Indy eye for the BLOCKBUSTER film

Indy eye for the BLOCKBUSTER film

  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • no

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Mic. Gee

New member
What do you think would happen if Hollywood turned to independent film makers to make the large budget blockbuster,superhero,etc. films we're seeing now? Would we see a Rennisannce (can't spellit) in American filmmaking or would the small film directors fail commercially and asthetically?
 
Wantig a maybe column

Wantig a maybe column

I dont know...Its really hard to say just what someone will come up with given a "Big Budget" opportunity...it would depend on the filmmaker..The person that made Batman and Robin was thinking he was making a good movie...just like the person making Pirates of the Carribean
 
Yes and no

Yes and no

I would have to say yes and no. Robert Rodriquez is an indy filmmaker and is about to blow hollywood out of the water with the release of Sin City. No one is talking about what it took to actually bring the picture to the screen. He wanted co-directors credit alongside Frank Miller. The DGA said no way jose, so Robert QUIT the DGA, effectively ending his hollywood career. Doing so, he was no longer tied to the rules of the Hollywood machine, and was free to make the film as he saw fit. It is totally unprecedented for a director to voluntarily give up their Guild membership. SIn City is truly and independent film not by budget senses, but b y freedom from the overlords of the hollywood machine.

Now if you gave Harmony Corrine 20 Million dollars to make a blockbuster, it's probably going to suck completely. The quality of the blockbuster would be dependent on the sensibilities of the director chosen..
 
There are a lot of factors that are tough to predict here - just as every film is unpredictable from start to finish - - you just are never totally sure what you'll come up with - I think you just set things up the best you can and work for a good product and vision. Vision...I think that's something that is key to a project, and what plagues most hollywood projects - - once you get a mass amount of money in on something, you then get a mass amount of people, or more than just a few, who think they can and try to push the project this way and that. This is more supposition than known fact, but I would guess this is often what makes a project falter...that and of course the fact that anyhting produced with a target audience as broad and diverse as the U.S. moviegoing audience is incredibly hard to make and keep solid.

Another thing is if you've got someone who's used to making indie stuff for maybe, max 2mil a film, then they are used to dealing with the limited resources and restrictions that go along with that - often less choices lead to more creative and ultimately more artistic and interesting pieces. When you've suddenly got 10's of millions to mess with and all the options in the world, it is easy to go overboard and out the window goes your originally solid message, your vision, your throughline that is so important in film... So perhaps it takes a whole different animal at the hollywood level to really maintain the right kinds of control/delegate things well. Perhaps if we gave Spielberg 1mil to make a little movie he would make a piece of junk - who knows? These are only my sort of philosophical thoughts on things since I'm not yet a professional and my insight is limited by my experience and age :lol:

-Aaron
 
Re: Yes and no

Re: Yes and no

As for giving the big movies to the indies...

It's not a matter of indy director's being better or worse than the already established directors... it's a matter of who's going to be the best visionary director for the job.

Not all independents want the 120 million dollar movie with all of it's special effects, gizmo's, and giganto-crews.

Really, you have to look at the stories being told... and the scope of the films... If an indy director wanted to do one of those it would have to be a director with the vision and thick skin necessary to make a big blockbuster film... Robert Rodriguez has shown that he's got the balls to make his films the way he wants to.

Just because you direct films, dosen't mean that you necessarilly want to do the really big ones.



Also, just a slight correction:

MikeWash said:
The DGA said no way jose, so Robert QUIT the DGA, effectively ending his hollywood career... It is totally unprecedented for a director to voluntarily give up their Guild membership...

This isn't exactly unprecedented... as George Lucas did this in the 80's after the DGA sued him & Kershner for Empire Strikes Back.
 
This isn't exactly unprecedented... as George Lucas did this in the 80's after the DGA sued him & Kershner for Empire Strikes Back.

I didn't realise that. Didn't Lloyd Kaufman also quit the DGA because they were hassling him over directing non-union movies at Troma?
 

Network Sponsors

Back
Top