Friday, November 13, 2009
Realistic moviemaking
You have to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars(maybe a million dollars if you're lucky), hire as close to professional actors as possible, build sets and/or pay for permits, pay for expensive special effects, use professional equipment, and know the distribution game, etc. to get any help to possibly get attention to the film. Above that the chances are zero to none that it will still get attention unless your script is perfect.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Genres
Action
Erotica
Adventure
Comedy
Crime and Gangster
Drama
Epics and Historical
Horror
Musicals
Science Fiction
War and anti War
Western
Erotica
Adventure
Comedy
Crime and Gangster
Drama
Epics and Historical
Horror
Musicals
Science Fiction
War and anti War
Western
Moviemaking in a nutshell
Movies are detailed technical books(screenplays) played out on a stage with intricate camera movements capturing the action. Movies are a collaborative effort of a director's vision of the screenplay.
What do movies make you think?
What do you think my movies do?
I can tell you this:
If you are just looking at the screen and not looking at your own life, then watch it again.
If you are only looking for entertaining, its there, but do not go in expecting to turn your mind off. There is enough junk out there and its been done way too often.
I can tell you this:
If you are just looking at the screen and not looking at your own life, then watch it again.
If you are only looking for entertaining, its there, but do not go in expecting to turn your mind off. There is enough junk out there and its been done way too often.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Movies imitate life
Life imitates movies as well as movies imitating life. People that go to movies can have discussions about topics of the film or even saying lines of dialog in pop culture references in everyday life.
Movies like Clueless and Juno changed the way people talked, right? Not necessarily. These movies were careful observations of people of that time and thus used in the screenplay as guides of youthful mannerisms. What happens next is young and hip kids that hadn't heard of the lingo or actions will use them as their own original thoughts in public such as parties or get-together with friends. These friends will also mimic the lingo or action until a fad is created and eventually everyone believes the mannerisms came from the movie first. Pretty scientific stuff here.
As an example, real life gang members knew to point a gun sideways before movies like New Jack City, Menace II Society, Boyz n the Hood among others glorified that action. Of course now its been spoofed in comedy films that its lost its momentum but you get the point.
There was as a kid saying this to his parents after he had done something wrong and they said he was a bad kid and should be spanked for some discipline. He retorted "If you spank me in a dream, you better wake up and apologize." This line was a stolen quote from Reservoir Dogs by Quentin Tarantino. He was eleven or twelve years old at the time. That attitude of the movie stuck with him throughout the teenage years because it was powerful and exciting. As a grown-up now, he does think it was immature, but no one can go back into the past and reinvent themselves as they would have liked, but also that attitude makes that person who they are today. This is an example of how movies imitate life and life bringing it back full circle.
So what good are movies if they do this? Good question. There needs to be moviemakers out there that bring positive thinking into the ending so that when the movie ends, the audience goes out wanting to bring about positive change in their own lives. That is the power of film. Yes its entertaining but its also a tool. With this tool is a chance to enrich lives of everyone and anyone willing to give it a chance.
Movies like Clueless and Juno changed the way people talked, right? Not necessarily. These movies were careful observations of people of that time and thus used in the screenplay as guides of youthful mannerisms. What happens next is young and hip kids that hadn't heard of the lingo or actions will use them as their own original thoughts in public such as parties or get-together with friends. These friends will also mimic the lingo or action until a fad is created and eventually everyone believes the mannerisms came from the movie first. Pretty scientific stuff here.
As an example, real life gang members knew to point a gun sideways before movies like New Jack City, Menace II Society, Boyz n the Hood among others glorified that action. Of course now its been spoofed in comedy films that its lost its momentum but you get the point.
There was as a kid saying this to his parents after he had done something wrong and they said he was a bad kid and should be spanked for some discipline. He retorted "If you spank me in a dream, you better wake up and apologize." This line was a stolen quote from Reservoir Dogs by Quentin Tarantino. He was eleven or twelve years old at the time. That attitude of the movie stuck with him throughout the teenage years because it was powerful and exciting. As a grown-up now, he does think it was immature, but no one can go back into the past and reinvent themselves as they would have liked, but also that attitude makes that person who they are today. This is an example of how movies imitate life and life bringing it back full circle.
So what good are movies if they do this? Good question. There needs to be moviemakers out there that bring positive thinking into the ending so that when the movie ends, the audience goes out wanting to bring about positive change in their own lives. That is the power of film. Yes its entertaining but its also a tool. With this tool is a chance to enrich lives of everyone and anyone willing to give it a chance.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
How to get 6 pack abs within 5 years
How many hearts must be broken before someone figures out that it will take longer than a blink of an eye to get physically fit? Pick up any fitness magazine or news article and its all garbage lines like "How to get six pack abs in 6 weeks." Not that its impossible to do, but it is quite a defeat to those that trust the written word without a verifiable source giving the exact information in plain text.
"Want a six pack abs like Gerard Butler had in the movie 300? Try the 300 workout program and look like King Leonidas in three months." These creative marketers didn't say more than a word about Butler already being in great shape before the movie and that he worked out six hours a day for three months straight to get like that.
Or how about the physique like that of modern bodybuilding inventor Arnold Schwarzenegger? Actually, the California governor and former Terminator franchise star knows what he is talking about in his book. But then again he also used steroids to achieve that overworked out body and spent anywhere from SIX TO EIGHT HOURS A DAY FOR YEARS.
It is fully possible to get more in shape than what you are now in six to eight weeks. Muscle takes work, time, and dedication, more than most people are willing to devote. Nutrition is probably more important than exercise when it comes to getting big though and that is what Hollywood trades don't tell you. These bodybuilders eat something like eight meals a day at the least and its not junk food.
There's a problem with media outlets. In this instant coffee taking too long and faster than fast instant Internet connection loving society that has come to fruition in the last decade, news articles have to be timely, not just information packed. And that problem is a large amount of people believe that if something doesn't come quick, its not worth the wait.(Thanks McDonald's!) In the case of physical fitness, movie promotions will tell you these actors went to unbelievable odds to get unbelievable weight and muscle gain/loss to sell more tickets. There is nothing wrong with good marketing, but honest marketing is more important than misdirection.
"Want a six pack abs like Gerard Butler had in the movie 300? Try the 300 workout program and look like King Leonidas in three months." These creative marketers didn't say more than a word about Butler already being in great shape before the movie and that he worked out six hours a day for three months straight to get like that.
Or how about the physique like that of modern bodybuilding inventor Arnold Schwarzenegger? Actually, the California governor and former Terminator franchise star knows what he is talking about in his book. But then again he also used steroids to achieve that overworked out body and spent anywhere from SIX TO EIGHT HOURS A DAY FOR YEARS.
It is fully possible to get more in shape than what you are now in six to eight weeks. Muscle takes work, time, and dedication, more than most people are willing to devote. Nutrition is probably more important than exercise when it comes to getting big though and that is what Hollywood trades don't tell you. These bodybuilders eat something like eight meals a day at the least and its not junk food.
There's a problem with media outlets. In this instant coffee taking too long and faster than fast instant Internet connection loving society that has come to fruition in the last decade, news articles have to be timely, not just information packed. And that problem is a large amount of people believe that if something doesn't come quick, its not worth the wait.(Thanks McDonald's!) In the case of physical fitness, movie promotions will tell you these actors went to unbelievable odds to get unbelievable weight and muscle gain/loss to sell more tickets. There is nothing wrong with good marketing, but honest marketing is more important than misdirection.
TV or movies
Are television and the movie theater any different now? Most of the general public aren't going to the movie theaters as much these days. Thanks in part to Netflix, flash video streaming, home theater video technology, and Hollywood going more towards HD video instead of the film stock format. What is happening is that film is changing its looks more towards the aesthetics of television. The reason is not an artistic approach but a business approach of low cost digital capturing though the quality is not better. Luckily though the normal movie watcher has no idea that what they are looking at is sub par quality. The only thing the viewer is capable of is being intrigued by the story.
