The Orange County Screenwriters Association
Be Inspired, Do Good Work
Mashup (9)
O Zombie Pioneer! George A. Romero is still "Dead" and kicking!
Mark Sevi
Not surprisingly, George A. Romero spends a lot of time dreaming up new ways to kill zombies.
“It’s a lot of down time between making these films and I’m always thinking about, ‘Oh, what can I do next time?’” the director/writer explained during a roundtable session promoting his latest undead installment, Survival of the Dead. “CG has made it [easy] to do things that I couldn’t think of doing when it was me and (acclaimed special effects artist) Tom Savini trying to pull the strings on puppets. A lot of old ideas that I have I’m able to execute now by using the computer technology.”
Romero’s first feature, 1968’s Night of the Living Dead, redefined not only that specific genre, but also the concept that important American cinema had to have a big budget, big stars and be otherwise overinflated. His little film about flesh-eating ghouls attacking the stranded inhabitants of a deserted farmhouse is not only explicitly violent, but satirical and relevant even today. Thanks to Romero, cheesy creature features and gross-out B movies gave way to a new sophistication in screen horror that reflects the ugly underbelly of our cultures’ sensibilities and flaws, which is frankly more terrifying and unforgettable.
The legendary pioneer of contemporary horror films recognizes and cares for his fans. “I have sort of two kinds of fans: fans that sort of appreciate what I’m trying to say, and then there’s this whole other—and probably larger—group of fans that are just in it for the ride and don’t care about anything that might be beneath the surface,” Romero explained. “But you have to please that ‘fangoria’ crowd while you’re up and doing it.”
Survival of the Dead spins a Hatfields and McCoys-tale inspired by William Wyler’s The Big Country. “One of the things that appealed to me about going with the Western theme is that it makes it a bit more timeless. I speak to today a little bit, just because people are shooting at their senators these days,” Romero theorized. “Of all the films I’ve done, Survival is much less about what is happening right now in the news than any of the other ones I did. But I like the idea of taking this sort of ageless problem, conflicts that don’t die and are just too deeply engrained. I felt that was the way to go. If I needed a broader theme, than that was one that I could use and it was not going to wear-out.”
Survival also has a returning character from Land and Diary of the Dead, Sarge (Alan Van Sprang). Romero hopes that Survival may begin a new Dead legacy. “The first four films I’ve never been able to cross-collateralize to use the same characters, use the storyline, create a mythology that was bigger than an individual film because [the films] were all controlled by different people…and one week before we started this film, I said, ‘Tell you what…I’d love to do a set of three of these films, using minor characters from Diary and wind up with this portrait of the world where I could re-use characters and re-use storylines and have these little threads of mystery and rules and things that go through them,’” he enthused. “It all depends on how this film performs. It’s something I always wanted to do, though: create a more broader mythology. But we’ll see what happens,” he laughed.
In the event that Survival doesn’t warrant subsequent spin-offs, Romero likely won’t be lumbering aimlessly about the countryside; he’s got an arsenal of prospective projects to keep him busy. “One of them is this non-horror thing entirely—a little personal film I’d like to try. Also low budget—always staying low budget, I don’t have the time in my life or the energy anymore to come down here and pitch something for a year and a half and then have it not happen. So I’m keeping myself at the two dollar betting window. That’s just ass-covering so that I’d maybe get a chance to make three or four more films instead of one,” he said. “We [also] have a horror project which is non-zombie and I’m also being talked to by two European companies about projects they want to do over there…[those would be] the most fun, I think—almost like a vacation. There’s a film called Paris le Temp…many little love tales. I want to do the dark side of that. And who are you going to call? So it will probably be me, and [John] Carpenter and [John] Landis and all of the usual suspects. That would be very nice and short term. All that sort of stuff is sort of…bubbling.”
