doing it right for the wrong reasons?

Started by Sal, August 06, 2003, 04:52:02 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

Jeremy Blackman

#30
August 12, 2003, 06:28:18 PM
Quote from: SpikeI don't know, for me it's like a factory of nightmare. I mean, when I'll be someday a real director (hopefully) I don't want to end in Hollywood as big blockbuster director. I would like to be an independent filmmaker, who makes small low-budget-films.

:-D  :yabbse-thumbup:

Gamblour.

#31
August 14, 2003, 04:09:26 PM
Quote from: mutinyco
One thing to REALLY think about is how many indie movies get made each year. How many of them are ever released? Think of all the people trying to become directors. How many really make it? Of the thousands in the last decade, maybe a dozen have actually gone on to do bigger and better things... Technology is more widely available than ever. Doesn't mean there's any more talent though. And nobody makes it strictly on talent, no matter how good you are.

Yeah, I've thought about this fact and it gets me depressed a little, when I think about going and becoming a director.

Quote from: cecil b. dementedmaybe this belongs in the what is/isnt art discussion

I tried searching for that thread...I can't find it. Links, anyone? I'd like to read it.

Quote from: ghostboyMaybe this is where we revive the Jennifer Connelly "ass to ass" conversation.
What was that discussion about?

And overall, I think this kid's reach exceeds his grasp (pardon the idiom). I mean, he's just too ambitious. Even if he is talented, look how far Orson Welles got...the guy had great movies, but his career eventually fizzled out. This kid says he'd rather not start his career after college. I can't wait to start college(two Mondays from now, fuck yea), and I really don't wanna make any big productions until I get out. Know why? So I can live a little, fuck around, party my ass off, instead of making pretentious movies about some perspective I read about or saw on television. Sure, I'll get my feet wet on some shorts. But you shouldn't go from Sam Spud to some Sara Jane drama (he made his friends pay for it? what a dickhead) to a feature film. He should at least make it a comedy first. There's room that people could enjoy it.
WWPTAD?

MacGuffin

#32
August 14, 2003, 04:13:21 PM
Quote from: Gamblor
Quote from: cecil b. dementedmaybe this belongs in the what is/isnt art discussion

I tried searching for that thread...I can't find it. Links, anyone? I'd like to read it.

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=2982

Quote from: Gamblor
Quote from: ghostboyMaybe this is where we revive the Jennifer Connelly "ass to ass" conversation.
What was that discussion about?

Not worth bringing up again.
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

Gamblour.

#33
August 14, 2003, 04:18:49 PM
Thanks for the link, MacGuffin. And now I am curious. I'm gonna find that Connelly topic, if it still exists.
WWPTAD?

Sal

#34
August 14, 2003, 04:20:11 PM
I'm finding it funny that so many here believe good art is predicated on living a fully lived life.  Doesn't work that way.  It's more intrinsic than that.  At the end of the day, you either have it or you don't.  You don't "get it" through the course of time.  Your artistic maturation relies on perception, not experience.

SoNowThen

#35
August 14, 2003, 04:22:06 PM
Hard work is a factor. As is trial and error. But passion is probably most important, whether you're young or old, smart or a bit slow...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

MacGuffin

#36
August 14, 2003, 04:24:43 PM
Quote from: GamblorAnd now I am curious. I'm gonna find that Connelly topic, if it still exists.
Even ass-man, Mr. Xixax, was repulsed:
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=2581
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

Gamblour.

#37
August 14, 2003, 05:38:36 PM
Again, thanks for the link. Yeah, not too great of a topic.
WWPTAD?

Link

#38
August 14, 2003, 06:38:06 PM
Quote from: SalYour artistic maturation relies on perception, not experience.

It's easier to "perceive" if you "experience."  No, not impossible if you don't experience, but easier if you do.

