Xixax Film Forum

The Director's Chair => The Director's Chair => Topic started by: MacGuffin on August 06, 2006, 09:34:21 PM

Title: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on August 06, 2006, 09:34:21 PM
Brothers Bloom Next for Brick Director

Well, this is both exciting and infuriating: An official site (http://www.thebrothersbloom.com/Index.html) has popped up for a movie called The Brothers Bloom, apparently the sophomore effort from Rian Johnson, whose hard-boiled-detective-story-in-high-school debut, Brick, was praised by pretty much everyone. The new film is described on the site as "a con man movie," and the few sketches there place it firmly in the first half of the 20th century. Because the characters are wearing slouchy hats, everyone who is speculating about the film is comparing it to The Sting, which is probably setting it up for spectacular failure -- I mean, the movie could be great and still not come within shouting distance of The Sting's virtual perfection, right?

What's infuriating about the news is that the Brothers Bloom site is essentially just a riddle: It consists of three sketches, a soundtrack and a few short quotes from writers who aren't named Rian Johnson. No information on plot, release date, stars -- nothin'. The only details I can find online come from a couple of interviews Johnson gave back in April. In those conversations, he described the film as "globe-trotting," and indicated that casting was already underway.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on October 10, 2006, 10:52:19 PM
Weisz pulls off 'Brothers' con with Johnson
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Writer-director Rian Johnson has cast Oscar winner Rachel Weisz in "The Brothers Bloom," an international con man adventure that will be Johnson's follow-up to 2005's teen film noir "Brick."

The project was announced Tuesday by producers Ram Bergman and Endgame Entertainment's Jim Stern.

Endgame has raised equity financing for the film, budgeted at more than $20 million and scheduled to start production in February. The shoot will cover 12 countries in Europe, Scandinavia and Asia. Johnson is scouting locations in Europe.

Weisz, who won a supporting actress Oscar for "The Constant Gardener," stars in "Brothers" as a mysterious millionaire who turns the tables on a veteran team of con men who take on one last job after the younger brother threatens to quit the family business.

"Brothers" reunites Bergman and Johnson, who teamed on the critically hailed rookie feature "Brick," which won the Special Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival in January and was released by Focus Features.

USC grad Johnson was wooed by the studios but preferred to remain independent, Bergman said. The writer-director has been prepping two original scripts and completed "Brothers" first. "As long as he can generate his own material, he's not looking at anything else" Bergman said. "Financing is not an issue. It came very quickly. Endgame will be a good partner; they understand what it takes to make a movie."

Stern compared "Brothers" to "a great con artist film such as 'The Sting.' " Bergman, who hopes to bring the movie to Cannes in 2008, added, "This is a big, fun commercial movie, but it's pretty original."

The two thirtysomething American male leads have yet to be cast. In advance of the American Film Market, the filmmakers have brought in the Weinstein Co. to handle international sales for the film; CAA will sell domestic distribution rights. Wendy Japhet, Endgame's new president of production, is the executive producer.

Weisz next stars opposite Hugh Jackman in Darren Aronofsky's "The Fountain," due in theaters Nov. 22. She recently wrapped production on Wong Kar Wai's "My Blueberry Nights" and is shooting Working Title's "Definitely Maybe," written and directed by Adam Brooks. She begins production in December on Noam Morro's "Smart People" opposite Dennis Quaid.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: modage on October 10, 2006, 11:01:14 PM
wow good for him.  20 million budget in 12 europeon countries is pretty huge.  weisz is awesome as well.  i hope he can handle it!
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on February 06, 2007, 01:11:26 AM
'Bloom' on for Brody, Kikuchi
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Screenwriter-director Rian Johnson has cast Oscar winner Adrien Brody and Oscar nominee Rinko Kikuchi to join Oscar-winner Rachel Weisz in Endgame Entertainment's "The Brothers Bloom," an international con man adventure that is Johnson's follow-up to 2005's teen film noir "Brick."

The Weinstein Co. International is selling foreign territories at this month's Berlin International Film Festival; CAA and Cinetic Media are selling domestic rights. The project is produced by Ram Bergman and Endgame Entertainment's Jim Stern.

Endgame has raised equity financing for the film, budgeted at more than $20 million and scheduled to start production March 19 in 12 countries in Europe, Scandinavia and Asia.

Brody will play Bloom, the younger brother in a veteran team of con men who falls for a mysterious millionaire (Weisz) who turns the tables on them as they take on one last job after Brody threatens to quit the family business. Kikuchi will play the brothers' sexy and secretive accomplice.

"Brothers" reunites Bergman and Johnson, who teamed on the critically hailed rookie feature "Brick," which won the Special Jury Prize at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival and was released by Focus Features. Stern has compared "Brothers" to "The Sting." Bergman hopes to bring the movie to the Festival de Cannes in 2008. Wendy Japhet, Endgame's new president of production, is the executive producer.

Johnson was wooed by Brody's "natural charm and intelligence," he said. "Rinko blew me -- and everyone else in the world -- away in 'Babel.' "
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on February 06, 2007, 01:22:55 AM
And now... FUN WITH OUT-OF-CONTEXT QUOTES!

Quote from: MacGuffin on February 06, 2007, 01:11:26 AM
Johnson was wooed by Brody's "natural charm and intelligence," he said. "Rinko blew me[.]"


:bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:




But in all seriousness, I'm very excited about this movie.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: modage on February 14, 2007, 01:48:50 PM
Ruffalo bursts into 'Bloom'
Source: Variety

Mark Ruffalo is joining Endgame Entertainment's "The Brothers Bloom" alongside Adrien Brody, Rinko Kikuchi and Rachel Weisz.

Ruffalo will portray the older brother in a conman team with Brody; Kikuchi, who's Oscar-nominated for her role in "Babel," will play the brothers' partner in crime who may be hiding secrets of her own. Ruffalo will be seen next in "Zodiac," "Reserveration Road" and "Where the Wild Things Are."

"Brothers" was penned and will be directed by Rian Johnson in his first project since helming "Brick." Production begins next month.

Endgame Entertainment is financing and producing with Ram Bergman. Endgame's Jim Stern is handling producer duties and Endgame production prexy Wendy Japhet is exec producing.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on August 07, 2008, 12:59:45 AM
Johnson's Loop-y Film
The Brick director says a sci-fi story is next for him.

Rian Johnson, writer-director of the upcoming The Brothers Bloom, has informed IGN that his next project will be a science fiction film.

"It's called Looper," Johnson said during a recent visit to the edit bay for The Brothers Bloom. "It's sci-fi, but it's very much -- well, I think people toss out Philip Dick sci-fi when they mean 'small, dark' sci-fi. Although, when I think of Philip Dick's books, it's something very different. I think people are confusing it with the movie Blade Runner."

Johnson, who previously wrote and directed the high school-film noir hybrid Brick, explained that the film would be set in a sci-fi reality, but deal more with characters than fantastical conceits. "To me, it's a lot more like the first Terminator," he said. "It's very sci-fi, but it's very character-based and very concentrated. It's very different from the Terminator movies, but it's like the first Terminator in that time travel is involved with it, but only as a plot device.

Comparing it to The Brothers Bloom, he added, "It's going to be really different than this. It's really violent and dark."
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: theyarelegion on September 04, 2008, 12:12:43 AM
"The film opens very promising however.  A delightful voice-over narration from magician extraordinaire Ricky Jay, whose interesting speech rhythms (on display in most David Mamet films, but also in the opening set-up for P.T. Anderson's Magnolia) set the stage for the bubbly confidence caper film to follow."

full review at: http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/tiff-review-the-brothers-bloom/
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on September 17, 2008, 12:12:41 AM
Rian Johnson's future target: 'Looper'
Writer-director to team with Ram Bergman on thriller
Source: Hollywood Reporter

NEW YORK -- "The Brothers Bloom" writer-director Rian Johnson has set a new project, a time-travel thriller titled "Looper" that again will see the filmmaker seek to reinvent a familiar genre.

The project will team Johnson with producer Ram Bergman, who produced Johnson's previous two films, with the pair eyeing a 2009 start date. Johnson again will direct from his own script.

Endgame Entertainment, which financed and produced "Bloom," will likely come on to finance and produce "Looper," though the principals said there have been no formal negotiations yet.

"Looper" is set in a present-day world in which a group of hitmen are sent their victims from the future.

Johnson is known for giving a traditional format an original spin. His debut "Brick," a media and cult hit released by Focus in 2006, set a noir tale in a contemporary Southern California high school, while "Bloom" is a modern take on the conman picture, with Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo as brothers who may or may not be conning a wealthy eccentric (Rachel Weisz).

Summit, which bested a number of suitors last year to pick up "Bloom" off a script and promo reel in a reported eight-figure deal, will release the film in December and, along with "Twilight," will make the title one of its first major releases.

"Bloom" garnered strong word-of-mouth at this month's Toronto International Film Festival, with Johnson telling The Hollywood Reporter that the conventions of the conman movie helped him create the story.

"The nice thing about doing a movie like this is that you can use the audience's expectations as part of the storytelling," he said.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on May 28, 2009, 09:45:11 AM
Director Rian Johnson unravels his time-travel drama Looper
Source: SciFiWire

Director Rian Johnson (The Brothers Bloom) told SCI FI Wire that his next project, Looper, involves time travel but doesn't sacrifice character in the name of high-concept storytelling. "It's got time travel in it, but it uses time travel as the setup for a situation," Johnson said in an exclusive interview last month.

"But it's very character-based," Johnson added. "Especially in the second half of it, it definitely goes someplace you wouldn't quite expect it to go. Just like with The Brothers Bloom, that ended up being the part of it that both challenged and excited me the most—the fact that the back half of the script, a large part of it just hangs on the interactions between three characters, without a lot of plot to lean on. That's really, really hard for me, and really challenging, and also exciting. And fun, since it's what I've probably put the most work into."

Looper is set in a present-day world in which a group of hit men are sent their victims from the future.

Johnson spoke exclusively to SCI FI Wire while promoting The Brothers Bloom. The following is an edited version of that interview.

So how's Looper coming?

Johnson: I just finished the first draft two days ago, and it's a first draft, so I'm now kind of just wandering around confused. No, I sent it out and showed it to some people, just kind of working on making a second draft. But it's way too soon to have any kind of perspective. But I had a great time during the writing process. It is so completely different than Bloom that it was refreshing. I'm excited about it, and I can feel a kind of—it's getting to the point where I think about it for 70 percent of the day, which is a good point.

What's your revision process like?

Johnson: Again, probably as a function of this just being my third film, I don't have a set thing that I do, but that's one thing that I've been trying to work on in terms of myself, that's revision. I'm really bad about having the discipline to rewrite, just because it's such a long process for me, of writing. I really do plan things out for a few years before I sit down and start actually writing, but at that point everything that is down on paper [has] been in your head for so long. But that's something that I'm making a real conscious effort to avoid. I'm trying to be as brutal as possible in the writing process on paper with this, just to try and get it as tight as I can.

Is it action-oriented?

Johnson: Not really. It's got action in it; it's got lots of action, and it's pretty violent.

What kind of music have you thought about using in the film?

Johnson: I've talked a little bit with Nathan Johnson [Rian's cousin], who did the score for Brick and The Brothers Bloom. He was going to do Looper, and I talked to him a little bit, and we have some notions, but Nathan actually hasn't read the script yet. So once he does we'll actually sit down and have a conversation about it. [But] the one thing that I had as an idea was that it was going to be a lot more sparse than Bloom and Brick. I want to pull way back on the amount of music in the movie. But as a disconnected idea, who knows if it may even see it through the production?

How do you communicate your ideas with Nathan? Is the process easier since he's also your cousin?

Johnson: I'm very collaborative with Nathan, and we've been making movies together since we were 10. It does generally start with me giving him some reference points; like, for Brick it was Morricone scores, and for Bloom it was a combination of '70s American folk-rock, like The Band. Of course it goes somewhere different from there, but that's the starting point.

So for Looper that's probably the first thing: I'll start feeding him some stuff and some ideas. But right now I have strings in my head for it, a very clean and completely string-based type of thing. So we might start exploring in that direction, but that's a nice thing about keeping it in the family: You can hang out with these people that you've known for years, and it's not a shorthand, because that makes it sound like you're taking a shortcut, but it's a lack of ego on both sides. It's just completely able to be about the work, I guess.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on May 04, 2010, 10:11:08 AM
Joseph Gordon-Levitt eyeing roles in two action thrillers (exclusive)
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who last starred as a lovelorn man in "(500) Days of Summer," is taking a turn into action territory.

The actor is in final negotiations to star in "Premium Rush," a Columbia chase thriller being directed by David Koepp. He also is in talks to topline "Looper," a sci-fi thriller that will reteam him with "Brick" director Rian Johnson.

