Skip to main content

Last movie you saw

They're done because they are cheap and pretty much guaranteed to make money. Even if it's not much, it's still worth studios making them.

Often there's all sorts of things. Like a studio has a deal with people to make movies. So they just churn out cheap crap to finish the deals. As in a production company signs a 3 picture deal. They do one or two. They don't do well. Under contract still, so they give them a small budget and say.. here go make a movie and finish the deal.


You'd be surprised how often things like that go on. Sometimes people turn out a crap movie, or a low budget movie. To end a deal. To then get a new contract.


Something I found interesting, sometimes film budgets are less than claimed for tax reasons. Say a city or state or country offers tax breaks for local filming. Due to money and skill they bring into the area. The higher the budget, often the higher the tax incentives. Studios say the film costs a lot more than it does. That money just gets funneled through the movie, back to the studio. However they've then saved a bunch of money filming from paying less tax ect. Sometimes there's rebates and all sorts of things that go on.
 
up_all_night said:
They're done because they are cheap and pretty much guaranteed to make money. Even if it's not much, it's still worth studios making them.

Often there's all sorts of things. Like a studio has a deal with people to make movies. So they just churn out cheap crap to finish the deals. As in a production company signs a 3 picture deal. They do one or two. They don't do well. Under contract still, so they give them a small budget and say.. here go make a movie and finish the deal.


You'd be surprised how often things like that go on. Sometimes people turn out a crap movie, or a low budget movie. To end a deal. To then get a new contract.


Something I found interesting, sometimes film budgets are less than claimed for tax reasons. Say a city or state or country offers tax breaks for local filming. Due to money and skill they bring into the area. The higher the budget, often the higher the tax incentives. Studios say the film costs a lot more than it does. That money just gets funneled through the movie, back to the studio. However they've then saved a bunch of money filming from paying less tax ect. Sometimes there's rebates and all sorts of things that go on.
Click to expand...


Sounds like corruption
 
Remember Sean Connery took an accounting course because he wanted to personally look over the finances of films because he knew how much they tried to screw people out of money.


Something else they do is make sure films never technically make a product. Apparently they still add stuff onto the budgets decades later. So there's a DVD release. All the marketing costs get added to the film budget. To screw people who had deals to get money from the profits.
 
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
"I want to destroy the myth of Abraham Lincoln, so that history will know you not as a man but as a monster! bwahaha"
This is not a quote from Russian director Timur Bekmambetov, or screenwriter Seth Grahame-Smith (who is currently giving Jane Austen just cause to arise from the dead and eat his brains), but it might as well be.

It is a very good looking film. Zoey Deschanel's dad did a great job as cinematographer, and every major fx studio on the planet appears to have been employed in plugging plot holes - in fact, the plot is really just an excuse to throw effects at the screen to distract from it.

And it is not a typical zombie flick - they have gone more for a shameless Samurai pastiche, referencing every well-known Samurai flick so blatantly, that characters seem to be mouthing dialogue like "Wax on, wax off, Luke" apropos of nothing. The slave owners/ southerners/ confederates all have English accents and there are plenty of designer specs and anachronisms (Who knew they had aviator shades in 1825?). Its all ready for Xbox.

This Abe Lincoln has a confusing resemblance to Jefferson Davis, and he is not overly religious. The vampires are very much of the Twilight variety - good looking, active in daylight;elegant, ruthless, family types who keep a good set of crockery for entertaining. It is true they keep slaves, but these appear to be well dressed, accommodated in roomy family-style cabins, and not employed in picking cotton or any sort of manual labour. Only free blacks seem to be threatened with whips.
The vampires can be destroyed by Silver, even nickle-silver, and even a silvery piece of tin , but are not bothered by crosses (this whole silver thing seems to be a confused metaphor for the silver standard).

There are nods to historic technologies - the zoopraxiscope, the telegraph and railways, photography, electricity, but there does not seem to have been any serious attempt to match every set, prop and costume to their particular time period - anything from 1818 to 1865 seems near enough. There are lots of nice things on display, and plenty of antique weapons, too.
The women in this movie are strong - Mrs Lincoln controls the distribution of munitions singlehandedly and the vampires proove that Southern Belles can wear leather jeans if they are kick-ass enough.
Abe's political career, his desire to change the world, is much lauded, but how exactly he went about it (as a senatorial candidate, a Whig, a republican etc, etc) is glossed over - there are a lot of things glossed over or left as open questions, I suspect to leave room for a sequel.
There are lots of explosions and fantasy kung-fu scenes, a couple of real scares near the beginning, a truly appalling script, and for all the money you can see on the screen, it appears there was as much again left on the cutting room floor. The movie starts and ends in the present. The beginning scene, where modern Washington is photo-shopped away to reveal 1860 Washington, is really cool. And there is a sunrise over the Louisiana delta that are probably my favourite frames of this very silly, very good looking movie.
And, talking of good looking - Rufus Sewell still has it, and Dominic Cooper.
 
tarn_seiche said:
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
"I want to destroy the myth of Abraham Lincoln, so that history will know you not as a man but as a monster! bwahaha"
This is not a quote from Russian director Timur Bekmambetov, or screenwriter Seth Grahame-Smith (who is currently giving Jane Austen just cause to arise from the dead and eat his brains), but it might as well be.

It is a very good looking film. Zoey Deschanel's dad did a great job as cinematographer, and every major fx studio on the planet appears to have been employed in plugging plot holes - in fact, the plot is really just an excuse to throw effects at the screen to distract from it.

And it is not a typical zombie flick - they have gone more for a shameless Samurai pastiche, referencing every well-known Samurai flick so blatantly, that characters seem to be mouthing dialogue like "Wax on, wax off, Luke" apropos of nothing. The slave owners/ southerners/ confederates all have English accents and there are plenty of designer specs and anachronisms (Who knew they had aviator shades in 1825?). Its all ready for Xbox.

This Abe Lincoln has a confusing resemblance to Jefferson Davis, and he is not overly religious. The vampires are very much of the Twilight variety - good looking, active in daylight;elegant, ruthless, family types who keep a good set of crockery for entertaining. It is true they keep slaves, but these appear to be well dressed, accommodated in roomy family-style cabins, and not employed in picking cotton or any sort of manual labour. Only free blacks seem to be threatened with whips.
The vampires can be destroyed by Silver, even nickle-silver, and even a silvery piece of tin , but are not bothered by crosses (this whole silver thing seems to be a confused metaphor for the silver standard).

There are nods to historic technologies - the zoopraxiscope, the telegraph and railways, photography, electricity, but there does not seem to have been any serious attempt to match every set, prop and costume to their particular time period - anything from 1818 to 1865 seems near enough. There are lots of nice things on display, and plenty of antique weapons, too.
The women in this movie are strong - Mrs Lincoln controls the distribution of munitions singlehandedly and the vampires proove that Southern Belles can wear leather jeans if they are kick-ass enough.
Abe's political career, his desire to change the world, is much lauded, but how exactly he went about it (as a senatorial candidate, a Whig, a republican etc, etc) is glossed over - there are a lot of things glossed over or left as open questions, I suspect to leave room for a sequel.
There are lots of explosions and fantasy kung-fu scenes, a couple of real scares near the beginning, a truly appalling script, and for all the money you can see on the screen, it appears there was as much again left on the cutting room floor. The movie starts and ends in the present. The beginning scene, where modern Washington is photo-shopped away to reveal 1860 Washington, is really cool. And there is a sunrise over the Louisiana delta that are probably my favourite frames of this very silly, very good looking movie.
And, talking of good looking - Rufus Sewell still has it, and Dominic Cooper.
Click to expand...



I'll just wait for the DVD. Sounds like another film not to spend $$$$ on at the cinema.
 
up_all_night said:
Remember Sean Connery took an accounting course because he wanted to personally look over the finances of films because he knew how much they tried to screw people out of money.


Something else they do is make sure films never technically make a product. Apparently they still add stuff onto the budgets decades later. So there's a DVD release. All the marketing costs get added to the film budget. To screw people who had deals to get money from the profits.
Click to expand...

OMG I saw an aboslutely hilarious interview with Michael Caine about Connery, so, so funny.
Caine said Connery went through every movie budget and financials with a fine tooth comb, just as any good Scot should, and the killer - Connery has taken every movie to task for some accounting error or corruption, taking lots to court.

