|
User-Friendly posted:It tends to be pretty difficult to get a gun back that just exploded with enough force to blow a man's arm off. One of the few things that was better in the Stallone movie. His gun just electrocuted the bad guy who took it instead of exploding. And yeah, losing your gun is kind of a big thing, especially for a probie; now you're unarmed, and the bad guy still has one perfectly good hand with which to beat you to death. It's more "indicator that this newbie has a tendency for loving up hardcore" than a thing that would get a veteran canned. Jack Gladney posted:This isn't exclusively a movie question, but I've noticed that in older science fiction--mostly the 1950s and 1960s--actors almost universally pronounce the word "robot" as "robutt," with a short o at the end--like how Dr. Zoidberg pronounces it on Futurama. Answer to the actual question: The word was coined by a Czech guy, who apparently pronounced it somewhere in between. Asimov, though, popularized "robot" in the modern sense, and he pronounced it "robutt": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWJJnQybZlk Coincidentally, Asimov was a Russian Jew and had a bit of the Yiddish accent (it's more obvious in interviews from when he was older). I think it was probably originally pronounced that way because that's how Asimov pronounced it, and then shifted to match the spelling when other writers started using it because Americans are lazy when adopting foreign words. Edit: also, the '60s was when people in movies started talking like real people instead of radio announcers/stage actors. Somebody had always pronounced it in the modern way, but that wasn't "proper" in the RP-equivalent standardized American movie accent back in the day. Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Oct 7, 2013 |
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 13:10
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
Mescal posted:In the godfather ii, Michael doesn't let Kay say "what's wrong with Anthony." What's wrong with him? I believe that's a cut subplot from the book, from what I recall, Anthony has a learning disability/speech disorder and Michael won't countenance it. The implication is that he won't be like his father, the reveal later that Kay had an abortion sends him over the edge with this in mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
Doesn't book Michael not want his son to follow in his footsteps, similar to how Vito didn't want Michael to? I seem to remember the ending to the book implying a cycle- similar to how Kay ends up becoming similar to Michael's mother...
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:At the end of Resolution, were the two main characters killed by Big Foot? Or could it have been this thing: The conceit of Resolution is that you, the viewer, are the killer/stalker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
Hey, avid film readers (pim, SubG, et al): you know of any good writing on A) the history of the ratings system in general, but more specifically B) the history of X and NC-17? Having a harder time than I figured finding good stuff besides the occasional newspaper article on Google for my Box Office Mistakes contribution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:Hey, avid film readers (pim, SubG, et al): you know of any good writing on A) the history of the ratings system in general, but more specifically B) the history of X and NC-17? Having a harder time than I figured finding good stuff besides the occasional newspaper article on Google for my Box Office Mistakes contribution. Wasn't the documentary "This film is rated R" basically about this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Wasn't the documentary "This film is rated R" basically about this? I think you're thinking of "This Film Is Not Yet Rated," and that doc focuses a lot more on the modern hypocrisy of the MPAA than the history of the rating system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:I think you're thinking of "This Film Is Not Yet Rated," and that doc focuses a lot more on the modern hypocrisy of the MPAA than the history of the rating system. Yeah, you're absolutely right. My bad. Carry on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Have there been any good articles relating to the artistic use of shooting films in 3D? Like something where the 3D is designed to enhance the message or atmosphere of the film and not just used as a novelty to increase ticket sales.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
Wrong thread
CV 64 Fan fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Oct 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
Why in some cases do productions have to pay companies to use their logos (prompting reality shows to blur out caps, shirts, etc.), and in some cases companies pay them to use their brand (prompting product placement complaints)?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
User-Friendly posted:Why in some cases do productions have to pay companies to use their logos (prompting reality shows to blur out caps, shirts, etc.), and in some cases companies pay them to use their brand (prompting product placement complaints)? Its all about who signed off and what they want to be involved with. Blurring tends to happen when you have shows that are considered non-family orientated because companies don't want to be associated with them and will effectively give up free money to avoid the association. The best of course is things like Blade 3 where the director put in a bunch of iPod stuff hoping Apple would pay for it and they laughed in his face and took the free advertising.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Sometimes you might want to have the characters use some sort of brand product to make things seem more 'real' but the company might not be interested in paying to have their product or logo show up in your movie for some reason, maybe if you're making something like Chainsaw Scumfuck part III: Revelations and they don't want to be associated with that or something, so if you want to be allowed to use it you might have to pay. I think one of the commentaries for Shaun of the Dead mentions that the scene where they turn on the tv but all the channels are just broadcasting their logos and some text about technical difficulties was one most expensive scenes in the entire film because of all the money spent on clearing the various logos. Repo Man avoided this problem rather cleverly by having all the products be ultra-generic: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Cigarettes for a dollar and ten, Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Fun fact on product placement; Beer companies are typically very uptight about being featured in a movie if a character is just pounding them to pound them or goes and does something stupid/dangerous/horrible while drunk. When the went to make Hellboy no beer company was willing to be Satan's child's beer of choice for his benders except Tecate who were just thrilled to be in a movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Fun fact on product placement; Beer companies are typically very uptight about being featured in a movie if a character is just pounding them to pound them or goes and does something stupid/dangerous/horrible while drunk. When the went to make Hellboy no beer company was willing to be Satan's child's beer of choice for his benders except Tecate who were just thrilled to be in a movie. I guess that explains the prominently featured Steel Reserve in Grandma's Boy. They probably figure anyone who drinks their poo poo doesn't care if it leads to hooking up with a septuagenarian.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Cigarettes for a dollar and ten, Jesus Christ. Just one cigarette, it seems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Just one cigarette, it seems. Maybe it's like Canada where the plural of beer is beer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
