Good films or Different films more important?

Gohanto

Gohanto

Veteran
Just cursious, but what types of films do you consider to be more important?

Starting off a career with an incredibly innovative film (Citizen Kane, Pi) or making a more tradionally "good" film usually with an above average script (Shawshank Redemption, The Terminator, Crash) with no really new techniques used.

People have gotten well known going both routes, but what's your opinion on how to impress people?
 
Gohanto said:
. . . but what's your opinion on how to impress people?
Click to expand...

That's the first misstep.

Do what impresses you.

If someone else likes it, too, good. If not, that's their problem.
 
"Do what impresses you. "

That's not why I make movies.

I like trying just about anything and I like a broad scope of movies. I enjoy making movies no matter what they're about (within reason), I take more pleasure in entertaining others than having a movie I like that no one else does.

I'm making an art film at the moment which I'm very aware wouldn't be liked or understood by many outside of myself. It's fun to make, but knowing not many others would appreciate it has left less happy about working on it than anything else I've done.

Basically, I'd be more proud to have made Raiders of the Lost Ark than to have made Gandhi. That's me though, and I'm sure many others disagree.
 
If you don't feel it yourself ("impresses you"), then no one else will, either, no matter how innovative it is, or whether or not you use the sure-fire elements.

Thinking otherwise is how we wind up with a lot of mediocre crap.
 
See that's the thing...I do what I like, and everyone who likes what I do are clearly people of good taste and large intelligence quotients; those who don't are obviously drooling, mentally stunted individuals who wouldn't know a good laugh if it snuck up and bit them in the ass, people I wouldn't want as admirers in the first place.
 
I got bit in the ass by a good laugh that snuck up on me, once.

I was in bed for a week.

No matter how much you believe in a given piece of work you're doing, it's pretty common to look at it after hours and days and weeks of pre-production/production/post, and be totally unable to tell, any more, if it's as brilliant as you though it was, on day one, or if it's deteriorated into humiliating sh*t that even your own mother would walk out on.

(humiliating sh*t, out on which even your own mother would walk)

That's why new eyes on the work, are so valuable sometimes.

And if they fail to reassure you that the work is as brilliant as it promised to be, on day one...well, see what HappyGobo sez.
 
Last edited:
I agree with GenJerDan...you have to feel your story inside of you. Can you relate to it? Do you have a passion for it? If so, then that will show on screen when your audience is watching it. And, with any luck, you'll strike a chord with a particular audience that will appreciate your work. Not everything can appeal to everybody; that's what Hollywood thinks and it's bringing them down.

Do what you love, and love what you do. Otherwise, what's the point? Money? Psshh...
 
I'm on the side of doing something that you really WANT to do, if you want to do it you will be more invested in it and that will definitely show.

So if you want to make a mainstream movie it should be good, because that's what you want to do.

And, if you want to do something wild and unheard of, it will be good too, because, tagline. . . . YOU want to do it.

Just me $0.02
 
GenJerDan said:
If you don't feel it yourself ("impresses you"), then no one else will, either, no matter how innovative it is, or whether or not you use the sure-fire elements.

Thinking otherwise is how we wind up with a lot of mediocre crap.
Click to expand...

So, by that logic isn't Uwe Boll a better filmmaker than early Spielberg?

Boll has said a number of times about not caring what anyone else thinks of his movies and everyone seems to agree he shouldn't be allowed to make movies anymore. Before Schindler's List, I didn't see Spielberg following that belief.

(Sorry if I sound angry, I'm not trying to insult anyone, just get a clearer understanding)
 
It's not symmetrical.

Feeling it isn't a guarantee of success.

Not feeling it is pretty much a guarantee of failure, though.

(Always exceptions, always exceptions. Wanna gamble on it? I don't.)
 
I agree, do what impresses/inspires you first. But then (here's the real tricky part) learn to impress others enough to believe in what you want to do, so they "get on board" as they say. It's very tricky because you have to translate your passion/interests into language others (with different tastes/sensibilities/interests) can relate to on an almost...I'd say, visceral level. Primal, even.
After that, it's all about talent and a little luck to see if audiences will "get it"

And, hey, I get what people mean when they say, "I don't care what others think about my work -- it's all about my vision" but that's a little naive, too. Every filmmaker, more than anything else, wants to communicate something -- and more specifically, to an audience. It just comes out of you, and no one lives in a bubble. Even Kubrick cared about what the critics would say about his work.

Martin Luther King, Jr. once said while reading an article about himself, "I know I shouldn't care what they say about me. But I do." (paraphrased)
 
Last edited:
GenJerDan said:
Not feeling it is pretty much a guarantee of failure, though.

(Always exceptions, always exceptions. Wanna gamble on it? I don't.)
Click to expand...

Here's one exception. My friend wrote and directed a film that was basically a break out sucess. Everyone who saw it (not just their friends, but strangers) loved it. He asked me to assemble the DVD and behind the scene commentary for him and I was really suprised to hear him say that the whole time he thought the film sucked. His words were "I looked at the footage and I thought 'aww crap, how am I going to fix this?'" Strange how things work out sometime.
 
HappyGobo said:
See that's the thing...I do what I like, and everyone who likes what I do are clearly people of good taste and large intelligence quotients; those who don't are obviously drooling, mentally stunted individuals who wouldn't know a good laugh if it snuck up and bit them in the ass, people I wouldn't want as admirers in the first place.
Click to expand...

:grin:
 
jade8472 said:
Here's one exception. My friend wrote and directed a film that was basically a break out sucess. Everyone who saw it (not just their friends, but strangers) loved it. He asked me to assemble the DVD and behind the scene commentary for him and I was really suprised to hear him say that the whole time he thought the film sucked. His words were "I looked at the footage and I thought 'aww crap, how am I going to fix this?'" Strange how things work out sometime.
Click to expand...

I saw this documentary once on cable about the movie industry. It was real interesting, all top execs, directors, producers were interviewed. And the one thing they all agreed on is the fact that... "No one knows." That is so true, because you never really know what will become a hit, what will the audience like, it just happens. I'm pretty sure film makers set out to make movies thinking it's gonna be the next big thing, it's gonna be great.. and 9 out of 10 times, it bombs. Then there's those movies where the film maker just goes and makes a movie just to make a movie then that becomes a huge success.. in other words, there's no secret recipe... A good example of that is Jaws. Speilberg thought that movie was a disaster because of all the things that went wrong in production, and now look at it.

As some of you mentioned, just believe in your work and if it's met to happen the rest will just happen, because no one really ever know what will be a huge success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top