Movie watched - tee hee, Midnight in Paris last night, awww, gorgeous movie.
I feel so content, I have a movie for every mood now I bought out the local bankrupt dvd store :)
 
Yes, Midnight in Paris is fantastic. Woody Allen is ok, sometimes :)

We haven't been to see as many new release films as usual this year. I think the last one was The Dark Knight Rises - before I knew Bradley even existed! It was great. Very surprised at how good Anne Hathaway was as Catwoman; and that kid from Third Rock from the Sun has done alright for himself, too.
 
Midnight in Paris is just lovely, he does make sweet movies occassionaly, but he creeps me out as a person.

Last night I watched Marilyn with Michelle Williams and Kenneth Brannagh. I liked it, love her......but Brannagah bugs me sometimes, for some reason, and I'm not sure why,, and sometimes I really like him.

Oh and I love, love, love Joseph Gorden levitt - kid from 3rd rock, especially 500 Days of Summer
 
Not movie but eh.

I've been making my way through Mad Men. I watched the first season when it was new and liked it. Then never got around to watching the rest. So I picked up the Blu-rays a couple months back and slowly working my way through. I'm now halfway through season three.

First season was good, but having seen it I kind of knew the beats even if I had forgotten stuff. Season two was kind of loosing me towards the end. I was feeling just kind of over it. Like it was just a soap opera. Some of the stuff was also getting it realms of ridiculousness. I understand Jon Ham is a handsome man, but come on... every gorgeous girl kind of throwing themselves... Anyway...

Now onto season three my interest has picked up again and really enjoying it. The show seems to have improved. Hopefully this stays as I actually was starting to think my purchasing four seasons on blu-ray at once might have been a waste during season two.
 
I tried Mad Men, and couldn't get into it on TV, and then it gets such raving reviews and awards and I keep thinking I should give it another try.
 
kxk said:
I tried Mad Men, and couldn't get into it on TV, and then it gets such raving reviews and awards and I keep thinking I should give it another try.
Click to expand...

Tell me some other shows you've had this experience with. Or have yet to watch and maybe some of us can tell what what's worth watching.


Number One of course if you haven't watched it is Breaking Bad.
 
Breaking Bad is fantastic! I can't wait for the rest of season 5 to air on foxtel. How will it all end?

Some of my other all-time favourite series are Deadwood, Rome, The Borgias, The Wire and of course, Game of Thrones.

I have bought Seasons 1-4 of Mad Men and have watched the first 2 or 3 episodes, but He Who Lives Indoors isn't all that keen, so I am left still not knowing what all the hype is about.
 
Jam said:
Breaking Bad is fantastic! I can't wait for the rest of season 5 to air on foxtel. How will it all end?

Some of my other all-time favourite series are Deadwood, Rome, The Borgias, The Wire and of course, Game of Thrones.

I have bought Seasons 1-4 of Mad Men and have watched the first 2 or 3 episodes, but He Who Lives Indoors isn't all that keen, so I am left still not knowing what all the hype is about.
Click to expand...
I was like this but with True Blood, so many of my mates are always telling me to watch it, can't get into it.

Game of thrones however, wow, I think it's probably one of the best television series ever.
 
Sorceress said:
I was like this but with True Blood, so many of my mates are always telling me to watch it, can't get into it.

Game of thrones however, wow, I think it's probably one of the best television series ever.
Click to expand...

Game of Thrones! I so want dragons; and who would have thought that The Imp would be such a sex symbol? Such a great series.
 
Jam said:
I have bought Seasons 1-4 of Mad Men and have watched the first 2 or 3 episodes, but He Who Lives Indoors isn't all that keen, so I am left still not knowing what all the hype is about.
Click to expand...

I would say stick with it until the end of the first season.

As I said I kind of lost interest in the 2nd season. Now in the third it's picked right up.





A show which I got over quickly was Boardwalk Empire. Started off great! However there got to a point around 3/4 of the way through the first season I just didn't give a fuck. I keep meaning to finish the last couple episodes. Try season two.
 
Love Breaking Bad and talking about Mad Men, On The Road (the movie I saw tonight) had Peggy Olsen (or rather, the actress that plays her, Elisabeth Moss) as Galatea Dunkle, a small but powerful role. I went into the movie knowing that it had been canned at Cannes, and had three strikes against it (an ESL script writer, an original score for the soundtrack, and a star from Twilight) so I was bowled over by how wonderfully good this movie was.

Kristen Stewart was really convincing as MaryLou (Kerouac's version had MaryLou as a blue eyed blonde and Camille as a brunette, but Kristen Dunst did an angsty Camille, and really, I don't think it would have been better any other way). The women are dealt with far more sympathetically here than in the Kerouac version, and I like that. As to the men, Garrett Hedlund absolutely nailed Dean Moriarty- he sounded exactly like the Dean I heard in my head when I read the book. I think he is going to be the next Brad Pitt, and Sam Reilly the next Leonardo DiCaprio. I don't know who Tom Sturridge is going to be the next of, but he is an incredibly talented actor and played love-struck Carlo Marx/Allen Ginsberg, note perfect. And I must not forget to mention the almost unrecognizable and not very big but brilliant performance Viggo Mortensen gives as Old Bull Lee.

They were helped (not that they needed help) by a really good script - this Sal does not have the pep and sass of the one in the sacred scroll, he is more subdued, observant, and the whole film is steeped in nostalgia, leafing through 1948 as an old man's memories, a dead man's memories, rather than the immediate sensations of a young man. And this Dean seems to see through time, knowing he is never to be the writer of his own story, that for all his attempts to use Carlo and Sal, he is the one that will ultimately be the most used.
The cinematography was as brilliant as you would expect from the guys who filmed Into the Wild and The Motorcycle Diaries. The modern roll type haystacks were a bit of a glaring error though, and while the city scenes of 'Denver' were believable to me, the gloriously huge rich prairies and endless roads and the play of mild Chinook Indian summer sun and fresh snow like icing across them, were obviously, undisguisedly Canadian, even if the Chic-chocs in the distance and the glimpses of the Athabasca river out the window had not been so uniquely what they are. Likewise, some parts of 'Mexico' were much, much further south, but so beautiful you can hardly blame them. The recreation of San Francisco as it was in the late 40's was impressive, and I was almost certain the skyline of 1948 New York as viewed from the Brooklyn Bridge must have been archive footage. Everything from the extreme closeups to the wide angled road shots were beautifully framed, although there was some shaky modern hand-held shots that I wish had been replaced with smoother takes.

The score I was so apprehensive about was the best part of the film - very important for a film about the Beat generation, that the free jazz is just so. It was, and they slipped in a bit of pop and classical too, although not as much as in the book. Superbly played, also. I noticed in the credits they had a 'Sax Consultant' as well as a dialect coach - the sound scape was carefully, lovingly, expertly crafted and just as it should be, one of the best things in a great movie.

I don't know if it was the pensive, nostalgic quality of the film, or if it was just because I went straight from the cinema to Josh saying goodbye, but it brought a poem to my mind - not Ginsberg or Burroughs or Keroac, but Paul Levine

My brother comes home from work
and climbs the stairs to our room.
I can hear the bed groan and his shoes drop
one by one. You can have it, he says.

The moonlight streams in the window
and his unshaven face is whitened
like the face of the moon. He will sleep
long after noon and waken to find me gone.

Thirty years will pass before I remember
that moment when suddenly I knew each man
has one brother who dies when he sleeps
and sleeps when he rises to face this life,

and that together they are only one man
sharing a heart that always labors, hands
yellowed and cracked, a mouth that gasps
for breath and asks, Am I gonna make it?

All night at the ice plant he had fed
the chute its silvery blocks, and then I
stacked cases of orange soda for the children
of Kentucky, one gray boxcar at a time

with always two more waiting. We were twenty
for such a short time and always in
the wrong clothes, crusted with dirt
and sweat. I think now we were never twenty.

In 1948 in the city of Detroit, founded
by de la Mothe Cadillac for the distant purposes
of Henry Ford, no one wakened or died,
no one walked the streets or stoked a furnace,

for there was no such year, and now
that year has fallen off all the old newspapers,
calendars, doctors’ appointments, bonds,
wedding certificates, drivers licenses.

The city slept. The snow turned to ice.
The ice to standing pools or rivers
racing in the gutters. Then bright grass rose
between the thousands of cracked squares,

and that grass died. I give you back 1948.
I give you all the years from then

to the coming one. Give me back the moon
with its frail light falling across a face.

Give me back my young brother, hard
and furious, with wide shoulders and a curse
for God and burning eyes that look upon
all creation and say, You can have it.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top