PDA

View Full Version : "Empire" raise a very good point this month......


ak
01-04-2002, 06:25 PM
Having recently bought Empire film magazine, here in the U.K, I flicked through to see an interesting article, perhaps one of their most interesting articles in recent months.
The article is titled "Is the pre-determined release date ruining Hollywood"?
(The writing here is in my own words, with snippets from the article).

And, as the article addresses a definite "yes", I totally agree. It's not something i've thought about much before, but is very obvious.

The piece goes onto address such films as The Mummy Returns (Which had some god-awful effects) and Harry Potter (which also had a lot of dodgy effects - due to their deadlines).

It's true. The whole Hollywood system really is devoid of the integrity it certainly should have, and audiences should certainly see that these cheaply-put- together films certainly aren't worthy of our money, which then equals a success, only for the studio to want another sequel, which has an even shorter dead-line.
Heck, look at The Scorpion King - That's going to come around really quickly, and also looks dreadful.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the article though, is how it references Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, who are the kings at correct scheduling.
Minority Report finished principal photography a while ago, giving ILM a year or so to work on effects. The same with Attack Of The Clones, which finished even longer ago, and has had a great time advantage with the effects side.

Ian Freer (article writer) also comments on the popular use of digital editing machines, which can smack a film together without much blood, sweat or tears. There's isn't a great deal of physical involvement at that stage it seems, directors can mess about with a film when they seem fit. It's a far quicker method, which once again ties in with the pre-determined deadline.
Yet again, good old Spielberg still likes to cut his films using the traditional method, and it comes through in the great quality of his work.

I can only connect this with that broken toy you got for Christmas when you were younger. It was one of a million on a production line, and not the only one that was faulty. Manufacturers are trying their best to keep up with demands, yet make a botched-job, which is hopeless.

Please Hollywood, less Mummy Returns - more integrity, and as the article perfectly puts it - More common sense!!



[This message has been edited by ak (edited 01-04-2002).]

herculeez
01-04-2002, 06:59 PM
I have to say that i definately agree with Empire on this one aswell.
Due to the fact that such films (as previously exampled by ak) as The Mummy Returns and Harry Potter have resulted in having either attrotious (mummy returns) or just downright dodgy (HP) effects, all thanks to their deadlines that need to be met.
Had a little more time construction been set up or even delaying the film a little to give them more time to work on the movie, then they would have resulted with better effects to top off their movies.
Now in my eyes, not even a years worth of work with the best special effects could have saved the mummy returns, but with Harry Potter and taking into consideration the fact that it had so much hype and would guarantee a huge sum back form the box office, you would have thought they would set a better example as far as effects are concerned.

Take into consideration what peter jackson has done with LOTR...he spent what 13 months filming all three movies?
Then he gave himself about a year for each movie to add the special effects on.
This is better for us all, it allows us to see a great ending result with guaranteed great SFX and also the year's wait in between each movie now, just creates all the more hype for us eager fans...all round good time management.

Jay_visigoth
01-04-2002, 07:03 PM
Well, you know how thw system works man. Yeah Mummy 2 looked Dreadfull(not because of the effects though! LOL) and the big ending with the showdown was kind of dissapointment. But it though, the director wanted to make look like kind of a comic book! A cartoon thing. It was a film for kid anyway... As for Harry-Poter, dodgy effects? I really don't get it! I overlook most of the unimpressing FX lately('cause of the Matrix) but i though that three-headed DOG was kinda weird... Anyway...
Hollywood will always work like that! I mean, dates are DATES, crowds are crowds! The companies in Hollywood are facing tons of fans who are anticipating their films, so they say when, the fans want it that way! Oh, those AMERICANS we shall say!

Dumb-Fokker-**
01-05-2002, 12:32 AM
I say shit on Hollywood. Everyone should make their moves in New Zealand. ....unless the movie is gonna suck, in that case, stay in Hollywood.

Common Sense Man
01-05-2002, 12:51 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by ak:
More common sense!!
</font>

Did I hear my battle cry!? Yes, yes I did!

I agree, I know studios need to get the movies out so they can make money and everyone is feeling soo lucky to be working on a project.

But if I was a Director I would have to have released date control, or I would simply give the studio a date that was like a year beyond what I expected.

I do not understand why there even has to be deadlines for some of these movies. They would make so much more money if they looked better.

And if you have to have that special release date and you miss it, wait until next year.

One thing that we have all seen is anticipation for a good movie only builds your desire to see it.

But greed rules the day in Hollywood so I do not expect this to change.

At least I hear the principal photography is done for The Two Towers so hopefully with a whole year they can bang out the effects and edit that bad boy until they get exactly what they want.

Out.....

Dalek
01-07-2002, 02:49 PM
I guess the winner for taking your time has to be Eyes Wide Shut, with 15 months of principal photography, plus I think something like 3 months of reshoots (?), and that's with no special effects work at all (except for the post-mortem tinkering from the studio that nearly destroys the film).

It's pretty terrible to think that Kubrick spent so much time achieving perfection of his vision, and then WB shits all over it to get an R rating.

bitch tits bob
01-08-2002, 02:07 PM
Before i even start who here liked anything in or about Final Fantasy?......

FeverDog420
01-08-2002, 05:40 PM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dalek:
I guess the winner for taking your time has to be Eyes Wide Shut, with 15 months of principal photography, plus I think something like 3 months of reshoots (?), and that's with no special effects work at all (except for the post-mortem tinkering from the studio that nearly destroys the film).

It's pretty terrible to think that Kubrick spent so much time achieving perfection of his vision, and then WB shits all over it to get an R rating.</font>

Hollywood is run by a bunch of cowards! EYES WIDE SHUT would have been the perfect candidate to challenge the MPAA and rehabilitate the NC-17 rating. Would this movie have honestly made any less money with the harsher rating? I suspect it would have made more. Instead, the Warners suits bowed down to the evil Jack Valenti and cut (censored!) the movie to placate the extreme right wing, thereby allowing access to EYES WIDE SHUT to minors who had no business, or desire, seeing the movie anyway. It's total bullshit.

After this PR debacle, one would assume that Warners would release the uncut version of EYES WIDE SHUT on DVD. Why the hell didn't they? Why is America the only Western nation not permitted to see Kubrick's intended version? Are we so immature that we can't view some artsy sex scenes? But I guess we're "mature" enough to see David Arquette roll around in dogshit in Warners' SEE SPOT RUN (which, incredibly, is rated PG). Why is adult material suitable for children but not suitable for adults? It's situations like this that make me embarrassed to be American sometimes...

FeverDog

[This message has been edited by FeverDog420 (edited 01-08-2002).]