The Film Talk - Latest Comments in The Incredible Ann Savage

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

TimHeaney — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 06:33:02 -0000

Can't remember if you ever mentioned My Winnipeg again after this but I watched it last night and thought it was great. I can honestly say I have never seen anything like it and while it took me a while to get in to by the end I was mesmerised. (oh yes - and Ann Savage was wonderful).

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

jettloe — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:15:47 -0000

Hmm...yes, have contacted Seesmic to see what the deal is re: vid comments!

+ I agree Kiley - one problem of course is that film is 'forgiving', being analog and all - with the moving picture in the gate and the grain/losing a generation etc., whereas if you're watching an all 'digital pipeline' presentation = Spiderman 3 going right from some CGI guy's cubicle to your HD screen = the image is rock steady and the flaws are much more apparent!

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Philemon — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:03:21 -0000

The death of video commenting......?

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Tom_B — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:08:08 -0000

seesmic didn't work for me either.

Early CGI was used really well by Spielberg and Cameron - lots of wow moments.

Thought we'd reached a pinnacle last year with Transformers and Pirates 3 where the divide between beautiful effects work and awful scripts/stories had never been greater. mind you i haven't seen Mummy 3!

Maybe the the majority of the cinema going public are of the 'I go so I can switch off' variety, which explains the success of bad films. Are we the minority?

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

kiley — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:18:25 -0000

seesmic doesn't seem to be working atm, but here's my video comment:
http://seesmic.com/video/F7bmN9pV5p

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Philemon — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:43:22 -0000

Yep - Transformers was just on last night - incredibly stupid scenes and dialogue. I went into the theater fully expecting that but was only interested in the action sequences - and this normally goes against my movie-selection criteria - so, there you go I guess. I still paid the $10 or whatever it was and now Michael Bay can make Pearl Harbor II.

Also, my mother in law once rented a movie strictly because Luke Perry was in it. No, it wasn't '8 seconds' - it an even more obscure movie.

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

jettloe — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:27:16 -0000

Blockbusters

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Philemon — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:38:16 -0000

I know exactly what you mean...yeah, I think to some degree CGI ruins a lot of movies because it seems that the opinions of some think that you can ignore a script if there's great CGI.

"Transformers" is an example - though I have to admit, I kind of liked this movie, even though I thought the dialogue was generally stupid as are most Michael Bay productions (and I typically hate his movies). So in that example maybe I'm part of the problem.

On the other hand, there are people (like my wife) who say they go to movies so "they don't have to think"...which is the absolute wrong way to go into a movie, because that's why you end up with so many Freddie Prinze, Jr. vehicles (which I constantly kid her is her favorite actor).

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Tom_B — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 04:36:54 -0000

Apologies - seem to have ended up having the same discussion on two sides of the site. Anyway....

Some random further blockbuster thoughts:

Phil - Gone with the Wind is possibly the first blockbuster, I agree, and I was being a little sweeping when asking if there really were any decent mega budget films. Jaws and Star Wars are two such examples, as are the Indy films. And of course we've just had The Dark Knight. But the poor certainly seem to outweigh the good.

Is CGI to blame for these poor big budget films? CGI pushes up production costs (let's have some yetis in this!!!) .Yet we see amazing results from more creative folk with less cash. Sunshine (regardless of what you thought of it) had amazing effects and production design. Terry Gilliam has always worked wonders with (most of the time) tiny budgets.

175 $1 million dollar films would be impractical, you're right Jett. But think of the possibilities of say four $40 million dollar films.

What I find amazing is not only the cost of the big event pictures during the summer, but the number of them too. It's seems normal now to have between 10 and 12 of them. Surely that wasn't always the case. I seem to recall the choice back in the summer of 1984 being Indy 2 or Star Trek 3!

Enough rambling..

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

jettloe — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:19:11 -0000

Rambling

Re: The Incredible Ann Savage

Tom_B — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:48:32 -0000

How can the cycle of increasingly expensive movies be broken, since we know full well that big budgets don't mean good films? In fact big budgets are often the kiss of death for a film. How many great big budget films can you think of?

Maybe big budget bubble needs to be burst by a low to mid budget film that does incredible business, and I'm not talking about a summer comedy 'sleeper' hit, but an 'action-packed-adrenalin-fuelled-thrill-ride' for all the family. But big summer event movies are never deliberately made on the cheap are they?

I think it's a shame that here in Britain there's never really any attempt made to compete with the big summer market, which I think is purely because companies here think that you've got to have a mega budget in order to compete.