Romero is not a fan of remakes, especially remakes of his previous work. “It pisses me off a little bit. I didn’t particularly like the Dawn [of the Dead] remake; I think Zack’s (Snyder) a good filmmaker and I thought the first 15-20 minutes were really hot…and then it sort of lost its reason for being. When we made that film that was the first time any of us had ever seen one of these indoor shopping malls…I thought that was something fun to snipe at at the time. And then it’s not the same, it was a film of a certain time. I wouldn’t have chosen to remake it. It was quite successful and, you know, mazel tov. I just wouldn’t have chosen to do it. I get a little bit irritated about it, but by the same token my stuff is my stuff.”
The director continued to put his point into perspective. “People always say to Steve King, ‘How do you feel about Hollywood ruining your books?’ and he says, ‘They’re not ruined; here they are, on the shelf.’ I sort of feel the same way about my films. I don’t think The Crazies needed to be remade, that my version of The Crazies was (again) of a certain time. It needed that to have any strength or any anger. So on the one hand I just find it silly, but I guess this whole remake craze, people would rather rely on what they think is a proven title than to try something new.”
Is it true that Romero was asked to direct World War Z, the on-again, off-again screen version of Max Brooks’ zombie epic novel?
“I was never called about that,” answered Romero. “I don’t even know what’s happening with that project now. I think Max actually believes that this may happen someday,” he chuckled. (The project is allegedly in pre-production with Brad Pitt’s Plan B Entertainment to be directed by Marc Forster of Quantum of Solace.) Would the King of the Zombie flicks be interested in championing such a big budget, highly anticipated and possible monumental feature?
“I don’t think so, no,” Romero replied. “My zombie stuff is again my zombie stuff. I don’t think I’d take it quite that serious.”
Finally, if George Romero can’t advise us all on how to survive a zombie apocalypse then there is no hope for mankind. How would he best arm himself against the ungrateful dead that he almost single-handedly made infamous? (I'm not kidding, this is a frequent topic of conversation in my home, and hopefully everyone out there in the OC is thinking ahead as well!)
“[Not] a chainsaw, you’ve got to get too close,” Romero stated. “I don’t know, man, I’d get out on a raft somewhere…although they can walk on the bottom of the water…” he remembered.
Not good. Has Romero inadvertently made the walking dead ultimately invincible? He doesn’t think so!
“I’d try to find some protective spot, get a Gatling gun or something,” he concluded. “I wouldn’t think of fancy ways of killing them, I’d just think of killing them. Save up the ammo and get a tank!”
Daybreaker's Spierig Brothers Peter and Micheal: Double the Visual Effects, Double the Fun!
Mark SeviI had the pleasure to chat with Peter and Micheal Spierif during a phone interview to promote the DVD/Blu-ray release of Daybreakers. Peter recalled how he and his twin brother sparked the film’s initial concept. “I think Michael might have come up with just a very brief one-liner of, ‘What if the world was dominated by vampires?’ and then I added, ‘What if they weren’t [in a] postapocalyptical kind of world?’ and we kind of bounced back and forth with ‘What if?’”
“It was always, what if they moved back to their homes and then went back to regular jobs and the big dilemma is that they’re running out of their food supply, which is human beings. What’s that world going to be like?” Michael added.
The Spierig Brothers hail from Australia and until Daybreakers had a few shorts and one low budget horror film, 2003’s Undead, carrying their credits. Sharing writing and directing roles, they found that the tricks of the visual trade they picked up during their first feature would 
serve them well while in production with Daybreakers as well. “Peter and I ended taking on a lot of the visual effects ourselves again, which is what we did on our first film to keep the cost down,” Michael admitted. “It wasn’t something we originally planned on doing, but again [with] budget constraints we ended up having to do it. I guess it’s good to have that knowledge when it comes to visual effects.”
The payoff is a low budget yet stylish vampire genre film that holds its own against blockbusters that racked up at least five times the budget. For the most part, Peter said they are satisfied with the results. “We were terrified when we shot that last scene, saying, ‘Gee, do we have enough footage?’ I never thought we did have enough; I always wanted more. I think it turned out okay, though. I wanted it to be bloodier. It’s still bloody enough, I guess,” he laughed.
