Linkletter was hardly starving, even when he started the project.Originally Posted by RedTeamGo!
Great concept, pretty good movie though. What are you saying?
Linkletter was hardly starving, even when he started the project.
Great concept, pretty good movie though. What are you saying?
"Lemonade requires a significant amount of sugar. Otherwise, you've just made lemon juice."
That not all movie makers are in it to make a bunch of money, which is what I thought you were implying.
Maybe I missed the context of this post -- but how is making a movie over 12 years "making a quick buck"?
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
It was sarcasm
cincinnati chili (01-29-2015),Dom Heffner (01-21-2015)
Gotcha. So did you like Boyhood? I thought it was quite an achievement.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
Haven't seen it yet - looking forward to doing so. I have always liked Ethan Hawke.
I think if you like Linklater's other work, you will love it. You may not even need to like earlier Linklater, but knowing his style is helpful in that things in this film don't really happen in the same way as they do in other feature films. It is more about tonal ambience than actual events -- about following the maturation of a little boy into a man, and about the experience of doing so in a three-hour span. Sure there are events in the narrative, but they are loosely arranged and thematic, more about watching the character's reactions than about establishing clarity about his motivations or his overt personality traits.
Hawke is great -- very much like the character in the Before Sunrise trilogy, in many ways, though this guy is far less successful in life. The film manages to be deeply moving and well-nigh spiritual about the process of growing up without (for the most part) being too heavy handed. Patricia Arquette is amazing, too... and I thought Eller Coltrane was really solid, especially since when they cast him as a six year-old there is no way they could have known whether he would be any good at acting later on.
Last edited by RedEye; 01-22-2015 at 04:38 PM.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
I was saying that if it wasn't for the accolades of the awards, then the only reason people would make movies would be to make money. Which isn't entirely accurate I suppose.
I guess the only thing left besides the money-makers would be the very low percentage of artists doing it for the yuks.
Quality would suffer greatly if there was nothing to shoot for except money, personal fulfillment, and yuks, that's what I was saying.
Without the awards and all the attention drawn to it, "high-fives" would be all anyone had to shoot for, from an accolades standpoint.
Coincidentally enough, I was paraphrasing a sentiment from Ethan Hawke himself in his last AMA.
Last edited by Bob Sheed; 01-22-2015 at 05:28 PM.
"Lemonade requires a significant amount of sugar. Otherwise, you've just made lemon juice."
Why would quality suffer? People strive for money. A lot. They do all kinds of insane things for it. People would continue to make quality work because it's what makes people money and people want money. Lots of it.
Ummm... people also make art because they like to make art and express themselves. Just sayin'. The money is nice too, of course. When you can get it.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
RedTeamGo! (01-23-2015),westofyou (01-22-2015)
Some of the most fabulous works in Hollywood occurred before award shows, sound or huge worldwide prestige. In the silent era
Film is an art that can packaged as commerce. But most films are labors of love that no one ever sees.
Last edited by westofyou; 01-22-2015 at 10:43 PM.
Someone making something for profit, versus someone making something for other reasons from artistic vision to accolades, can produce quite different results.
A strictly profit driven Hollywood, with a dash or two of "pet project" and no-budget "vision" would get you "pretty good, I guess." I don't know, maybe that's what we have now already. I don't think so though. Most of my enjoyment comes from lower budget indie films. And I feel the only reason I even know about them is because of the indie awards/filmings that at least gets them on the radar.
Some people primarily do it for money.
Some primarily because they want to be the best.
Some because they have to.
If you take away number two, you have something different.
Historically, money and prestige go hand in hand. Take away the awards and the quality will drop. Will there always be good movies? I hope so. But anytime you take a chunk away from the motivation pie, the product will suffer. I'm not sure why there is even a question here.
"Lemonade requires a significant amount of sugar. Otherwise, you've just made lemon juice."
RedTeamGo! (01-23-2015)
I don't know, I might be crazy, but I just don't see awards being something that people are truly striving/working for. Sure, you want to be recognized for your work, but I don't think it's why they are working.
Then why are so many crummy biopics being made?
Because people watch the crap out of them.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote