Home

Go Back   IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum > IndieTalk > The Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-25-2018, 02:04 PM   #1
peacemaker
Basic Member
 
peacemaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 120
James Cameron and Peter Bogdanovich Quotes

I was reading some quotes online by great filmmakers. I came across this two quotes which I don't clearly get what they were saying.

1) “I thought I was making a movie and I inadvertently made a film.” (James Cameron)

2) “The lack of film culture is one of the things that really upsets me. There’s this complete lack of interest in anything that was made longer than ten years ago…it’s like ignoring buried treasure, but it’s not even buried. It’s right there.” (Peter Bogdanovich)

https://stargayzing.com/movie-quote-...-film-history/

One of my professor always says that the previous generation of filmmakers had disciple (planning etc, because they were shooting in film) where most of the current filmmakers lack that. is Mr. Bogdanovich talking about that or is it something else.

Thanks.
peacemaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today   #1A
film guy
Basic Member
 
Posts: 17

 
Old 09-25-2018, 02:19 PM   #2
El Director
Basic Member
 
El Director's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Spokane Valley, WA
Posts: 491
I disagree that shooting digital means there's less planning. Look at any action blockbuster (Transformers, Avengers....) With so much being done on a digital backlot these days, I'd argue it takes just as much, if not more planning.

I do agree with Peter's remark though about people not being interested in movies older than ten years. It's really sad.
El Director is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2018, 05:40 PM   #3
Lucky Hardwood
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
Lucky Hardwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 1,736
The Cameron quote means that he thought he was making a movie (lowest common denominator entertainment) and made a film (visual art).
Lucky Hardwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2018, 05:50 PM   #4
Alcove Audio
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
Alcove Audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fairfield County, CT
Posts: 7,619
Actually, with the plethora of CGI techniques available - everything from simply turning a sunny sky into a gray sky to dragons, aliens or entire landscapes - a lot of filmmaking requires even more planning and discipline.

When it comes to film vs. video, yes, fledglings tend to shoot without lots of preproduction because they lack formal education and experience, the experience that tells them to do lots of preproduction.
Alcove Audio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2018, 05:50 PM   #5
AcousticAl
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
1) “I thought I was making a movie and I inadvertently made a film.” (James Cameron)
No clue what the context is for this quote, but if I had to guess... he’d differentiating a “movie” (a fun ride, a 2-hour piece of entertainment), and a “film” (something with artistic depth and meaning).

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
2) “The lack of film culture is one of the things that really upsets me. There’s this complete lack of interest in anything that was made longer than ten years ago…it’s like ignoring buried treasure, but it’s not even buried. It’s right there.” (Peter Bogdanovich)
Because audiences are more drawn to CGI, lens flares, and big explosions in slow-mo. The only reasons Michael Bay has a career.

Anything 10 years old or older either suffers from more primitive CGI or from a raging case of simpler storytelling (in other words, reliant on story and not FX).

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
One of my professor always says that the previous generation of filmmakers had disciple (planning etc, because they were shooting in film) where most of the current filmmakers lack that. is Mr. Bogdanovich talking about that or is it something else.
That’s not what the Bogdanovich quote is about. It’s about something entirely different.

Shooting on film is an absolute commitment. When you’re paying by the foot, you stop and think everything through. You plan and check and re-check before you expose a single frame. And you pay by the foot at least three times. Once to expose the film, once to develop it, and once to telecine it. Kinda like still photography on film: a roll had 24 or 36 frames with no image review, so you had to be sure before releasing the shutter.

Digital has changed this. We get to review what we just shot. Hard drive storage is dirt-cheap so conservative shooting isn’t necessary for budget. We can preview with a LUT and do almost anything we want to the image in post. It speeds up some of the workflow, but that in turn creates a more hasty environment.

I don’t think this has to do, necessarily, with the big-budget Hollywood films. Those still have plenty of people who cut their teeth the old way and they have healthy pre-pro budgets. What I see is a bunch of kids coming up in the industry, fresh out of film school or just jumping in and teaching themselves, who get a C100 or an Ursa Mini or a Sony F-something and it’s paid for. They don’t have to work for it. They never learn to have to pay off overhead so they lowball everything and take work from experienced professionals. And what is pre-production? They don’t know, or understand how to do it. The end-products show. Clients will buy cheaper if cheaper is available, even if the product isn’t as good.