"Rush" sees Gordon-Levitt as a New York bike messenger who picks up an envelope at Columbia University, only to be chased throughout the city by a dirty cop desperate to get his hands on it.

Koepp, one of the town's hottest screenwriters, wrote the script with John Kamps. Gavin Polone, who produced "Zombieland" for the studio, is producing the pic, which is eyeing a late-summer start. Matt Tolmach and Elizabeth Cantillon are overseeing for the studio.

Gordon-Levitt then could segue to "Looper," the latest movie from Johnson. Veteran producer Ram Bergman is producing with Endgame, which also is financing.

Johnson gave Gordon-Levitt one of his first major roles as the actor was coming off five years worth of "3rd Rock From the Sun." Gordon-Levitt's role in "Brick" represented a 180-degree turn from his NBC sitcom work.

"Looper" is set during a future in which time travel has been invented, with operatives sent back to the present to assassinate criminals. Gordon-Levitt will play a man sent back to kill himself.

Repped by CAA and attorney Karl Austen, Gordon-Levitt next appears in Christopher Nolan's "Inception" and stars in the indie drama "Hesher," which premiered this year at Sundance.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Pubrick on May 04, 2010, 11:54:30 AM
Quote from: MacGuffin on May 04, 2010, 10:11:08 AM
Joseph Gordon-Levitt eyeing roles in two action thrillers (exclusive)

Pubrick Rolling Eyes in Anticipation of Rian Johnson's Next Film
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on May 04, 2010, 01:37:36 PM
Quote from: P on May 04, 2010, 11:54:30 AM
Quote from: MacGuffin on May 04, 2010, 10:11:08 AM
Joseph Gordon-Levitt eyeing roles in two action thrillers (exclusive)

Pubrick Rolling Eyes in Anticipation of Rian Johnson's Next Film

Polkablues Still Baffled by Rian Johnson Haters, I Mean It's Not Like He's Richard Kelly or Justin Lin or Something
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Captain of Industry on May 04, 2010, 01:39:05 PM
I made the mistake of buying the Rian Johnson directed Life of the World to Come dvd.  Big (well, $18) mistake.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on May 16, 2010, 11:05:57 AM
CANNES: Bruce Willis Plays Mature Joseph Gordon-Levitt In Time Travel Pic 'Looper'
By MIKE FLEMING; Deadline Hollywood
 
EXCLUSIVE: Bruce Willis is joining the cast of Looper, a science fiction time travel tale that reunites the Brick team of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and writer/director Rian Johnson. The Terminator-esque action film has a clever premise. Loopers are hit men whose victims are sent back in time from the future to be executed. The Loopers bump them off in the present, so there is no trace of a crime in the future. I'm told that Willis and Gordon-Levitt will play the same character, in those different time frames. That ploy is also being used in Men in Black 3, with Josh Brolin playing the younger version of Tommy Lee Jones's Agent Kay. CAA is repping North American rights, and FilmNation Entertainment is repping it. Insiders said it is not being shopped at this fest. But buyers are all over it.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: RegularKarate on May 17, 2010, 02:10:38 PM
I don't know which is worse, that Johnson is making Time Cop or that Men in Black 3 is a thing.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: modage on May 17, 2010, 05:09:59 PM
I think Bruce Willis being in a movie nowadays pretty much guarantees it will be awful.  Brick was good though.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Pubrick on May 17, 2010, 07:22:19 PM
Quote from: modage on May 17, 2010, 05:09:59 PM
Brick was good though.

no it wasn't, it was insufferable.

this douche is 0 for 3.

willis is a perfect match for him.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: MacGuffin on June 09, 2011, 09:23:22 AM
Anyone Got A Time Machine? Rian Johnson's 'Looper' Gets A September 28, 2012 Release Date
Roland Emmerich's 'Anonymous,' Gerald Butler Vehicle 'Playing The Field,' Space Actioner 'Lockout' All Shuffle Dates
Source: Playlist

Of all the films to have gone before the cameras this year, Rian Johnson's "Looper" is one of our most anticipated. It's a mindbending, violent time travel thriller, with the best script to date from the man behind "Brick" and "The Brothers Bloom", and features a top-notch cast including Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt, Paul Dano, Jeff Daniels and more. After a fierce bidding war, the project, now in post-production, was snapped up by FilmDistrict, who'll release the film through their deal with TriStar. With all going swimmingly, we were ready to sit back and enjoy the wait for the film, quietly crossing our fingers that it might even sneak onto the 2011 release schedule, but TriStar have announced a date, and unfortunately, it's not going to be this year. In fact, it'll be quite some way into 2012, with Box Office Mojo revealing that the film has a September 28, 2012 date planned, a whopping fifteen months from now, and Johnson later confirmed it to The Film Stage on Twitter, saying that "I'd love for it to be sooner, but it's a good date for the movie, hopefully it'll be worth the wait." Indeed. Johnson's last film, "The Brothers Bloom" also had a long wait before it hit screens, but this seems like a much happier position to be in, and it probably suggests that TriStar and FilmDistrict know they need some time to market a movie slightly off the beaten track, but one that has the potential to be a real crossover hit. We imagine the big reason for the far-off release is to capitalize on Gordon-Levitt's heat coming off "The Dark Knight Rises," which opens two months earlier. FilmDistrict have also moved a few more of their pictures around. The Luc Besson-produced sci-fi actioner "Lockout"—basically "Taken" in space—which stars Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Lennie James and Peter Stormare, has moved back a couple of months, from February 24 to April 13, 2012, while the sex and soccer comedy "Playing The Field," which involves Gerald Butler working through a starry line-up of soccer moms, including Uma Thurman, Jessica Biel, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Judy Greer, and comes from "The Pursuit of Happyness" director Gabriele Muccino, is now slated on March 9th. In the more immediate future, IFC have moved the Kristin Scott-Thomas French thriller "Love Crime" back a week, to September 2nd, while the disappointing "Brighton Rock" has done the same, moving from August 19th to August 26th. Finally, the flat-out hilarious looking "Anonymous," which sees "2012" helmer Roland Emmerich tackling the question of the authorship of Shakespeare's plays, with the likes of Rhys Ifans, Vanessa Redgrave, David Thewlis, Edward Hogg, Jamie Campbell-Bower and Rafe Spall, has moved back a whole month, from September 30th to October 28th, a date it shares with another new addition to the schedule, the cult Sundance horror comedy "Tucker and Dale vs. Evil," starring Alan Tudyck, Tyler Labine and Katrina Bowden, which Magnet, who just acquired the film, will release on the same day, with a VoD release coming sooner, on August 26th.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: wilder on June 14, 2012, 06:32:47 PM
Worthwhile blog post (http://rcjohnso.tumblr.com/post/24693276556/some-thoughts-on-3d) describing his thoughts on 3D
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on June 14, 2012, 11:39:13 PM
That's a good read.  I'm a much bigger Rian Johnson fan than the next guy, but this makes some great points that gives even those of us who hate the current generation of 3D hope for its future.

Quote from: Rian Johnson3D is absolutely analogous to the development of color film, and on that developmental timeline stereoscopic photography is the equivalent of hand-painting color onto black and white frames.

Love it.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: BB on June 15, 2012, 02:48:23 AM
Admittedly, I'm not a fan of Rian Johnson's work thus far and perhaps that's coloring my judgment somewhat, but I feel he's dead wrong here. As with sound, audiences and filmmakers were clamoring for color film almost from the start. Hand-painting, tinting, Kinemacolor, etc. were reasonably common throughout the silent era, just as musicians or gramophones were often brought in to accompany screenings. Obviously, there was some resistance from purists, but once true color became economically and technologically feasible, it quickly took off and was the norm within about twenty years.

Stereoscopic filmmaking has existed in various forms since the 20s. Its supposed "golden era" lasted only about three years in the 50s. We've seen periodic revivals here and there but until today, it had never significantly taken off because every credible person without a vested interest in the technology regards it as a goofy distraction. 2D films provide an adequate -- if not excellent -- simulation of depth and dimension. Good deep focus photography on a nice big screen looks like you are staring out a window onto the scene. 3D as it currently stands does not. Nor do I believe it ever will no matter how refined the technology. How could it ever surpass a really good approximation of our natural vision? It's fine for a ride, but is otherwise pointless.

