Saturday, March 05, 2011

WOMEN Actresses and Hollywood expectations limitations

[NB: the term 'actress' has become controversial, with many arguing the term 'actor' is preferable as otherwise we're in effect singling out women for differentiation, not men; I use it here for clarity + succinctness!]

Debra Winger quit Hollywood when a much in demand actress; the extracts from an article on this give you some insight into the issues facing women in Hollywood (see the blog posts on fem. dirs + editors too)

Debra Winger was one of the highest-paid actresses in the world during the 1980s thanks to performances in films such as Terms of Endearment and An Officer and a Gentleman. She also had three Oscar nominations for best actress under her belt. Then, at the age of 40, she retired, causing shockwaves through the film industry. 
...
"I look at women in Hollywood, my age or a little older, and some of them are creating the problem themselves," she says. "They do not accept their age, physically. They start doing things to their face and body which are designed to make them look less than their real age. They feel pressure to constantly play women who are younger. I don't think it is worth trying to look 10 years younger through surgery. It is too high a price to pay." 
...
"I had this reputation for being 'difficult'. But would a man have suffered the same accusation? He would probably have been admired for speaking his mind and be called a 'perfectionist'. There have been several men who have been able to appreciate the difference. Richard Attenborough, who directed me in Shadowlands, springs to mind. He is not a sexist and treated myself and Tony Hopkins as equals. 
...
"An actress in a film starts every day with an hour and a half in front of a mirror, with hair and make-up and costumes. That is unnatural - too much unnatural attention. I was never too confident about my beauty, to tell the truth, and that puts you on edge. As a result, I would not do many interviews and would always seem to regret them when I read the result. It made me very cautious." 

If you come across any articles on how actresses are treated, please add details (including a link) as a comment below!

Winter's Bone as eg of Indie budget-raising

In an insightful article on Debra Granik's Oscar-nominated Winter's Bone, we get useful info on working as a female director, and the lengths she personally went to to achieve verisimilitude (a sense of realism) in her movie (find much more on fem. dirs here). We also get a sense of the struggles facing Indie productions - and the pressures to give into commercial considerations once a higher budget is offered:
The top films at Sundance picked up 14 Oscar nominations this year, more than ever before, thanks primarily to Winter's Bone and The Kids Are All Right, which also got four. Does this mean it's a golden age for independent film? "Oh God, no, that would be premature." Raising the film's $2m budget was a struggle. Signing a distribution deal was a triumph in itself.
Now that it's brought in $6.4m at the box office in the US alone, Granik is hot property. Studio financiers who have apparently not seen her films, or at least not digested what makes them good, are suddenly keen to throw money at her next project. She wants to make a movie about bomb-sniffing dogs that return from Iraq with post-traumatic stress disorder, centred on a family coming to terms with the death of their son, but the people who own the rights can already hear patriotic strings swelling in the background.
"They want to see completeness, tied-upness, the dad healing. They said to me: 'With the money that we're offering you, you can have 500 people at the Purple Heart ceremony at the start of the film.' I told them that I wasn't going to have a Purple Heart ceremony, and they said: 'Well, how do you show that the loss of his life was meaningful?'" She wonders if becoming a bankable, Academy-endorsed director will make it harder to do what she does best, without studio interference.

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Kings Speech budget: role of co-production + distributors

This is a brief extract from a longer article worth reading for insight into the economics of the 'British' film industry:
For some years now a movie's prospects outside the US have played a key role in assembling the financing and distribution. Central to this is the international pre-sale, whereby a company licenses distribution rights to a forthcoming project in return for a portion of the budget. In this regard kudos is due to FilmNation, the New York-based company run by the vastly experienced former Weinstein lieutenant Glen Basner. FilmNation handled international sales on The King's Speech and ensured it ended up in safe hands outside the US. To date the movie has grossed more than $130m outside the US, bringing worldwide ticket sales to around $245m.

Using YouTube video to pitch for $45k horror

If you've got a spare $45k you can get this into production...
The detail from the YouTube page is added below




thepaperboatman | Aug 30, 2010 | likes, 2 dislikes
COST TO MAKE: $45,000
contact tyroneacierto@gmail.com
visit www.thegravebandits.com



Synopsis: Professor William Seabrook, an obsessed American researcher, uncovers what he had
been searching for the last five years of his life-- an ancient meteorite made of pure
diamond that landed on a desolated island in Zambales, Philippines a hundred years
ago. But the local pirates he hired to help him uncover the treasure want the diamond
for themselves and betrayed the Professor. Unbeknownst to the pirates, the diamond
contains microscopic alien virus. Despite the warnings from the Professor, the pirates
keep the diamond. The pirates die after contracting the virus and their body resurrect
into mindless flesh-eatiing creatures.

And so they remain on the island, undead, hungry for flesh, thirsty for blood...

In a not so distant town roam the Grave Bandits, Romy and Peewee, two orphan
kids wanted by the law for making a career out of stealing precious belongings from the
dead. As they try to escape the townspeople, they end up on the desolated island and
discover a greater foe: The undead, lots of them! The Grave Bandits hide in a cave
where they meet Maiya, a beautiful native girl and Professor Seabrook.

Trapped on an island and left with nothing to defend themselves, the Grave
Bandits formulate a plan to escape and battle the undead using
improvised tools. But a diamond the size of a tangerine is hard to resist, just
when things are going according to plan, they discover greater enemies
amongst themselves. Will the Grave Bandits become our unlikely heroes or will they
ulitmately succumb to greed?

The Grave Bandits is a feature length horror-adventrue film filled with twists and
dark humor. It's a film no horror fans can afforrd to miss!
Running time: approx 1 hr 45 min.