While net video streaming sites such as Hulu or Youtube still allow much to be desired due to buffering and HD video streaming taking even longer, it is an acceptable way to watch shorter movies that are under an hour and half long. The only true downside is the size of the video monitors. People want to watch movies on a big screen even though the only thing the viewer is capable of is being intrigued by the story.
Netflix is a great little service, maybe some folks out there have heard of it? Most movie lovers have a dedicated queue of twenty or so movies that they can pick from to watch at their liesure at home, or on their home computer with a compatible DVD player embedded into their machine. Downside of Netflix is that the discs that they send can be scratched and there isn't a great way to take care of that problem, though the company is showcasing a bigger library of titles to view online also, so it seems the future is streaming net video technology.
Home video technology has expanded to plasma televisions and wide screen high definition capabilities that rival theater systems without the bucket seating and annoying people that bring their infants to a rated R for nudity film. A small disadvantage is the rigging of new technology together. As one new standard is adopted there is a much required nuisance of having to upgrade every couple years with hopes that all the other equipment will conform. Anybody upgraded to Windows 98 from Windows 95 before? Its a pain. There is no main disadvantage for home theater systems except needing bricks of money for the adventures of buying large seating, expensive newest technology, and your very own popcorn machine which Skymall seems to have in abundance.
Hollywood movies are made more and more with HD video that looks more and more like film every year. The issue with the technology is that all the information is based on magnetic discs that are easily corruptible and serious cash can be lost by using these input devices as storage without backup systems in place. Filmmmakers who consider themselves artists are very one sides about using one medium or another. Luckily, the only thing the viewer is capable of is being intrigued by the story.
In these times television is played on the internet. Movies are also played on television and the internet. The time frame to get a movie from the theater to a digital copy is narrower than before. A summer blockbuster will be on disc or on-demand within a few months if not sooner. With sequels becoming the rage, movies are no longer a single entity. They are transforming into a series of films, which is in essence: Television. Yes, TV on demand on the internet but with higher blockbuster budgets.
What is already happening to the industry? Lower budget indie films. Big budget movies are becoming a thing of the past but now the movies have sequel minded endings. Its all television series if you ask me, and I don't even have cable.
While net video streaming sites such as Hulu or Youtube still allow much to be desired due to buffering and HD video streaming taking even longer, it is an acceptable way to watch shorter movies that are under an hour and half long. The only true downside is the size of the video monitors. People want to watch movies on a big screen even though the only thing the viewer is capable of is being intrigued by the story.
Netflix is a great little service, maybe some folks out there have heard of it? Most movie lovers have a dedicated queue of twenty or so movies that they can pick from to watch at their liesure at home, or on their home computer with a compatible DVD player embedded into their machine. Downside of Netflix is that the discs that they send can be scratched and there isn't a great way to take care of that problem, though the company is showcasing a bigger library of titles to view online also, so it seems the future is streaming net video technology.
Home video technology has expanded to plasma televisions and wide screen high definition capabilities that rival theater systems without the bucket seating and annoying people that bring their infants to a rated R for nudity film. A small disadvantage is the rigging of new technology together. As one new standard is adopted there is a much required nuisance of having to upgrade every couple years with hopes that all the other equipment will conform. Anybody upgraded to Windows 98 from Windows 95 before? Its a pain. There is no main disadvantage for home theater systems except needing bricks of money for the adventures of buying large seating, expensive newest technology, and your very own popcorn machine which Skymall seems to have in abundance.
Hollywood movies are made more and more with HD video that looks more and more like film every year. The issue with the technology is that all the information is based on magnetic discs that are easily corruptible and serious cash can be lost by using these input devices as storage without backup systems in place. Filmmmakers who consider themselves artists are very one sides about using one medium or another. Luckily, the only thing the viewer is capable of is being intrigued by the story.
In these times television is played on the internet. Movies are also played on television and the internet. The time frame to get a movie from the theater to a digital copy is narrower than before. A summer blockbuster will be on disc or on-demand within a few months if not sooner. With sequels becoming the rage, movies are no longer a single entity. They are transforming into a series of films, which is in essence: Television. Yes, TV on demand on the internet but with higher blockbuster budgets.
