|
ufarn posted:That his IMDB pedigree is poo poo, and "assume the dude knows what he's doing for whatever reason" is how he got the job in the first place. He's 45 and this is his second movie, ffs
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
Snow White is an extremely solid movie and lol if you're legit upset that Bella Swan cheated on Edward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Snow White is an extremely solid movie and lol if you're legit upset that Bella Swan cheated on Edward. Edward is happier with FKA twigs anyways
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HIDEO_KOJIMA_EN/status/844003140139540480 Bugblatter posted:What does that have to do with anything? It's relatively tame compared to a lot of other more prominent directors and artists. Yeah, it's crazy how nobody even brings up things like Bryan Singer being a serial statutory date rapist during the release of any one of the half dozen movies about high school students that he's put out but an affair between two consenting adults is all anybody wants to bring up whenever either of them are mentioned because  .
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:What is embarrassing about what's written on the director's note card, and what you have transcribed? I mean, did you read it? It's kind of hard to argue why its so sad an unimpressive. I don't want to harp on the child thing, but it really is like... sad. It's literally just 'character is lost, finds self, beats villain'. I just don't even see why a proffesional would need to write it down, it's just the most pathetic thing I've ever seen. To even call it a 'plan' is an insult to plans. quote:You are giving an inaccurate explanation of the context of the image, which appears on the same page as a bunch of concept art and storyboards. Yeah... But I'm pretty sure the guy who wrote that didn't draw the concept art or the storyboards. quote:This is not a trailer for the film. The book exists for absolutely anybody who for any reason might be interested in the development and production of Ghost in the Shell, regardless of whether or not they would personally like Ghost in the Shell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Wait...Raiden's not white?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:I mean, did you read it? It's kind of hard to argue why its so sad an unimpressive. I don't want to harp on the child thing, but it really is like... sad. It's literally just 'character is lost, finds self, beats villain'. I just don't even see why a proffesional would need to write it down, it's just the most pathetic thing I've ever seen. To even call it a 'plan' is an insult to plans. The card is, specifically, to help in structuring the plot (and supposedly convey simply and directly to other production people/performers what he wants to depict) around Mira's subjective. And while you've continued to frame your perception of this in terms like 'sad,' 'embarrassing,' 'pathetic,' you basically admit to not being able to convey precisely what is wrong with it formalistically or conceptually, except to re-transcribe it. Meanwhile, what you have clarified is that your displeasure has something to do with 'character is lost, finds self, beats villain.' The last two things are irrelevant to what Sanders is - I guess he should feel 'embarrassed' about this - trying to map out for his protagonist, with a minimum of b.s. and maximum conceptual legibility.  All it does is clarify that filmmaking is a conceptual as well as collaborative process. It's clear why a professional filmmaker would use such a device, but the one thing that's brought out the most ire towards GitS'17 is this meme that it's 'dumbed-down,' that it's 'just another story about identity,' and that Major's identity problems are dumb because reasons. So, meanwhile, the revelation that Motoko Kusanagi and Major are two completely different characters, played by separate actresses, goes over everyone's heads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:The card is, specifically, to help in structuring the plot (and supposedly convey simply and directly to other production people/performers what he wants to depict) around Mira's subjective. And while you've continued to frame your perception of this in terms like 'sad,' 'embarrassing,' 'pathetic,' you basically admit to not being able to convey precisely what is wrong with it formalistically or conceptually, except to re-transcribe it. The note basically says 'insert story arc here' I really don't get how you can describe it as some sort of valuable tool crucial to creating this work of fiction. It's like someone wrote 'PLAN: Make movie with character arc'. That's what's so embarassing about it, it doesn't do anything wrong it's just so childish and dumb that it's funny. I mean that might be me just being pretentious, thinking that 'is lost, finds self beats villain' should be written down with lines connecting those points like you might accidentally start with her found and then losing herself while beating the villain in the first act. quote:Meanwhile, what you have clarified is that your displeasure has something to do with 