Talk of deeper immersion in the story is silly shit. Does anybody find going to the theater to be MORE immersive than watching a film? Done well, both are plenty immersive. Story, performance, and style immerse viewers, technology be damned. Johnson's appeal to true, organic depth makes no sense. In any case, it will be a simulation. If it's a hologram, it's still a SIMULATION. The only true, organic depth you'll see in a film is if you visit the set. Additionally, who cares? Have you ever watched a movie and thought, "I just can't feel the shape of this actor's face! GAH!"? Films look (or can look) so good today, it's ridiculous. Lenses are better now than they have ever been. The film that is available is terrific. As digital cameras develop their footage will look better and better. Already, they're pretty good for a lot things. CGI will soon be indistinguishable from real-life elements if the filmmakers have the time and budget. Of course, it's all mostly wasted. But it's there for the picking.

Where color and sound (and to a certain degree digital) were artistically motivated developments, 3D is purely a corporate enterprise and all corporate enterprises demand unmitigated progress. Even if it's senseless or detrimental to the ultimate product. Everybody involved (directors included) makes more money if movies are shown in 3D. I understand that it's in part a means to combat losses from piracy, but let's be real. Big movies today are making billions of dollars. BILLIONS. When the next evolution (be it 48fps3DIMAX or whatever) comes about, they will charge even more. My only hope for the future of 3D is that they make it prohibitively expensive and nobody goes and it all crumbles and the younger generation realizes they've been had so we can break the cycle.

Sorry for all the negativity.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: pete on June 15, 2012, 03:28:48 AM
color and sound were artistically motivated? have you not seen singing in the rain?
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Pubrick on June 15, 2012, 04:51:10 AM
Quote from: BB on June 15, 2012, 02:48:23 AM
Sorry for all the negativity.

No, you're right.

Fuck Rian Johnson.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: BB on June 15, 2012, 11:29:04 AM
Quote from: pete on June 15, 2012, 03:28:48 AM
color and sound were artistically motivated? have you not seen singing in the rain?

I'm not denying that there was a corporate element at play in the final push for transition. Moviemaking is a business, after all. I mean, it wasn't until television threatened film's dominion that color became standard.

But filmmakers had wanted color and sound from the start. There's no doubt. Fucking Edison and Eastman dyed frames to color them almost as soon as they were invented. And what of title cards? Scorebooks for theater pianists? Corporations just found a way to make a buck off of it.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Pubrick on June 15, 2012, 11:35:42 AM
Of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of of .

There I think that makes sense now.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: BB on June 15, 2012, 12:23:09 PM
God, I'm sorry. I didn't read that back. I sound like such a twat.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on June 15, 2012, 12:59:17 PM
Ouch. Right in the pet peeve.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: pete on June 15, 2012, 02:44:25 PM
Quote from: BB on June 15, 2012, 11:29:04 AM

But filmmakers had wanted color and sound from the start. There's no doubt. Fucking Edison and Eastman dyed frames to color them almost as soon as they were invented. And what of title cards? Scorebooks for theater pianists? Corporations just found a way to make a buck off of it.

lots of great filmmakers didn't want sound, and a lot of great talents were ruined by sound. Buster Keaton being the primary example. I get what you're saying in general, but the historical approach you took seemed a little simplistic, which translated to the rest of your argument about 3d now. technology certainly makes filmmakers curious, and the meddling of money and studio finance does seem to make everything less pure, I'm just not sure if it's to the extent of what you're saying - where it's one evil entity ruling over all the working artists.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Pubrick on June 16, 2012, 03:18:15 AM
Quote from: BB on June 15, 2012, 12:23:09 PM
God, I'm sorry. I didn't read that back. I sound like such a twat.

No, I'm sorry, it was a drunk post.

I support your position here.

It's just that "off of" is the kind of thing Rian Johnson would say.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: BB on June 16, 2012, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: pete on June 15, 2012, 02:44:25 PM
lots of great filmmakers didn't want sound, and a lot of great talents were ruined by sound. Buster Keaton being the primary example. I get what you're saying in general, but the historical approach you took seemed a little simplistic, which translated to the rest of your argument about 3d now. technology certainly makes filmmakers curious, and the meddling of money and studio finance does seem to make everything less pure, I'm just not sure if it's to the extent of what you're saying - where it's one evil entity ruling over all the working artists.

