S04.E03: Gun To Your Head

[biakbiak]

I remember enjoying previous seasons of Project Runway, but this one is driving me up the wall. They chose an intentionally aloof, stubborn, and spoiled guy to win their contest so there would be drama, and they got their wish. I'm so tired of the film vs. digital debate. It just drags on and on, for dramas sake. I wish they had chosen one of the other contestants who I could root for. Instead, I wouldn't mind seeing this Jason doofus fail.

Effie seems "on" all the time, trying to be powerful, yet adorable. I guess with a camera stuck in your face that you elevate the situation and try to get the most drama for the show. I'd like to like her, but she's very tiring.

It all seems to be made of manufactured story lines, and I wanted to see a more genuine film making experience. Maybe they think that would be too boring.

Have you done a rewatch of the previous seasons? I only ask because my sister hasn't and also thinks that Jason is the most entitled jackass ever on this show but Pete and Kyle/Ephraim were also awful. I did a rewatch and there are so many times those three are also punchable and entitled! Hell Kyle complained and got a new SUV to drive during the show. Edited September 29, 2015 by biakbiak

[Clanstarling]

After Jason announced he wanted to use film, all the decision-makers should have addressed this directly. Instead it's been tossed around like a hot potato. I think Jason thought he could "make a case" for it, and so kept trying to maneuver around Effie. All the deciding people were making sympathetic noises instead of telling him NO. They were playing chicken. But until someone steps forward and says "here's the extra cash, use film" -- Effie had to proceed with the budget they've got, so she was the one with the gun to her head. What I can't figure out is why. Why didn't any of those decision-makers just tell him no, flat no. That's their job. It's such an elementary bungle. It seems like they were deliberately going ultra-hands-off. To facilitate dramatic tension. To create drama. That's what they got. 

This. My sense, particularly when Jason went to Affleck and Damon, is that they deliberately encouraged him. They, particularly Affleck, stirred up the shit by telling them the line producer should give him whatever he wants, not even acknowledging the importance of her role.

 

Having the responsibility of being the person who keeps everyone on track and on budget is a fairly thankless job when it comes to the "creative" people. People like Effie are hugely important, but no one, especially creative people, like hearing about practicalities.  I know from experience that it's exhausting to be "mommy" to infantile grownups who should be able to sack up and make decisions based on reality.

Edited September 29, 2015 by clanstarling

[Milburn Stone]

This. My sense, particularly when Jason went to Affleck and Damon, is that they deliberately encouraged him. They, particularly Affleck, stirred up the shit by telling them the line producer should give him whatever he wants, not even acknowledging the importance of her role.

 

Without disagreeing with your analysis, I'll reiterate why I think this is so.

 

Both Affleck and Damon, experienced as they are in the practicalities of moviemaking, also know that of the movies they've been in or produced themselves, the better ones were the ones that had a director and/or producer with a strong creative vision who fought compromise tooth and nail. Of course sometimes compromise is necessary. But some people cave earlier than others. The ones who only cave when every other option has been exhausted are the ones who often make the best and/or most interesting movies.

 

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

[calliope1975]

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

 

That's probably true, but when I look back on the low/no-budget directors who made visually interesting, lasting movies (Robert Rodriguez, John Waters, John Carpenter, Sam Raimi, etc.) all I see is compromise. Maybe compromise isn't the best word, but these filmmakers had such strong creative visions, they were able to work around the low budget. I don't see the same creative strength in Jason. I would rather hear him talk through how to make one of the LA mansions work when it doesn't meet his "vision" then refuse to make a decision and hold production hostage. 

 

Maybe the directors I mentioned had an advantage because they were all making genre pictures, but Jason has yet to impress me with the creative vision that he's clinging to so strongly.

[OptimisticCynic]

Both Affleck and Damon, experienced as they are in the practicalities of moviemaking, also know that of the movies they've been in or produced themselves, the better ones were the ones that had a director and/or producer with a strong creative vision who fought compromise tooth and nail. Of course sometimes compromise is necessary. But some people cave earlier than others. The ones who only cave when every other option has been exhausted are the ones who often make the best and/or most interesting movies.

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

I see your point, but in those cases where the director has a "strong vision," the money still has to come from somewhere to pay for all these whims they want. It's not coming out of Effie's pocket, nor should it. If it gets to the point where Jason can actually justify all of the particular things he wants, Ben and Matt should pony up more money to pay for it or Jason should start talking to investors himself. It doesn't mean anything if he has a great idea - if he at the end of the day can't pay the union jobs and the expenditures that require it. It's not a line producer's job to secure more investors or a bigger budget. She was given a budget to work with and unless the Mann parents want to supply the rest of the money it's not going to appear out of thin air.