'character is lost, finds self, beats villain.' The last two things are irrelevant to what Sanders is - I guess he should feel 'embarrassed' about this - trying to map out for his protagonist, with a minimum of b.s. and maximum conceptual legibility. Yeah it's an attempt to 'map out his protagonist' but that map is literally 'is lost, who am I? I am me'. I do feel bad for repeating myself over and over, but I just don't think your attempts to frame this thing as more impressive are working by saying stuff like 'MAXIMUM CONCEPTUAL LEGIBILITY' in regards to that post-it. quote:All it does is clarify that filmmaking is a conceptual as well as collaborative process. It's clear why a professional filmmaker would use such a device, 'Such a device' kind of missing the point that the device in question is that piece of paper. If it had a little more to it then maybe I could agree, but it's so overly simplistic it looks like something written by a 10 year old. The idea that this piece of paper was a valuable part of the collaborative process that everyone needed just makes them all look as dumb as the guy who wrote it. I mean I'm not even slagging off the movie or saying it's gonna be garbage, I just love that plan and think it's comedic genius.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
The thing that gets me about that card is that it's very Blake Snyder or Robert McKee scriptwriting. It thinks it's deep and unique but in reality, it's almost generic to the point of being boilerplate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:The note basically says 'insert story arc here' I really don't get how you can describe it as some sort of valuable tool crucial to creating this work of fiction. It's like someone wrote 'PLAN: Make movie with character arc'. That's what's so embarassing about it, it doesn't do anything wrong it's just so childish and dumb that it's funny. I mean that might be me just being pretentious, thinking that 'is lost, finds self beats villain' should be written down with lines connecting those points like you might accidentally start with her found and then losing herself while beating the villain in the first act. I am not trying to make the card seem "more impressive" - I am attempting to clarify for you that its function and point of inclusion in the art of GitS'17 book is not for Sanders to project this idea that he has some impressive, deep, or unique insight - this ideological fantasy that Young Freud expresses. Remember, Sanders nor the card "thinks" anything. Sanders might not have even thought a lot of these materials would be of interest for anyone outside of the production. The operating theme of the meme is that Sanders should be embarrassed, that he thinks he's deep, but Sanders just has a journal that he used to develop his ideas on writing and directing the film, which is not impressive technique, but is, specifically, not remarkably idiotic technique either. In order for this rather unremarkable organizational technique to become 'childish' or 'pretentious,' there needs to be this imagined hierarchy of themes - concepts and how they are conveyed. You are close in labeling this position - and the inability to expand upon it without repeating yourself - 'pretension,' though I would dare you friend to go even further and say elitism. The premise of the meme is that Sanders is trying and failing to make his film impressive, but all he does is betray how generic it was all along. But the problem with memes is that they don't clarify anything, like that 'moving beyond generics' is not impressive in and of itself, nor does it really mean anything. Nobody is actually against genre.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:The note basically says 'insert story arc here' I really don't get how you can describe it as some sort of valuable tool crucial to creating this work of fiction. It's like someone wrote 'PLAN: Make movie with character arc'. That's what's so embarassing about it, it doesn't do anything wrong it's just so childish and dumb that it's funny. I mean that might be me just being pretentious, thinking that 'is lost, finds self beats villain' should be written down with lines connecting those points like you might accidentally start with her found and then losing herself while beating the villain in the first act. Nobody has framed it as valuable, crucial or impressive except you. You've used these lofty terms, then gotten angry when the image in a shallow making of book fails to live up to the towering heights you've set. You might as well have spent several long posts being angry about sketches of characters. "Why do they need sketches? People can just figure out how they stand. This is not a gorgeous, beautiful, transcendant image." Young Freud posted:It thinks it's deep and unique but in reality, it's almost generic to the point of being boilerplate. It does not think anything because it is a piece of paper represented on another piece of paper. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Mar 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