Fan trailers of movies they WANT made!

[Cross-posted from my Teaser trailers blog]

Interesting phenomenon (which can provoke some fierce criticism on YouTube; the Alien 5 trailer has 3 times as many dislikes as likes): franchise fans creating fake trailers for films they want to see, and labelling them 'official':


Tuesday, March 01, 2011

Paddy Considine

Shane Meadows' muse is branching out on his directorial career, having etched out a considerable reputation through films such as Dead Man's Shoes (and the less impressive, albeit dirt-cheap, quickly shot Le Donk...).

The Sundance film festival has long been a platform for independent American cinema, launching the careers of directors as diverse as Quentin Tarantino, Darren Aronofsky and the Coen brothers. Lately, though, things have been changing. As the event pays more and more attention to European film, the British have begun to infiltrate the brunches and gifting suites that spring up every year in Park City, Utah. In 2008 it was James Marsh with his vertiginous doc Man on Wire, in 2009 it was Duncan Jones with his philosophical sci-fi parable Moon, and last year Chris Morris became an unlikely Sundance hero with his biting jihadist comedy Four Lions.
This year the honour fell to Paddy Considine, for his dark, blue-collar drama Tyrannosaur. Though the film features serious brutality – notably (unseen) violence against animals – which often raises the temperature in the US, the actor's self-penned debut as a features director went down a storm with audiences and jury alike, winning a prize for its two leads and a directing award for Considine. (source)


More Gdn articles

Duncan Jones' Moon: $5m UK sci-fi


DUNCAN JONES, 2009
$5m budget
$10m global box office (£700k UK, $3.3m USA)
Produced by Stage 6 Films
Sony Pictures Worldwide Acquisitions Group acquired distribution rights to the film for English-speaking territories.[3] Sony Pictures Worldwide Acquisitions Group was considering making Moon a direct-to-DVD release; however, after Moon premiered at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival in January 2009, Sony Pictures Classics decided to handle this film's theatrical release for Sony Pictures Worldwide Acquisitions Group.[12]
Rotten Tomatoes reports that 89% of critics gave the film a positive review based on 185 reviews, with an average score of 7.4/10 [Wiki]

KEY POINT: Like Monsters (Gareth Edwards, 2010, $800k), digitisation has opened up even sci-fi to low-budget Indie producers. Genres such as horror have always been accessible to Indies, but until CGI SFX became accessible to anyone with an Apple Mac convincing sci-fi hasn't been a realistic possibility for Indies. Both Moon and Monsters (which won director Edwards the director's seat on the big budget studio production Godzilla: $160m with a $0.5bn take!). Moon had a much larger crew than Monsters, and required extensive set-building, helping explain why its budget was around 10-times higher - but still in the low budget range of, say a Warp or a WT2 production. Strong word-of-mouth and various festival and other awards helped boost box office takings. A slick website further boosts its prospects of DVD/Blu-Ray sales (the long tail?)
A critical hit.

The official site launch page - its a slick production; see next shot


BASIC LINKS:
Wiki, IMDB, RottenTomatoes, Official site, YouTube vids. There is a longer list of articles etc further down.



See full list on the Wiki; despite its low budget, Moon was a multiple award-winner

Consider this from the amctv blog:

Next question:

Why do idiotic films like Transformers and Wolverine get put into thousands of theaters while really excellent science fiction movies like Moon don't show up anywhere?
The short answer is that Transformers and Wolverine are "tentpole" pictures -- i.e., the sort of movies that studios spend millions on in the hope of making millions from -- so naturally they're going to be screened far and wide as well as promoted in a screaming haze of advertising, while Moon -- starring Sam Rockwell as a schmoe on a 3-year moonbase stint -- is sort of the exact opposite: A small movie, made for roughly the cost of Transformer shoot's craft service budget and without the help of a major studio. Moon was never destined to get onto 4,000 screens on opening day.
Now, this avoids the implicit question, which is why studios choose to spend millions and millions on movies based on toys and comic books and not on movies that grownups might not be embarrassed to be seen coming out of in the first place. The answer to that is actually the solution, which is that if you want studios to make those sorts of movies, go out of your way to see them in the theater, rather than just waiting until they wash up on Starz or HBO. It's not that humans are getting stupider, it's that people interested in entertainment that doesn't EXPLODE aren't going into theaters. So, you know. Go.


If you haven't seen this I'd highly recommend it: you'll be astonished for one thing at its cinematographic quality, and the convincing nature of its set, when you're aware of its production budget: $5m (which would merely pay for a quarter of a Hollywood A-lister's basic fee for a movie!). There are some great behind-the-scenes features on the DVD too, showing you how this was achieved.
The one caveat to this is that it helps being the son of David Bowie, even if you have changed your name from Zowie Bowie.
This enterprising directorial debut, working wonders on a modest budget, consciously sets out to operate in the manner of psychological SF movies of the 60s and 70s about the experience of being in outer space: films such as 2001, Outland and Alien, where being on Jupiter or the Moon has become an accepted way of life. Sam Rockwell plays Sam Bell, the sole operator of a plant mining Helium-3 on the Moon to provide energy for Earth. His only company is a computer called Gerty (voiced with slyly condescending concern by Kevin Spacey), and he's nearing the end of his three-year stint. One day, Bell has an accident driving a motor vehicle, and after coming to he discovers he has a doppelganger. Is this figure a clone or his real self? Is he the victim of some conspiracy operated by his callous capitalist employers in league with Gerty? A gripping, thoughtful, extremely claustrophobic movie, its director Duncan Jones, is a onetime graduate student of philosophy. Moreover, he was once known as Zowie Bowie and is the son of David Bowie, no stranger to the world of outer space.
(Philip French for The Observer)
Some links for further reading: 
Peter Bradshaw review (3/5) in Gdn
Gdn profile of DJones (2009)

US TRAILER [hq]

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Cineworld 2011

Just listening to Radio 5's "On the Money" (27.2.11, 8-9pm) with Cineworld boss Steve Wiener interviewed on Oscar night. Some intersting insights:
  • whilst the 15-24 (and wider 15-34) demographic remains absolutely key, the fastest growing audience segment is 35-44
  • with this in mind, a spate of new cinemas (or at least sections in cinemas) will be rolled out across the Cineworld chain: deluxe cinemas with bigger, individual seats and luxury food for sale at cafe-style outlets in place of the popcorn concession stalls (he doesn't say so, but this must partially be in response to consistent complaints from non-teen cine-goers over texting/mobile-using youth spoiling the cine-experience!)
  • just as with £d - sorry, 3D... -  that handily creates an excuse for premium ticket prices!
  • Cineworld's shares are valued at around £300m
  • the majors have subsidised the cost of digital projectors and 3D projectors (Cineworld is spending £40m on digital projectors alone) - and have agreed to stick with the technology in use for a period of time in order to let cinema operators recoup the set-up costs
  • 65-70% of profits still come from ticket revenues; Wiener is adamant the profits from popcorn etc are overplayed
A second interviewee (from Pinewood Studios, recently bought by private equity investors, I think) discussed the major investment in studio facilities, with 3D cameras for hire and the old "The Bill" sets of police station/cells and hospital wards/operating rooms among the features.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Who's getting paid $50m for ONE film?

...Not counting our beloved bevvy of merchant bankers and their bonuses for wreaking economic devestation. Nope, this is a humble actor, getting the highest fee EVER for a single film. Discounting Working Title, would the entire combined budget of a year's British cinema amount to this much?
Can you work out who it is? Its a useful fact to cite to demonstrate the challenge facing Indie cinema, but also all non-Hollywood cinema, including the UK's.
You can find the answer at http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/01/2011-film-preview

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Economics demand remakes/sequels?

Great article from ... The Film Guardian (do try and read it weekly!) about the raw economics of the film industry and how these always seem to overcome any notions of film as art; some sample quotes then the full article:

...the economics of remakes and sequels is hard to argue. In the modern era the marketing of a film is key and for a big budget picture can often exceed $100m. Sequels and remakes bring a built-in brand name . That is why Hollywood is intent on endless reboots and sequels of superhero franchises such as Superman, Batman, X-Men and Spider-Man. It also explains why 2011 will see a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean movie, a film series inspired by a theme-park ride at Disneyland.
[following is by Philip French, not the main article author]
... Remakes have been Hollywood's stock in trade ever since in 1914 Edwin S Porter (director of The Great Train Robbery, the first film to achieve worldwide recognition) was told his company needed to produce a feature-length movie a week. "There's not enough talent in the world to make that many pictures in a year," Porter replied.
...
Are they ever justified other than commercially? Yes, if significant improvements can be made, especially if this means going back to a literary source. Eventually someone is bound to make a successful version of Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. But some attempts should never be made or allowed. Only a fool or a knave would embark on remakes of Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind or Singin' in the Rain, though Gus Van Sant, a director who is neither fool nor knave, got egg on his face and a tarnished reputation with a shot-for-shot reworking of Hitchcock's Psycho.
Remakes are frequently interesting sociologically for the light they throw on changing times and different cultures: Seven Samurai becoming The Magnificent Seven, for instance, or the blaxploitation version of Odd Man Out and The Informer, or the four contrasted treatments of The Front Page.


SOURCE: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/02/hollywood-remakes-sequels-weinstein 


Hollywood takes a safe bet for 2011 with the year of the repeat

To critics' dismay and despite the success of original films like Inception, the movies on this year's agenda announced by Harvey Weinstein are sequels, spin-offs and remakes of past hits
Marion Cotillard, Leonardo DiCaprio
Marion Cotillard, left, and Leonardo DiCaprio in a scene from Inception.
The new year ought to be a time for

Monday, January 10, 2011

Enfield plays Nighy plays Grant

Wonderfully postmodern skit playing on the cliches employed in Richard Curtis' Hugh Grant-starring rom-coms (cross-posted on BritCinema + rom-com blogs):
(NB: contains 1 swear word towards the end)

Thursday, January 06, 2011

Critics v Popular Culture?

Brief article about the Twilight franchise picking up awards voted for by the US public (as did HSMusical); horror movies - especially teen-centred horror - tend to be dismissed as worthless, empty commercial vehicles by critics ... yet remain enduringly popular with the public. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/06/twilight-eclipse-peoples-choice-awards
This links into previous posts about female directors, and the prevailing scorn for female-targeted cultural forms: celeb mags, soap operas, rom-coms etc

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Hugh Grant breaks down

Nice story here on how the bundle of joy that is Mr Rom-com was compelled to take a lift with a journo from the News of the Screws (a common nickname for The S*n's Sunday sister paper, given its muck-raking, sensationalist history under Murdoch's proprietorship), a rag that has been none too complimentary about HG in the past: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/jan/03/hughgrant-newsoftheworld
Click through for the rather funny picture...
(Never forget though that the Grant-Curtis partnership is responsible for some of the biggest all-time British movies)

Thursday, October 14, 2010

micro-quiz!

Here's a question for you (please don't use google to answer it!): which film does this quote describe?
a worldwide gross of $248m for a poorly lit video with a three-person cast and a budget of $60,000
...

