do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

I

IsraelHoudini

Well-known member
1. if the name of your movie does not appear in the movie, is not said by a character in the movie, or is not in any way intricately involved in the movie, it cannot be the name of the movie. (examples of this...that irritate me to no end : fatal attraction, basic instinct, the missing, etc. anything blah and overarching but not specific to the movie.) ::)

2. you shall not have a 10 minute trailer that shows every good part/funny moment/plot twist in the whole movie. (i, robot anyone?) does no one remember the matrix? the only thing you got to see was ...what is the matrix? that's it, not even a screen shot. tell me why i should go see it, not show me the whole thing. :-/

3. if you cannot get the original actor to return for a sequel, do not make a sequel. batman forever....batman and robin anyone? no michael keaton (not to mention no tim burton) = time to stop making batman movies. 8)

4. if i have to sit through 10 mins of titles before the action starts at least make them entertaining to watch. or fire a few people, then you can spend what you saved on making a decent movie and cut to the good stuff faster. >:(

5. if you want me to believe the leading man is falling for the leading lady, she better really be attractive, and certainly not less attractive than another female in the cast. (latest example i saw of this was mean girls. lacey charbet was far more {insert machismo offensive name for a fine lady of your choice here} than the vile blond they had as the lead plastic. or lindsay lohan for that matter) i will never believe anyone really wants to bed uma thurmon or sissy spacek or meryl streep. *shudders* :o

6. if your only A list actor makes only a small cameo in one scene, you may not put them on the poster and make me think its thier movie. and vis-a-vis if a name actor that i like is in the movie, you better promote them (did you know val kilmer is in alexander? ???)

7. have any of you ever had intimate relations where the lady did not remove her bra...most likely at an early point in the mating process? no? didn't think so. why is it only women in movies do this? (just a curious observation ive made over the course of my filmgoing tenure). a little realism please. (for the ladies in the audience....i fully appreciate the unfair treatment you recieve on the big screen...apparently men always sleep in thier underwear even with extremely beautiful women they've just gotten to know in a biblical sense. ;D)
 
Re: do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

Well, "2001: A Space Odyssey" didn't reveal its title, spoken or involved in the plot per-se, so...bad?

I appreciate your points, but if we reduce filmmaking as a set of rules compiled by every film viewer and filmmaker, then we're reducing film to some bulleted yes and nos. Film, like life, is about nuance. And you want realism, well why must looks of a female necessarily yield truth where a man chooses a woman, for love or lust in movies? That yields to one of Hollywood's biggest superficialities. If realism were really what you wanted, how about two homeless people who fall in love under the Brooklyn Bridge or an average couple who go to bars every Friday and Saturday and work 9-5 M-F?
 
Re: do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

Change the subject: write distribution rules. Instead of filmmaking. Or perhaps rules to sell the product.
 
Re: do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

I have to agree somewhat with those takes. Especially the skanky actress part. TIMELINE and the female lead and Im to believe Paul Walker is in love with her? What? I too want entertaining credit sequences (Dawn of the Dead 04 opening credits were nice while Tatrantinos usually suck sans Jackie Brown)

I also like a movie title sequnce to be clipped from the film although there are some great films that dont do that (Star Wars, Raiders, Jaws) but if you can pull it off that would be cool.

Perhaps they should change the name of FATAL ATTRACTION to 'The Boiling Rabbit' ?
 
Re: do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

This is an entertaining post. Quite funny and relevant to what we as viewers must endure.

John - dead on with the Timeline reference. Couldn't they have gotten a different actress? Maybe Donner thought she reminded him of Margot Kidder.

As for Credits... in this day and age of ritalin and x-box, we should get title of film then get right to movie, all other credits at end. For some movies the credits are essential just to make the movie long enough to be considered a feature. Sometimes they set mood.
I'd rather have lame credits and strong movie than cool credits and lame movie.

As for my thoughts on some of the orignal post points:

1. Bad point. Names are all about marketing. You want a title that can sell your film. As an example, I know of a straight to video film that could only get distribution if they changed the title of the film to "Vampires vs. Zombies", yet the film is not about that at all. This same distributor has a film titled "Angels Crest", when in the movie the place is called Angela's Crest.

As for the refernce to Fatal Attraction... that's pretty self explainatory. The film is about a women's fatal attraction toward's a man, bad example.

2. Good call. I hate it when everything is laid out in the previews. for some reason Zemekis is obsessed with this. He thinks the viewer needs to know the entire story before they enter the theatre. Remember the trailer for Castaway. It shows Hanks arriving on Hunts doorstep.

3. Good idea, but not applicable. Batman is an awful example. The real quote should be do not hire Shumacher to direct any Batman sequels. Studios have to make sequels. They usual are the best ways to guarentee money back on investment. Sometimes actors just don't want to play the same character over and over, or they're asking to much money, or are too busy. Nature of the business, not much you can do to change that. but if the replacement does a killer job and it's an awesome film we are able to get over it. You know how close we were to having a different Spiderman? Dunst's boyfriend was the replacement.

5. I agree. As a superficial male I always go for the hottest and feel that the guy onscreen should do the same. Did not agree with your reference to Thurman. I think she rocks!

6. Total agreeance. (*at the theatre last night. Big poster for Alexander - showed all the actors on it including Kilmer)

7. Yes. Bring on the skin. to add to that, one of my biggest pet peeves is stand in breasts. You know when the actresses face and body don't get shown in the same shot. Sure I like the nudity, but it's a ripoff.
 
Re: do you agree with my rules of filmmaking?

[quote author=John Hudson link=board=movies;num=1091265502;start=0#3 date=07/31/04 at 11:22:21]  I too want entertaining credit sequences (Dawn of the Dead 04 opening credits were nice while Tatrantinos usually suck sans Jackie Brown)
[/quote]


the opening sequence for D of D was done by this artist who recently came out in one of the men's magazines, i dunno what, don't remember but he's done quite a few in the past, including SPIDERMAN.
it pays to have people like that who can take your movie and make the opening sequence or trailer.
Tarantino and even M. Night. they are always in homage to their idols and keep their movies classy by showing plain titles running across black frame. And the movie doesn't begin till it's over. But i'd have to say, The Village opening with the trees were done just right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top