Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Screenlabs Challenge Competition
Sponsor of ScriptNight
Deadline: January 11
a professional development film and media workshop
VIEW and VOTE
Screenlabs Challenge Competition
Sponsor of ScriptNight
Deadline: January 11
Places to Visit
- ScriptNight Review by Tracy McCormick
- GreenCine Daily
- MNFTVB Dialog Blogs
- Screenwriters' Workshop
- Production Forms
- Editors Network
- Norman Hollyn's Blog
- Errol Morris ZOOM NYT Blog
- Screenplay Quiz
- Brian Newman's Blog
- ScreenLabs @ Blip TV
- Minnesota Film Arts
- Minnesota Film & TV Board
- MN Artists.org
- Independent Feature Project Minnesota
- MN DocuClub
- Riverview Theater
- The Heights Theater
- Euan Kerr's Movie Natters
- LA Log: A Minnesotan in Tinsel Town
- David Carr's Carpetbagger
- Brainiac
- Overheard in Minneapolis
- The Artful Writer
- The Unknown Screenwriter
- Danny Stacks Scriptwriting in the U.K.
- Franks Wild Lunch
- Jane in Progress
- John August's Tips Blog
- Maupin's Completely in the Dark
- Man Bytes Hollywood
- indieWIRE blogs
- FILMMAKER Magazine
- Renew Media
- res magazine
- written by magazine
- Internet Movie Database
- XIXAX
- WGA West
- Boing Boing
- Student Filmmakers
- Sundance Short Film Submission
- Withoutabox
- Izzy Video & Tutorial Podcasts
- Coppola's American Zoetrope Virtual Studio
- Cinematical
- IFC MediaLab
- REELZ
- Mefeedia
- veoh Video Network
- ifilm
About Me
Labels
- 2007 Oscar Nominations (1)
- 30 Rock (1)
- A Simple Twist of Fate (8)
- Al Pacino (1)
- Alexander Rockwell. Pulp Fiction (1)
- Alfred Hitchcock (1)
- Alison Anders (1)
- American independent film (2)
- AMPTP (1)
- Andrew Okpeaha MacLean (1)
- Ang Lee (1)
- Apple (1)
- B.J. Novak (1)
- Barbet Schroeder (1)
- Best Film 2007 (1)
- Best Worse Movie (1)
- Bill Pohlad (1)
- Blind Fate (1)
- Bob Dylan (1)
- Brad Melby (1)
- Brazilian Film (1)
- breakdancing (1)
- Brett Morgan (2)
- Brian Newman (1)
- Bulle Ogier (1)
- Care of the Spitfire Grill (1)
- Cate Blanchett (1)
- Chicago 10 (2)
- Chris Gegax (1)
- Christine Vachon (2)
- Christine Walker (1)
- Clerks (1)
- Coen Brothers (1)
- Craig Rice (1)
- Cristian Mungiu (1)
- Cristian Nemescu (1)
- Dalton Trumbo (1)
- Darren Aronofsky (1)
- Dave Halls (1)
- David Carr (1)
- David Letterman (1)
- David O. Russell (1)
- Diablo Cody (6)
- distribution (1)
- Edgar Wright (1)
- Ellen Page (2)
- Errol Morris (2)
- Film Contests (1)
- filmmaking (1)
- Flim Flam Man (1)
- Forgotten (2)
- Four Sheets to the Wind (1)
- Garrett Williams (1)
- Geoffrey Gilmore (2)
- Geoffrey Rush (1)
- Go Fish (1)
- Greg Daniels (1)
- Greg Winter (1)
- Harvey Weinstein (2)
- House of Sand and Fog (1)
- I'm Not There (1)
- indie film (1)
- Inspi(red) (1)
- iPhone (1)
- James Toback (1)
- Jason Reitman (3)
- Jason Ross (1)
- Jennifer Vogel (1)
- Jez Butterworth (1)
- Jim Jarmusch (1)
- Joel and Ethan Coen (1)
- John Carroll Lynch (1)
- John Oliver (1)
- John Pierson (1)
- John Soberg (1)
- Jonathan Taplin (1)
- JR Havlan (1)
- Julie Meyer (1)
- Juno (1)
- Kelly Kapoor (1)
