tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post1577576535823346821..comments2024-01-24T15:33:58.720-05:00Comments on A<br> Mythical<br> Monkey<br> writes<br> about<br> the<br> movies: On The Perils Of Watching Silent MoviesMythical Monkeyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11330587602682498820noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-79852512193517522752009-04-02T08:19:00.000-04:002009-04-02T08:19:00.000-04:00Really?Bad movies are much cheaper to make than go...<EM>Really?Bad movies are much cheaper to make than good movies? Like what?</EM><BR/><BR/>Assuming that this question is serious, I'll respond with the question <B>are you serious?</B><BR/><BR/>The syntax obviously leads to further inquiry: was I saying that cheap is always bad? Was I saying that bad will always be cheap?<BR/><BR/>We'll leave answers to a later time.<BR/><BR/>If we assume that a "bad" movie either has "bad" performances, bad writing, bead sets, bad sound, bad music, bad lighting, bad directing, or bad editing, then I'll say that a bad movie is cheaper to make. You can get bad actors a lot cheaper than you can get good ones. Ask filmmakers on a limited budget how much they'd like to work with actors with talent, or experience, or both, who can't work on the cheap on their movies. Try to get a paid boom-operator [you know, one of those "good" moviemakers to work for free, and he'll decline; get your friend [you know, "bad"] and you can make the film more cheaply. Ask <A HREF="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0650356/" REL="nofollow">Michael Ornstein</A> to edit your movie for free, and he'll decline; *I*, on the other hand, will come and do it for mere airfare and a hotel room. Of course, Charles next door will do it for you for less, but probably can't thread the editing reel or boot the Mac Pro and launch FInal Cut Pro. . . .<BR/><BR/>Ask filmmakers like <A HREF="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1908524/" REL="nofollow">Dan Sallitt</A> how the limits on budget made their films worse, rather than better; his <A HREF="http://www.panix.com/~sallitt/intro.html" REL="nofollow">Diary of a Low-Budget Filmmaker</A> offers some nitty-gritty decision-making where low budgets cut into artistic achievement. There isn't a cause-and-effect relationship, but you can make a bad movie a lot more cheaply than you can make a good one.<BR/><BR/>Why, I will spend seven dollars and make a bad movie today, proving my point.rodger eburthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10262572966816753300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-69758886324151793182009-04-01T22:15:00.000-04:002009-04-01T22:15:00.000-04:00Yeah, Eburt, explain yourself!Yeah, Eburt, explain yourself!Mythical Monkeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11330587602682498820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-9505249928423733292009-04-01T21:50:00.000-04:002009-04-01T21:50:00.000-04:00Really?Bad movies are much cheaper to make than go...Really?Bad movies are much cheaper to make than good movies? Like what?Entertainment Bloghttp://mhuy2x.net84.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-22109455479595027252009-03-30T22:13:00.000-04:002009-03-30T22:13:00.000-04:00Oops, Nosferatu, with an 'f'. My hands must have ...Oops, Nosferatu, with an 'f'. My hands must have been shaking a little . . .Lupnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314903093402072186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-90515159001698195652009-03-30T22:11:00.000-04:002009-03-30T22:11:00.000-04:00i remember 'Shadow of the Vampire' -- did venture ...i remember 'Shadow of the Vampire' -- did venture out to see it despite my fear of the subject matter, heh. Very interesting idea and appreciated it to a point, although I do remember thinking the carnage at the end was a bit too much for my taste. But obviously I'm not the best person for an unbiased opinion on things Nosteratu . . .Lupnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314903093402072186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-61785153609700132422009-03-30T22:07:00.000-04:002009-03-30T22:07:00.000-04:00"Nosferatu" is every bit as good as you remember i..."Nosferatu" is every bit as good as you remember it. When I publish my very backhanded review of D.W Griffith later this week, I mention "Nosferatu" (directed by F.W. Murnau) and then again in a list of the Must-See movies of the Silent Era.<BR/><BR/>By the way, there was a pretty good movie a few years back called "Shadow Of The Vampire" starring John Malkovich as Murnau and Willem Dafoe as Max Schreck, the actor who played the vampire in "Nosferatu." The film starts with the conceit that Schreck really was a vampire who starts feasting on the crew. It's sort of a study in how far an artist has to be willing to go to make something great.Mister Parkerhttp://mythicalmonkey.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-3235057556968344012009-03-30T21:59:00.000-04:002009-03-30T21:59:00.000-04:00P.S. Find Buster Keaton and Charlie Chapline to b...P.S. Find Buster Keaton and Charlie Chapline to both be brilliant. But have always leaned a bit more towards Buster . . .Lupnernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-77029787126489845302009-03-30T21:56:00.000-04:002009-03-30T21:56:00.000-04:00Does anyone remember that show 'Silence Please!" ?...Does anyone remember that show 'Silence Please!" ? The first silent movie I ever saw literally inspired nightmares for weeks -- and sometimes periodically beyond -- as it was so intended, since it was the infamous 'Nosferatu'. Still don't know if I saw the whole thing or not -- think Silence Please! was an hour-long show, so expect the film might have run within that time period? -- just remember being absolutely GLUED in abject horror to the TV -- and for some reason being totally by myself for that period of time and thinking I was perhaps actually having a waking nightmare -- though quite frankly people could have been walking all around me and I'd have been oblivious . . . Anyhow, one of those few examples of a film that -- due to its genre and powerful visual images, needed no words at all to scare the bleedin' bejesus out of anybody, much less a 9-year-old girl. Never did know what it was, only remembered the images too clearly, until the revival of the film later -- in the 80s, was it? Nothing could be scarier than the silent version, no words needed . . . <BR/>Later I wondered if they quite knew what they were doing, airing that film during a time when kids could see it. Still haven't had the guts to see it again, perhaps it's not as powerful as I remember. But "Yaaaaaah!"<BR/><BR/>Favorite silent film experience to date goes to "Phantom of the Opera" accompanied by the NSO at the Kennedy Center in Opera House. <BR/><BR/>The only other thing I have to add is that my grandmother, born in 1901, reportedly enjoyed providing piano accompaniment for the local movie theatre when she was a teenager/young woman. Always thought that was kinda neat.Lupnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314903093402072186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6924668268143757716.post-71580977531607790972009-03-30T09:55:00.000-04:002009-03-30T09:55:00.000-04:00I can't believe you'd mention "Sue" in front of . ...I can't <I>believe</I> you'd mention "Sue" in front of . . . .<BR/><BR/>oh, never mind.<BR/><BR/><BR/>As you know, movies play a healthy role in my activity, and I have some connection to them, but it's not my medium and it's not my wheelhouse.<BR/><BR/>but you've captured the problem of many silent pictures [but not the really, really celebrated ones] - they're talkies without the talk.<BR/><BR/>I think, just as it's expensive to mount a spectacle today, it was probably a lot cheaper to write bad little plays, put people in rooms [or outside, with sets to LOOK like rooms, but free sunshine], and then drop in a few title cards.<BR/><BR/>Meaning I think bad movies are much cheaper to make than good movies, and for a few years, just seieng a movie was pretty damned cool!rodger eburthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10262572966816753300noreply@blogger.com