2,626

(5 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I don't really know what I hope to accomplish by posting this but it's just something that struck me and I wanted to share it.

I've had a sudden burst of fascination with practical effects and especially practical creatures (I mean more of a fascination than usual) over the last week or so and I found this /\ video, and in the comments someone posted Ian Malcolms quote from Jurassic Park: "You didn't earn the knowledge for yourself, so you don't take any responsibility for it, you've stood on the shoulders of Genius' to accomplish something as fast as you could." And that poster likened that to the state of the visual effects in modern movies today. Which...Idk, sorta made me look at the entire thing a little different I guess, it certain struck a very strange chord that hadn't been struck before.

Anyways.

I guess if I have to actually make this thread about something. What do guys think the likelihood of returning to a, certainly not entirely practically based effects world, but reintroducing those ideas back into mainstream film making is? Where do practical effects even have a place in an HD world? And how SHOULD a modern filmmaker go about balancing practical and CG visual effects?

2,627

(30 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I...whoah...my brain just twisted a bit.

2,628

(30 replies, posted in Off Topic)

ALL HAIL!

Also not quite a bug...but it's weird that when I search for "Star Wars" the only thing that comes up is the Star Wars (A new hope) episode. Not any of the other ones. And similar weirdery happens throughout.

2,629

(9 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I didn't even know they bothered releasing it anywhere, I know they didn't here.

2,630

(109 replies, posted in Off Topic)

litomnivore wrote:

As the thread seems to be winding down, I give you a handy dandy spreadsheet of the recs in this thread (albeit without any television programs recommended; miniseries are included, though). It's just under three hundred movies long. Nicely done, folks!

Daaaaamn, although just quickly glancing through I don't really think some of those should be included cough*cars2*cough. But a nifty resource.

And I wouldn't mind hearing some more of the linguist course stuff either.

2,631

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

switch wrote:

isn't the idea that there isn't a market for small genre films more a perception of hollywood suits that has trinkled down to the creative types?

Thats basically what I've been trying to say. Albeit confusedly and not very well hmm

2,632

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Lamer wrote:

Not everyone has to make movies.

I get that and if it were just a couple of people then fine, the issue is that no one is.

It's a few outlying people actually attempting to make actual movies while the vast majority is not, instead of the other way around. Basically no one out there is making solid indie movies or anything besides transformers, blow-em-up, fan wankery.

2,633

(133 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Heehee.

http://thedoghousediaries.com/comics/uncategorized/2012-06-01-78db5ce.png

http://thedoghousediaries.com/4296

2,634

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Squiggly_P wrote:

They perceive the market for them. They just perceive that market to be a lot smaller than the one for Transformers. It wouldn't be so bad if they'd allow some movies to be made specifically for that smaller market, but they usually demand that all their movies have some level of mass market appeal to them, either via some hot star or by demanding changes to the script or to the movie that would allow them to market the movie that way.

What I meant is that from the youtube/indie filmmakers perspective, there isn't a market for the early carpenter, super low budget genre films anymore. Because all that they see on the market, and all people talk about are the big explodey movies. BECAUSE the small narrow focus movies aren't being made so they arn't being there to be talked about. I'm sure there's some fancy word for it but it's basically the assumption that people don't want something because no one talks about it, but no one talks about it because it's not being produced. So the indie filmmaker has nothing to base their work after.

And I mean sure we can say, well just look at carpenter or X director or movie from 30 years ago. But I mean a movie that is 10 years older than i am is going to hold very little practical advice on making those kinds of movies today. (AGAIN. this is not what I actually believe, this is just what I think is running through the heads of a lot of people trying to make indie films today)


Squiggly_P wrote:

As far as the youtube people getting off their asses and making movies, I think a lot of them still think they have to have a ton of money and have to do it through the studio. You kinda do if you want to get a wide theatrical release, but there's nothing stopping you from just making a DVD. You can self-publish though a number of websites. Hell, you can burn the discs yourself if you're desperate. There's literally nothing stopping people.

Again, I think this comes down to the fact that there are is practically nothing in way of role models for making good indie productions on shoestrings budgets in popular knowledge. You have to be willing to brute force bludgeon your way through that kind of stuff and that wall of failures is gonna stop a lot of people from even trying it. Or most people don't even realize the wall is there and just think the studio route is the ONLY way to do it. Which granted is mostly their fault for not doing the research to figure it out, but it's still a thing that exists.

squiggly_P wrote:

The only thing stopping me is my lack of hardware and money and friends. Which is why I'm trying to make zero-budget animated silent films.

I'm ina very similar position, which is why I'm trying to use the unfortunate situation I've been forced into (Going back home and living with the rents for a while) to try and get myself set up, at least a little better, financially and equipment wise to start making my own live action short films. And hopefully a couple years down the line start making longer peices.