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Warp/WT/Optimum - French connection

Extremely useful from our old friends at Film Guardian, looking at the growing influence of French finance and film companies in the future of British cinema. The article fails to note the more formal links between StudioCanal, WT + Universal, but provides some great detail and insight into the workings of 'our' domestic film industry. Interesting to note Universal passing on a WT movie too; could that relationship be on the rocks?



Changing Channel: France becomes the unlikely saviour of British film


Antipathy has long been the default setting for the countries' cinematic relations, but French investment is behind a string of new British productions
 
SOURCE: Adam Dawtrey, 7.10.10 at http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/oct/07/france-saviour-british-film


The Hollywood studios are retreating, and the UK Film Council is heading for oblivion. But help is at hand from the other side of the Channel. The French are coming.
François Truffaut famously once suggested that the words "British" and "cinema" were incompatible. Fortunately his compatriots at StudioCanal don't seem to agree.
StudioCanal has emerged this year as the most significant new force in UK film-making. It stepped in to finance Working Title's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy when Universal passed, and it's powering up the production slate at its own company, Optimum Releasing. After many years distributing crucial British films such as This Is England, In The Loop and Four Lions, Optimum has plunged headfirst into making its own. Its first production, Rowan Joffe's Brighton Rock, premiered at Toronto and opens next February.
Joe Cornish's alien invasion film Attack the Block, Nick Murphy's period ghost story The Awakening and Nigel Cole's Asian family comedy Rafta Rafta are also in the can for release next year. Matthias Hoene's gangster/horror mash-up Cockneys vs Zombies is getting ready to shoot next spring. StudioCanal is also looking at the Sam Mendes project On Chesil Beach, based on Ian McEwan's novel, after US studio backer Focus Features dropped out.
As a distributor, Optimum is also handling two of the most hotly anticipated UK directing debuts – Submarine by the IT Crowd's Richard Ayoade, which went down a storm in Toronto, and Paddy Considine's Tyrannosaur.
Historically, the UK and the French film industries have never been as close as they should have been. The British have always looked to Hollywood first while the French barricaded themselves behind the fortress of their language. In cinematic terms, the Channel is wider than the Atlantic, and harder to bridge.
The British mistrust the seriousness with which the French regard the septième art while envying the unshakeable political and financial support their film-makers enjoy. The French laugh at (not with) our floppy-haired comedies while envying our international success. And like Truffaut, who delivered his notorious snub in an interview with none other than Alfred Hitchcock, they love to provoke us with their sense of cinematic superiority – yet cherish our great directors better than we do ourselves.
But some on both sides have always dreamed of an entente cordiale that could unite the contrasting strengths of these two industries and mount a real European challenge to Hollywood.
"Being French, StudioCanal want to produce great cinema – and they are passionate about talented film-makers, and so are we," says Optimum's chief executive, Danny Perkins. "For example, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy has got a great literary pedigree and a very exciting Swedish film-maker attached in Tomas Alfredson, so Working Title found a better fit with StudioCanal. We're also very involved in The Tourist, with another highly-rated European director, Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, going on to his second film."
Another French studio, Pathé, showed the way by backing The Queen and Slumdog Millionaire. Pathé's François Ivernel says: "We are naturally drawn to a different type of material than the Americans because we come from a different cultural angle. Our relationship to film-makers is more one of respect and collaboration and flexibility."
StudioCanal has been waiting in the wings for a while. It already owns a big chunk of British cinema heritage in the shape of a library of 5,000 titles, including the Ealing comedies. It has been a quiet investor in Working Title's films for many years. But now it is moving to centre stage.
Optimum is mining its library for material – both Brighton Rock and Rafta Rafta are technically remakes. But it has also shown a French willingness to take a punt on new talent – Joffe, Cornish and Murphy are all big-screen debutants.
"We are standing very firm in a fragile landscape," says Optimum's head of production, Jenny Borgars. "We want to encourage established film-makers to come and make a home here. We offer the comfort of cash and a creative partnership. And it's very helpful to have a proper financier with a European sensibility, which perhaps has more respect for the film-maker than the American one."

Thursday, September 30, 2010

3D

This post gathers together a range of resources - and viewpoints - on the issue of 3D. This is a key development for cinema in the UK and worldwide; for the time being at least, notwithstanding the first batch of 3D TVs being released and the growing number of 3D broadcasts and channels, this remains one area in which cinema offers an experience 'home cinema' cannot match.
Cinemas routinely charge 2-3 times normal ticket prices for the privilege of getting 3D, which is actually most often a 'retrofitting' of a 2D movie, rendered into 3D via a computer process rather than planned and shot in 3D.
Its a key issue to consider not just for your AS exam, but also your coursework!
Speaking of which, with the A2 task in mind, I wonder when we'll start getting music videos in 3D? Surely somebody has thought of this by now?! If you find the article which considers director Wim Wenders' opinion that 3D transforms dance-based movies, surely the same applies to the average performance-based music video?