what are... words!?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Everyone knows that all good movies either spring fully-formed from a difficult savant auteur who obviously has no need to ever set ideas to paper, or are borne through serendipity from production constraints and mishaps (which is, incidentally, why CGI has ruined movies forever). Any evidence of effort, any detectable molecule of process, is a surefire indicator that it's gonna be poo poo, you guys 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
If you don't think it's going to be the dumbest thing you've ever seen, you're going to be in for a rude awakening.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Phone posted:If you don't think it's going to be the dumbest thing you've ever seen, you're going to be in for a rude awakening. The movie will probably be bad. However, it's not going to be bad because, at some point, the director sketched out a bare bones outline, and then someone else put that in a making of book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
And I doubt it will be the dumbest thing everyone has ever seen. I let a friend drag me to Meet the Spartans, and even that wasn't the dumbest thing I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
You're also assuming that the blurb saying "this is what the director wrote down" isn't just some bullshit the people who put the book together did to fill some space. What a non issue
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Exactly. If the movie is good it'll be a pleasant surprise, but getting in such a rush to portray every Hollywood person as the insane hack producer from that Kevin Smith story who was sure that Superman needed to fight a giant spider as part of his hero's journey that you cast the totally mundane minutia of the writing process as pretentious failure is dumb. Like-- cosmically_cosmic posted:The note basically says 'insert story arc here' I really don't get how you can describe it as some sort of valuable tool crucial to creating this work of fiction. It's like someone wrote 'PLAN: Make movie with character arc'. That's what's so embarassing about it, it doesn't do anything wrong it's just so childish and dumb that it's funny. I mean that might be me just being pretentious, thinking that 'is lost, finds self beats villain' should be written down with lines connecting those points like you might accidentally start with her found and then losing herself while beating the villain in the first act. This entire quote is predicated on the idea that that little note is somehow 90% of the bulk of the story work going into the final product, and not a thumbnail sketch likely clipped to a huge sheaf of pre-pro work and script drafts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
I have no high hopes for the story, but those kinds of little outline cards are not uncommon on productions. You might do something like that for costumes or sets when they just need the roughest bullet points of what story beats their designs should be supporting. The Stanley Kubrick archive is full of thousands of similar, seemingly trite, reference cards. They aren't meant to be deep or profound, they're intentionally stripped down. The only weird thing is someone thought it should be in publicity materials.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
The movie looks amusing and I am excited about live action transhumanism, which has only really been technically feasible in the last few years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 00:35
|
|
Phone posted:If you don't think it's going to be the dumbest thing you've ever seen, you're going to be in for a rude awakening. Buddy, let me tell you about a little film called Foodfight
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
90% of any creative endeavor is writing down something that every time you look at it makes you feel stupid, such as that note card, because once you're actually in the throes of the making of a thing, it's real easy to get lost. The essence of a card like that is to serve as a reminder of who the story is centered around, and what the basic idea of the character is. The arc itself is formed in treatments that delineate who your characters are, how they react to things, how this snowballs into new things that they react to, little things like whether they're hesitant or bullheaded, passive or active, the stuff that's the actual writing and filming and editing and whatnot. I feel like anybody mocking a note card that reminds a guy that all this odd stuff he wrote that serves no purpose that he really liked in the second act has nothing to do with the character he's centering his story around and has been completely useless and should probably delete it or at least revise it into something that actually feeds into that second act directly is the sort of person who has never really sat down and tried to build something especially long-form before in their life. Ghost in the Shell will probably be bad and Rupert Sanders is a blasé filmmaker for the most part, but this is divining for water with a random stick in the woods, guys. This is about as bad a complaint as "the initial (read: assembly) cut of this movie was four hours, it's a mess".
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
As long as GITS over uses that Ki Theory cover of Enjoy The Silence during the run time of the movie I'll be happy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
GitS fans don't like GitS.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Wait...Raiden's not white? Raiden's ethnicity has always been kinda weird because he's from Liberia and is kinda/sorta/maybe not an albino (and some areas of West Africa have huge tribal taboos against albinos). Like MGS3 taking place in a Russian jungle, it's something that's just kinda hand waved over. But yeah, Raiden is literally an African-American.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
Knowing Kojima, he's probably half Japanese like every Metal Gear character.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Vanderdeath posted:But yeah, Raiden is literally an African-American. What the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:What the gently caress. There are white guys in africa. And those who come over to the US would be....african-american. That the term generally refers to black people with a high degree of accuracy just enables double takes like this. ....doesn't make Raiden's child-soldier WTF backstory any less, uh, WTF-inducing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
I feel like I need to repeat cosmically_cosmic posted:I mean I'm not even slagging off the movie or saying it's gonna be garbage, I just love that plan and think it's comedic genius. Because yall keep acting like I'm writing this stuff unprovoked, but people are comparing that half-baked plot arc 101 with nothing else to the detailed notes Kubrick kept on his films. If comparing 'Who am I, I am motoko' to Stanley Kubricks insane amounts of research/planning isn't trying to make it sound more impressive I dunno what is. The card is dumb. You can argue I'm making up a fantasy or that I'm ideologically memed or something, based on the idea that I'm arguing something I'm not, like: HookedOnChthonics posted:Everyone knows that all good movies either spring fully-formed from a difficult savant auteur who obviously has no need to ever set ideas to paper, or are borne through serendipity from production constraints and mishaps (which is, incidentally, why CGI has ruined movies forever). Any evidence of effort, any detectable molecule of process, is a surefire indicator that it's gonna be poo poo, you guys Because that seems to assume that I hate all plans and notes, not just this hilarious one. Which is plainly bad, and not at all useful as a note unless you literally can't remember 5 words in a row, or understand that movies start before they finish. I mean I get that it isn't even really about the note at this point, and it's just a 'You're all just haters who think X about this movie' or 'you think no movie maker should make notes ever'. Most of the arguments seem to focus on the abstract concept of taking notes or making plans, and not the actual one the normies are laughing at. cosmically_cosmic fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:I feel like I need to repeat Quoting because you're correct. We didn't stumble across the card in a big box of keepsakes, it's something someone thought worthy of a glossy art-book image. I make some algorithmic art and would never show off the trivial poo poo in my notebook from the beginning of a project. at everyone defending this.Also, is K. Waste a SMG sockpuppet? Basically the same tedious logic leaps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:normies Honestly I'm just mad curious at this point to see what a 'good' ten-word character journey diagram looks like. Must be really mindblowing if the dumbness of this one is so transparent! The caption to that image even specifies it's a single page from his notebook. Now why do you suspect that for an art book they might choose to excerpt a visual element rather than a random page of notes? Is it because those notes don't exist, as you suppose, or could there be some other reason? HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:lol You're right, it's not a bad 10-word character diagram. But it's placement in that book is an explicit statement that the offhand scribblings of the rich and powerful Director deserve equal attention as stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosBvDyWgnA
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Analytic Engine posted:Quoting because you're correct. We didn't stumble across the card in a big box of keepsakes, it's something someone thought worthy of a glossy art-book image. I make some algorithmic art and would never show off the trivial poo poo in my notebook from the beginning of a project. Everyone has maintained that it's weird that this thing was showcased in the art book. There's no controversy there. The editor that made that call is dumb. However, these simplistic reference cards are common in film, even (especially) when the narrative content is ambitious in its complexity (I don't think that's the case here). Everyone from Spielberg to Scott to Cameron use them heavily when working with different departments. And I wasn't comparing them to Kubrick's historical research notes. These are inter-departmental cliff notes for quick reference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Analytic Engine posted:You're right, it's not a bad 10-word character diagram. But it's placement in that book is an explicit statement