- Kevin Bleyer (1)
- Kevin Smith (1)
- Kevin Spacey (1)
- L'Avocat de la Terreur (1)
- Laura Gabbert (1)
- Leon Ichaso (1)
- Lisa Zeno Churgin (1)
- Martin Scorcese (1)
- Martin Scorsese (1)
- media access centers (1)
- Michael Stephenson (1)
- Michael Tezla (1)
- Mike Leigh (2)
- Mike Schur (1)
- minnesota (1)
- Minnesota Film and TV Board (1)
- Mutum (1)
- Napolean Dynamite (1)
- New Queer Cinema (1)
- No Impact Man (1)
- Panel Picker (1)
- Patrick Coyle (1)
- Paul is Dead (1)
- Paul Lieberstein (1)
- Peter Broderick (1)
- Planet B-boy (1)
- Quentin Tarantino (1)
- Quid Pro Quo (1)
- Rachel Axler (1)
- Remember Minnesota (1)
- River Road Entertainment (1)
- Robert Redford (3)
- Roger Ebert (1)
- Romanian film (1)
- Rome International Film Festival (1)
- Rose Troche (1)
- Sandra Kogut (1)
- Sarah Pillsbury (1)
- Scott Hicks (1)
- ScreenLabs Challenge 2007 (10)
- ScreenLabs Challenge 2008 (1)
- ScriptNight (1)
- Secrets and Lies (1)
- Shawn Lawrence Otto (1)
- Shine (1)
- Shoot in Minnesota (1)
- Sikumi (1)
- SNL (1)
- Spanking the Monkey (1)
- Spike Lee (2)
- Standard Operating Procedure (1)
- Sterlin Harjo (1)
- Steven Soderbergh (2)
- Steven Spielberg (1)
- Sudance Film Festival (1)
- Sundance Channel (1)
- Sundance Cinema's (1)
- Sundance Film Festiv (1)
- Sundance Film Festival (7)
- Sundance Film Festival 2008 (1)
- SXSW 2010 (1)
- Terror's Advocate (1)
- Tess Clark (1)
- Thanksgiving films (1)
- The Daily Show (1)
- The Office (1)
- Tim Carvell (1)
- Todd Haynes (2)
- Tony Safford (1)
- Troll 2 (1)
- Tyson (1)
- Vadim Perelman (1)
- Viacom (1)
- Walker Art Center (1)
- Walt Mossberg (1)
- Werner Herzog (1)
- WGA Strike (5)
- Women in film (1)
- Workshop (1)
59 comments:
It still continues...
show me don't tell me
this is a diatribe
not a dramatic story
It's intended to be a diatribe you boob. I understand in the directors cut for simple-minded people, Indiana Jones, Jet Li and John Rambo blow up the online gambling companies.
HEY, hey, you don't need to call people names!
anonymous #2 simply said it was a diatribe, you answered "it is intended to be a diatribe" and guess what IT IS A DIATRIBE so why the condescending attitude??
Simple-minded insecure people are those who go around calling people they don't know anything about degrading names.
Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me
Continuity with the first bar scene. And, to be very honest I zoned out in that scene. Too much talking, not enough going on.
I liked the difference between the conversation and the colorful bar scene. I also like the way that you cut to colorful lights when he was about to punch him with his brass knuckles. But was that repeat footage?
Music choice in the conversations is really weird. It's like eating at a restaurant with soothing music in the background.
I feel like this whole thing just drags.
Let me say that the actors do give creditable performances. The shady lawyer was miscast, out of his league, but the others are obviously seasoned actors and do well in front of the camera.