The Guardian gathers together articles on 3D at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/3d

Here's a good, opinionated article to get you started. The user comments are typically robust, featuring some strong language, but a goldmine too, eg this from 'Gelion':
At present putting a film out in 3D must be synonymous with the audience knowing that that film is going to be poorly rated.
Some weeks ago on another thread I looked at the scores for films in 3D out to date on Rotten Tomatoes.
The average score was 30% (you could argue the only one holding it up was Avatar - but take the special effects out of that film, and in my view you have very little left.)
The Last Airbender with 6% and Cats and Dogs, The Revenge of Kitty Galore 3D! at 13% were the bottom of a very bad pile.
So at the moment, 3D remains a gimmick used to entice film goers to pay their money to view poorly rated films.
It must be a haunting fact for the producers of these films that 3D might soon be common place. 
 The article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/sep/29/star-wars-inception-hbo-3d):
 Blurred vision on the 3D bandwagon
With Star Wars and Inception returning in stereoscopic vision – and three-dimensional HBO due to launch – is 2D dead?
Jar Jar Binks, Star Wars So much prettier in 3D ... a two-dimensional Jar Jar Binks in Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace. Photograph: AFP The intriguing thing about 3D is that even after the enormous success of Avatar nobody knows yet how extensive its use will become in modern film. Might 2D eventually become the exclusive preserve of low budget or independent film-making, with virtually all mainstream fare pushed into stereoscopic vision? Or, once all the fuss and hype dies down, will we see 3D only where its use is sensible: in features with the kind of content that lends itself to the experience?
Up until recently, most observers have seen the second outcome as the more likely one. But there appears to be a rabid frenzy going on in Hollywood right now, with every project under the sun seemingly being green-lit in 3D. Today, the US trades confirmed the rumours that George Lucas is to bring his entire six-film Star Wars saga back to the big screen in stereoscopic vision, starting with 1999's The Phantom Menace (because blooming Jar Jar Binks' fizzog will naturally be infinitely less irritating in three dimensions than it was in two) in 2012. And, in a separate report, I read that Warner Bros is considering retro-fitting Christopher Nolan's Inception for a 3D re-release in cinemas and on the small screen, via US network HBO's soon-to-be-launched 3D TV channel.
Yes, that's right, 3D TVs are very much here. You can buy one now, though you may have to remortgage your house to do so. Naturally, however, as more people grab one the prices will come down. And before long you won't have to wear glasses in order to see that extra dimension: new technologies are already in place which use a different system to trick the eyes into picking up extra depth.
Whether we actually want all this extra gimmickry is a moot point, but it has to be a concern if Hollywoodinhidef.com's report is correct and a film-maker such as Nolan, who specifically chose not to make Inception a 3D project, is now being pushed into doing so retrospectively. Even worse, the article suggests that the film-maker's forthcoming sequel to the Dark Knight, the third in his excellent Batman series, will be shot in three dimensions – whether Nolan likes it or not.
Imagine that. In a few years' time, you sit down for an eight-hour Batman marathon, watching all three films back to back (I'm sad enough to have done this with Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, so I'm confident that this is a genuine potential scenario) and when it comes to the final movie everything suddenly goes all 3D. Or will Warner insist that the first two films are also refitted? What a bunch of jokers.



I'll add a few links here in due course, starting with this...from The Guardian. I can't recommend strongly enough that you browse/read the paper/site regularly, it is a real treasure trove.
With the market overall slipping 3% from the equivalent frame from 2009, when Slumdog Millionaire and Gran Torino led the field, cinemas are hotly anticipating the arrival of Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland on Friday. All the big plex chains have now made their peace with Disney over the film's early DVD release date, presumably extracting more generous terms in the revenue split on box office. This means Alice will be limited only by the still insufficient number of 3D screens, where it will presumably lose the late-evening showtime to Avatar.

A Woman's Place is in...the Editor's Chair?

Great Guardian article here that reminds us of the many unlikely examples of macho directors whose trademark style, the hallmarks that earn them their auteur stripes, are often closely tied to a more feminine touch. Scorsese, Coppola, even Hitchcock; all worked closely with a crucial female collaborator. This article (read it at the Guardian site and you'll see embedded film clips to illustrate each paragraoh) focuses on Quentin Tarantino's muse...

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/sep/29/sally-menke-quentin-tarantino-editor 



Sally Menke: the quiet heroine of the Quentin Tarantino success story
Tarantino's trusted editor and 'number one collaborator', found dead yesterday, was partly to thank for his signature style

