Nov. 20th, 2003
On movies and storytelling
Nov. 20th, 2003 08:21 amFound this link in
jidabug's LJ: an article about how too many special effects ruin movies like Matrix Reloaded and Phantom Menace. I so agree! Which is why I'm looking forward to Master and Commander - which opens here in Germany next week. I think I'll try to get a babysitter and buy tickets for the first screening. Oh wheee
The article really sums up what's wrong with many (not all) big budget productions. The budget for the special effects far outweighs the amount of money poured into a decent screenplay. Even supposed geniuses with a vision need a beta. I stopped reading Stephen KIing novels years ago because I felt they needed a more brutal editor than they obviously had.
What the article doesn't mention is the opposite end of the movie spectrum: movies that have no guiding vision, that are slapped into shape by a dozen differnte producers who all have about what makes a movie a success, one thinks it's exploseions, the other swears it's a particular star, the third has another failsafe recipe. So they bring in a dozen script doctors who have to accomodate all these elements, and presto, we get the kind of jigsaw puzzle, where obviously someone made the pieces fit by squashing them flat through brute force.
Strangely enough, some of the most coherent films I've seen recently were animated pictures, namely Ice Age, Shrek, and Finding Nemo. The characters are funny little critters without boobs (um, ok there are boobs in Shrek) or puffed up lips (my Angelina Jolie pet peeve), or huge guns, or sunglasses, who have interesting stories and who change in the course of their stories.
Why, oh why, is a good screenplay so underrated?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
The article really sums up what's wrong with many (not all) big budget productions. The budget for the special effects far outweighs the amount of money poured into a decent screenplay. Even supposed geniuses with a vision need a beta. I stopped reading Stephen KIing novels years ago because I felt they needed a more brutal editor than they obviously had.
What the article doesn't mention is the opposite end of the movie spectrum: movies that have no guiding vision, that are slapped into shape by a dozen differnte producers who all have about what makes a movie a success, one thinks it's exploseions, the other swears it's a particular star, the third has another failsafe recipe. So they bring in a dozen script doctors who have to accomodate all these elements, and presto, we get the kind of jigsaw puzzle, where obviously someone made the pieces fit by squashing them flat through brute force.
Strangely enough, some of the most coherent films I've seen recently were animated pictures, namely Ice Age, Shrek, and Finding Nemo. The characters are funny little critters without boobs (um, ok there are boobs in Shrek) or puffed up lips (my Angelina Jolie pet peeve), or huge guns, or sunglasses, who have interesting stories and who change in the course of their stories.
Why, oh why, is a good screenplay so underrated?
About a week ago I wrote a bit of dialogue for my Spike/Angel story Devil You Know, but it was kinda angsty and since
ladycat777 felt crappy, I put in another scene instead (the elevator sex) and resolved to save the angst for a later (and more suitable) date. Now I've seen AtS 5x08 it turned out that there's a sbit of dialogue that covers pretty much the same ground. Now I'm not sure what to do with that dialogue. Throw it away? Rewrite? Behind the cut tags there's a poll where you can say yay or nay, and also an exerpt from that scene.
I must admit, I'm kinda pleased with myself for cooking up something so similar. :-)
( Spoilers for AtS 5x08 )
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I must admit, I'm kinda pleased with myself for cooking up something so similar. :-)
( Spoilers for AtS 5x08 )