2,635

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

bullet3 wrote:

So why are we not seeing more young film-makers making simple genre films in that type of mold?

I think it's probably 2 fold.

Firstly the type of people that have the capabilities to actually do that sort of thing, aren't the people who would (See FreddieW and the general visual effects based youtuber community), they are perfectly happy to make stupid little 3 min videos of fanwankery and other related things because it makes them youtube famous. They have their audience of thousands of people who do nothing but love everything they do and never have a bad thing to say about them. So why would they do something more?

And secondly, there's no market for that anymore, or more accurately there's no perceived market for those types of movies anymore. With Michael Bay BS fests and Battleships being the only thing coming out of hollywood for so long, an entire generation of amateur filmmakers have grown up thinking that's what you have to do to become popular. And everything they see that tries to do something else fails miserably.

Along with that I don't think amateur filmmakers have any good role models right now. We have FreddieW and Andrew Kramer out there basically, while not outright saying anything, being the examplke that if you do this and this and this you be famous and rich. So an entire generation does that and that and that and everything looks exactly the same. And sure, we have Monsters. Which is one film created on a shoestring budget (Name me another one in the last 5 years), but look at the response to it, it's praised as this feat impossible to match, this holy idol of filmmaking that only a filmmaking god or a madman would have attempted.

I know that's really really painting the entire issue with one brush, but I think a lot of the problems stem from those 2 things.

2,636

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I can understand that, and actually agree with most of it. But I still love it, and I can't really explain why. It's just stupid and silly and ridiculous fun that doesn't really care that it's stupid and silly and ridiculous and just embraces it.

But idk, I'm not sure THAT crew doing a "serious" series would work. I believe that the reason it works the way it does now is because the guys at roosterteeth are just laid back and silly and not very serious and that comes through in RvB. I think that if they tried to shoe horn themselves into doing something serious it would come off as forced and stilted. But then all the Project Freelancer stuff has been pretty awesome and more serious, so who knows.

2,637

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Holy shit, how did I forget RvB?!

I, unlike bullet, love the ever living shit out of RvB. Of course it is still mostly comedy and it's own very bizarre form of dramedy and short episodes. But yeah, RvB is awesome.

2,638

(35 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I got nothing. Like literally. Absolutely no idea.

2,639

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Lamer wrote:

The majority of YT users want to see familiar shit that blows up and looks nice.


I knew there had to be a reason Transformers made all the money it did-...oh right, we're talking about webseries.


And I'm much like Sguiggy. I have yet to find a solid non comedy webseries that doesn't make me groan or want to throw a shoe at something at how bad it is. That is also longer than 3-10 minute episodes.

2,640

(33 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I enjoy The Guild although I kinda stopped watching halfway through season 4 or somewhere around there. Not because it got bad or anything, I just never really had any strong desire to keep watching. (I'm neither an MMO-er or anything even close) Though I'll probably get around to watching the rest eventually.

I haven't seen any of VGHS but I've seen enough of his youtube stuff to know what he does, and while technically pretty decent, I just don't care.

2,641

(133 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Owen Ward wrote:

Just got back from seeing it

Damn Europeans. We still have to wait a week and a bit.

2,642

(30 replies, posted in Off Topic)

The search function on the episode list no longer works, it just doesn't do anything. Tried in chrome and firefox.

2,643

(126 replies, posted in Off Topic)

W.T.F.

Pretty much my reaction to everything in that post.

2,644

(956 replies, posted in Off Topic)

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2012/05/29/pulp-fiction-chronological.jpg

Pulp Fiction. In Order.

2,645

(670 replies, posted in Creations)

(Since everyone else in the chat is a lazy bastard, I guess I'll start it.)

Anything you didn't think was worth it's own post, and so has been resigned to life of loneliness and sadness sitting in a drawer or file somewhere now goes in here!!

Let's see it!


Oh hey look! Anemonenoies...aneenemoomnemonies... anenonenomemminies... you know what I mean.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6046/6231800303_5248e514c3_z.jpg
Vancouver Aquarium 03 by BigDamnArtist, on Flickr

(Vancouver Aquarium...an old picture, but I really like it)

2,646

(346 replies, posted in Off Topic)

...

2,647

(99 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Great Grey Owl.

I tend to spend a lot of time thinking about this type of thing for some reason. My answer also kinda loses a bit of punch in text form...if it were face to face I would have interupted you mid sentence and screamed my answer in glee.

Yeah...I think about this a lot.


You get one actor or musician back from the reaper. Who do you choose?

2,648

(36 replies, posted in Episodes)

I am getting so fucking sick of that picture.

2,649

(99 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I think I broke the thread.

2,650

(1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yep, I'm pretty sure I fell a tiny bit in love with her by the end of it.