However, all the written characters just really long and painfully boring, untextured, colorless, as well as humorless speeches. There is no dialogue written for these actors to perform and it is unfair to their talent. It's all diatribe as the previous comments agree and there is practically no dialogue.
The writer of this script needs to learn to write dialogue and let the actors perform with eachother to create interesting personal dynamics and characters with dimension, rather than flat cardboard people reading speeches to eachother.
Viewing this short I cannot help but think you do not care much about the characters but care a lot about the issue and making a statement. Nothing wrong with making a statement but you also need to be faithful to storytelling, drama, and the rules of cinematic dramatic storytelling.
You need to create credible characters and interesting dynamics on the screen if you want others to understand your issue and appreciate your statement and stand.
Zoom Zoom's credulous. Dialogue is no more complicated than a conversation between two or more persons. This is screenwriting, not playwriting, you have this convoluted opinion that the characters should speak in a Hamlet like Soliloquy. This short film is chock-full with dialogue and drama. The reality and actuality is, this project went from page to screen and became a work of art and no critic can ever take that away...
I found the film enlightening and fun!
Informative and enjoyable.
zoom zoom here! You've made my point exactly! The bar scene at The Laffey in downtown St. Paul is almost compaletely a soliloquy from Hamlet spoken by McBride. Film is NOT theater.
I'm not a film critic. I've been making films for more than 30 years. This script doesn't make it through pre-production on any professional set. In fact, this script wouldn't make it through Screenwriting 101.
Hey Zoom! In the words of Tom Cruise, your glib!
Professionalism Zoom...see what Coppola has to say about that...
http://bavatuesdays.com/francis-ford-coppola-predicts-youtube/
All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom
Just shake your rump
It's called rump shaker, the piece is like sweeter than candy
I'm feelin' manly and you say it's comin' in handy
Slidin' my claws from New York down by N. Virginia
Ticklin' you around Delaware before I enter
Total seduction, from face, hips, to feet
A wiggle and jiggle can make the night complete
Now since you got the body of the year, come and get the award
Here's a hint, it's like a long chop sword
Flip town, so let me see you shake it up like dice
The way you shake your rump is turnin' mighty men to mice
But A+ got a surprise that's a back breaker
Now let me see you shake your rump like a rump shaker
All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom
Just shake your rump
All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom
Just shake your rump
All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom
Just shake your rump
All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom
Just shake your rump
I agree completely with Coppolla about where the new art forum is coming from BUT sorry boys, you ain't got it with Illegal & Triving and it ain't even close to being anything like a new art form. It's a hack job.
Yeah, really bad writing will always be boring and unwatchable as this short no matter if they come from Hollywood pros or YouTube -- and there is a lot of awful sh%t on YouTube
Zoom, I'd like to see your body of work, I'm sure it' as hollow as your noggin. Your an overcritical, cinematic elitist, voyeur, schoolgirl, who has no clout, no oscars, no golden globes, no guts, who can't see the forest for the trees. Anybody who has anything critical to say about these films, has not appreciation or understanding for what it takes to make an independent film.
You want spectacle and theme park rides, go to the county fair and eat some hot dogs. I think the film enlightens and engages the audience. Don't expect Arnold, Sly or Willis to jump out of a corner and kill stuff, it isn't some BS action movie, it's a drama.
Kudos to the filmakers! I think it's pretty ambitious of them to take make a short film about a topic as behemoth as the online gaming industry. God bless em'.
Zoom, doesn't know his ass from his elbow. Where's your masterpiece film? If you have been making films for 30 years, then you should have had yours entered in the challenge. I think you are a wanna be film maker who really liked this film, but your jealoues that you weren't involved. Maybe you've never gotten pass the sniffing butt stage. That's what that sounds like to me. Before you make comments, think about the people who worked hard to make a film. By the way, I saw your show on the animal planet channel on retarded monkeys. Nice editing!!!