How did they manage to lure in talent such as Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill and Willem Dafoe? “We wrote the script saying we’d really like an Ethan Hawke type, never assuming we’d actually be able to get him. He was just sort of an archetype, I guess, in some respect,” Michael explained. “We just said, ‘What the hell, let’s go ask him and see what he says.’ He responded amazingly to it. He loved the material, and once he said yes it kind of opened the door to legitimize the project. We were very lucky everybody said yes, which was a huge surprise to us, particularly considering some of these guys, certainly Ethan, hadn’t done a horror film before.”
“He keeps saying that he doesn’t like horror films but he’s seen every one. I don’t believe that he doesn’t like horror films,” Peter added. “[Willem] had fun with it. I always think these serious actors, they always like doing these parts because it gives them a chance to be a kid again and play cowboys and Indians. They all love it.”
Speaking of love for horror films, what inspired the Spierigs to contribute to the vampire genre? Michael was quick to answer. “Near Dark is a big one, Kathryn Bigelow’s forgotten classic in many respects; I love that movie and that was of course a good time for vampire films that year [which] was dominated by another great film The Lost Boys, which is the ‘Corey classic.’ And there’s a fun Roman Polanski one, The Fearless Vampire Killers--Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate. It was an odd movie, really kind of twisted and kind of fun.”
Prior to writing the script for Daybreakers, the brothers inadvertently wrote a detailed graphic novel to use as source material. “We’ve written a very detailed backstory on how the vampire plague happened and how the world reacted and how it spread. All of that really isn’t in the movie, but it’s kind of necessary to understand before you write that story. Maybe it’ll get published sometime soon, maybe it will be another feature film--it’s hard to know at this stage,” Peter said.
But for now, any thoughts of a Daybreakers sequel, prequel or an updated Captain Blood feature (based on the Errol Flynn classic) are on hold. “We’re currently working on the sequel to The Dark Crystal, which is really exciting and sort of a big passion of ours. It’s such a complex movie that it’s going to consume all our time for the next couple of years,” Michael explained.
Michael and Peter will be directing The Power of the Dark Crystal from a script written by Baz Luhrmann alumni Craig Pearce (Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge). At this point, I felt compelled to interject, "You Aussies kick ass" to which Micheal replied, "We've been doing it for years!"
Are there any issues directing material they did not have a hand in writing? “We’ve written purely out of necessity. We’ve felt like in order to get our career to a certain point, in order for people to take us seriously and so we’re not directing the twentieth sequel to a straight-to-video horror film or that sort of thing, we felt that we had to take the initiative and write our own project and dictate our path,” Peter said. “Now we’re fortunate that we have the opportunity to work with some extremely talented and experienced writers, which is what we’ve always strived for and thankfully now it’s starting to happen.”
Back to the matter at hand, the release of Daybreakers on DVD and Blu-ray. “We put in a feature-length documentary about the making of the film; it’s all in high definition. It’s a really in-depth account of how we made the film, it’s not a total love fest like most of these ‘making-of’ documentaries are; it’s an honest, accurate account of how you make a movie and it starts from the initial script stage all the way to premiering [the film] at the Toronto Film Festival,” Peter enthused. “It’s a very comprehensive account of how this film was made. We have interesting things [in it], like a producer being rushed to the hospital--he got hit by a car--lots of interesting things like that happens while you’re trying to get a film made,” he laughed.
“There’s also obviously a commentary track and we managed to remaster one of our short films (‘The Big Picture‘) and put it on the Blu-Ray disc and in high definition as well, which is great. The short film has nothing to do with Daybreakers, but it is a fun little addition if you’re sort of curious about how we got started and where we came from,” Peter continued with another chuckle. “The audio’s been mastered to 7.1 which is fantastic--it sounds incredible. It’s a great disc; certainly the Blu-Ray is very comprehensive. Definitely worth the money.”
I'm sold! Checking out some Blu-ray deals at Best Buy as I type....
Although it may seem like they just landed in L.A. with their indie film noir feature The Square, Aussie brothers Nash and Joel Edgerton are no strangers to major Hollywood productions. I had an opportunity to take part of a roundtable interview with the guys; ironically they were seated before a panoramic view of the city, ripe for conquest!