The director commentary on Donnie Darko is very educational as to how complicated these things can be. (Though I assume only on the original cut.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Repo Man avoided this problem rather cleverly by having all the products be ultra-generic: I wish those were still around, things like Dr. Thunder are fun but I'd love to be able to sit down on a hot summer's day and drink some nice refreshing ｃｏｌａ
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:I wish those were still around, things like Dr. Thunder are fun but I'd love to be able to sit down on a hot summer's day and drink some nice refreshing ｃｏｌａ 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:07
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Fun fact on product placement; Beer companies are typically very uptight about being featured in a movie if a character is just pounding them to pound them or goes and does something stupid/dangerous/horrible while drunk. When the went to make Hellboy no beer company was willing to be Satan's child's beer of choice for his benders except Tecate who were just thrilled to be in a movie. They are. They require the actors who drink the beer to be over the age of 25 in real life (good luck getting those real ages) so that there is 100% no confusion over whether their product is being consumed underage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 05:18
|
|
|
User-Friendly posted:Why in some cases do productions have to pay companies to use their logos (prompting reality shows to blur out caps, shirts, etc.), and in some cases companies pay them to use their brand (prompting product placement complaints)? Sometimes it's also a studio thing. The studio will have a policy that movies or shows can't feature product placement unless they get money out of it, and will prevent companies that didn't pay from appearing. They're reluctant to give out free advertising when much of their money (in the case of broadcast TV, all of it) is dependent on companies buying ads.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:They are. They require the actors who drink the beer to be over the age of 25 in real life (good luck getting those real ages) so that there is 100% no confusion over whether their product is being consumed underage. Theoretically they could do this with a lot of high school movies, in that case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 07:58
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Repo Man avoided this problem rather cleverly by having all the products be ultra-generic Repo's Man's generic brand was from Ralph's, or based off of Ralph's, I don't remember.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 08:35
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Theoretically they could do this with a lot of high school movies, in that case. The character has to be above age as well. They want there to be no confusion, so the actor has to be well above age.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 08:35
|
|
|
I'm sure there's a more recent example, but honestly the last time I remember a beer being called out by name in a movie was the first Fast and Furious movie, "You can have any beer you want, as long as it's Corona." And everyone in that movie was a least in their mid-twenties. (Given that I was 16 when that movie came out, I just realized how old Paul Walker and Vin Diesel are).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
They're still drinking Corona in Furious 6 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 09:25
|
|
|
They renounced life on beautiful island paradises specifically to drink coronas in a lovely part of LA. I dont think they even put limes in them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeWUXV89w0g
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Fun fact on product placement; Beer companies are typically very uptight about being featured in a movie if a character is just pounding them to pound them or goes and does something stupid/dangerous/horrible while drunk. When the went to make Hellboy no beer company was willing to be Satan's child's beer of choice for his benders except Tecate who were just thrilled to be in a movie. This is apparently a common occurrence in Hollywood. I Adam Carolla's movie The Hammer he wrote a scene where his character gets black out drunk and the only company that would allow their brand to be used without huge fees was Tecate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
I don't know if this counts, but I'm at my wits end: I know for a fact we had a thread about The Cabin In the Woods. I have search and archives, but no matter of inputs is finding it. I can find Film Dump posts, but not the actual thread. Did someone delete it, or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2013 08:48
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I don't know if this counts, but I'm at my wits end: I don't think search works for archives so it can be tough to find particular threads. At least, that's been my experience when looking for an old thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
2 seconds. Archives of 2013. Click "Horror" Tag. Boom: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3478708
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
Luckluster posted:This is apparently a common occurrence in Hollywood. I Adam Carolla's movie The Hammer he wrote a scene where his character gets black out drunk and the only company that would allow their brand to be used without huge fees was Tecate. I'm trying to recall whether we've seen a Lenovo/Mac laptop used in hacking sequences....
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 10:40
|
|
|
WastedJoker posted:I'm trying to recall whether we've seen a Lenovo/Mac laptop used in hacking sequences.... Surely you're forgetting the immortal scene where a Macbook hacks into an alien mothership and uploads a virus
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 11:44
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Surely you're forgetting the immortal scene where a Macbook hacks into an alien mothership and uploads a virus I feel extremely embarrassed that I completely forgot about that *hands in my cinema pass* Return it only when I have completed the 10 Challenges of Herculean Movie Efforts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 12:55
|
|
|
Yeah Apple were always good at product placement, giving free computers to film makers at a time when their PC rivals often made it difficult to use their stuff. It's why you get so many macs in movies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Yeah Apple were always good at product placement, giving free computers to film makers at a time when their PC rivals often made it difficult to use their stuff. It's why you get so many macs in movies. Is that a fact? They were very pervasive during a period where they were the only computers that looked good on film. Does a free computer make much of a difference in that big movie budget?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
Not just a free computer, but also the rights to use it on screen. That second part is usually the rub.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2013 07:13
|
|