Read Sally Menke's obituary here
Quentin Tarantino and Sally Menke in 2007. A cut above ... Quentin Tarantino with editor Sally Menke in 2007. Photograph: Kevin Winter/Getty Images Sally Menke died this week, aged 56, after going hiking near the Hollywood Hills on a day that was extremely hot even by Los Angeles standards. Her sad death brings to a close the longstanding collaboration with Quentin Tarantino – Menke was the only editor with whom the writer-director has ever worked – that yielded some of the most exhilarating and accomplished films of the past 20 years. He once described her as "hands-down my number one collaborator", noting in an interview for the Grindhouse DVD that "I write by myself but when it comes to the editing, I write with Sally. It's the true epitome, I guess, of a collaboration because I don't remember what was her idea, what was my idea. We're just right there together."
Menke was hiking when the collaboration began, too: she was standing in a phone booth on a remote Canadian mountainside when she learned Tarantino wanted her to cut Reservoir Dogs. Although Tarantino was an untried filmmaker, Menke – whose two previous credits included Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles – had loved his script, plus the fact that Harvey Keitel was on board, and was attracted by the possibility of working with a director whose interests seemed so ostensibly macho. She thought of Martin Scorsese and Thelma Schoonmaker.
Tarantino later said (in the documentary The Cutting Edge: The Magic of Movie Editing) that he had expected a female editor to be "more nurturing to the movie and to me. They wouldn't be trying to win their way just to win their way, all right? They wouldn't be trying to shove their agenda or win their battles with me. They would be nurturing me through this process." Menke, too, felt this dimension of the working relationship: "I think editors play a big role with directors in giving them support, making them feel like they can look at something that may have trouble or problems and be comfortable enough so that they can approach those problems."
She once described editors to the Observer as "the quiet heroes of movies", noting that "we have a very private relationship with our directors, most often conducted in dark rooms". It could be "so intense", she said in The Cutting Edge, that "I see [Tarantino] more than my husband". He in turn noted in mock-dudgeon that "sometimes I get annoyed with her for not reading my mind 100%. It's not good enough that she reads it 80% of the time."
Many aspects of the style Menke developed with Tarantino were already evident in Reservoir Dogs (1992), from long, dialogue-heavy takes shot with a restless camera to bursts of immersive violence. Another signature was the brilliant use of obscure music over material tellingly heightened through devices such as slow motion. Intriguingly, Menke revealed that "I don't cut to music. I just make the scene work emotionally and dramatically, and then Quentin will come in and lay the track over it and we'll tweak it to the beats." The opening sequence of the film remains a masterclass in the technique.
Their next project, Pulp Fiction (1994), was altogether more ambitious but developed familiar motifs. The scene in which Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) dance was shot to live playback of Chuck Berry's You Never Can Tell and plays out in sensuous continuous takes rather than the fast cutting that characterises the rest of their date – a sequence that played out almost in real time until Menke helped Tarantino boil it down. "Most editing is painstaking but this was an exciting scene to edit because it had momentum of its own and an obvious magic," she said of the dance scene itself.
Jackie Brown (1997) offered fewer obvious bravura set-pieces but still plays as effortlessly impressive. This clip shows not just a range of judiciously timed reaction shots but also, thanks to the show Chicks Who Love Guns on the TV, a taste of the outrageous and beat-perfect exploitation-genre pastiche that would play an ever-larger role in the Tarantino oeuvre.
This tendency was indulged to the full in Kill Bill: Vols 1 and 2 (2003 & 2004), a riotous two-volume collage of genre tropes for which appropriate editing was absolutely essential. Yet as the fight sequence from Vol 1 in which the Bride (Uma Thurman) faces down the Crazy 88 shows, Menke was adept both at emulating chop-socky style and interpolating other techniques, such as spaghetti-western-style extreme close-ups. As she told the Observer: "The thing with Tarantino is the mix-and-match ... Our style is to mimic, not homage, but it's all about recontextualising the film language to make it fresh within the new genre."
Death Proof – half of the Grindhouse double-bill that Tarantino made with Robert Rodriguez in 2007 – expanded the love of exploitation to the physical material of the film itself, involved distressing the celluloid to mimic ill-treated old prints. "We'd take a pen, a needle or some other implement and scratch the film," Menke told the Editors Guild Magazine, "thrash it against the bushes on the driveway". But the editing was no less important here – in fact, the meat of Death Proof is an extended car chase, a form in which montage is everything. As this clip shows, Menke knew exactly how to ratchet up the tension while maintaining character engagement.
By the time of last year's Inglourious Basterds, Menke reported, the implicit trust between her and Tarantino was such that "he gives me the dailies and I put 'em together and there's little interference". His confidence was amply rewarded. One of the film's most widely praised sequences was the introduction of the charming, sinister SS officer Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz). Thanks to Waltz's performance and Menke's editing, almost unbearable tension was wrung out of the most ostensibly banal subject matter. Menke told the Observer how she had learned from Scorsese and Schoonmaker's example how to "follow the emotional arc of a character through a scene, even if, as in the opening of Inglourious Basterds, they're just pouring a glass of milk or stuffing their pipe. We're very proud of that scene – it might be the best thing we've ever done."
It's worth noting that the nurturing aspect of Menke and Tarantino's relationship went both ways. Editing on Tarantino films would take place not at studio suites but in small, rented private houses – a more personal setup than the norm, but also perhaps a more isolated one. Tarantino thus got into the habit of asking cast and crew members to slip greetings into their work when the opportunity arose, to stop her feeling lonesome.
Every botched take became an opportunity for a goofy "Hi Sally!"
The farewells of the director and his team will surely be no less heartfelt.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

iPhone in cinema????

see http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/jul/12/despicable-me-iphone-app for news of a potentially very annoying new wave of iPhone apps...

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Are Critics Critical?

'In a repeat of the previous weekend, three releases on 100-plus screens completely failed to engage wide audience attention. Torture-horror The Collector, from the writers of the past four Saw movies, struggled past £100,000 for a weak £586 average. The film wasn't a hit with critics, but the genre audience is considered virtually reviews-proof, and can usually be relied upon to generate a much stronger number than that.' http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/jun/29/uk-cinema-box-office

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Star system

I'll add some notes on Richard Dyer's theory later; for now, this article adds an interesting slant to it:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/jun/27/celebrities-reality-film-hollywood

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

China to become biggest film market?

Good article which looks at trends in US film industry, especially on the cinema (exhibition) side. A snippet:
Take China. Its 2009 box office was roughly $1bn, but the rate of cinema construction is so quick there that one producer I spoke to this week believes the country's box office will reach $10bn by 2015. China delivered stingy returns for most Hollywood movies until several years ago. Then along came Transformers 2, which made a load of money there, and of course, Avatar. China was the second biggest market in the world for Avatar behind North America. The producer reckons that by the time Transformers 4 opens in around 2014, China could be its biggest market.
SOURCE: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/jun/21/toy-story-pixar-box-office

Monday, June 21, 2010

Viral Video chart

Should we consider any of these 'British film'? A useful source to look at with digitization in mind: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2010/jun/18/digital-media (taken from http://www.viralvideochart.com/)

What about amateur productions such as this: Zombie Bosh - amateur short from Huddersfield enthusiasts

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Report on UK Film Industry

Very useful article copied in below, which raises a number of issues and includes a link to a new Oxford Economics report on the economics of the UK film industry, eg:
  • UK film needs a government subsidy and/or tax breaks
  • this currently amounts to £110m a year ...
  • which generates £1.3bn extra film-based revenue
  • in total, the UK film industry generates £4.5bn, including £1.2bn which the government takes back as tax
  • the industry directly employs 36,000 people (and the same again indirectly)
  • in addition, UK films 'generate around 10% of revenues from overseas visitors, or around £1.9bn a year' (various examples are given of how individual films have created massive visitor surges)
  • 'The report, called The Economic Impact of the UK Film Industry, and downloadable at the UK Film Council website, also emphasised the importance of Britishness to audiences. An indigenous film can expect 30% higher box office takings than a similar foreign film.'
This last point seems questionable - are they referring to non-Hollywood films only as 'a similar foreign film'? Bond and Potter movies, and the occasional WT-blockbuster (basically the RC rom-coms), 'British' (and we have to remember many so-called British movies, including those by WT, all too often are largely financed by Hollywood companies, who also then take the profit) films simply cannot compete with Hollywood blockbusters, no matter how awful they are.