Having a "strong vision" or being a difficult person to work with isn't the only way to make a great film. I get tired with the idea that artistic "geniuses" are just assholes and everyone should have to deal with it because they are so brilliant in the end. There's something to be said for paying your dues, learning from experience, taking advice from the more experienced, and being a good leader and manager as a director. That can be achieved while also having integrity with your work. Jason is not doing that at all and he is not sufficiently explaining why specific details are so important. Perhaps if he did, the location manager or Effie would know what the fuck he wants. It's great to have a strong vision, but nothing if you can't articulate it to those who are trying to help you build it.

Really those artistic asshole geniuses usually get away with this behavior once they have actually proven their work justifies the headache and stress of having to work with them. Jason's reputation of a short film is really justifiable for this behavior? For a TV movie comedy on a small budget? Please.

[Milburn Stone]

calliope and Cynic, I find nothing to disagree with in your posts.

 

What causes Affleck and Damon to make the decisions they've made so far, IMO, is that they "see" in Mann someone who reminds them of the strong directors they've worked with. Whether what they think they see will turn out to be validated, we don't know yet.

Edited September 29, 2015 by Milburn Stone

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it, here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

 

The Three Faces Of Effie
Why the case of Brown v. Farrelly is so frustrating...and compelling.

[itainttippithebird]

I sorta agree, Kenz - while I think every director on this show has been awful in their own snowflake way, Jason is (edited as) awful in a way that's getting really redundant and boring. I can't believe we're 3 eps in and still having this digital/film fight - in previous seasons, we'd be shooting already (or at least it feels like we would?) and on to a whole NEW set of galling idiosyncrasies. I'm still 100% addicted to this show, but I hope future eps shake things up a bit.

[lidarose9]

I see your point, but in those cases where the director has a "strong vision," the money still has to come from somewhere to pay for all these whims they want. It's not coming out of Effie's pocket, nor should it. If it gets to the point where Jason can actually justify all of the particular things he wants, Ben and Matt should pony up more money to pay for it or Jason should start talking to investors himself. It doesn't mean anything if he has a great idea - if he at the end of the day can't pay the union jobs and the expenditures that require it. It's not a line producer's job to secure more investors or a bigger budget. She was given a budget to work with and unless the Mann parents want to supply the rest of the money it's not going to appear out of thin air.

 

 

All this while 2 weeks away from beginning of production with no location and casting incomplete. Insane. 

 

Also, is there any reason why they couldn't just use stock footage of some random house for exteriors and then dress up some interiors to create the look he wants? It's not like the whole thing will be shot in one take. 

[OptimisticCynic]

it's not like the whole thing will be shot in one take.

Maybe that's Jason's next demand as this strong visionary.

[Clanstarling]

Without disagreeing with your analysis, I'll reiterate why I think this is so.

 

Both Affleck and Damon, experienced as they are in the practicalities of moviemaking, also know that of the movies they've been in or produced themselves, the better ones were the ones that had a director and/or producer with a strong creative vision who fought compromise tooth and nail. Of course sometimes compromise is necessary. But some people cave earlier than others. The ones who only cave when every other option has been exhausted are the ones who often make the best and/or most interesting movies.

 

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

You certainly have a valid point. Others have said what I might have said (and far better than I might have), though I might add that a truly creative person cornered by constraints can use his/her creativity and come up with something even better, because they were challenged to question their original vision/approach.

Edited September 29, 2015 by clanstarling

[Milburn Stone]

I might add that a truly creative person cornered by constraints can use his/her creativity and come up with something even better, because they were challenged to question their original vision/approach.

 

Agree.

[Julia]

Without disagreeing with your analysis, I'll reiterate why I think this is so.

 

Both Affleck and Damon, experienced as they are in the practicalities of moviemaking, also know that of the movies they've been in or produced themselves, the better ones were the ones that had a director and/or producer with a strong creative vision who fought compromise tooth and nail. Of course sometimes compromise is necessary. But some people cave earlier than others. The ones who only cave when every other option has been exhausted are the ones who often make the best and/or most interesting movies.

 

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

 

Well, that would certainly be the best-case scenario. It's entirely possible my perspective on this is colored by the fact that I didn't think Jason's was the best film in the pool they chose from, and the fact that it's Weinstein-produced television (because Project Runway has been a producer-driven coronation for years). 