Director Nash is a seasoned stunt performer whose credits include The Matrix trilogy, Star Wars: Episode II and Episode III, The Thin Red Line and Superman Returns. He directed and starred in “Spider,” a dark comedy short shot on 16MM that made serious headway and garnered awards and praise during the 2007/2008 film festival circuit, and is also an award-winning music video director and experienced film editor. The Square marks his feature film directorial debut.
Joel, the actor and screenwriter of the pair, said, “It’s sort of surreal to be directed by your brother, but I trust him and the proof is in the product.”
Joel knows of which he speaks in regard to working with directors. He is currently filming the prequel to John Carpenter’s The Thing with director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. and has two films in post-production: David Michod’s Animal Kingdom and Gavin O’Connor’s Warrior. Previous acting credits include King Arthur, Kinky Boots, Smokin’ Aces and Star Wars: Episode II and Episode III, playing Owen Lars (Nash served as his stunt double and there are many asides exchanged between the two regarding Joel sipping coffee while snuggling in a blanket as his brother had glass vacuumed from his hand after performing his stunts.) The Square, in which Joel plays Billy the arsonist, was a first for him as well; he conceived the original story and drafted the screenplay.
“There were times we would rehearse and Nash would come in with the script and, without even looking at me, just be talking to an actor, ‘Ah, don’t say that, that’s so pointless,’” Joel recalled. So how do the two work together while retaining their close relationship as brothers and buddies? “We’re really blunt with each other, almost careless sometimes. But we never bear a grudge,” Joel explained.
Nash obviously believes in his brother’s script and The Square is a stellar example of how the film noir genre can succeed with modern audiences on a shoestring budget by keeping it real. It’s a simple and tightly constructed story of lust and betrayal involving two adulterous lovers who decide to execute a simple plan in order to obtain funds and run away together. They succeed, but with tragic results and find themselves victims of blackmail. The premise works due to believable characters and ordinary surroundings: much of the action takes place in the light of day.
“The whole idea of basing it in reality, to me, made it, one, more relatable [to] an audience and two, by doing that made it more tense,” Nash explained. “At one time film noir [films] had elements of tension to them and intrigue and thrills--yeah, it’s thrilling, but I thought the more real it felt, it would be much more engaging [as well].”
Joel offered his theory as to why the classic genre doesn’t play well today. “Film noir, I think, has a traditional story structure that we somehow felt went out of date. I somehow suspect that it’s because of the traditional role of the woman in the film noir. She was a femme fatale and she actually had no genuine interest in the man except...a financial gain or to dupe him into killing her husband or something. I think the successful kind of modern noirs take what was [in the] original and bring something new to it. And for [The Square’s] Carla (Claire van der Boom), while she may have been a little questionable sometimes, she actually has a genuine interest in escaping with Ray (David Roberts) rather than just, you know, hobbling him.”
The setting for the film plays a huge part in the suspense as well; the doomed lovers live across a river from each other. Joel conceived of the setting, and Nash found the perfect location. “I was describing it to a friend and she said, ‘Had you ever been to Woronora (Australia)?’ I hadn’t, so I went there the next day and I was like, ‘I found the town; this is where we’re going to set the movie.’ The whole waterway was definitely integral to the story [since] they lived across the river from each other and…”
Joel jumped in and finished the thought, “There was socially a kind of economic division between the two lovers and there’s really a sense that the river divides the town between the haves and the have-nots in a way, without being too overstated about it.”
The setting also led to a sense of impending danger, Joel explained. “This undercurrent--which is [considered] truth in Queensland--this manmade canal that actually had dogs and people and all sorts of things go missing there, there’s this element of questioning crocodiles and sharks and weird things that live in there.”
All of this leads to the fun of a satisfying thriller with the prospect of several suggested twists. Joel promises repeated viewings of The Square peels back even more layers. “I think one of the things that Nash has done with the finished film is that the answers are all there but he hasn’t spelled them out too much,” he said. “That‘s a really tricky skill.”
With numerous solo projects in progress between the two brothers are there plans to work together again in the near future? Nash said, “I’m writing another film with Joel and I’m going to make another short which is kind of a sequel to ‘Spider.’ I thought no one ever makes sequels to shorts, so yes, I’m doing that.”
