|
Post by Lensman on Jun 7, 2005 13:23:24 GMT
They honestly believed this would be some kind of epic blockbuster, a masterful fusion of Merchant/Ivory and James Cameron Dunno who you're talking about here, Alabaster. *I* certainly wasn't expecting a blockbuster, nor even an "A" picture. I was hoping for a solid-- or at least passable-- "B" picture. Having grown up on cheezy '50s science fiction films, I can forgive occasionally laughable FX. But this film isn't even up to that standard.
|
|
SEAN
Full Member
Posts: 146
|
Post by SEAN on Jun 7, 2005 14:20:43 GMT
I know I havent seen this film yet but....
I'm not sure if it's just me being a bit over sensetive, but I actually feel not only let down, but also pretty hurt regarding this whole sorry affair. If I was to really stretch it I could say I almost feel sorry for TH himself as this will of torpedoed any asppirations to make it in the film making industry.
Surely he must of had some kind of insight into what was/wasnt going wrong/right with this project. The other comment made earlier regading honesty and that people would of offered help is a big one for me. Those statement made last Autumn by him were so bold and full of promise.
I would love it if My Hines gave some kind of full HONEST statement regarding this project, but I guess that won't happen.
Anyway...
|
|
|
Post by nervouspete on Jun 7, 2005 14:35:14 GMT
I once saw a Star Wars fan film that was visually very impressive, with actually reasonable acting. True, it was a little deriative, but it was quite impressive on what they achieved with so little money. It was twenty minutes long and had an impressive space chase, and the fighting was reasonably choreographed. Not worth money, but definitely worth attention and praise. Here's an instance of a piffling budget with impressive results, a fine dark live action fairy tale about a cat with hands... (best if you right click and download as) www.jengajam.com/r/Cat-With-HandsAnd then there is the wonderful aforementioned 'Mirrormask' trailer, which can be found here... www.sonypictures.com/movies/mirrormask/Don't forget to navigate the site. Truly a remarkable vision! And only $4,000,000! With Stephen Fry! And Gina McKee! And Robert Llewyln! And Rob Brydon! By Neil Gaiman and Dave McKean! Currently, I cannot see any excuse for Hines except his notable lack of talent and skill. Cheers, Pete
|
|
alabaster
Full Member
Watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's...
Posts: 112
|
Post by alabaster on Jun 7, 2005 15:59:55 GMT
Talent and skill are one thing; experience is another. This is Neil Gaiman's first actual movie; it seems odd that that would be the case, because of his omnipresence in the fanboy community, but it is. He began his career as a comic writer and artist, went on to write novels and teleplays for miniseries and television, all the while establishing his reputation and developing his vision and artistic competence. Reputation gets you many things you wouldn't otherwise have; the backing of a creative and daring studio like Henson, talented actors like Stephen Fry willing to work for scale, access to a genuinely talented artistic department, connections with other people willing to take risks.
The same is true for major "dumb" blockbusters as it is for minor, indie productions. Look at everyone's nemesis, Steven Spielberg. He didn't pull Jaws out of a hat; he'd worked for years in television before he even made it to cinema, and his first movie was a chase caper called The Sugarland Express. No one remembers that one, but everyone remembers Jaws, because by that time he had matured and mastered the medium well enough to produce something of quality. He was also part of a cadre that included some of the best and brightest young filmmakers of his generation, including Coppola and Scorsese, from whom he could absorb the finer points of technique.
For all I know, Timothy Hines may be a talented, inspired guy; certainly the images from the movie don't seem as ditchwater-dull as many other direct-to-video scifi films, but who is he? Where did he learn his craft? What are his previous works? Where did he learn to write? Does he have access to anyone of talent with whom he can study? If a man comes out of left field with no credentials, seemingly no connections to Hollywood, no body of work to back him up, no previous experience with design, editing or FX, and a tiny budget, can we really take his word (doubtless well-meant) that his film will be a masterpiece?
OK; you say you were expecting a well-made B-movie, but what is that? B-movies of the 50s mold are usually dire these days; most of them are released directly to video, and nearly all of them are cheap ripoffs of, or unnecessary sequels to, mid-range Hollywood productions. As I said before, this movie, by the standards of the current B-movie market, looks pretty good, especially when compared to crap like Proteus, Alien Predator and the nafarious Left Behind. Even well received B-movies that might see the light of wide release, such as The Prophecy and Cabin Fever, ultimately fail to live up to the hype.
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 7, 2005 16:37:54 GMT
I think everyone's missing a fundamental point here. If, when travelling through some forgtten Midwestern corn town, we stumble upon a travelling carny, the paint peeling in tracks from the ancient billboards, their monstrous images fading into the rain-stained wood, do we really trust the man in the dusty black cape and battered top hat as he informs us that the funhouse we are about to enter is the next level in terror, a descent into the blackest pits of hell, the greatest experiment ever in controlled mass hysteria? Do we storm out and shout we were robbed when we find out it's a collection of broken mirrors set against a scratchy tape of emphesimatic 30-year-old houswives trying to pass off their hacking of last week's tar from their lungs as horrified screaming? Of course we don't. We accept it with the same leap of faith that encourages us to crave the prize at the coconut shy, even when we know it will be in the jumble sale next week- it's all about the dream, reality ultimately doesn't matter. I thought that this was a wonderful post that very accurately described what I was feeling about 10 minutes into watching this film. I truly fell for all of the 'ballyhoo' surrounding this project (though at the time I would never have believed it was 'ballyhoo'). When I saw the 'final' product, the film seemed so riduculous that I couldn't help but laugh at the fact that I allowed myself to be taken in with the hype from 'the man in the black raincoat'! I didn't feel disappointed at being 'had', but instead felt like someone pulled a really funny practical joke on me. If any of you that have seen the film want a particularly good laugh, re-read the old news articles on the 'news repository' link on the Pemdragon War of the Worlds movie site. In particular, this article will seem extremely funny after you see the movie: www.computercrowsnest.com/sfnews2/04_sept/news0904_9.shtml
|
|
|
Post by David Faltskog on Jun 7, 2005 16:51:39 GMT
"For god's sake woman don't just stand there, get us out of this cowpat of a movie". D.F...Still wanna see it.
|
|
alabaster
Full Member
Watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man's...
Posts: 112
|
Post by alabaster on Jun 7, 2005 17:46:24 GMT
But you see, I don't think that's it. People are saying they've been had, or had a joke pulled on them, when really all they've been the victims of is marketing. Having seen the trailer for Stealth, I can pretty much conclude that it will be a rather stale bit of excreta, regardless of the fact that the advertising people will doubtless put "Academy Award winner Jaimie Foxx" in all of their posters, and include reviews from the South Pemberton Plumbers' Gazette or the Podunk Daily Mentioner calling it "Spectacular!" and "A Must-See, action-packed summer blockbuster!"
Now, Jaimie Foxx has indeed won an Academy Award, and I am very certain that the fine reviewers down in South Pemberton or Podunk will have a genuinely wonderful experience watching it. The marketers aren't lying, they're just... being selective.
The same is true here; people say they would be happy if he'd just said, "Look, this is what I've got, it's the best I could do with what I had," but what filmmaker in his right mind would ever say that? Marketing is myth, and Hines milked the myth for all he was worth, as any producer would do. He sold it on the myth of HG Wells, on the myth of classic storytelling, on the myth of fealty to the original source (which can take many forms, not merely rote transcription), the myth of grand CGI attained on the cheap and so on. Since his film IS the only film that is faithful to the letter of Wells's novel, and CGI CAN produce excellent effects for little money, and WotW IS a classic story, he isn't exactly lying, he just neglects to tell people that his film isn't up to attaining those lofty goals. I even believe that Paramount, quite sensibly, made some noises to remind Hines that he didn't have the rights to distribute his title internationally, and if he tried, their lawyers would be on him like a lamprey. If he inflated that story a bit by playing on the myth of the Evil Corporation (and yes, many are evil; myths are not always untrue), you could hardly blame him for capitalising on his situation.
|
|
|
Post by recumbentrider on Jun 7, 2005 18:19:55 GMT
But you see, I don't think that's it. People are saying they've been had, or had a joke pulled on them, when really all they've been the victims of is marketing. Having seen the trailer for Stealth, I can pretty much conclude that it will be a rather stale bit of excreta, regardless of the fact that the advertising people will doubtless put "Academy Award winner Jaimie Foxx" in all of their posters, and include reviews from the South Pemberton Plumbers' Gazette or the Podunk Daily Mentioner calling it "Spectacular!" and "A Must-See, action-packed summer blockbuster!" It may not have sounded like it in my post, but I do agree with you. Despite what I thought of his movie, and what I read from the news articles about the movie, I believe that anything Mr. Hines said about the film was simply the same 'marketing speech' put forth by promoters in many field, not just the movies. I just found it very amusing to have seen the wide gap between the descriptions he gave of the 'state of the art' special effects and the actual product. For the life of me, however, I find it impossible to be angry with Mr. Hines.
|
|
|
Post by dudalb on Jun 7, 2005 19:02:15 GMT
I think that people bought into the film because they wanted a good Victorian version of the film so bad, and they ignored all the signs early on what the final result would be.
As a matter of fact, the publicity and marketing on this film was wretched and incomepent, (statements like the "Next Al Pacino" are something that no competent publicist would make in a million years). In the end, nobody really cared or heard about it except the hard core fans, and they are not enough to justify even a low budget film.
I can't feel sorry for Tim Hines. He simply does not do work at a professional level, and if you are making a feature film, even a Straight to DVD feature.you have have a certain degree of professionalism. Hines does not.
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Jun 8, 2005 17:45:57 GMT
Then there's the Space 1999 episode where Maya transforms into a shoe in order to trap a deadly Cobbla monster which terrorizes Moonbase Alpha, but the plan is foiled when Koening puts her on by accident. She can only save the situation by transforming into a rancid sock which, as luck would have it, Cobbla monsters are much afeared of. The Cobbla monster transforms into a much less deadly Keecutta and the day is thus saved. Or did I dream that? I bet Helena wasn't too chuffed to find out Koenig had had his foot inside Maya!!
|
|
|
Post by EvilNerfherder on Jun 8, 2005 19:33:28 GMT
I bet Helena wasn't too chuffed to find out Koenig had had his foot inside Maya!! Indeed not. She pouted at him, in soft focus obviously, for a fair amount of time until Prof Victor Bergman prodded her for a bit with his 'test tube'. They were therefore declared even and the day was saved. Again. And Martin Landau says 'And to think I could've been Mr Spock!' Everyone laughs unconvincingly. The End. And Poyks says that he can't believe EvilNerfy missed out on the chance of an hilarious joke about what a big boy Koenig is after his post. you know.. foot.. inside? Oh forget it. 'Look out John! That daft Tony has mistaken your hat for an Eagle and is taking off!'
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Jun 8, 2005 19:50:42 GMT
That eagle appears to be wearing a sailors hat! The whole thing was a cover up to shade Johns confused tendancies!!!
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Jun 9, 2005 2:37:11 GMT
And Poyks says that he can't believe EvilNerfy missed out on the chance of an hilarious joke about what a big boy Koenig is after his post. you know.. foot.. inside? Oh forget it. Just glad someone got the joke!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 4:31:12 GMT
I haven't seen the whole film through yet. I couldn't bare watching it so I had to take a break. But I can say that there is one reason for watching this, to show future directors exactly how bad of film can be made. Guys I knew that I would most likley be wasting my money when I picked this trash up today, but dang. It is the worse film I have seen. Seems true to the book, don't get me wrong, but my pre-teen nephews could do a better job of making FX with a old VHS camcorder and MS Paint. At least Pal's movie had good enough effects that I could at least use my imagination to not see the wires and whatnot.
The Heat Ray stuff is the worse. People get burnt to a skeleton. But don't think they just fall to the ground at that point..... No they fraw about with more motion than the people did when they were covered in flames.
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 4:52:25 GMT
Actually there is a point in buying this trash...... So when MS3tK comes back around you will have the original version.... Ha Ha.
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 9, 2005 5:11:12 GMT
The Heat Ray stuff is the worse. People get burnt to a skeleton. But don't think they just fall to the ground at that point..... No they fraw about with more motion than the people did when they were covered in flames. LOL! Yes they do. But those who haven't seen this will think you're joking! Hines must have told the actors not to move around much, which might risk damaging all those costumes they borrowed from museums and other places.
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 5:16:07 GMT
As I watch this I actually think that the horse animation is even funnier than the Heatray stricken corpses. The Heat Ray stuff is the worse. People get burnt to a skeleton. But don't think they just fall to the ground at that point..... No they fraw about with more motion than the people did when they were covered in flames. LOL! Yes they do. But those who haven't seen this will think you're joking! Hines must have told the actors not to move around much, which might risk damaging all those costumes they borrowed from museums and other places.
|
|
|
Post by neuronomad on Jun 9, 2005 5:19:27 GMT
Oh yeah, on for those that talk about how long this movie is at just under 3 hours. Well so far I am at the 1/2 way point and I can say that at least 50% of what I have seen so far is just people walking around, really.
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Jun 9, 2005 5:54:02 GMT
I made a wild guess that fast-forwarding thru all the excessive walking scenes might save 30-40 minutes. I may have underestimated that by quite a bit! As I watch this I actually think that the horse animation is even funnier than the Heatray stricken corpses. Do you mean the carriage accident with the (typically) horrible CGI? That's another instance where my friend and I looked at it in disbelief and asked, "Why the heck didn't they do that practically instead of using CGI" ?? I mean I can understand doing the horse with CGI as they wouldn't want to risk injuring it, but wouldn't it have been easier and cheaper to make a mockup of the carriage with breakaway boards, than to create an animated version just for that one sequence?
|
|
|
Post by nervouspete on Jun 9, 2005 10:29:28 GMT
|
|