After Last Season

Started by picolas, June 10, 2009, 02:32:59 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

picolas



"Most of the movie was set in one room, and by the end of the movie, I still had no idea of what the geography of the room was."
- http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2009/06/some-guys-who-saw-after-last-season#more-14464

i heard about this a while ago and forgot but now it's out and i Must see it.

tralier: http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/afterlastseason/

excerpt from imdb review: "I'm just really not sure if it's meant as a joke or not. Most of the scenes are done in a master or medium-wide, the camera rarely moves but when it does, it's in a slight jerky movement to the left or right that makes no sense."

Ghostboy

I've found myself somewhere near the epicenter of it all - I got interviewed by Rotten Tomtoes about it yesterday!

Here's my review: http://www.hammertonail.com/genre/drama/after-last-season-movie-review/

For those of you who haven't experienced it yet - this is one of the all time greatest trailers.

Gamblour.

Oh yeah! I saw this on your blog a long time ago, ghostboy. I need to find more info on its distribution.
WWPTAD?

RegularKarate

I've been curious about it since Ghostboy posted about it on his blog.

It's showing in 4 theaters, one of which is in Austin.

The strange thing is that the theater it's showing at here is a giant run-down Cinemark which most customers have abandoned for the gianter slightly-less-run-down Regal across the street.  I typically go to neither.

I've been debating about whether I really want to take time out to go see this though.  I'm a huge fan of shitty movies (The ROOM anyone?), but this one just looks like a boring failed attempt to be artsy.

picolas

if the trailer didn't make you laugh you probably shouldn't go. maybe after it's been ritualized.

Stefen

Falling in love is the greatest joy in life. Followed closely by sneaking into a gated community late at night and firing a gun into the air.

RegularKarate

Quote from: picolas on June 10, 2009, 01:04:01 PM
if the trailer didn't make you laugh you probably shouldn't go. maybe after it's been ritualized.

The trailer did make me laugh.
Possible ritualization is a reason to see it sooner.  When we screened The Room here in Austin, I just got so bummed out by all the calculated "Fun" everyone was having with the spoons and crap... that just robs a bad movie of all the joy.

polkablues

What I haven't been able to figure out yet from articles and statements and so forth is whether the filmmaker was making the thing with complete sincerity, or if he was in on the joke.  If it's for real, this movie will be an enduring classic.  If not, we'll all forget about it within the year.
My house, my rules, my coffee

hedwig

Quote from: RegularKarate on June 10, 2009, 12:52:24 PM
I'm a huge fan of shitty movies (The ROOM anyone?)
The Room is not even just a shitty movie, it's truly something else.

my jaw dropped OFF.  :shock:

children with angels

After reading about this on Ghostboy's blog, a few friends and I were thrown into absolute confusion and have debated the trailer and its possible intentions in ridiculous depth, the transcript of which is here, if anyone's interested enough: http://www.alternatetakes.co.uk/?2009,4,225

Also, Ghostboy, have you read lead actor Jason Kulas' facebook blog about how the film was shot? It likely sheds some light on what you say is its formal incoherence (I am SO jealous that you've now seen it!). It still doesn't let us pronounce for certain WHY the film was made in this insane way, though. Clearly, Lars Von Trier has NOTHING on Mark Region...


BEHIND THE SCENES OF AFTER LAST SEASON

I am the lead male actor from the indie feature film "After Last
Season", which will be released to a few theaters on 6/5 (details at
afterlastseason.com).

I've read some wild speculation about the film as I've surfed the web,
I thought I'd post a little behind the scenes info about the film for
those that would like to hear a little more of the reality behind the
film.

By the way, as for the release, they are negotiating for additional
theaters, particularly near Boston. If it does well in theaters,
additional theaters may be booked in subsequent weeks.

I haven't seen the film (I plan to be in Rochester at the 7:45 & 10pm
shows on Friday), so I don't know everything about it, but as the male
lead, I was around for most of the shooting.

I've noticed questions about artistic intent, but those questions
would be better discussed with the writer/director, Mark Region.

As Mark already explained in an interview, he shot a feature length
film. It was shot on 35mm. From all I know, the trailer appears to be
an accurate preview of the final product.

As for a little behind-the-scenes info on the production, this was
shot in a process that seemed unique to me. I've done 20 shorts &
features, as lead and supporting roles. But this was my first on film
(35mm), which made things interesting. The shooting method was pretty
efficient, both on time, and film stock. On video I'm used to multiple
takes, and standard coverage (master and close-ups). That gets
expensive on 35mm, and of course it's time-consuming, and this wasn't
shot quite that way. To use time, and film stock efficiently, a number
of times Mark didn't shoot the scene, but rather just individual lines
from various scenes, out-of-sequence, in close-up. He planned to
assemble these shots in editing to form the scene.
Mark seemed to
already have the entire film visually in his head, right down to what
shots, angles, masters, and close-ups would be in a scene. Because of
this he could shoot only what he knew he needed, and time and budget
didn't get expended on extraneous coverage.