Nash was reluctant to provide further details on the pending project, however, “It’s still taking shape. I kind of know where the film is but I’m not really ready to [say much more]. It’s a mix of genres. It’s different from The Square. I can’t help myself if I base all my films in that kind of reality in some way, but it will be bigger than The Square is, I think.”
Will Joel be in it? Nash laughed, “Yeah, if he plays his cards right.”
Joel doesn’t seem too worried about securing a role. “I’m getting really good at auditions,” he replied.
It took eighty-one years and three previous nominations (Pop Quiz! When, what and who? No fair Googling!) but the Old Boy’s School better know as the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences finally had to break protocol and award the first ever Best Director Oscar to Kathryn Bigelow. This victory was especially sweet because not only did Bigelow absolutely deserve it, she also spared us another cornball acceptance speech from her ex James Cameron. Thank you, Lord, one more chest-beating-Navi-lingo performance from that man and there would have been some blue hued 3-D barfing taking place in my living room!The Death of Snarky? and Twenty Mintues in a Hotel Room with Josh Goldin
Mark Sevi
How to Improve Inglourious Basterds
Warning: This isn’t a review, it’s an opinion piece on how better writing would have improved this movies. That means I’ll be revealing key plot points and even the ending. If you don’t want to know these things, don’t read this.
I have the same reaction to every film by Quentin Tarantino. If this were his first film, I’d think that, though the film is flawed, he’s a filmmaker with a lot of potential. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like he’ll ever reach that potential and will continue to make spotty films, some of which will make a lot of money.
Ironically, his first film, Reservoir Dogs, may be his most accomplished because it’s his least flawed. But after so many of his films, I’m weary and resentful of just how much he lifts from other films. And enough of this homage bullshit—he steals way too much for that excuse to hold. The fact that he admits that he’s remaking the Italian film,
The Inglourious Bastards, doesn’t excuse the excessive stealing from other films. That’s one of the reasons his admirers are usually in their twenties; they haven’t seen enough movies to recognize the thefts, so it looks clever and original to them.
Yet, there are wonderful scenes, too. The long scene in the tavern with SS officer Hellstrom is suspenseful and entertaining. So is the opening scene with the French dairy farmer. Those scenes are brave because he lets the suspense build without impatiently rushing into action. And I admire his courage in abandoning historical accuracy to such an extent. In every film he’s made, there has been something so original and entertaining that I keep coming back for more. So, I hope he continues to be successful and make more movies. Maybe he will fool me and eventually make a fully realized film. He certainly has the potential.
What Needs Fixing:
1. Not enough action.
Yeah, there’s scalping and head bashing, but this story makes a promise that these guys are really good at what they do and we never see them do anything clever. Basically, they’re brutes. I’m okay with that if we see them do a variety of brutish things. Jews killing Nazis is the hook—so let’s have more fun with the concept. And the mass slaying of Nazis in the movie theater doesn’t really satisfy enough to count because it’s most a faceless mob.
2. Unnecessary scenes.
There are a few scenes that aren’t needed. For example, the scene with the wounded German actress, Bridget von Hammersmark. Brad Pitt sticks his finger in the bullet hole in her leg in order to get her to give him information. Two problems: (1) the information she gives is information that the audience already has, so it’s not interesting to us; (2) we’ve seen the finger-in-the-bullet-hole scenes often before. So, since we already have the info and we’ve seen this method of torture before, no need for the scene.
3. Actress shoots soldier.
Why does Bridget von Hammersmark shoot the likable German soldier who just became a father? There’s no good plot reason; there are many ways they might have incapacitated him. So the reason might be to make the German actress more villainess in order for us to not care much when evil Col. Hans Landa chokes her to death. But why? We already don’t care that much about her, and the fact that Brad Pitt is willing to torture her for info makes us care even less about her.
