|
Og Oggilby posted:Part of the reason for the slow gain in wide releases... Lot 49 posted:Are movies generally getting longer? I think so, for a few reasons. In part because producers/studios are rushing to gets films into theatres to hit certain release dates. CG/VFX play a role in that they take a long time to create and integrate into a film, thus creating additional time pressure. Lastly, most independent films have limited budgets and can't spend that long in post, or afford the time taken to properly edit (e.g., a bank is financing the film and the interest is mounting - they need to complete and deliver the film ASAP to pay the bank off). It takes time to make a long movie shorter, and the economics are such that few directors, producers and editors these days have that time.
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2008 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 01:20 |
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:He doesn't, the line producer does. Usually it's by which location is available first or which actor do they need to shoot out first. What he said. FYI, the line producer is the person responsible for the physical manufacture of the film, including, essentially, budgeting and scheduling. The director has some input into this process, but it is the line producer's call (with the producer, if necessary). Actors are often available for specified limited periods, e.g., two weeks commencing Sept 20th - so if you want that actor in your film you'd better organise your schedule so that they get their scenes done in the 2 weeks starting then.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2008 23:30
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Not directly. Imagine that there's a large pool of oil that was underground, under both pieces of land. The derricks that he placed on his own land were tapping the entire oil patch, as I understand it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2008 21:27
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:I thought Daniel was still bitter about Eli embarrassing him during the baptism, because his guilt really was torturing him. H.W. walking out on him brought those feelings back and Eli arrived just in time for Daniel to take it out on him. I think it is a bit of all of them. I do believe that Daniel loved HW, and he would hate Eli for making him feel that guilt and that love - and when Eli comes after HW has walked out, Daniel can vent all of his pent-up rage, guilt and frustration on the man who made him face up to it. Eli, while being slimy and avaricious, also represents, in a twisted way, Daniel's conscience.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2008 14:35
|
|
|
voltron posted:Re: the Frost/Nixon movie: Spoiler this, chum.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2008 21:42
|
|
|
Agatha Christie-based films like Murder on The Orient Express and Death on the Nile.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2008 21:59
|
|
|
Does anyone know why Chris Menges replaced Roger Deakins on The Reader? I know the film was delayed; was it scheduling conflicts with Deakins's prior commitments?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2009 19:48
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:Bear in mind that we'd come out of a war, a bad economy, and were fueling rather incredible economic success driven in part by unprecedented deficit spending and a stock market explosion. Blockbusters were becoming the new mainstay of movie studios and television marketing was going into overdrive to siphon the new wealth (with kids shows tied inextricably to toy lines). And the best thing ever? Credit Cards. Also, Reagan had come into power in America, with trickle-down economics which wanted to make the rich richer, while a similar thing was happening in the UK with Thatcher and the end of the unions and heavy industry and mining. (yes, gross oversimplifications but indicative of where society was heading).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2009 12:06
|
|
|
timeandtide posted:I just recalled watching a cartoon film in elementary school that was somewhat disturbing, and was trying to figure out what it was: it's basically about a cat trying to chase away/kill a snake that is trying to get into the crib of a baby. The film takes place in a falling apart house/mansion, none of the animals talk, and I think all of the humans are seen from the waist or chest down, or obscured from the back. There is actually a thread dedicated to these questions called "Identify a movie for me 2: identify harder" http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2177344
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2009 10:42
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:casting stuff Yes, this. For instance, for roles such as child roles where the actors are unknowns, the casting director would have the auditions (and film them), and then whittle down the ones that suited the look that the director was after, and present the leading candidates. What if, for instance, the film requires supporting cast with specific attributes (tattoos, ethnicity, etc)- you think the director is going to call and sit through auditions for all of those? Also, if you are an inexperienced or unknown producer, casting directors can get you access to agents and cast, and give guidance on deal-making. There is nothing inefficient about it at all. Also, on an unrelated note: I just had a crap and when I exited the toilet, Terry Gilliam was waiting to go in. Luckily it wasn't too smelly, but he loves scatological humour, so I didn't feel too sorry for him. therattle fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jun 23, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2009 17:34
|
|
|
JD Brickmeister posted:Follow up re: casting stuff Yep. Ever heard of the casting couch? They are classified as heads of department, alongside people like director of photography, editor, costume designer, etc, and thus receive a main-title credit. They are not assistants to the producer: they are not employed full-time by him/her, but are brought on on a project-by-project basis to perform a specific and specialised task. By your logic, everyone who works on the film could be classified as an assistant to the producer or director.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2009 19:15
|
|
|