This allowed him to do things like have 1 setup, like a close-up on
one actor, and he'd have them perform just line 18 from scene 80, then
line 12 from scene 20, etc. With a little attention to remaining
footage, this approach let him pack dialog lines into every last bit
of film before retiring that reel, and without having to move the
camera or lights. While I would say I prefer performing full scenes,
with a partner, more often, it was a new challenge to tackle work that
way and learn how to work with this approach.


Of course, this made for a little extra pressure on the actors. Mark
hoped to get most of the shots in just 1 take, which he generally did.
And of course you had to complete your lines before the reel ran out.
All of this contributed to efficiency in using film stock. It also
made for a bit more of a challenge to "keep your place" in the film.
Since individual lines of a scene might be shot stand-alone over
several days, and out of sequence, the actor's task was to keep
getting into the context of where in the scene and the film this
shot/line was going to appear.


Like any film, we had our unexpected production challenges as well. In
our case, we ran into a problem with the heating, so much of the shoot
was unheated. Since this was winter in northern MA it got pretty cold.
Our characters wore light clothing, so shooting got pretty
interesting. Now you know why you see red noses in the trailer! But
every shoot has its unique tales behind the production, and this
became one of ours. But actors, and everyone on a film team, need the
spirit to cheerfully tackle all challenges, including physical
adversity, and we did.

I've also noticed remarks about the sets. From what I saw, I would say
that in-person the set design often conveyed a utilitarian, minimalist
feel. I don't know yet what the total on-screen effect of them will
be.

I hope this peek behind the scenes will be of interest to those
looking to learn more about this film. If I have any additional
interesting news about the film I will be publishing updates on my
public Facebook page that is for fans to find news.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Jason-Kulas/81856376634
"Should I bring my own chains?"
"We always do..."

http://www.alternatetakes.co.uk/
http://thelesserfeat.blogspot.com/

ono

I don't really see what all the fuss is about.  I didn't laugh, but that's probably 'cause I didn't understand most of the dialogue -- too quiet.  There's a fine line between mysterious and vague.  It's something that'll have some people lauding it, others loathing it, all for the same reasons.  Seems like obtuse language from a hobbyist who doesn't know what he's doing.  The interview posted on Ghostboy's blog pretty much proves either there's no depth to it or he's lying.  It's all in the 'newspaper.'  There's no reason for it.  Seems like a sloppy thing.  Plus, you don't spend $50k on production then $5 million in post only to have something look like that.

Because the director keeps insisting it's a thriller, I'd want to see it just to see how much of the plot really is THERE as he insists it is.  Some are too opaque to penetrate even after multiple viewings.

pete

I don't think I get the discussion, after seeing the trailer and reading the reviews.  So a guy made an incomprehensible movie that got picked up, and people are trying to figure out if it was done on purpose or not?
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

matt35mm

Well the more you find out about it, the less mysterious it is.  It's just that when the trailer first came out, this didn't seem like it could possible have a theatrical release of any sort, plus it's just a really strange trailer.  The initial mystery was whether or not there even was such a movie or if it was a fake trailer, and whether or not this Mark Region guy even actually existed.

My understanding is that it didn't get picked up, but rather that through sheer persistence of calling up Cinemark or whatever, they managed to negotiate having it play for a week in 4 theaters, which is not that unbelievable, though it is unusual.

The main mystery for me now is around how the fuck almost $5 million was spent on the visual effects.

pete

so it's a marketing gimmick.
clever.
man, can just about anything generate hype on the internet these days?
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

WorldForgot

I guess that the answer to Pete's question above iz: Yes.

Letterboxd has revived this film in a small way. I actually almost posted about this flick in the Cult Cinema thread. But then I was reading a rather thorough essay on its production & release history that name-dropped Ghostboy, so, oop, time to Xixax search. Gah, the dayz when I woulda had to drive to Austin to see this --

It's not an outrageous oddity. If anything it's just an enthusiastic attempt at sci-fi that fallz as Flat as the cgi renderings that give it its surreal glue. That iz, I dug its themes but obviously the execution iz neither Neil Breen nor Tommy Wiseau. It would make for a good short story. Instead, it was shot on 35mm film in stilted near-mumblecore stasis. But there's no naturalism, only the essence of boundary.

An oral history of its production from the cast

QuoteJoan-Marie Dewsnap: “I remember seeing the infamous MRI machine across the hall from where I was shooting my first scene. I didn’t know what it was, but someone pointed it out to me and raved at how wonderful a job they had done building an MRI machine. I felt stupid because it just looked like bunch of paper to me; I couldn’t see why they thought it was so wonderful.”

Jason Kulas (from the Cashiers du Cinemart #17 piece on the film by Jim Donahue): “When I saw the cardboard and paper MRI, with moving parts and lights, I will say it was the best cardboard MRI anyone could make. And it did cost money. But I was incredulous after my introduction to the shoot. It seemed surreal that with all the money, time, and energy going into it that it was really going to be shot this way.”