that the street we live on and the alley that provides the only access to our garage was going to be blocked. How would you feel if someone parked a diesel engine under your window at 7am on a Sunday morning and filled your bedroom with black exhaust? What if you walked into your living room, three stories off the ground, in your night-shirt on a Sunday morning to find a gaffer with a 50,000 watt light level with your window not two metres away? On what authority? The almightly American dollar and paying off the monopoly of force maintained by the city. If I were to have seriously disrupted the shoot, perhaps by throwing a bucket of water at that 50,000 watt light outside my living room window set up without warning or permission, who would have been dragged off by thugs with guns (the police)? Certainly not the lackeys of the American media giant that had bought and paid for the complicity of those controlling the guns and truncheons. What recourse the individual having his home surrounded, privacy breached, and life distrupted (if only for a day)?
As you said, "I don't think destroying art , or disrupting someone elses thing is cool. Even if they have more money or equipment than you do." Do you think either Elaine or I got any painting done that Sunday with all that shit going on around us?
Local?
The last line of the edict posted to our door informing us the shoot read "Thank you for supporting the Vancouver film industry". The money comes from Time-Warner, based in New York, the director is French, the stars are American, the product is designed for profitablity (for Time-Warner) in distribution in the American market. The money remaining in Vancouver is the relative pittance going to the crew doing the monkey-work. Servants wages for servants, the very sort of colonial service-industry ass-licking that has continually kept Vancouver from realising its own potential and from producing real, tangible value from the vast resources around us.
And consider that American film distribution network for a moment: if these people were to produce a genuinely local, purely Vancouver film, where would it get shown in Canada? In rep theatres and film festivals if they are lucky, even then only in major cities. Canada is the only nation on Earth where locally produced films are relegated to be shown as "foreign" films in our own country because, since the 1920's, Canada has been part of the "domestic" American film distribution network. Yet, despite being part of this "domestic" distribution network the movies shot here are considered by the people who control that network to be "runaway productions". Arnold Schwarzenegger accepted a cut of several million dollars to his salary to offset the $8,000,000 USD cost difference between shooting Terminator 3 in L.A. rather than here. "Our" film industry got screwed out of those wages yet the movie will be jammed down our throats in every cinema because it is still a "domestic" film. There is no Vancouver film industry, just a cheap backlot for Hollywood that can be closed on whim.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-30 11:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-30 12:14 pm (UTC)The film industry as it stands sucks , they pay extras to stand around , they pay high union wages to teamster drivers , Every municipality hears of huge budgets and charges them an arm and a leg for permits then they have to pay key talent ridiculously high wages..... And the only way studios make any money is to
put out the shit you see in theatres by catering to the LCD
for mass consumption - formulaic drivel, T& A , and guns and blood
The only way for GOOD movies to get made is by keeping the budget under control or virtually non-existant - this means no unnessesary expenses and re-shoots because of wild sound (someone yelling out window), people walking through frames
Crew WORKING and not standing around, and a modest cost for permits (or Geurilla filmaking)
But the big budget studios/unions cornered the market and DON'T
want competiton. So they do things that artificially inflate budget requirements municipalities jack up the price of permits
unions jack up the price of labor. And give off this mystique that productions are endless money pits - so everyone involved thinks that they deserve a huge peice of a small pie.
So what you end up with is some poor independant filmaker
who has to come up with $5000 in EOM insurance, $2000 a day
in municipal permnits , $8000 in Accident insurance $15000
even before they start equipment rental or pay their actors.
Most indy films only have a budget of $2000-$5000 for short films - becasue of the industry enforcing these high expectations - they can't be made. So cool and unique shit
makes way for Tits and explosions big budget hack
Getting back on track ... when you interfere with a film set
and contribute to bringing the costs of the film up - its not the studios you hurt.. they will just use the formula to suck more money out from other places. Its not the municipalities that sold your rights to quiet comfortable enjoyment of your home - becasue they just raise the permit costs.
You set up a pattern of behavior that says that mistreating filmmakers is fun, Them Vs you , Evil Producers vs Public ,
All productions are evil becasue "I Robot" fired machine guns
at night in a residential neiborhood
ultimatley leads to the death of the ART of the film as the real ARTISTS can't keep up , compete , or even survive in the toxic wasteland leftover when Schwartnegger leaves. They hold with them the stigma of unscrupulous producers , and greedy corprate backers, mistreated employees, and destructive practices even before they go to camera.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-30 12:31 pm (UTC)Some of the best films I've seen have been the $5,000-$10,000 fourth-year films coming out of the film programme at SFU. But the creativity and inventiveness that student film-makers leave school with dies a quick and uncerimonious death under the wheels of the industry.
The same is true of music.
The problem really lies with mass-distribution and the profit-model. For anyone to make money after ponying up for all the inflated expenses, as you mention, they have to appeal to a dismally broad audience requiring that lowest-common-denominiator approach.
For example what film about Vancouver would require a machine gun in a residential neighbourhood? (A pistol in a nightclub, sure, but machine guns in the street... nah.) But things are such that not only would anything genuinely local never get made because of the cost, but it wouldn't get watched even if it were made because the bulk of the audience has been conditioned to only want Hollywood. Regional distictiveness has been has been chopped into a bland purée by cookie-cutter media.