What is already happening to the industry? Lower budget indie films. Big budget movies are becoming a thing of the past but now the movies have sequel minded endings. Its all television series if you ask me, and I don't even have cable.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Review of my reviews (part 1)
We look back on the film observation and movie reviews so far from the first one to the current one that is being written for tomorrow. There are noticeable style points and substance given within most articles. The writer never claims to be the expert on films, just that he knows what he likes and what he feels socially acceptable or ludicrous. What is not acceptable is thinking, "That was ridiculous, do the filmmakers think we are idiots?".
Now movies are made to entertain, and part of writing about the films has been questioning the existence of being entertained while watching the feature film. Though amusing or entertaining, most movies do not bring one into the story being told with some exceptions. Writing about movies is meant to be entertaining also, not always a college course about film noir.
Dena Derakhshan spent his teen years watching movies like The Crow and Pulp Fiction to the point of knowing and reciting the movie line by line, aggravating everyone in the room trying to watch it. His early twenties were spent watching as many movies as possible after work or on the weekends, sometimes even three movies a day using a Hollywood Video unlimited pass. His mid-twenties to present have been a quest to watch every type of genre out there from chick flicks to international films to cult films and in between many bad films that still manage a profit.
The hardest part of reviewing films and giving an analysis about them is the opinion factor. Everyone has an opinion, that doesn't mean that it is the correct opinion. What we all strive for is to be correct in what we talk about and that is not always the case. There is always an observation, whether it is correct or not.
There have been a few comments on the articles written that give further insight or "internet flaming" which is unavoidable. The aspect of comments on articles being personally responded is an interesting notion since in the public eye, it must be thought out, precise and with fact to back it up. There have been numerous attempts to discredit the writing, with most not backing up the insults, but that is still a deciding issue at large.
It should go without saying but still must be said: NEVER TRUST A REVIEWER. Movies are an art form. And business. They are never about spending hundreds of thousands or millions to lose money just because it is what the producer or director artistic sense says. Go out and watch a movie because your friends or family say its good. The previews of movies are a joke. An advertisement for something a studio wants you to pay your good money for. Don't be afraid to say you don't like a movie. Half art, half business. The happy medium for the working filmmakers, but not necessarily the viewing audience.
Another moment: Dena has never said he has seen every movie or arthouse film out there. He is a watcher of movies and maybe seen more than most. Where most people watch television shows and news as entertainment, he watches movies.
His talks on the film are for the most part positive, with a small section of whether the film could be edited tighter or the suspension of disbelief is lacking in the story. The first section is almost always a brief recap of the situation given in the movie followed by initial thoughts on the actors work and the message being given. The best part of the articles is at the end of the web page there are links to either the official site of the film or the link to where to purchase the DVD, even sometimes to a review by someone else. The biggest notice is the articles started out wacky and some were long, some were barely 250 words. Now the articles seem more straightforward and not the feeling of opinion, but more of advice, which is nice. The range of movies talked about is mostly feature films, but there are a few of short films, local films, and newsworthy movie related talks. Its still too early to tell if there is a future for film writing for Dena, but its obvious he has talent. It is probably a matter of whether he will be able to keep going at the speed and consistency that he has been going because some weeks there is one or two reviews, and some there are seven or eight reviews. More than likely we will see the articles only once or twice a week after the new year, which is a shame.
So far its been a good year for going out to the movie theater with the exception of action movies. The future of film is smaller budget movies that have an important message about human beings but aren't drawn out over lengthy dialog that is deemed unusual. The biggest factor is story no matter how big the star, how much hype is advertised, or how great the special effects.
Now movies are made to entertain, and part of writing about the films has been questioning the existence of being entertained while watching the feature film. Though amusing or entertaining, most movies do not bring one into the story being told with some exceptions. Writing about movies is meant to be entertaining also, not always a college course about film noir.
Dena Derakhshan spent his teen years watching movies like The Crow and Pulp Fiction to the point of knowing and reciting the movie line by line, aggravating everyone in the room trying to watch it. His early twenties were spent watching as many movies as possible after work or on the weekends, sometimes even three movies a day using a Hollywood Video unlimited pass. His mid-twenties to present have been a quest to watch every type of genre out there from chick flicks to international films to cult films and in between many bad films that still manage a profit.
The hardest part of reviewing films and giving an analysis about them is the opinion factor. Everyone has an opinion, that doesn't mean that it is the correct opinion. What we all strive for is to be correct in what we talk about and that is not always the case. There is always an observation, whether it is correct or not.
There have been a few comments on the articles written that give further insight or "internet flaming" which is unavoidable. The aspect of comments on articles being personally responded is an interesting notion since in the public eye, it must be thought out, precise and with fact to back it up. There have been numerous attempts to discredit the writing, with most not backing up the insults, but that is still a deciding issue at large.
It should go without saying but still must be said: NEVER TRUST A REVIEWER. Movies are an art form. And business. They are never about spending hundreds of thousands or millions to lose money just because it is what the producer or director artistic sense says. Go out and watch a movie because your friends or family say its good. The previews of movies are a joke. An advertisement for something a studio wants you to pay your good money for. Don't be afraid to say you don't like a movie. Half art, half business. The happy medium for the working filmmakers, but not necessarily the viewing audience.
Another moment: Dena has never said he has seen every movie or arthouse film out there. He is a watcher of movies and maybe seen more than most. Where most people watch television shows and news as entertainment, he watches movies.
His talks on the film are for the most part positive, with a small section of whether the film could be edited tighter or the suspension of disbelief is lacking in the story. The first section is almost always a brief recap of the situation given in the movie followed by initial thoughts on the actors work and the message being given. The best part of the articles is at the end of the web page there are links to either the official site of the film or the link to where to purchase the DVD, even sometimes to a review by someone else. The biggest notice is the articles started out wacky and some were long, some were barely 250 words. Now the articles seem more straightforward and not the feeling of opinion, but more of advice, which is nice. The range of movies talked about is mostly feature films, but there are a few of short films, local films, and newsworthy movie related talks. Its still too early to tell if there is a future for film writing for Dena, but its obvious he has talent. It is probably a matter of whether he will be able to keep going at the speed and consistency that he has been going because some weeks there is one or two reviews, and some there are seven or eight reviews. More than likely we will see the articles only once or twice a week after the new year, which is a shame.
So far its been a good year for going out to the movie theater with the exception of action movies. The future of film is smaller budget movies that have an important message about human beings but aren't drawn out over lengthy dialog that is deemed unusual. The biggest factor is story no matter how big the star, how much hype is advertised, or how great the special effects.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
youtube.com/movies
Yes its true.
Hulu is in competition.
Videos on the web became more readily available as high speed internet connections beat out dial up service. It was around 2004 that Flash videos started taking over the web by dedicated servers streaming the video content. In 2007 companies like Netflix started teaming up with Starz Play with their streaming service, and EZtakes came around town for independent film, both streaming full length movies. The TV networks decided they wanted a piece of the pie and Hulu.com came out of nowhere to lead the pack strong.
Now back to Youtube(a San Bruno company bought out recently by Google) wanting some advertising revenue. They see Hulu making some waves and they want the entire ocean. So far, the limited video selection is not optimal to go rooting for although I usually do root for Google and its products. Give it some time and lets see what happens. Though in my opinion, if Google wants to engage more viewers to stream full length movies instead of watching little clips here and there, they need to buy out Netflix.
The selection so far is nothing to cry home about, but keep checking back and see what develops here.
Hulu is in competition.
Videos on the web became more readily available as high speed internet connections beat out dial up service. It was around 2004 that Flash videos started taking over the web by dedicated servers streaming the video content. In 2007 companies like Netflix started teaming up with Starz Play with their streaming service, and EZtakes came around town for independent film, both streaming full length movies. The TV networks decided they wanted a piece of the pie and Hulu.com came out of nowhere to lead the pack strong.
Now back to Youtube(a San Bruno company bought out recently by Google) wanting some advertising revenue. They see Hulu making some waves and they want the entire ocean. So far, the limited video selection is not optimal to go rooting for although I usually do root for Google and its products. Give it some time and lets see what happens. Though in my opinion, if Google wants to engage more viewers to stream full length movies instead of watching little clips here and there, they need to buy out Netflix.
The selection so far is nothing to cry home about, but keep checking back and see what develops here.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Actor headshots
Attention actors looking for a new headshot:
What is most important for a headshot is does the photographer photograph people like you. Do they take headshots of other people with similar skin complexions, hair color, eye color, ethnicity range, age, physical structure, and background?. If they don't, look around. There are lots of quality photographers in the bay area. Just because a certain photographer is known to be great for someone else, doesn't mean that they will be great for you.
Face it. You will be paying someone to take photographs of you to submit for that leading role in the next big picture. This is your money, spend it wisely and do your homework. You should do an online search on local photographers and see if they have reviews or testimonials. Choose your top five and meet in person with all of them to get their personality type and see if you mesh with them well. You could be using their services over and over, so be thorough.
Additional tips:
Color Color Color. Black and white is rarely used anymore. If you go to Los Angeles or New York with black and white headshots, chances are you won't get the part. Color headshots are slightly higher in price but will keep you looking professional.
For commercial/industrial headshots, smile and wear brighter colors. For film and television use an intense look and muted colors.
It's important that your head and upper torso is clear so agents and casting directors can fairly judge you physically.
8X10 photographs are standard size. Why is that? Who cares! Just go with it.
You should have your name printed on the front below your photo. Most people just put it on the right side, but you can center or left justify it if you prefer.
Your resume should be stapled to the back of the headshot and cut to 8X10 also.
Have either a white or black border surround your photo. No border sells unprofessional work.
Get matte finish. Glossy photos get ruined and can be difficult for someone to see when florescent lights reflect from it.
It must be professionally done. Do not have your step sister take photos of you in your backyard...unless you have an incredible backdrop in your backyard and your step sister is a professional photographer.
Do not do literal character costumes for the picture. Do not dress like a cop, sailor, etc. You want to *suggest* character identities with professional suits or casual shirts.
Don't do silly poses. It makes you look silly. You want to show who you are and what you look like. The best tip ever is to look like your headshot, so change your headshot as soon as you get a haircut or any other changes.
That's it. Oh and don't pay too much. Shop around.
What is most important for a headshot is does the photographer photograph people like you. Do they take headshots of other people with similar skin complexions, hair color, eye color, ethnicity range, age, physical structure, and background?. If they don't, look around. There are lots of quality photographers in the bay area. Just because a certain photographer is known to be great for someone else, doesn't mean that they will be great for you.
Face it. You will be paying someone to take photographs of you to submit for that leading role in the next big picture. This is your money, spend it wisely and do your homework. You should do an online search on local photographers and see if they have reviews or testimonials. Choose your top five and meet in person with all of them to get their personality type and see if you mesh with them well. You could be using their services over and over, so be thorough.
Additional tips:
Color Color Color. Black and white is rarely used anymore. If you go to Los Angeles or New York with black and white headshots, chances are you won't get the part. Color headshots are slightly higher in price but will keep you looking professional.
For commercial/industrial headshots, smile and wear brighter colors. For film and television use an intense look and muted colors.
It's important that your head and upper torso is clear so agents and casting directors can fairly judge you physically.
8X10 photographs are standard size. Why is that? Who cares! Just go with it.
You should have your name printed on the front below your photo. Most people just put it on the right side, but you can center or left justify it if you prefer.
Your resume should be stapled to the back of the headshot and cut to 8X10 also.
Have either a white or black border surround your photo. No border sells unprofessional work.
Get matte finish. Glossy photos get ruined and can be difficult for someone to see when florescent lights reflect from it.
It must be professionally done. Do not have your step sister take photos of you in your backyard...unless you have an incredible backdrop in your backyard and your step sister is a professional photographer.
Do not do literal character costumes for the picture. Do not dress like a cop, sailor, etc. You want to *suggest* character identities with professional suits or casual shirts.
Don't do silly poses. It makes you look silly. You want to show who you are and what you look like. The best tip ever is to look like your headshot, so change your headshot as soon as you get a haircut or any other changes.
That's it. Oh and don't pay too much. Shop around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)