S04.E02: Going Rogue

[radishcake]

Production is two months away, but Effie, Marc and Len sing the praises of shooting digitally to Jason as a way of staying on schedule and under budget. Meanwhile, Jason pitches his own script for a dark comedy called "The Leisure Class."

[Primetimer]

All the dickery of Project Greenlight, from first to worst.

Read the story

[itainttippithebird]

I doubt anyone else found that segment as off-putting as I did, or at all, but something about the way he thought listing a bunch of hall-of-fame movies shot before the invention of DV proved his point made me want to slap his toupee crooked.

 

You are so not alone on this, Sarah D. Bunting!

 

God, I love this show so damn much. I would watch 7 different iterations of this show, one for every day of the week, year round. It's so great for its ability across seasons to find a medium where you throw a few variations in the blender and come up with a whole new brand of fascinating every time. And yet dickishness remains a (blessed) constant.

Edited September 21, 2015 by itainttippithebird

[stanleyk]

I have to admit that Jason doesn't really bother me. Yes, he's socially awkward, can't read a room to save his life, has trouble seeing the big picture, and says all manner of eye-roll-y things. But after the way he was presented in the first episode, I was surprised that he got along as well as he did with everyone. I don't get a dickish or even particularly arrogant vibe from him. To me it reads more as general skittishness and immaturity, and nervousness in particular at this situation.

 

Oh, and the dogs! I don't care for what the Farrelly brothers are selling movie-wise, but I am a dog person so the menagerie earned some points with me. I will slightly defend Jason on this too. While it was clear he wasn't super-comfortable with dogs (and I generally mercilessly, silently and unfairly judge people when I can tell they don't like my dogs), I also got the feeling with that huge one (a Leonberger, maybe?) that he didn't know how to get the dog to move back and didn't want to be rude to his host's dog by pushing it out of the way so he could work.

As a person who lives on this plane of reality, though, of course I take Effie's side on all things practical related to film-making. That said, I don't respond well to her relentlessly upbeat and seemingly constant talking; the "with love" stuff is already chapping my ass. I would join her in the stress-eating, however.

In other news, Pete Jones looks like a ventriloquist's dummy, and it is freaking me out.

Edited September 21, 2015 by stanleyk

[LADreamr]

Yeah, Affleck left me a little baffled.  "Need I say more?"  Well... a little more, because I'm missing your fucking point.

 

And speaking of, was Mann's short really that laugh-out-loud funny?  I didn't get it.  I have to wonder what his girlfriend is getting out of that relationship.  I can imagine he would be a bit precious and self-absorbed/important about everything.

[Racj82]

I'm not sure why Ben's line about movies made on film was so baffling. First off, I'm not sure why it was taken so seriously. He said Porky's at the end with a big smile on his face. I don't think it was a comment to be taken real seriously. Also, I think some people are just film purists. To go along with that, I think they look at it is, if all of these wonderful movies were made on film and still look great, why would be change that. I want to make movies the way my idols did type of thing. None of it was baffling to me.

 

Also, while I sometimes feel bad for not liking things other do I will never ever feel bad about my disdain for animals. Don't like them, keep them away from me, don't even try to bring a animal with me. That house was nightmare fuel for me. I also sure as hell don't think someone should have to put up with someone elses animals while trying to work. Put them anywhere else for the time being. Don't want any harm to come to animal and all but keep them away from me.

 

I find Effie annoying as hell. More than Jason. I understand her feelings on the film issue and it's out of their hands. But, the way she talks at times just rubs me the wrong the way. Jason can do in that regard but I appreciate him actively trying to make this movie not be utter tripe.

[ratgirlagogo]

 

I also got the feeling with that huge one (a Leonberger, maybe?) that he didn't know how to get the dog to move back

It looks to me like an Ovcharka.  Especially since ovcharkas are big on making people stay where they are in a room.

Edited September 21, 2015 by ratgirlagogo

[heatherkay]

Based on the coat color (the fawn with the black mask) and the floppy ears, I would have said Leonberger, just from that still. Leonbergers were developed from other livestock guardian breeds, so their disposition is probably pretty close to that of an Ovcharka (which I don't know anything about, BTW, other than BIG).