This film seems to be in the vein of a Good Shepard or Godfather, it fastens the audience into the inner workings of a foreign syndicate.
it matters little if zoom zoom is an emmy, oscar, indie spirit or tony winner, he (or she) is spot on with comments about this film
a big problem here in mpls stpaul with filmmakers is their inability to take feedback on their work. they are way too ego invested to grow and talk intelligently about how they can get better. they are fascinated with stars, fame, short term ego gratification to engage in constructive conversation about what works and what doesn't work.
if you think this is a "masterpiece film" hummmm.... your not listening....
Like Brady said, 'It's a cold and hostile universe', it's human nature to critique others. But for a short film, this definately isn't bush league.
No film is free of faultfinding. I mean there are critics and audiences who find flaws in movies the caliber of Citizen Kane and Taxi Driver. For a short film, this was a strong effort.
As the screenwriter, admittedly the film is a little like a Baptist Church, in that your kind of listening to a Preacher, preach. But I am gratified, to take it from script to screen. And there is a kind of strange serene feeling of enjoyment, that it is at least provoking some people to comment on it, which I think is better than no comments.
Kind of reminds me of a Midwestern 'Mean Streets', where Brady is like Harvey Keitel, a small-time hood, working for McBride, making collections and reclaiming bad debts
On the topic of illegal and thriving, which one of these doesn't fit with the group:
prostitution
weed
murder
war
bribes
gambling
doping
torture
meth
influence peddling
war
Prostitution legal in Amsterdam.
Hash is legal in parts of Europe. Hash bars let you light up, no questions asked.
Torture seems to be legal in Iraq.
Seems to me, looking at the list, gambling is not illegal. Gambling is highly regulated and restricted by states to certain forms (lotteries, pull-tabs, gaming, betting) and/or areas (i.e. Indian reservations, riverboats) but not illegal.
The rest of those items are illegal and they are thriving... is that what you meant?
After watching the film, I think it's safe to say gambling online isn't legal...
Online gambling is legal in Europe...
Aaron:
"After watching the film, I think it's safe to say..."
Say What?!?!
This film isn't a documentary. There is no factual data presented one way or another. It's just highly questionable and unreliable guys blowin' hot air at each other in a fictional drama. Do you believe everything you see on the internet as absolute truth? Do you understand the concept of fiction? What have you been smokin? YOW
On the contrary, online gambling is illegal, as defined by the Wire Act of the 60s. And I'm totally cognizant and aware that this is a fictional film, but it does inform and present loose facts.
Off-track betting is restricted in most, if not all states and so are pyramid schemes using the U.S. Mail. At the risk of being controversial, there is good and valid reasons (other than economics and political corruption) for this type of commerce to be restricted. Those facts exist independently, and apparently, in blindness to the logic of this fictional drama and the idiots mugs who are blathering on about gambling in the film. I rather much enjoy watching this short drama, knowing it is fiction but find the claims that it reflects a certain truth in the real world boring and insipid.
The fact is, right wing republicans snuck a online gambling ban on a port security bill called The SAFE Port Act. WTF kind of shady shi* is that?
The reason they snuck the unlawful internet gambling act on the port bill, is because no one in congress would vote against keeping out ports safe, so it had to pass. That is some Bullllshiii*****
What facts discredit this film, what disproves any of the gambling dialogue?
The factual gamut of the social, political and financial ramifications of gambling are covered, not sure what other reasons the previous blogger fails to disclose, as to why gambling has so many restrictions?
The risk of enraging the flaming geeks:
http://www.ncpgambling.org/
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/41277.php
http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600144921,00.html
http://www.problemgambling.com/faq.html
http://www.amazon.com/Pathological-Gambling-Making-Medical-Problem/dp/0791445216
just to cite a few...
But I know most do not care about being rational on the subject of gambling when they can be emotional, accusatory, and outraged. I do think there are responsible gambling practices that make gaming a form of entertainment but, by nature, it must be a highly regulated and restricted industry. But that seems to be the thing most internet gambling advocates have a problem with.