4. Everyone’s suicidal.
Why are all the protagonists so anxious to commit suicide? The challenge for a writer of having a handful of dedicated characters fighting against overwhelming odds is to see how the characters will create a clever plan to accomplish their goal and still have the chance to escape (if for no other reason than to kill more enemies again). The fact that the Basterds can only come up with blowing themselves up shows a lack of creativity in the writing. Same goes for Shosanna and Marcel. They don’t even try to create a plan that would allow them to escape, though they could easily accomplish their goal with a crude timer. It’s difficult to believe that her character, who was so aggressive in escaping when her family was slaughtered, would now commit suicide. Again, this is just lazy writing, contrived to create melodrama, but it’s neither believable nor satisfying.
5. Shootout in projection room.
Really? Zoller and Shosanna kill each other? Yes, there’s the usual predictable irony of having all this drama take place while the movie is running (done many times before). That one of therm might kill the other is perfectly acceptable and would have cranked up the suspense a notch. But having them shoot each other is, again, lazy melodrama that achieves no emotional impact.
6. Is the villain gay?
We never see Col. Landa having sex with men, but two things imply it: (1) How distraught he is when Brad Pitt shoots his driver/companion. Landa has not shown any honest emotional attachment to anyone throughout the movie, yet he’s nearly hysterical at the death of his driver. We know it’s not because he fears for his own life, because he doesn’t respond with fear, only anger and grief. (2) His sudden attack on Bridget von Hammersmark, in which he straddles her in mock sexuality while choking her to death indicates a deep hatred for women. This is the most passion he’s shown throughout the film. We know he doesn’t hate her because she’s a traitor, since he’s about to turn traitor himself. And if he needed her dead to further his own plot, he could have done so more dispassionately. Which raises the question: why make him gay? Is that supposed to be a villainous trait, even worse than slaughtering innocent people?
7. Goofy Hitler.
Hitler is portrayed as some sort of nutty parody better suited for a Monty Python spoof. By characterizing him this way, the stakes are lowered and so is the suspense. His death would have been more satisfying if he were a more believable character (like Col. Landa).
8. Carving Swastikas.
At the end, we’re supposed to get some sort of satisfaction when Brad Pitt carves the swastika in Landa’s forehead. That’s just the kind of redneck pettiness that passes for clever here. Landa’s made a generous financial deal with the U.S. that will make him wealthy enough to afford the best plastic surgeons. The audience knows that. We want something much more ingenious than this equivalent of toilet-papering the principal’s yard. We want something visceral—and permanent.
Summary: Some brilliant scenes. But whenever cleverness is required, the script takes the easy way out and opts for predictable and unsatisfying melodrama.
Finally got around to seeing District 9, which is way cool, don’t let Mark Sevi tell you it isn’t, and although I didn’t sit through all the credits I’m fairly sure there was a disclaimer stating no prawns were harmed during filming. But that’s not why I called…
LOVE, LOVE, LOVE trailers, good ones make you forget that the movie you just paid for and busted your ass to get to the theater at a reasonable time hasn’t even started yet…and the stuff before D9 kicked major tushie! OMG, are they are making better trailers (i.e. not giving away the entire plot in three minutes...”in a world where seafood’s not for dinner any more”) or is it that and the latest Nancy Meyers doesn’t quite work for the D9 demographics and I was spared that ilk?
Shutter Island with Leonardo DiCaprio and directed by Martin Scorsese, looks pretty good although I have no clue what it’s about…there’s an insane asylum, some crazy lady escaped and hides a note: Where is inmate #67?
“BUT THERE ARE ONLY 66 PATIENTS!”
“IS SHE SAYING THERE’S ANOTHER ONE?”
“YA THINK?” (The last line is what I would have said if I had been in the trailer)
So then there’s an island and I don’t know why he’s even there, but Leo looks like he’s dancing with a ghost or going crazy or into insane ghost dancing and he’s really getting confused and freaking out. I’m going see it just to find out what the heck is up. And what does the title even mean? The trailer doesn’t tell you squat. LOVE IT!