This is has been an installment of Dog Breed Highjack. We take you back to your regularly scheduled program.

[MrWhyt]

There has to be something they're not explaining on the film vs. digital issue. The previous PG movies were all shot on film on much lower budgets

 

I'm not in the film business but it seems to me that as with computers, the advancement in technology has driven the price down so that you can get something good with relatively low cost, while at the same time there hasn't been any advancement in film to bring the cost of that down. So 10 years out from the last PG digital is cheaper than film with a comparable quality (though jason would disagree).

[Kat]

Marc Joubert - American hero! I still miss the hell out of Chris Moore, but Marc will do. He and Effie are the only reasons I'm watching this show right now.

[Racj82]

Yeah, all of that is true and a very fair argument in favor of digital. But it's still not the same thing as "we don't have the budget to shoot on film," and I understand why Jason's frustrated that they keep making that claim.

They said in the episode that flat out, it would cost 300k to do the movie on film with a 3,000,000 budget. They don't have the budget to drop nearly half a million on film. HBO damn sure has no plans to drop more money for a inexperienced director and a script that is not finished. I don't really see anymore to it than that. Affleck can use film for his movies. He gets at least four times that budget to film his movies. They don't have that type of luxury.

[Julia]

Yeah, all of that is true and a very fair argument in favor of digital. But it's still not the same thing as "we don't have the budget to shoot on film," and I understand why Jason's frustrated that they keep making that claim. 

 

If they have the same budget as they did ten years ago, it kind of is the same thing as "we don't have the money to shoot on film," isn't it?

[MrWhyt]

If they have the same budget as they did ten years ago, it kind of is the same thing as "we don't have the money to shoot on film," isn't it?

yeah I don't know what the previous films were budgeted at but $3M now is not going to buy as much as $3M did 10 years ago.

[LADreamr]

I thought Stolen Summer was a $1M budget.

[Racj82]

It's basically the same budget scale. They got 2.5 million and had to go outside the studio for funding on feast. In between 2 to 3 million is where they wanted to keep it. The first season was ultra low budget though.

[LADreamr]

I remember Pete having to fight for certain things on that shoot (that he was completely right about), but also his enthusiasm about the whole thing. And Aiden Quinn was invaluable. I loved watching his process. I thought the film came out rather well, considering.

[biakbiak]

I think I might only like Effie when she gets mad because her rah, rah cheerleading shtick might keep up morale but it would annoy the shit out of me.

Edited September 21, 2015 by biakbiak

[scrb]

Jason still seems like he'd jettison Pete the first chance he gets, even though he helped convince the others to switch the script.

 

If he wasn't so preoccupied about getting film, he might have been looking to throw Pete under the bus.

 

OK for the kind of movie this is, why would the "film look" matter?  Sounds like the kind of thing you'd see on TV, not Lawrence of Arabia.  This is a chance for Jason to demonstrate his screenwriting, his ability to work with actors (who are presumably going to be more accomplished than the ones he's worked with in his student films), ability to stay on budget, work with producers, etc.

 

It's like a demo reel, a stepping stone to other jobs.  And he wants to pitch a hissy fit every other day?

 

Chances are, this is not going to be the work that he's remembered for, unless it's his only feature film.  Hmm, I don't know if PGL directors have had careers after the show so who knows.

[RemoteControlFreak]

Jason can stop worrying that he won't create a good first impression in Hollywood if he has to shoot the Pete Jones script.

 

The first impression has been established.  He's an arrogant jerk who will be hard to work with and unwilling to compromise on anything from the writer to the script to the medium.  And we haven't even gotten to casting or locations yet.

 

But then again, Ben "need I say more" Affleck is equally jerky and he seems to be doing alright.

 

Glad I don't work in Hollywood or anywhere near it.

Edited September 22, 2015 by RemoteControlFreak

[FastLou]

I absolutely could not believe he tried to get his own script instead, I would have thought that was part of the contract, but if it's in good shape and can fit into the established budget and shoot schedule then I think the producers were right to agree.

I doubt he has much interest now in getting rid of Jones now, as Pete Jones seems to be very open to his ideas and letting him share in the writing. The script they were originally ping to do wasn't Pete's either. Unless he's going to be a super dick about credit authorship. With the way they are collaborating it should end up with Mann getting Story By and Mann & Jones sharing Screenplay By with an & indicating they wrote together.

I do kind of wonder which production company is stuck with owning or optioning Not Another Pretty Woman.

He really needs to let shooting on film go. It's probably because he's just out of film school, and pretentious. Someone should explain he'd be way better off using that 300k for production instead of having to scrimp because he "needed" film for his movie people are going to watch on phones. Just lay out the rough budget - they already have estimates based on days, locations, cast, etc - and what he'd lose without that 300k.

[pasdetrois]

I'm enjoying what little we see of actual production planning and scriptwriting. I felt for Jason and Pete as they labored to meet that deadline. Been there, done that.

 

Loved seeing Ojai, one of my favorite places. The Jack Russell terrier leaping up and down in the window was hilarious.

 

Effie's constant patter and colloquialisms would drive me nuts. She needs to step up her professional communication. I'm sure there's a good producer in there somewhere, but I didn't see much of it, with all the "Yes Jesus."

 

I hope Jason can set aside his idealism and take smart advantage of this opportunity: cooperate with decision-makers who can help his career and learn how to play the game. The obsession with film, in the face of being told no, is kind of a red flag. He can make those demands when he has more control later in his career.

[Julia]

I like Effie. I'm not super comfortable with her verbal signaling, mostly because it makes me sad that she's found it necessary to approach men she deals with professionally that way. But I was getting the idea towards the end there that she's realizing that the younglings aren't smart enough to hear her if she doesn't bring the hammer down, and I think she's going to be a little less Mary Poppins and a little more Nanny 911 moving forward.

[sanford]

Mann should just concede and use digital and then add it to his CV for the future, proving he can work in both film and digital. Resume builder.

[Julia]

Mann should just concede and use digital and then add it to his CV for the future, proving he can work in both film and digital. Resume builder.

 

If the studio isn't willing to pay for film, I don't see how he has a choice, unless he's willing to walk off the project.

[Latverian Diplomat]

I would have liked to see Mann have to take a double blind test of digital with "filmic" filters applied vs film. No fancy techniques, just the vanilla filming that a $3 million film has to do to stay on budget. I bet he would struggle to tell the difference.

 

One example of a fancy technique he mentioned "flashing" is exposing the negative to additional light after filming but before developing. If it works, it can enhance the contrast in low light areas, but if it doesn't, it basically ruins the footage. Guess who's not going to be able to afford to risk "flashing" any of his footage.

 

I suspect that DV can already get you the improved contrast anyway.

 

One of the frustrating things about the digital/analog debate is that digital captures more, and more accurately. Analog media like film or vinyl introduce artifacts. In many cases, people actually like those artifacts (like film grain, or the warm sound of tube amplifier), and that is perfectly fine. But the same artifacts can often be added with computer processing starting from a digital source. And it looks like EFilm is in exactly that business. If Mann really likes the look of film, in 10 years places like EFilm could be his best friends. If he wasn't such a pompous ass about it. If he cared about the end result more than only getting there his way.

[LADreamr]

I have this mildly evil wish that he gets everything exactly his way... and then the film sucks.

[scrb]

PGL films don't have that great a track record do they?

 

Maybe this demand for film is also a request for a higher budget.

 

That is, add the additional costs of the film without giving up anything else.

[biakbiak]

One thing that is different from the first three seasons is that the Weinsteins have nothing to do with it and at the end of the day it's an HBO movie (yes it's not tv it's HBO) which limits the options. Miramax were responsible for the first two, Dimension (run by Bob)/The Weinstein Brothers (fairly newly formed) and because of a the horror element a number of foreign investors for Feast, so they had more riggle room on the budget. Ben could get Harvey on the phone to agree to more money for Stolen Summer (though even Harvey's initial agreement for 2 million got declared a misunderstanding so it was only 1.5) and he and Chris were able to make him watch Shaker Heights and get it a "bigger" opening (ie not just be buried in two theaters one in NY and one in LA), this group doesn't have the same pull with HBO, Matt's turn in Behind the Cabrallara not withstanding. In addition to HBO their company is producing it so if Ben thinks Porkys worked because of film he and Matt should cough up the dough they casually asked Miramax for during the first seasons.