Hell... you don’t have to have much capital these days to get your feet in the water. A decent camera, a gimbal, and a drone... presto, you’re a production company. Shoot all that crap at 60p, slow it down in post, and call it a day. And the clients go wild.

And the cameras do much of the work for you out of the box. Auto-whatever can yield a moderately passable image without ever knowing how to make any manual adjustments. Enough to get by, anyway. Image sensors can do fairly well with lower light levels, so more productions are using less artificial lights. Shoot it flat and leave the rest to editing. Again, cheaper price, cheaper product as far as lowball production bids.

So yeah... lots of newer filmmakers lack discipline. I’ve worked with several of them.

One of the worst: we were shooting interviews and the DP wanted to soften the background. C100 with a Canon 50mm cinema lens. He turned off all the lights in the house and lit with a couple of F&V 1x1 panels. To the naked eye, there was barely any light in the room. But he got to open the lens all the way up and get his softer background. And focus was so dang shallow that he had to keep one hand on the lens and pull throughout the entire interview because they’d go out of focus if they shifted even slightly in their chair.
AcousticAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2018, 05:51 PM   #6
directorik
IndieTalk's Resident Guru
 
directorik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: hollywood
Posts: 9,535
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
I was reading some quotes online by great filmmakers. I came across this two quotes which I don't clearly get what they were saying.

1) “I thought I was making a movie and I inadvertently made a film.” (James Cameron)
He's using "film" to mean something special, something better and more
important than a movie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
“The lack of film culture is one of the things that really upsets me. There’s this complete lack of interest in anything that was made longer than ten years ago…it’s like ignoring buried treasure, but it’s not even buried. It’s right there.” (Peter Bogdanovich)
I don't know what you don't get. It as true when he said it and it's true
today. In general people (even filmmakers) are not interested in movies
made 10 or more years ago. "it’s like ignoring buried treasure" means
there is a lot to learn from movies made decades ago.

Ask your average 25 year old filmmaker to name 5 movies made in the
1950's and I'll bet they can't. Go back to the 1930's when filmmakers
were literally writing the language of film and they will not know anything
outside of "Wizard of OZ" and "Gone With the Wind" which they have
head of but never seen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacemaker View Post
One of my professor always says that the previous generation of filmmakers had disciple (planning etc, because they were shooting in film) where most of the current filmmakers lack that.
Your professor is foolish. Shooting on film stock took different discipline
than shooting digital. Shooting digital still takes planning and discipline
and skill and talent. It's important to keep film alive and many filmmakers
are doing that. Your professor sounds like someone who is living in the past.
directorik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2018, 01:47 PM   #7
CamDoz
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 42
I think sometimes filmmakers generalize a ton. I don't think there is a complete lack of interest in films older than 10 years, or a lack of film culture...in the US or elsewhere. Maybe there is a lack in certain areas of the world, but I see a ton of my peers and younger folks taking an interest in older films. Just depends on what circles you are in.

I just think in general there is an overwhelming interest in having a new TV show to bing on EVERY DAY lol. I think my peers recommend a new show to me every time our paths cross. They must just sit there watching TV all night when they get home....though I admit I have it on in the background while I work lol.

With movie vs film thing, I think it's so much more complicated than that, and I believe that this outlook leads to missing hidden gems. There are films that are labeled just cheap "movies," that end up branching into some cathartic territory and depict some enthralling things. From my perspective a movie and a film are the same damned thing, just maybe used in different contexts by people that have different perspectives on cinema.

The feature film format is much a much more important classification for me, and denotes a form of art no matter how well made it is. Since I consider those words to mean the same thing, I just think there are bad movies/films and good movies/films. James Cameron just thought he was making a bad film.

I know that most of the public has adopted the movie/film definition that James Cameron referred to, I just dismissed that notion long ago.
CamDoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


©IndieTalk