Daduzi posted:I was watching Cloverfield today and noticed a curious credit: "Sound editing at: 20th Century Fox Studios". Can anyone explain to me why a Paramount produced film would have sound editing done at a different studio, and is this the norm and I just failed to notice it before? Fox Sound would be just one of many sound facilities operating. Rather than keep it just for internal projects, at some point Fox would have spun it off as an independent business to compete in the market for business. I don't really know, but I imagine it's a top-flight sound lab equipped to handle studio-level films. Paramount may no longer have this kind of physical infrastructure; it might not be as good; or it might have been busy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2009 14:36
|
|
|
ONE YEAR LATER posted:That movie is combining elements of both stories like the original animated film did and the pig has a place in the story. It's not like Tim Burton just went "hey a pig would make this picture wacky!!" Tori Amos did this sometime in the mid-90s - although she went a step further and had the pig suckling at her breast (perhaps a visual pun on 'suckling pig'?). C'mon Tim, get with it. Anyway, I liked The Corpse Bride. It was slight, but I liked it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2009 20:35
|
|
|
Binowru posted:When did movies go from having all their credits at the beginning to having all the credits at the end? And was this change caused by moviemakers realizing people don't like sitting through long lists of names before the story starts? This is pure supposition but I think it might have something to do with guilds and teamsters/IATSE (film technicians' union) gaining more power which led to their members increasingly being granted credits, so that credits became too long for the opening of the film.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
haveblue posted:The completion guarantee is sort of like "production insurance". If a movie is suddenly unable to continue filming and has to be abandoned, this is the mechanism that would trigger to handle all the lost investments. Mostly true but there is specific insurance one gets for cast, which is a specific risk that the bond excludes. If the film is not deliverable because the specified cast or director have not fully rendered their services (eg you have a deal to France which specifies Jean Rochefort in the role of Quixote, or that Terry Giliam will be the film's director - if those elements are not in the finished film, the French distributor refuses delivery and is not obliged to pay what it has agreed to) then the production has to get what is called essential elements insurance, which covers those people deemed to be essential for various (contractual) reasons. Getting that insurance for someone like Jean Rochefort will be a lot harder and pricier than for someone young and healthy. In Lost In la Mancha, it was not the completion guarantor that ended up with the rights, but Gehrling, the insurance company which had underwritten the essential elements policy and had to pay up when Rochefort fell out of the film. That said, the bond was lucky that they weren't on the hook for that disaster. SaintFu posted:If that sort of insurance were available, nobody would write a policy for a Terry Gilliam movie. Gilliam can get a bond without too much hassle. Tideland, for instance, was bonded by Film Finances, and it came in on time and on budget. He can also get essential elements insurance as he is fit and healthy. How insurable the actors he casts are is dependent on the actor in question.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2009 16:40
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:Well then that makes me quite the idiot I guess. No, not really. Also, scheduling, esp for independent films, also depends a lot on cast availability: if Depp is only available for a certain limited period, then that's when they'll film his scenes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2009 12:18
|
|
|
Disco De Soto posted:And when they want a horse, they just tape a bunch of cats together. that's absolutely hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2010 23:40
|
|
|
hog wizard posted:^^^ hahah I love going back and reading posts that are 100% wrong. I thought Creation would get some awards heat in the awards thread, and boy, has it not. That's probably my biggest error.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2010 18:50
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0069 posted:The release rights for a single movie might be owned by different distributors for each market. Region locking helps make sure that only the company that owns the rights within a region is selling to that region. yes, and also helps protect pricing within a region so that people can't import cheaper versions and undercut distributors. VVVVVVVVVV Yes, definitely therattle fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Feb 22, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2010 14:08
|
|
|
Cerv posted:Is there any part 3 of a crime trilogy that isn't a let down? Police Academy III.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2010 19:21
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:No there is very little continuity in the Bond films. Is Sheriff Pepper the one who says "What the hell's ailin' you, boy?"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
Binowru posted:I would hope so. What kind of spy goes around telling everyone his name? Bond. James Bond.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 11:52
|
|
|
Penpal posted:Also, a general movie question: Have any really good DP's gone on to direct really good films? Barry Sonnenfeld. DP for Misery, Miller's Crossing, When Harry Met Sally, Big (amongst others) - then directed my fave Addams Family Values (which I think is a really good film).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2010 18:03
|
|
|
Akuma posted:I watched Kick-rear end last night, and it got me thinking; how often do films use pieces of music from another film's score? I'm sure it must happen a decent amount, but I'm drawing a complete blank. Goodfellas uses score from Le Mepris, which is an absolutely beautiful, melancholy piece.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 10:34
|
|
|
Zwille posted:
Oil rigs showings are classed as non-theatrical exploitation, which is treated separately from home video (sell-through or rental). Non-theatrical is usually handled alongside theatrical, which usually treats revenues and expenses differently from home video.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 15:03
|
|
|
doctor thodt posted:Optimum distributes Studio Canal stuff in the UK. They've got some pretty nice Blu-Ray packages. Yeah. Until about 4 years ago they were independent, and distribute independent films, but then they were bought by SC and release SC product. I didn't realise they had a particular reputation for good DVD releases. Artificial Eye does some good releases too; so does Axiom. You could just buy a multi-region Blu-ray player. I got a very nice LG Blu-ray multi-region player for about £140. You can get cheaper.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2010 13:30
|
|
|
ProfessorClumsy posted:Bad Santa knight. "Mmm baby, you ain't gonna poo poo right for a week"
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2010 14:43
|
|
|
fenix down posted:Can't be worse than what Harpo did in Animal Crackers (used a painting as a blanket) Could have wiped his arse on it.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2010 18:31
|
|
|
bad movie knight posted:As great as Raiders of the Lost Ark is, it would be 100x more awesome if it starred Klaus Kinski as the villain and was directed by Werner Herzog. My god, the mind boggles. You're totally right though! Maybe not so many Germans appear in Hollywood films because not that many are good enough AND have excellent English? Herzog/Kinski snipe 
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2010 11:23
|
|
|
Elijya posted:Why is the movie Half Baked called that, and not just Baked? What is the rationale for the "Half"? It doesn't really work for the plot, and I've never heard 'half baked' as a drug term before. I think that's more a question for GWS. They even have a specific bread thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2010 11:10
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:Most likely I think they both just have a lot of interests other than writing, and would rather be doing them. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2010 14:22
|
|
|
Elijya posted:Anyway, Damon clearly had more luck in the acting field than Affleck Better luck, or better advice and role selection? Damon has picked some winning scripts and directors; far more than Affleck.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2010 18:30
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Are there any movies (or any medium I guess) where they try to have something look like it was filmed a long time ago and it really looks like it? It seems like whenever they try to make something look like it was filmed like it was in the 30's or 40', or even the 60's or 70's or whenever, it always looks too crisp or just off in some way. Can't they just use an old movie camera and do it like that or is it something with modern film stock that makes everything look modern? I thought CQ by Roman Coppola did a decent job of that. So did OSS117 too, actually. That's two just off the top of my head.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2010 12:09
|
|
|
I think things like that zoom need to be used sparingly because it is so obviously a technique that it can take the viewer out of the film very easily, and remind them that they are watching a film as opposed to being immersed in and caught up in a film-watching experience.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2010 12:11
|
|
|
fenix down posted:This has probably been asked before, but has there ever been a remake of a movie or TV show that rose above the source material or got good reviews? I'm'a gonna be controversial and say that I liked Adrian Lyne's 1997 version of Lolita better than Kubrick's.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2010 16:59
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Sorry, I don't have the entire Beatles Catalog memorized. Yeah, you should be, motherfucker. Dear Prudence is on The White Album. It's a beautiful song and you should check it out.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2010 11:23
|
|
|
SubG posted:I think this is equivalently true if you remove `in Japan'. Especially if the emphasis is on the word `in'. Well done for not mentioning anyone's mother.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 12:22
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Oooooh yeah, the cheese burger bit. God drat it just didnt click. Thanks. Don't mean to rain on your parade but I don't think they did that with cereal in Pulp Fiction. Burgers, yes, cereal, no. Could be wrong but I don't think so.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2010 14:50
|
|
|
Logtar posted:Has anyone here watched The Yes Men? I just finished it and it was very good, and free. I can't find a thread, and it definitely deserves one. If nobody can point me to a thread i'm going to make one tomorrow. Yeah, I saw it. I thought it was good in parts but as a movie in its entirety, quite good but not amazing. It's basically variations on a theme, quite snappily done, and, of course, very episodic in nature, almost by definition. Lastly, i is ultimately unsatisfying, because nothing really changes through their actions
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2010 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 01:20 |
|
|
ZenMaster posted:Can someone explain box office mojo to me? Specifically, how to figure out how much a movie made/lost? You are reading it incorrectly. It is very difficult to impossible to figure out how much a film made or lost. Let us start with the budget. Depending on how well the film does (or is expected to do) the budget figure will be inflated or deflated, usually by playing with the marketing costs directly attributable to the film. Jonah Hex - I am guessing that $47m is a low-ball figure that they adjusted downward when the film looked like it was tanking, to spare blushes. The problem is there is no standard way of defining budgets for these purposes. Does $47m include marketing? Who knows! Next is revenues. Box office is how much theatres take. From this they deduct a weekly fixed sum per theatre (the nut). The theatre also takes a % of box office, which varies widely from theatre to theatre and film to film - but for a rough estimate go with 50%. After that you have video (including VOD and DVD) and TV revenues, info on which is difficult to impossible to obtain unless you are privy to participation statements from the distributor. The net revenues go to the distributor (in this case, a studio). From that they deduct their distribution fee (say, 15% theatrical, 30% TV - for video they'll keep the lot and pay say 20% as a royalty), and then apply the money to their prints and advertising (P&A) costs - often plus interest. After those are recouped (often never - on successful films they mysteriously balloon), then the film has reached profit. Estimating that point from BO data alone is impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2010 17:15
|
|