Oh, going further into the two degrees of Leonardo DiCaprio, King of the World James Cameron’s Surrogate intrigues me ever so slightly. I just realized last week that the people in the billboards are missing actual body parts, whoa, creepy. At first, second and third glance I thought maybe Bruce Willis was promoting a new fragrance line for men and women. Seriously, I really did think that. According to the trailer, you can have a robot android surrogate live your life and do the stuff you can’t, shouldn’t or don’t actually feel like doing and see it all through their eyes…except, one day, surrogates are murder victims…Bruce is involved he’s always getting in some kind of hot water…then people or I guess Surrogates just fall down square in the middle of the street, which is a cool scene. And it’s based on a graphic novel, so it’s gotta be kinda good, right? Remember Watchmen? Oh, wait…
Not a huge Bruce fan, or James Cameron after T2, but if it’s either this or New Moon and I have to watch a movie or die, guess where I’ll be?
Speaking of the which, let me say if you have a vampire script right now you better fish or cut bait, because we’re fixing to have a blood bath in the theater! Cirque du Freak: The Vampire Assistant looks like absolute campy fun and very different and I think John C Reilly is the only actor left in town who hasn’t actually played a vamp. But his co-star Willem Dafoe has definitely portrayed one of the coolest, creepiest movies vamps ever…I’m totally seeing it, even if Rotten Tomatoes rates it at negative 10.
Oh, and Zombieland has Woody Harrelson and ZOMBIES! I’m so freakin’ excited and was screaming “YES!” and am so seeing that!
Hey, by the way, who can tell me who to sleep with to get Pride and Prejudice and Zombies in a theater near me?
Two more, Law Abiding Citizen looks like an excellent tense thriller and has a total Charles Bronson revenge vigilante deal happening with maybe a supernatural spin, and I think it will be way better than that Taken movie with Liam Nielson where his daughter got kidnapped in Paris…movie heros don’t like it one little bit when you mess with their little girls…hey, Gerard Butler kinda looks like Liam. What the??? Jamie Foxx is in it too, just thought I’d mention it because I took the time to look up who else starred. You are welcome.
And lastly saw the trailer for Avatar and I don’t know what is and I don’t care to find out. Animated blue people running around, I wasn’t actually paying attention…if it’s between this and New Moon and I’ll die if I don’t see a movie, it’s been nice knowing y’all.
Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Thrillers and Horror…c’mon, jump on in, the water is fine! And let me know how that whole Avatar thing works out!
I’ve seen this headline before: Death of the Story - true? Hyperbole? How about a bit of both.
There’s no doubt it’s harder to sell a script these days that doesn’t smell like a video game. I’ve heard this recently characterized as your scrpt needs to be “loud” to cut through the noise of all the content hitting audiences. It’s truly a video game world when it comes to recent high-performing movies: “Transformers 1 and 2,”G.I. Joe,” and “District 9" with stories that make about as much sense as any video game or comic book; visually stunning with a dumb-story factor of about 9.5 out of 10.
But I’m not here to bury Caesar rather to praise him - sorta.
This industry has always reflected our cultural slants. And hasn’t there always been nonsensical stories around? What about the 80's with all those silly coming-of-age movies? Or the recent past with every television show in history getting the “re-envisioning” treatment? Does anyone think that the 1994's “Forrest Gump” actually made sense? Gump, story-wise, was a pastiche of video clips that grossed $677meg not counting sales and rentals. Silly films have been and will always be around.
So it’s probably not any worse than it has been, content-wise. What I think is different is that there just isn’t an audience for movies in theaters anymore who want to drive, pay $12.00 for a ticket, $20.00 for snacks, watch a bunch of ads and then another bunch of trailers of movies they won’t see, and finally get to a feature that they can watch at least as effectively at home on their $3k livingroom theater system. Not really an earthshaking observation but more true now than ever.
That lack of motivated movie goers who would watch the films that are not adrenalin-packed, special effects-laden, testosterone romps is dwindling fast and their demographic isn’t being reflected monetarily anymore in the box office numbers. But guess which film grossed only 80 million in domestic box office (90 million foreign) and had the number one sales and rental figures recently? Nicholas Cage’s “Knowing.” Fairly standard thriller with a linear storyline. Lousy box office, amazing rental and sales figures. People (the older demographic) just don’t need to watch those kinds of films at any theater these days - home works for them. But the story...alive and well.
Plus, look at television - in case no one noticed, there’s some damned good drama on the tube. “Weeds,” “Rescue Me,” “The Shield,” “House M.D.,” “Heroes” - that’s some freakishly-good, compelling tales being told in a fairly standard way.
So, story is not dead. People still really like stories. But stories that 15-yr-olds like, the kind that make big box office splashes these days because kids go to see movies 2-3 times, are video-game based and the story is secondary to the visual experience - just like the video games that drive their world. Smart money knows that and they try hard to provide that eye candy to a still-hungry post-pubescent theater audience. The mega-plex in a shopping environment is a place where teenies can go and have some freedom and space while being entertained. Adults don’t hunger for that same sense of independence so going to the movies with friends isn’t quite as important to them - if it ever was.
If story was dead, then films like “Sideways,” “Juno,” “The Dark Knight,” and “Slumdog Millionaire” wouldn’t do well. But they did. And will continue to do so. If it’s good, people will get out of their homes and it will do great box office. What about the “Bourne” franchise? Well over a billion dollars for the three movies and about as traditional an action paradigm as you can get.
People will never tire of story because it is the rhythm of our lives. We are born and raised with it - we actually cannot live without it. Yes, there is a slightly new paradigm in the non-linear, barely-logical video game movie but it isn’t killing the story - it’s just changing it for the current demographic. And that demographic will eventually tire of it and grow out of it just like people tired and grew away from 80's coming of age films (now that’s sorta funny when you think of it - they came of age, movie-wise.)
I think story is still very, very strong. It lives in many forms, including music, ads, blogs, You Tube, television, books and just about any form that needs to make a point though artistic expression. We just need to allow that this new story paradigm - the one currently driving the box office - doesn’t always have to make total sense, or a follow a linear pattern to move or entertain the demographic that is buying that product (and has always bought that product.) Once embraced (and inevitably overdone,) this paradigm too will take its place among the silly, the profane, the funny, the dramatic and all other forms of story-telling currently used.
Tell your stories. They still have the power to move the world.
≈
Welcome to the inside of the iTV Fest for those of you who were not able to attend in person or via live stream from Stickam.com July 31-August 6 at Laemmle’s Sunset 5.
You might be saying … iTV Fest? What is an iTV Fest? And the “i” that must stand for Internet, right? Wrong! Or, you might be saying, “Wow! This sounds very cutting edge, like very futuristic TV.” Yes. No. Yes.
The “i” in iTV stands for “independent” not Internet. You know, quirky, original and edgy content – like independent films but mostly for TV. And believe me, most of the people who submitted for the festival hope their projects will end up on HBO, NBC … etc.
ITV fest has all of the things that other festivals have i.e. panels, screenings, coffee talks, food donated by Trader Joe’s (not always), ending night galas and festivities but then something new and different. Mobi fest day featured special screenings fit for your mobile device (i.e. cell phone) and a multi platform panel. Web TV day featured digital agents (talent agents in the Digital World) and the screenings of webisodes including the beloved OZ Girl (a country girl moves to the big city to live with her bitchy cousin) where the creator and actors flew in all the way from Australia and did a Q & A.
But here’s where the festival is different, and very cutting edge. Two of the days are devoted to new media. There was web TV day and mobi fest day within the actual festival which explores and defines where content is heading. Where is TV heading? Well, most of the panelists say that no one really knows, it’s up-in-the –air and changing everyday -- so “you” be the pioneer of where content is heading, with 20th Century Fox and most other major studios developing a web arm.
Some of the standard format, episodic submissions from producers, writers and directors that I had the opportunity to see were “Dog” which features a filthy-mouthed trash talking Howard Stern wanna be with brain cancer who thinks he may be falling in love with a lesbian. “Red State Blues” about a semi hypocritical leftwing pundit who’s searching for romance in the Mid-west. “Living in Captivity“ is a “Scrubs-style” workplace comedy that takes place in the NY City Zoo. Lastly, “Blog of a Pool Boy” where a horny employed pool boy tries to help out his unemployed Ivy League cousin.
Visit www.iTVfest.org for more information.
Ta!
Heather