 

Also, perhaps they're not presenting their story very artfully? I realize that "Jason is a tool" is compelling television, but if he actually has a case to make for his position, they really haven't shown him making it. The other producers are all over the place, and since they're the ones with the power in this situation and Jason is refusing to recognize the authority of their line producer, they need to step up and decide what they're doing. Are they making Citizen Kane? (Ben) Should Jason be letting it go? (Matt) Should they keep pretending to read labels until Jason's tantrum wears him out and he falls asleep on the floor of the cereal aisle? (Farrelly) If there's no money in the current budget for it, who in this situation has a long-running lucrative business relationship with Weinstein and his number on autodial? Certainly not Effie.

 

I would like to think that at the end of this, Jason will have produced something which will go some distance towards repairing his reputation, because I'd like to see a good movie. But they haven't convinced me at all that he's capable of making one, or that making one is their primary goal here.

[RemoteControlFreak]

Effie isn't the Executive Producer she is the line producer and the co-creative producer with Marc. Her responsibility is the budget, schedule, and day to day management of the shoot. Pat what's his name the line producer in the first season got over ruled all the freaking time.

Matt, Ben, both Farelly brothers and maybe one other person are the Exec Producers.

You are right.  Damon and Affleck are the execs. 

 

[RemoteControlFreak]

They may want a movie that comes in on budget and on time. But far more passionately, they want a movie they can be proud of. And they know that film audiences don't care about budget and schedule, as well they shouldn't. They only care about what's on the screen.

Right. They know that all of the Project Greenlight movies so far have been bombs.  They want to succeed with Project Greenlight. It's their names on it. They're thinking that any budget overruns will be forgotten and forgiven if they create a good movie.

 

They are both still raging assholes.  I don't care if they make the best movie ever.  They way both of them go about their business is nauseating.

[Milburn Stone]

You are right.  Damon and Affleck are the execs. 

 

 

That smile on Effie's face must have been photoshopped in.

[biakbiak]

You are right.  Damon and Affleck are the execs. 

That is for the show. During the first episode they outline the EPs for the movie which includes the Farelley brothers.

[RemoteControlFreak]

That is for the show. During the first episode they outline the EPs for the movie which includes the Farelley brothers.

Which, again, goes back to how complicated and non-standard the management process is with this show/film.

[Maximona]

In order to go with film, Jason would need to spend about two days in a locked room with Effie figuring out what other costs could be cut.  Maybe you go with no-name actors.  Maybe you film all the exteriors in one day at the Huntington Library -- I seem to remember it as one of the few places in Southern California that actually has deciduous trees -- and everything else on cheap sets.  It's certainly doable, if you shift costs.

 

I loathe Jason, but I don't think film is necessarily an unreasonable request.  

 

It just suspends the limits of my disbelief that producers would actually be on board with Jason substituting a whole new script.  And with choosing Jason in the first place.  But, of course, this is reality TV!  With Jason and Effie as Bethany and Ramona.

 

So, I have to believe that Farrelly and Effie are the best of friends, maybe even lovers, and that every week, they sit down with the Project Greenlight staff to plot what over-the-top hijinx they'll use next to divert the members of their vast home television-viewing audience -- all 17 of them.  Next week maybe the whole cast of Project Greenlight will go to Turks and Caicos! 

 

 

If Farrelly was indeed his mentor, then part of that mentoring should surely have been be the reality check between "this is how it's done in film school" and "this is how it goes down in real life." A discussion of wishes vs needs, the bottom line, and how all the players on the film have an important contribution.

 

Did Peter Farrelly go to film school?  I seem to recall the Farrelly Bros as being cinematic autodidacts.  Their films are extremely good from a structural point of view, even if one doesn't care for broad comedy.  In fact, my favorite scene in Project Greenlight 4 was Farrelly giving Jason notes on his script.  (And by the way, there is no universe in which taking a dump on a Bentley ever becomes funny.)

 

(edited for grammar)

Edited September 30, 2015 by radishcake

[Milburn Stone]

So, I have to believe that Farrelly and Effie are the best of friends, maybe even lovers, and that every week, they sit down with the Project Greenlight staff to plot what over-the-top hijinx they'll use next to divert the members of their vast home television-viewing audience -- all 17 of them.  

 

One shy of all the movies Effie has produced.

 

RemoteControlFreak, re your comment about the non-standard number of EPs on Jason's film (if I understand you correctly): Not sure how non-standard it is. Every time I've seen the opening titles on House of Cards, I've marveled at how many EPs that show has. (I think it may be a number greater than 8!) And wondered whether there is a clear delineation of "responsibilities" among them.