This post came close to defending Harvey and I feel dirty about that!

[opus]

Does anyone else get the vibe that Jason wants to shoot on film?

[LisaBLingLing]

The scene at the studio where Jason shows off his super cool knowledge techniques you can only use with film = every reason why picking this guy for a comedy was so, so wrong.  Yeah, his film short made people laugh.  Film shorts (mostly) don't work if they don't make people laugh.  The HBO exec who said the full script read like a short that had been stretched out?  Think about almost every SNL skit that's gone on to be a film.  Lots of people can be funny for 5 minutes.  It takes something different to tell a sustained funny story.  And it's not knowing about flashing.

Edited September 24, 2015 by LisaBLingLing

[Julia]

The scene at the studio where Jason shows off his super cool knowledge techniques you can only use with film = every reason why picking this guy for a comedy was so, so wrong.  Yeah, his film short made people laugh.  Film shorts (mostly) don't work if they don't make people laugh.  The HBO exec who said the full script read like a short that had been stretched out?  Think about almost every SNL skit that's gone on to be a film.  Lots of people can be funny for 5 minutes.  It takes something different to tell a sustained funny story.  And it's not knowing about flashing.

 

I think we knew he wasn't going to be much of a comedy director as soon as he made the pitch to replace the writer with a guy whose only credit is one of the most spectacularly depressing movies Clint Eastwood has ever made (and that's a pretty high bar). I can only guess that Affleck and Damon thought he'd provide the best absurdist 'reality.' 

[biakbiak]

I think we knew he wasn't going to be much of a comedy director as soon as he made the pitch to replace the writer with a guy whose only credit is one of the most spectacularly depressing movies Clint Eastwood has ever made (and that's a pretty high bar). I can only guess that Affleck and Damon thought he'd provide the best absurdist 'reality.'

I thought he suggested the writer of Boys Don't Cry which is depressing but Clint Eastwood had nothing to do with it.

[Julia]

I thought he suggested the writer of Boys Don't Cry which is depressing but Clint Eastwood had nothing to do with it.

 

Oh, was he? I thought I'd heard another movie title. nm.

[Jesse]

He really needs to let shooting on film go. It's probably because he's just out of film school, and pretentious. Someone should explain he'd be way better off using that 300k for production instead of having to scrimp because he "needed" film for his movie people are going to watch on phones. Just lay out the rough budget - they already have estimates based on days, locations, cast, etc - and what he'd lose without that 300k.

 

They shouldn't have to, since of course he's not actually the boss, but I agree that walking him through the budget could have a been a useful exercise. 10% is a significant amount -- it wouldn't have been scrimping here and there, it would have been eliminating whole locations or something, I'm sure. 

[Irlandesa]

I'm not in the film business but it seems to me that as with computers, the advancement in technology has driven the price down so that you can get something good with relatively low cost, while at the same time there hasn't been any advancement in film to bring the cost of that down. So 10 years out from the last PG digital is cheaper than film with a comparable quality (though jason would disagree).

 

There was recently a movement to convince Kodak to continue producing film. Its film sales had taken a dramatic drop.  When the supply is high and the demand is down, the demander comes out ahead. But when the supply drops to below demand, the cost increases. I think that's where we are with film and why it may be considered less cost effective than it would have ten years ago. (Plus, I think it has silver in it and if the cost of silver goes up, so does film.)

 

I respect film but if I were a producer, I'd have to really wonder if film was worth 10% of the budget. Will it make the film better or funnier?   In addition, it sounds like they're on a tight timeline.  Editing film vs. editing digital takes longer.

 

Even Ben alluded to film going away some day which might explain his support of Jason's use of film...he has a desire to breed more film purists.

[Milburn Stone]

Effie's constant patter and colloquialisms would drive me nuts. She needs to step up her professional communication. I'm sure there's a good producer in there somewhere, but I didn't see much of it, with all the "Yes Jesus."