I'll grant that there are lots of exceptions to what I've written. I am oversimplifying. But -- and here I might be changing my argument a bit -- I would maintain that B&W, silent film was an incidental step on the way to color, sound film. I don't mean to disparage B&W and silent. Many of the best films ever are both. What I mean is that if at the point of discovery Edison and Eastman could have fashioned color, sound film, they almost definitely would have. If early filmmakers like Melies and Griffith could have somehow bypassed B&W, silent film, they almost definitely would have. For most, that was the goal from day one. I don't think the same is true of 3D. The technology has existed for a very long time and has generally been regarded as shitty forever. It is not a "natural" evolution anymore than some sort of smell-o-vision system would be. I think the current push for 3D is purely a corporate play. It's a means to bolster flagging sales. The filmmakers most ardently in support of it (Cameron, Jackson) have financial interest in its success (I could be wrong here, can anybody confirm or deny?). Again, perhaps I'm oversimplifying. But I feel 3D is only "the future of film" because people (like Rian Johnson) are right now claiming it to be. I could be eating my words in a few years though.

As a side note, not that this supports my argument exactly, but we can't overlook Buster Keaton's alcoholism when discussing his decline after the silent era. Granted, his alcoholism could be a result of his struggle with sound, who knows? And, to be clear, I love Buster Keaton. Don't mean to dismiss him or anything.

Quote from: Pubrick on June 16, 2012, 03:18:15 AM
It's just that "off of" is the kind of thing Rian Johnson would say.

Agreed. It won't happen again.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 16, 2012, 10:50:00 AM
You really should of known about the "off of" police.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on June 16, 2012, 11:06:39 AM
If there's one thing you need to know about Pubrick, it's that he hates the word "of" in the middle of prepositional phrases. Hates it! And that's literally the only thing you need to know about him.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: pete on June 16, 2012, 03:08:54 PM
Quote from: BB on June 16, 2012, 09:39:34 AM
Quote from: pete on June 15, 2012, 02:44:25 PM
lots of great filmmakers didn't want sound, and a lot of great talents were ruined by sound. Buster Keaton being the primary example. I get what you're saying in general, but the historical approach you took seemed a little simplistic, which translated to the rest of your argument about 3d now. technology certainly makes filmmakers curious, and the meddling of money and studio finance does seem to make everything less pure, I'm just not sure if it's to the extent of what you're saying - where it's one evil entity ruling over all the working artists.

I'll grant that there are lots of exceptions to what I've written. I am oversimplifying. But -- and here I might be changing my argument a bit -- I would maintain that B&W, silent film was an incidental step on the way to color, sound film. I don't mean to disparage B&W and silent. Many of the best films ever are both. What I mean is that if at the point of discovery Edison and Eastman could have fashioned color, sound film, they almost definitely would have. If early filmmakers like Melies and Griffith could have somehow bypassed B&W, silent film, they almost definitely would have. For most, that was the goal from day one. I don't think the same is true of 3D. The technology has existed for a very long time and has generally been regarded as shitty forever. It is not a "natural" evolution anymore than some sort of smell-o-vision system would be. I think the current push for 3D is purely a corporate play. It's a means to bolster flagging sales. The filmmakers most ardently in support of it (Cameron, Jackson) have financial interest in its success (I could be wrong here, can anybody confirm or deny?). Again, perhaps I'm oversimplifying. But I feel 3D is only "the future of film" because people (like Rian Johnson) are right now claiming it to be. I could be eating my words in a few years though.

As a side note, not that this supports my argument exactly, but we can't overlook Buster Keaton's alcoholism when discussing his decline after the silent era. Granted, his alcoholism could be a result of his struggle with sound, who knows? And, to be clear, I love Buster Keaton. Don't mean to dismiss him or anything.



I forgot which famous cinematographers said this (Connie Hall and his ilks I believe) from that documentary Visions of Light - and I'm sorry that my film history is relatively out the window that I have to be quoting a documentary - that all breakthroughs in artful cinematography were halted because of sound, that the bandwagon jumping really forced the filmmakers - cinematographers especially - to abandon all the beautiful achievements they were making, so Edison's desire for coloring definitely did not speak for everyone. And Edison himself can't be the best representative for an altruistic artist anyway because 1) he wasn't that much of a filmmaker and 2) he was aggressive in his money-making ways.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: Ravi on June 16, 2012, 07:54:59 PM
Johnson makes a good point about the grand talk of 3D being so wonderful and immersive doesn't quite match what we see in theaters. Perhaps filmmakers are seeing their films in far better viewing conditions than regular people are, and they think that everyone sees what they see? Maybe Scorsese, Cameron, and Jackson really are seeing beautiful, immersive images while most of see dull, dim images?
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: polkablues on June 16, 2012, 11:51:05 PM
The point that stuck with me was the idea that when people like Scorsese rave about 3D, they're not actually seeing the 3D as it is but as how they envision its potential to be. It hadn't really occurred to me before that the current style of 3D is a transitional technology, something we have to suffer through to get to the next breakthrough, something that actually lives up to the artistic vision of the filmmakers using it.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: BB on June 18, 2012, 12:53:38 AM
Quote from: pete on June 16, 2012, 03:08:54 PM
I forgot which famous cinematographers said this (Connie Hall and his ilks I believe) from that documentary Visions of Light - and I'm sorry that my film history is relatively out the window that I have to be quoting a documentary - that all breakthroughs in artful cinematography were halted because of sound, that the bandwagon jumping really forced the filmmakers - cinematographers especially - to abandon all the beautiful achievements they were making, so Edison's desire for coloring definitely did not speak for everyone. And Edison himself can't be the best representative for an altruistic artist anyway because 1) he wasn't that much of a filmmaker and 2) he was aggressive in his money-making ways.

I'm not entirely sure if you're being sarcastic (I want to believe you're being sincere despite the marquee's warning) but there's no need to belittle yourself here. Everybody gets their information from somewhere. I've also seen Visions of Light and remember what you're talking about. There's no denying that many cinematographers were upset and many directors had a hard time transitioning from silent to sound. The difficulty of recording useable audio put limitations on what the camera could do. It took a while for things to catch up to where they were. King Vidor's The Crowd is full of crazy, amazing cinematography. His Street Scene made five years later is sort of plain. There's a clip on youtube of Vidor (from Scorsese's Journey Through American Movies) talking about the painful period of change. Then again, Fritz Lang had no apparent difficulty. Chaplin transitioned just fine despite not making many sound films (though his cinematography was always pretty plain, I guess).

Arguably, though, cinematographers were angry because the primacy of their craft was suddenly contested and directors were mad that they had to deal with a new set of challenges. It's an old dog new tricks thing (maybe that's the case with me as well, but I don't think so). Few disputed the ultimate benefits of sound and, later, color. They just disliked the working methods or had trouble acclimating. And really, what with all the attempts at imitating sound and color, they must have seemed like an inevitability from the start. Even if one personally prefers black and white, silent films, it's pretty hard to dismiss sound and color outright. They allow the medium to better mimic how most people experience the world with their eyes and ears.

My entire argument against 3D is that it detracts from the medium by poorly mimicking actual human experience. As long as film remains only an audiovisual medium, I can't see how 3D will improve upon what we currently have. If you look across your room right now and see a table and some chairs and a wall a few feet behind them, that image can, with proper lensing and so forth, look virtually the same as it does to you now projected in 2D. In 3D the table and chairs would appear to pop out at you or the room would be given unnatural depth. Now, I'm not arguing that the technology is as good as it will ever be. But as they make improvements, they'll be moving it closer to how good 2D projection currently looks. The only reason I can envision for this endeavor is that somehow, somebody is making money. No shame in husslin. I just dislike the notion that there's some sort of artistic justification, by which I mean that it is somehow better for or an improvement upon the medium. That it is somehow progress. If we're destined for amazing holographic projection storytelling, cool. It'll be interesting to see. Only then though can we decide whether or not such a thing is really a movie. 

Also, sorry, but this irked me, I wasn't appealing to Edison as an artist. I meant only to indicate that even from the inventor's standpoint, color was always the goal. Black and white was a sort of beautiful (I hesitate to say) shortcoming, which people fell in love with and fought for and did wonderful things with. I'm grateful for it, it can be gorgeous, but it makes sense that color would become the norm. 3D doesn't make sense. For me anyway. Even when I try to envision what it might potentially become. I like Scorsese. Hell, I often like Jackson and Cameron. But, from what I know right now, I have to disagree with them. I'm fully open to the certainty that they know more than I do and will be first to admit if I am proven wrong.

Also also, apologies to Rian Johnson and his fans. I know this is a tired argument. Still I'm glad we're having this talk, pete.
Title: Re: Rian Johnson
Post by: ono on November 21, 2012, 12:04:41 AM
Rian Johnson interviewed by Jason Reitman, or something. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dchOMz4lJs)