[MerryMary]

I don't think Ben and Matt are hands-on executive producers, it's just a title.  I think the problem is Ben doesn't realize tightfisted HBO is financing this and not his friend Harvey, who will whip out the wallet whenever Ben the golden calf wants.  I'm tired of Jason's nitpicking.  This is a comedy.  The value of the film will be determined by good actors and strong writing.  Everything else is minutiae.

[Milburn Stone]

I think the problem is Ben doesn't realize tightfisted HBO is financing this and not his friend Harvey, who will whip out the wallet whenever Ben the golden calf wants.

 

I think Ben must realize that. Once the Weinstein Brothers founded The Weinstein Company in 2005 (which has produced/released hundreds of films since then), I'm pretty sure they have had zero to do with Miramax, which has its name on Project Greenlight. Ben would certainly be aware of that.

[STOPSHOUTING]

Wow. That's one of the most uncomfortable half hours of TV I've ever seen.

I was so totally on Team Effie until the last ten minutes or so. But as hard as I'm trying, I just can't see her side of that argument. Yes, she already tried to get Jason on board with digital. And you know what? She failed. As stubborn and punchable as Jason was being, it's still her job to make him straighten up and fly right, and if he's still harping on about shooting film after all that, then she hasn't done her job. And I don't see how Peter Farrelly offering to do some one-on-one coaxing with Jason, based on his own experiences, is anything but a spot-on performance of Farrelly's job description as mentor/EP. It's not like he's scheduling production meetings behind her back, or approving budget line items. He's just trying to help get the director's mind right, as Coach Taylor would say.

As for Jason... if it wasn't already clear from the size and look of his NYC apartment, homeboy comes from serious money, and a movie that takes place in a ridiculous mansion is just him writing what he knows. I'm not altogether sure why he hasn't just offered to write a check for the additional cost of shooting film; I doubt it would make much of a dent in his weekly allowance.

(I mean, for fuck's sake, they were offering him GREYSTONE MANSION, one of the most beautiful and iconic locations in film history, and he's like.. "Meh." Jesus Christ, dude.)

 

This. All this. 1000 times this.

 

I'm obviously behind on this show, but we finally watched this ep last night and ... I have thoughts.

 

So, clearly, despite all the lip service to the opposite they 1000% picked Mann because he is a prickly asshat they knew would make good, angsty TV. Still doesn't make my blood pressure any lower when people, again and again, say "I know he has the creative vision to pull this off ..." How? How do you know this? Because Bargain Basement Robert Pattison has never shown you, or anyone else, that. At all. In fact, all common sense and experience to date has shown any logical human that he can NOT do that.

 

Two, you were never getting John Malkovich. Or Jeff Daniels. Or anyone else that has been in anything that didn't air on Hallmark or SoapNet. Get over yourselves.

 

Lastly, while I was strongly #TeamEffie coming in, she's losing me ... I disagree entirely that her problems with Farrley are mutual. Did I giggle when he discussed the "artistic vision" of shooting on film in the same sentence as "Dumb and Dumber Too". Yes; quite vociferously. But, seriously, whether I have respect for him as a filmmaker or not (spoiler alert: not), he is way further up the Hollywood food chain, and really was only trying to help and do what he thought he'd been brought in for: to mentor. He didn't know you'd already been down this road with Jason Mann, a.k.a Senor Douchenozzle. And, in fact, Farrley should probably have been the one to take him on the original digital editing field trip and say, 'Look, Junior, my movies have made a gazillion dollars for some reason and if I have to shoot digital, so do you. Now, let me show you what we can do to make it look like film.'

 

Farrley's decision not to engage with Effie who, at that point was being utterly rude and unreasonable, was the higher road ... Though I could have done without his final, small Effie slam. Still, while her anger is justified against MANN, not so much against Farrley, and annoyingly that's the only one we see her taking it out on. And in doing so, becoming the very stereotype she says she wants to undo. Which, frankly, makes me sad.

 

Furthermore, that she's making me support the Farrley Brothers in any way, shape or form is making me very, very angry. I know, I know ... Duly noted.

Edited October 14, 2015 by STOPSHOUTING

[SFoster21]

Farrelly Brothers and "artistic vision."

Wow! I can't watch their stupid movies.

So that makes no sense to me. The original "Alien" and "Aliens" have some interesting commentaries about how costs were cut. When Ridley Scott had unlimited money to make that prequel to "Alien," it was, excuse me, shit. So, just sayin'.

And Ben and Matt offered their own money, so...

Edited October 16, 2015 by SFoster21