 

I'm not super comfortable with her verbal signaling...

 

Plus, what kind of professional feels the need to say "I've produced over 17 movies"? Either you've produced 17 movies, which is a fine credit, or you've produced 18 or 20 or 21, which is marginally better, so say that if it's true. (People might say "I've produced over 20 movies," because a nice round number like 20 is understood in common speech to stand in for "around 20," but no one says "over 17." Especially more than once, like a mantra. Unless they're really insecure that the unvarnished truth doesn't sound good enough. Sweet Jesus.)

 

The verbal signaling (good term, Julia--I haven't encountered it before, but I get it) similarly reeks of BS. Just as when people begin a sentence with "honestly," which always signals that what you're about to hear isn't honest, beginning a sentence with "OK, this comes from love" invariably means it doesn't. And you don't need to say "OK, I'm about to get real with you," either, Effie. Just get real. No need for a preface, if you know what you're talking about.

 

I've worked with producers like her, and she's not earning my trust any more than she's earning Jason's.

 

(By the way, I just looked at her credits on imdb. They're numerous. But unimpressive. Dear White People may be the exception. In general, while she may have had a producer credit on a lot of films, there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence that she helps the films she produces be excellent.)

 

The excerpts we've seen of Jason's work do impress me, on the other hand. He's being a bit ridiculous about film vs. DV, but I find myself siding with him in nearly every other confrontation. I have no doubt the Farrelly Bros. script was on track to be a monumental piece of crap.

Edited September 28, 2015 by Milburn Stone

[Theopolis]

Please stop ragging on Jason. Everyone knows, the key to a successful comedy, is to shoot 35mm stock without anti halation backing. Light halos are hilarious. Carry on.

[FozzyBear]

I just stated watching Project Greenlight and I'm hooked! It's gold Jerry! Gold!

Anywho, came here to say I would also imagine that one of the issues with film that isn't being discussed (at least not yet. I'm on episode 2) is that as digital has become more of an industry standard, the cost of EVERYTHING associated with film has probably gone up since it has become something of a specialty item. You're not just talking about the film. You have to get equipment to shot and edit on film. You have to find a crew that knows how to work with film. You have to find people who can edit and lay sound over film. These aren't going to be kids working on the cheap. You're talking about really expensive personnel, equipment, and stiick. And if something goes wrong it's harder to correct. Which is what Effie really isn't saying; if you fuck up with digital it's easy to fix, not so much with film.

All that being said, I get why he wants film. I think he's really influenced by Wes Anderson (although he'd die before admitting to such a main stream influence) and wants that lost home movie feel that Anderson uses. So on the one hand I get it, on the other hand as a librarian who deals with old shit of all manner, it's a stupid argument that he's making in a stupid way. It's funny, you'd think I'd be tied to vintage media given my profession, but I think people get way too attached to it. Casablanca is no more a great movie because it was shot in film than The Declaration of Independence is a great document because it was written on parchment. Message first, media second. IMHO.

[Milburn Stone]

...as digital has become more of an industry standard, the cost of EVERYTHING associated with film has probably gone up since it has become something of a specialty item. You're not just talking about the film. You have to get equipment to shot and edit on film. You have to find a crew that knows how to work with film. You have to find people who can edit and lay sound over film. These aren't going to be kids working on the cheap. You're talking about really expensive personnel, equipment, and stiick. And if something goes wrong it's harder to correct. Which is what Effie really isn't saying; if you fuck up with digital it's easy to fix, not so much with film.

 

You're right about a lot of that, but as regards the post-production process, that part is roughly equivalent. The reason is that for many years now it's been the practice that even when the dailies are on film, they are digitized before the editing and other post-pro work is done. All the editing and post-pro is done in the digital domain even when the image was captured on film. The only additional step is the digitization of the image prior to this, which is somewhat time-consuming, but is a one-time-only event.

 

Of course, Jason would be just the sort to insist that no digitization of any kind take place at any point, and that the only way his movie should be edited is on a Moviola! But despite how much leeway he's been given so far, nobody would let him get away with that.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Milburn Stone