Pubrick

#39
August 15, 2003, 04:51:44 AM
Quote from: SoNowThenHard work is a factor. As is trial and error. But passion is probably most important, whether you're young or old, smart or a bit slow...
effort is a factor in success.. but not in quality of work. Sal's right about perception, or insight. what u bring to the table and how u lay it down may be perfected with experience, and u can get away with bringing disposable fluff if u can make a big show of it.

the role of the young artist (in an industry) is that of a whore.. the trick is to serve the paying customer in a way that gives u most satisfaction, that is, to make them want what u want.. instead of simply scratching their basic urge to just get off.

i don't think spike meant for this to become a discussion about art/truth/whores, he's just a kid who believes that low-budget independent = integrity. that is not so. as an example, PTA is making films that are anything but hollywood norm, but he's made it with their money.. how did he do this? as i was saying, he wanted sumthing and made others want it too. his experience in the biz has only increased the number of ppl he's seduced. kubrick got to the point where just his name was a marketable brand of "good art".

what's special about these ppl and many other artists, is that what they said and how they said it meet in a place that strikes at sumthin inside ppl which regardless of time must eventually be recognized. supposedly this was their ambition, who's to say how happy they are anyway about their work and the reaction? So back to our Spike, if u want to assign urself to a specific budget-bracket and popularity-level, ur only feeding into the lie that (in increasing magnitude):
- u must sacrifice integrity for success
- art/beauty is a factor of reaction and not essential truth
- money wins

even tho spike didn't want a lecture on art and modern times, i want to conclude, it's ur choice and duty to find sum inner voice, to amplify it and color it how u please. the only condition is that u feed it passionately with what is right (not necessarily good morally, like focussing on a darkness), if u want to grow old with it.. there is no way of knowing how many ppl will agree/feel it, or how powerful those ppl will be. of course, modern marketing has made ppl forget these truths.
under the paving stones.

Link

#40
August 17, 2003, 01:24:57 PM
Professor P, I really enjoyed your lecture today, will you sign my Mission Statement?

I actually agree with most of what you said, though.

mutinyco

#41
August 17, 2003, 01:35:35 PM
Yes, being artistic is intrinsic. But you need to live life in order to experience life and have something to say. That's why so many young directors make trite, shallow, stylized nonsense.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

kotte

#42
August 20, 2003, 02:56:12 PM
More life lived equals better movies right?

So then PTA should be pretty bad and Joel Schumacher a wiz right? No, this isn't the case. Why is that?

If you need a life under your belt to make good films then young people shouldn't even try right? And if they do they should make the films with the knowledge from the beginning that it's crap?

I'm a little bit two-minded here. On one hand I totally agree life makes better films but on the other young people can have a unique outlook on life too.

Chris

mindfuck

#43
August 20, 2003, 04:25:59 PM
Quote from: kotte
If you need a life under your belt to make good films then young people shouldn't even try right? And if they do they should make the films with the knowledge from the beginning that it's crap?

I think the point here is the TYPE of movie you make while you are young. It's all about the scope. I'm sorry, but I'm not really too interested in some kid's "observations of life" at 17-years-old. I doubt he has very much to say beyond things that have been said in 500 movies before. Hoping to hit on some resonating truth about how life works that no one has addressed before, especially at that age, seems a bit unlikely.

It's almost like it's some kind of ultimate "wunderkid" fantasy to make some heady film as a teenager and have everyone look at is and say "Holy shit, you know, he's right. I never thought of that before!" like all it needed was just perspective from a younger person. It's not gonna happen.

As a young filmmaker, stick to telling stories and save your ultimate commentary on life for when you have gathered some wisdom and actual life experience.

SoNowThen

#44
August 20, 2003, 04:34:51 PM
Quote from: mindfuckAs a young filmmaker, stick to telling stories and save your ultimate commentary on life for when you have gathered some wisdom and actual life experience.


Yes. That's it. That's what I've wanted to put and haven't found the words. Thank you.

Make great movies with stories while you are young, move into films that have some perspective the more you get some (perspective, that is...).

And both sets of films (young kid super-style vehicles AND older think pieces) can be great.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions