Author Topic: Ain't Them Bodies Saints  (Read 37715 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tictacbk

  • The Magic Flight
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
  • Respect: +171
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #60 on: January 23, 2013, 03:58:59 PM »
0
Ghostboy needs to post something so we can give him due respect. 


...By which I mean up-vote his post.

RegularKarate

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6000
  • Respect: +174
    • http://www.livejournal.com/users/regularkarate/
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #61 on: January 23, 2013, 04:15:18 PM »
0
I'm sure he's magnificently busy right now.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Respect: +1235
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #62 on: January 23, 2013, 04:23:00 PM »
0
well someone's gotta operate the juicer
"I must whisper it to you—not because Im ashamed but because it is so Dear to me that I must keep it close to me by whispering—"

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 6921
  • Respect: +1632
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #63 on: January 23, 2013, 04:32:14 PM »
0
Huffpo and Hitfix articles speculating which Sundance films could factor into next year's awards season.  ATBS features prominently in both, primarily in regard to the performances.

I have to think a distribution deal is inevitable at any moment now, with the kind of buzz and acclaim it has swirling around it.
Now you're in the *spoiler* place.

Ghostboy

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4892
  • Respect: +376
    • http://www.road-dog-productions.com/
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #64 on: January 23, 2013, 04:33:08 PM »
+31
I'm still here!

Sleepless

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
  • I told you I would eat you
  • Respect: +267
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #65 on: January 23, 2013, 04:41:41 PM »
0
Congrats! Can't wait to see it! Well done!

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2112
  • Respect: +1235
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #66 on: January 23, 2013, 04:47:57 PM »
+1
I'm still here!
to die for! we were all lonesome jims here, soul survivors smoking 200 cigarettes, thinking you were gone baby gone. but nah, you're committed.
"I must whisper it to you—not because Im ashamed but because it is so Dear to me that I must keep it close to me by whispering—"

max from fearless

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 259
  • Respect: +198
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #67 on: January 23, 2013, 05:56:58 PM »
0
Congratulations! Also been reading your road-dog-prods blog, loads of good stuff on there, especially liked the interview you did with Shane Carruth for Primer.

Kellen

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Respect: +60
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #68 on: January 24, 2013, 12:56:43 PM »
0

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10749
  • Respect: +686
    • Floating Heads
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #69 on: January 24, 2013, 01:14:07 PM »
0
Top 5 Films of Sundance - Rolling Stone
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Pozer

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2288
  • Respect: +135

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4858
  • Respect: +79

matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3213
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +447
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #72 on: January 25, 2013, 01:47:26 AM »
+1
Here's a conversation Ravi and I had on Facebook. I'd love to hear what y'all think of this. It involves a lot of me talking out of my butthole about stuff I don't know about, but really, it's not a crazy idea.

----------------------------

Ravi:
That means there's a chance this could be a Criterion DVD/Blu-Ray release...

Matt:
True, hadn't thought of that. I know that Weinstein Co. has foreign rights and had an option for North American rights, and I read a piece that posited that they could get this and try to shoot for Oscar if they wanted to. It seems that they are going to try that with FRUITVALE, which I hear is really working for people.

My impression of IFC is that they don't hit as hard with the advertising or the awards push. To be honest, I'm a little surprised by this acquisition because I can't remember the last time IFC really hit something out of the ballpark. I know that this movie will be a hard sell to large audiences, but it seemed to me that a heavier hitter like Weinstein could really leverage the hell out of the cast and make back more money.

The other thing is that I thought North America is where they're going to do their best potential business, because this is a movie about outlaws in Texas, and how do you sell that overseas? I also think that "Sundance" is more meaningful to North American audiences.

But IFC's relationship with Criterion is a very interesting point. Every mention of ATBS hails the arrival of Mr. Lowery, which makes it sound like this is one of the most distinctly auteur-driven films of the festival (along with BEFORE MIDNIGHT which also has a likely shot at Criterion for the whole trilogy, and UPSTREAM COLOR because Shane Carruth was a one-man band on it, so you can't say it's not auteur). Criterion is all about that auteur shit, so it's not a crazy idea.

The article mentions that Sony Pictures Classics was in the running and that did seem like the most natural fit for this film, all things considered. Their pedigree is higher. They're a classier joint.

I don't imagine that this is simply a highest-bidder-wins-type situation. It's gotta be about what they can offer the film in distribution and advertising, as well. I'm wondering what IFC is offering besides the "low seven figures" that this article mentions.

IFC does hit VOD harder than most. I wonder if that's a part. Maybe they want VOD to play a big part in this.

Lots of IFC films come and go with barely a blip in the market, so I am a bit concerned, but if they shoot for Criterion then it's really a whole other game, and IFC is their best shot.

I think that all makes sense. Right?

Ravi:
Maybe IFC offered a better back-end deal, or some other incentives, monetary or otherwise. Control over the marketing (trailers, posters, etc.) perhaps?

Matt:
It comes down to incentives one way or the other. Just a matter of what incentives, and a push for Criterion isn't out of the question. Really, why not? They did it with TINY FURNITURE and WEEKEND, which weren't obvious choices, and they did it with THE KID WITH THE BIKE, too. And really, if Criterion was mentioned, that would be hard to turn down.

I don't recall IFC giving filmmakers much control over marketing. Their marketing is honestly pretty gaudy and unimpressive (take a look: http://www.ifcfilms.com/in-theaters-on-demand). But they are ahead of the game in this VOD thing and might well have a better working distribution model for earning a profit. It's not as glamorous. The films don't pop up on as many screens (but that keeps distribution costs down). More of each dollar goes to the company and perhaps back to the filmmakers. Money money money money money. Maybe.

Ravi:
Yeah, their posters are pretty shitty.

ATBS seems like it would be one of their biggest releases, as far as cast and festival buzz are concerned.

Matt:
Yeah really. Looking at all their titles--ATBS doesn't even seem to fit, EXCEPT for their Criterion titles!

I was just thinking that the closest title they have to ATBS is THE FORGIVENESS OF BLOOD. I double-checked, and guess what? Criterion, baby!

Let's call it. AIN'T THEM BODIES SAINTS -- CRITERION COLLECTION.

Ravi:
WOO HOO!

matt35mm

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3213
  • Bony old behind.
  • Respect: +447
    • My Films on Vimeo
Re: Ain't Them Bodies Saints
« Reply #73 on: January 25, 2013, 11:54:10 AM »
+2
Audio interview with David: http://www.filmlinc.com/daily/entry/daily-buzz-sundance-episode-8-david-lowery-aint-them-bodies-saints (starts about a minute in and goes for about 15 minutes)

Also, IFC finalized the deal and it will be a multi-platform release. Seems to be aiming for something similar to MARGIN CALL (which had a different distributor, but still), which is looked to as a prime example of doing big business on VOD. So I think, profit-wise, this deal could work out very well. IFC hits VOD pretty hard.

Then on top of that, there's Criterion. Friend of mine who saw the movie at the festival and knows the Criterion Collection very well said it would totally fit. I also asked Gold Trumpet and he said he also thought it was quite possible.

All in all, the deal's making sense to me now.

Kellen

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Respect: +60

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy