Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Chaz54

Member
  • Posts

    1
  • Joined

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. I've watched the STARZ show with some fascination but it is the fascination of one who has worked in the film industry for over 30 yrs. It seems to me that the entire show is one huge ego boost for this MOORE producer dude. As a side note, & an "inside joke," I NEVER yet have seen a producer resist drooling over a scheduled "sex scene;" they see it as s sort of rite of conquest! First, let me just say: Shane, was given a golden oportunity and what is his first decision?trying to angle a writer's credit. This pays no"credit" to an industry that HAS NO SHORTCUTS. His behavior is one that plages his generation; the fast buck. Everyone starts in the mailroom, Pay your dues pal. What he gave us was one "bit" after another with BAD blocking and HUGE camera angle problems; at one point he has the main female lead "skyping" to a friend, sometimes looking into the computer screen & at other points, with the computer visible in the shot, looking directly into camera! His DP seemed like a good technician (he was handy with s camera at least) but he knew nothing about"camera" angles and "set ups;"was there even a script supervisor? A total lack of scene coverage obviously gave him little choice in editing; if one is going to "page direct" one needs the entire film"story boarded" INCLUDING camera set ups. Even if the editing was tighter (the music score moved 100 times faster than the scenes) what we are left viewing is at best a TV sitcom that is not funny AT ALL. Shane, if your going to make yourself a main character maybe it would be best not to intercut your main character scenes with scenes of you playing other roles ie: the cuts between Shsne as the main guy and Shane as lady bus driver were jarring and disconcerting at best. Did he realize this was a MOVIE he was making? Secondly, Anna: her entire approach to movie making was (ALMOST) spot on; hiring the right people for the job is paramount. Here is a visually gorgeous "mood Indie" BUT what was this movie about? Granted, both directors were given a tired coming of age tale between one's high school days & the rite of passage via one's college days. Anna seems to have pumped new life into the ( I can only assume) hackneyed script, if her flowing dialogue is any indication. Is there any writer or producer or "pitch person" out there that can present an idea without saying... "It's like this or that" or like a million other movies we've seen rehashed? What is lacking is NEW IDEAS or at least a novel approach to the standars. Did anyone else notice the sour grapes emoting from the original writer "incensed" that Anna re-wrote "his baby"... 90 to nothin' I would bet that he repackaged a tired old theme for HIS fast buck. Anna's writing is melodic but her attention to content is mystifying to me? I really enjoyed the look of her film but found myself waiting & waiting & waiting to find some basic conflict; some resolution to all her hard work. Furthermore, as a guy in "the industry," I was actually rooting for this female director; rooting & waiting for her to TAKE CHARGE. My gosh! All that passive/aggressive behavior she opened herself up to. Her husband and brother-in-law questioning ever single action she might or might not take; the usual 21st century testosterone crap. How does a guy get HIS ideas through; by causing doubt in the female of our species, all the while calculating the odds and guiding their wants under the smoke of... "Well it's your decision, I'm only making a suggestion BUT BUT BUT ultimately they were saying..."do it my way!" it is obvious that Anna works well with her male counterparts but this really was HER place in the sun. Where were he cohorts when it mattered most, at the beginning where their input into the MEANING of this film might have been useful to help her recognize that no matter how beautiful the pictures are or how well the dialogue flows the ultimate project needs more than a beginning middle & end; it has to, through basic protagonist convict, BE ABOUT SOMETHING. A real shame that Anna did not see that this was a chance for a WOMAN to make a contribution to the film process. We may all feel that there is gender equality these days & that gender should not come into play in producing art, but the reality is that this industry is still completely male dominated; Take it from this male who works in this industry. Shame on her male co-conspirators for not making sure her voice could be heard and shame on her for giving us this empty bit of film. All in all: I hope we hear more of Anna in the future & I hope that by winning...if indeed she does, the makers of this project are after all male & may "close ranks"...blet us hope she will utilize the $ to produce HER art. She is quite capable of making art, her gorgeous flick shows that, is she capable of finding HER voice? As for Shane? Anyone with an Iphone can & does consider thrmselves a filmmaker; he needs to work & then work harder at his craft & possibly take a course (or 2 or 10!) in filmmaking. Shane has ideas & the pulse of his generation behind him but needs to understand that a chain of fun, but not funny,"gags is just that; a bunch of running clips. If he had tightened his editing possibly the outcome would have been more favorable but the lesson here is the lesson of anyone who swims as a big fish in a small pond; the REAL world is a big ocean with lots & lots of talent and to get to shore first you well, just have to be a stroke ahead. For both, hard lessons to learn... It sure as hell didn't help that this entire production was structured in a stale HOLLYWOOD base; I just "loved" the powers that be bellowing out one word of wisdom after the other as if they were veteran (well established well earned) filmmakers... I especially "loved" the sequence that stated that the ONLY DIFFERENCE between union & non-union crews was the fact that one had to "pay into health welfare & annuity." The only difference in the industry is whether any given producer at any given time eats TUNA FISH or LOBSTER for lunch ('dem greedy dogs)!! In a production interested in showing the workings & financial wows faced by Indie Filmmaking, they certainly (literally) made sure their faces were fed in the food line, munching away as they gawked at the sex scenes!! Oh well, it's reality TV after all .
×
×
  • Create New...