that the offhand scribblings of the rich and powerful Director deserve equal attention as stuff like this: That's... certainly a conclusion you've come to based on a scan of a single page of an artbook, yes. It does raise the question of what you think a director actually contributes to a movie, though. You're aware they also get to put their names first in the credits, yes? Does that cheat the vfx department too somehow? Also, artbooks are usually production showcases intended to give a behind-the-scenes view of the creative process of a movie at all levels, not some presentation portfolio of only the most polished camera-ready product; I don't think the inclusion of production notes is strange at all. It's just... incredibly fuckin' strange to read into it for slights is all  HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Mar 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:That's... certainly a conclusion you've come to based on a scan of a single page of an artbook, yes. Agreed, and I know I was one of the people that's been heavily mocking that note card but there's nothing really wrong with the arc. I just think it's stupid because it's so far away from what Ghost in the Shell has ever been about in any incarnation. If the notes themselves were bad then hell Dark City wouldn't be one of my favorite movies ever. But it's just another bullet point to the question of why they really thought the Ghost in the Shell name would hold weight with so many changes instead of just making a cool cyberpunk action flick with Scarlet Johansson. I mean (prior to this movie being announced) she's way more popular than Ghost in the Shell in the public eye, is a huge star, and Lucy made like $500 million on a $40 million budget. But instead it's like they got the name and the characters but also have inadvertently made a great effort at getting people who would probably dig a Ghost in the Shell movie to not want to see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:I feel like I need to repeat It's why I invoked the names of Blake Snyder, whose only film credits are writing ground-breaking work like Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot and Blank Check, and Robert McKee, who has no film writing credits and mostly worked in television, but both had positioned themselves in Hollywood as these wise sages by teaching seminars on screenwriting. McKee himself is criticized by Joe Eszterhas and Charlie Kaufman, probably more famously in Adaptation. Their teaching tends to lead to very generic screenwriting and it wouldn't surprise me if Sanders or Jamie Moss was a student. The film looks like it will have a Snyder-influenced trademark to have the hero's first action to be shown rescuing someone, to prove that they're "likable", with Major's first action being hostage rescue. Compare this to the opening prologue where Kusanagi murders an unarmed diplomat. An aside: I looked up Moss' film credits, he's had only one credit prior to GITS, 2008 Street Kings, where I assume he was a script doctor since he's name is third credit after James Ellroy and Kurt Wimmer (!). Also, he has a film being developed from a Don Keith novel, Hunter Killer which after reading the synopsis, where "A sub captain and Navy SEALs rescue the Russian president, who has been kidnapped by a rogue general", feels like it should have been made ten or twenty years ago, given today's political climate. Seriously, it's hilarious to see that plot in 2017 and not end with "and the SEALs and sub captain goof off for two hours while the general dunks on not-Putin". Analytic Engine posted:Also, is K. Waste a SMG sockpuppet? Basically the same tedious logic leaps. I don't think so, but their accounts seem to be run by Markov chain generators, considering someone snuck Fast and Furious: Tokyo Drift into all this and we ended up getting some convoluted connection out of SMG. Also, K.Waste got owned by Tars in the greenlit thread when debating whether a name change took place and Tars put up a still from the movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:The movie looks amusing and I am excited about live action transhumanism, which has only really been technically feasible in the last few years. Go watch Transcendence, where Johnny Depp plays an action version of Ray Kurzweil.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:The movie looks amusing and I am excited about live action transhumanism, which has only really been technically feasible in the last few years. Please please please please watch this film if you haven't yet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alkPjVXDWfU
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
The movie looks great precisely because of the VFX and art direction. The card is a synecdoche for the uninterestingness of the story and it hurts to know what could have been with this movie. Yeah Mira -> Motoko is a new twist on GitS, but it's a worn path in modern fiction writing and won't hold a candle to the 30 year old B-plot of Murphy -> Robocop. I say this as a fan of "Perfume", "Dark City", Michele Gondry, and Jean-Pierre Jeunet. It's so frustrating to like something with incredible visual style that just doesn't hang together as a multimedia narrative worth telling. The GitS 2017 experience will be fun and at least inspire the kids entering art school in 2030. "Did you know it was based on a 40-year old manga?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2017 05:44
|
|