When over well over $100m is spent on abysmal films such as the recent Terminator and Transformers sequels, they are virtually critic-proof; such is the level of CGI and SFX that many will view these simply for the spectacle they offer. (You should be thinking here about the concepts of the big 6 and the tentpole strategy, not to mention the horizontal integration, vertical integration and synergies available to a giant conglomerate such as News Corporation, with its subsidiary Twentieth Century Fox, the Avatar main production co)

You can read the full report for yourself at http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/media/pdf/j/i/The_Economic_Impact_of_the_UK_Film_Industry_-_June_2010.pdf and the article at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/07/report-warning-uk-film-tax-cuts



Economists defend UK film tax breaks
UK Film Council welcomes Oxford Economics report over concerns that ending filmmaking relief will cost economy 
Mark Brown, arts correspondent guardian.co.uk,
Alnwick Castle, Alnwick, Northumberland, England
Visitor numbers for Alnwick Castle, Northumberland, went up because of the Harry Potter film. Photograph: Lee Frost/Robert Harding World Imagery/Corbis
Ending the tax relief given out to encourage filmmaking in the UK would cost the economy £1.4bn, a report on the economics of the British film industry warned today

Tuesday, June 01, 2010

80s boom: go old school?

When considering the style and look of your work perhaps you should consider amongst the options a retro approach? There has been a huge 80s turn in contemporary culture, from the music charts to the cinema screens, which this intriguing article (I've long argued a similar point and wholeheartedly agree with the analysis) puts down primarily to the age of the creatives and executives behind the media. The folk in control now are looking back to the 80s as 'their' age - the era when they were adolescents. It'll take 20-30 years but the noughties and then the tens will experience a similar retro boom in time, perhaps fuelled by some of you - just with inferior music and fashions!
From TisEng to Son of Rambow, not to mention Ashes to Ashes, movie versions of The A-Team, re-makes of Battlestar Galactica and horror icons such as Nightmare on Elm Street, the 80s revival is finally here!


From
April 23, 2010
Why Hollywood is remaking the Eighties

For today’s movie moguls it was the decade that rocked their world and they are certainly not going to let us forget it

The A Team, 2010 remake

Colin, the £45 film

Read more on Colin, reportedly a £45 movie that got a cinema release: Guardian article; BritMovie.co.uk forum thread; is the true budget much higher/is it all hype? 
Further articles linked from IMDB entry.

The trailer, naturally, is a tad gory, but search YouTube and its easily found. Below is a piece from SkyNews with the director interviewed.

£25k 'kitchen-table auteurship'

Another very useful article from the Guardian... (skip ahead and read the article if you wish!)

As with the $10k US Indie detailed in a separate post, this article (and accompanying video, with clips and interviews) centres on the growing phenomenon of micro-budget film-making, made possible by digitization, new media, web 2.0; call it what you will.

The cost of film itself, whether 8mm or 35mm reels, used to be an effective barrier to low-cost film-making. Digital media reduces this to effectively zero, and means, certainly as increasing numbers of cinemas install digital projectors, distribution and exhibition is made possible at a similar near-zero cost. Self-distribution through the web is also possible: this movie has racked up 810,036 views at YouTube by 1.6.10 - and thats just the full-length posting; its also split into 12.

The article's author, Tom Lamont, uses a superb phrase to describe director Kate Madison's status: 'kitchen-table auteurship'. He refers to another, well-established, concept seen as a key characteristic of creativity in the online age: 'crowd sourcing'. Read more on this concept: wiki; wired on rise of this; twitter feed; a slightly bizarre blog, crowdsourcing.com; and, of course, The Guardian's articles on this!

It may seem a hell of a stretch, but the sort of features this article discusses aren't a million miles from you do at AS and A2 Media Studies, and the particular exam board we use, OCR, are especially keen for students to take this on board. The concept of web 2.0 was coined to describe the radical change from the early days of the web (web 1.0 in effect): users, the passive audience, went on the web to search and use media; in web 2.0 the audience and 'the media' effectively merge, as so many users are also now media creators. If you've exhibited your coursework on YouTube, well done, for you are now a distributor (the blog to drum up attention and feed potential fans inside info!) who has found an exhibitor (YouTube)!

Even just 5 years ago, Media coursework would remain largely within the confines of the school it was created within, with the possibility of exhibition at a handful of festivals including the Co-Op's. Now, you all have the power to put your work out there and attract an audience (from which you can make money if you attract a large audience: you can join YouTube's advertising programme, and take a cut of the advertising revenue they rake in from people who click through to your channel!).

I've detailed several examples of micro-budget films in this blog, all very useful to consider for your AS exam and coursework blog, not to mention both sections of the A2 exam. If any of you do watch (or have already seen) Born of Hope, Colin or any other feature-length micro-budget movie, post a comment below.

[Read more on Colin, reportedly a £45 movie that got a cinema release: Guardian article; BritMovie.co.uk forum thread; is the true budget much higher/is it all hype?]


Born of Hope – and a lot of charity

A budget Lord of the Rings prequel put together by hundreds of people working for nothing has recorded nearly a million hits on video streaming sites
Tom Lamont The Observer, 7 March 2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/mar/07/born-of-hope-lord-rings

On the eastern flank of Epping Forest, a short walk in from the town of Debden, there is a huge tree, lying on its side, upended by a storm. It was in this clearing that independent film-maker Kate Madison, along with dozens of game volunteers, filmed Born of Hope, a homemade prequel to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy that has caused a great stir since its release in December. A production pulled together over four years with a budget of a mere £25,000 – about a tenth of one per cent of the cost of Jackson's epic – it has impressed critics and recorded close to a million views on video streaming sites.

Birdemic, $10,000 US Indie (Nguyen, 2008)

"Birdemic" was the lowest rated film on the Internet Movie Database (IMDb), with a 1.8 rating until it was overtaken by Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas with a rating of 1.5.[37] [Wiki]
JAMES NGUYEN, 2008
$10k budget; straight-to-DVD (touring single print, but no record of box office)

BASIC LINKS: Wiki; IMDB; Rottentomatoes; Official site
Critical reception was so bad it actually became a promotional device! It was for a time the lowest-rated movie on IMDB too!

Sometimes, being very bad can be a good thing ... This is a film seen as so bad its actually entertaining, much like The Room (though that was a $6m budget disaster), and has taken on cult movie status. It has also led to a 2013 sequel!
Birdemic was made with no studio support, largely self-financed and produced through Nguyen's Moviehead Pictures company for a budget of less than $10,000. The film has gained notoriety for its poor quality, with many critics citing it as one of the worst films of all time.[2][3] After a limited theatrical release, the film gained a cult following and was picked up for distribution by Severin Films in 2010. [Wiki]
This video sets out its critique over 20mins (the same vloggers gave The Room their unique treatment) - NB: I haven't had time to pre-vet this for language, so exercise caution.


Hebden Bridge re-premiere 1921 film


Helen of Four Gates to get screening after 80-year hiatus

After global search for last remaining negative, Cecil Hepworth's 1921 classic to be shown in Yorkshire town where it premiered
helen of four gates
A still from Helen of Four Gates starring the actor Alma Taylor in the title role. Photograph: BFI
A classic British film which helped the birth of the Hollywood star-and-blockbuster system is to be screened again in the UK after an international search for the last remaining negative.
Packed with 19th-century northern melodrama, from broody moors to cobbles, the 90-minute silent epic Helen of Four Gates was last shown in this country in the 1920s.
Based on a novel by a Yorkshire mill girl, who took the literary world by storm at the end of the first world war, the film had punters queuing at cinemas when it was released in 1921. Critics acknowledged the power of the much-clogged and be-shawled cast, and especially the landscape of Hebden Bridge in the Pennines where the pioneer director Cecil Hepworth did much of the filming.

DVD finally to kill cinema?

Closing the window on the multiplex
Plans to slash the time between cinema and DVD release, alongside improvements in home viewing technology, could kill multiplexes. Would you care?

Prince Charles wearing 3D glasses in Budapest, March 2010
An old business model gets a revamp … Prince Charles wearing 3D glasses in Budapest, March 2010. Photograph: Imre Foeldi/AP
It does not seem quite the right moment to be worrying about the future of our multiplexes. This weekend, Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland will become the second movie of 2010 to break the $1bn barrier at the box office, following James Cameron's Avatar earlier in the year. Prior to its arrival on cinema screens, some speculated that audiences might find a reimagining of Lewis Carroll's famous tale from the peculiar mind of Tim Burton a little too weird for comfort. Yet it is about to join an exclusive club of six movies, including Titanic, The Dark Knight, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. The huge success of these films suggests that people are seeing movies in ever greater numbers.

UKFilm best on low budget?

Budget cuts are no problem - British film is best when it keeps it real
Danny Leigh Friday 28 May 2010
It might be derided as 'poverty porn', but social realism provides British film-makers with a poetic – and relatively cheap – way to make truly great cinema
Lesley Manville and Peter Wright in Another Year by Mike Leigh
Real life rewards ... Lesley Manville and Peter Wright in Mike Leigh's Another Year
The sight of Mike Leigh and Ken Loach soaking up the plaudits at Cannes should have been omen enough. Then, with impeccable timing, came this week's sun-kissed announcement of the long-pending first round of government cuts, Tory chancellor George Osborne ushering in the new age of penury. For the observer of British cinema, these twin signs could mean only one thing: an imminent new wave of social realism, a gold rush of movies about dole claims, manky flats, smack habits and black eyes. I can see you wincing from here.
But personally, should such a thing arise, I'll welcome it. For one thing, in contrast to, say, the CGI-laden blockbuster, social realism has always been something British cinema is actually good at. Invariably cheap to make and enriched by the complexities of class, our eternal elephant in the room, it's been responsible for some of British cinema's most indelible movies ever since the kitchen sink era (in fact, ever since the Boer war), from the knuckle-hard It Always Rains On Sunday via the undimmed brilliance of the late Alan Clarke to the vibrant self-confidence of Andrea Arnold.
And yet there's still that persistent bad name: in certain eyes, the genre has become a byword for dreary poverty porn. Calling on some, if not all, the social realist party pieces (non-professional casts, dowdy small-town locations), Shane Meadows has slogged his way to a certain commercial reliability; Shifty, with its scuffed-up naturalism, pulled in a decent crowd. And, of course, Leigh and Loach have their audience.