And right or wrong, those who seek to restrict gambling, hope to control the adverse social consequences but not because they are liberal f*#ks who want to take cash bribes on a bridge from a shady character who goes around strong arming sleazy lawyers -- that's the movie version.
As much as you really really really want to, don't confuse the movie version and the reality. But feel free to enjoy the movie as fiction.
I think there is a hole in your interpretation of the plot. The senator on the bridge is a left wing democrat, taking bribes, to lobby for online gaming regulation...
I think the film holds it's own as a fictional drama to, but I also believe that your failing to understand that the senator was a left-wing democrat, taking bribes to lobby for online gaming legalization. Did you understand that?
Read it. The exact words are:
"And right or wrong, those who seek to restrict gambling, hope to control the adverse social consequences but NOT because they are LIBERAL f*#ks who want to take cash bribes on a bridge from a shady character who goes around strong arming sleazy lawyers -- that's the movie version."
That is precisely what is so naive and purposefully simplistic about the depiction of the politician on the bridge with thugs handing them money. It's trying to make a dull point with the blunt end of an axe.
The liberal left favors gambling, the conservative right rejects gambling. The politician on the bridge was LEFT!
There really is no clear LEFT and RIGHT polarity on gambling. There is opposition to gambling from the left and support by conservatives as well. That is simplistic thinking by people who do not want to listen had just stick with preconcived notions. And personally, I am not poosed to gambling, I just think it needs to be very, very highly restricted and controlled in order to prevent abuse and wide-spread social problems that result from its poliferation.
generally speaking I think you could say gambling is a liberal issue and it was republicans that tried to ban it
Look, republicans are idiots.
They are wasting a billion dollars or more a day
with their interventionist, wasteful war in Iraq
blowing up people and infrastructure
of civilizations that will do nothing productive
but bring further terror in the world
nothing they do is rational or responsible
nor does it follow a political philosophy
of conservatism or even patriotism
they are violating many of the basic values
in our constitution
it doesn't matter what they think
republicans are corrupt to their core
I know conservatives and Libertarians
in favor of maximizing individual rights
and who are opposed to government
interferance and regulation of any and all
aspects of commerce and industry
and those people opposed the regulation
of gambling or gaming
I know Liberals and left Democrats
who are opposed to the proliferation of
gambling and gaming because they see it
as having detrimental social effects
and see it as a way that syndicates and
corporate conglomerates can profit
from the greed and ignornace of poor
and uninformed citizens
desperate for a hand up or
their "lucky break"
the gambling issue just doesn't cut as simply a
left/right or republican/democrat issue
For the record...Republicans...former senate majority leader Bill Frist and senator Jon Kyl were the central political figures that lobbied for a online gambling ban. And last but not least, the king of republicans, Bush Junior, signed the act into law. These are the facts...
Wagering and risking money is a liberal act.
I believe wholeheartedly with the previous bloggers opinion regarding the waste and havoc of the Iraq war, but I feel gambling is more to the LEFT than it is the RIGHT.
Yeah, with the tax dollars from online gaming, Junior could make parking lots out of the entire third world!
I guess that is all we need to know to oppose legalized online gambling -- no more funds for illegal war!
Yeah, but if Hillary becomes the woman of the house, she'll put the online gaming money to other causes besides building bombs.
This stirred up some controversy huh? The most comments. I think this could have worked much better if the script was worked on more. I think it was shot 3 drafts too soon. A lot of on the nose dialogue, too much explaining for me. The scene in Celts was interupted by the editing. Why not just punch the guy in the face and drag or cut into the back room, instead of adding filler. I'd like them to rewrite and re-shoot and I think this would kiss some ass. I think maybe the time constraints played a factor in this and some of the other films.
For better or worst, as the film stands, it certainly aroused and stirred up emotions, which is noteworthy.
You don't make up for your sins in church. You do it in the streets...
Post a Comment