As a witness to last year's tornado disaster in Birmingham, I agree.
The worst scene in The Day After Tomorrow - bar none - is the Americans running to the Mexican border scene. Why? If you look at the map presented the Federal disaster planners and you look at the US from space, there is at a MINIMUM 400 miles of frost free land between the new arctic circle and the border with Mexico. So you have to assume that after all the Refugees from Canada and the Northern US hit the end of the frost line, they kept driving for a day and a half to hit the Mexican border and beg to be let in.
All that intervening desert land - not hot enough. They need to get to Mexico.
Well...true.
But Star Wars is so old you could argue that it is immune by virtue of having created most of them.
But well played...well played.
Sorry, I should have been more clear - I bet he does a good job with Frankenstein.
It's his comments about Fantastic Voyage that worry me.
Well Cage might surprise you. He's like Keanu. IF he is well cast, it works. IF he is just thrown in a roll, he's painful. This isn't a deep roll and Cage brings the batsh*t lunacy so it might well work.
I'm just a big proponent of giving a film a chance. And while I admit chances are slim (more for the directors than Cage) I'm willing to give it its best shot.
Me two (with a margin of error apparently of one and a half fish). I've always been oddly good at this and estimating liquid volume as well.
That said, I cannot choose an appropriate tie nor can I remember which single button is to remain unbuttoned on a dress jacket.
Shawn Levy maybe forgot that the point of a film is story and character and not special effects. If he has dim memories of the original it would behoove him to sit down fro two hours. Also the book would be a nice place to start. Based on his observations about the first film and where he wants to go with the new one, I have no doubt that the crew of the Proteus will all be saved by Optimus Prime in the fourth reel.
And by no means do I want a film with a modest effects budget. I want to see the human body on a cellular level. But I suspect that based on these few out of context quotes and my own cynicism that we're going to get some wild weird imagery that does not address how micro beings (made of micro atoms) can interact with macro organisms (made of macro atoms). Which was one of the major thinking points of the book.
I want a big movie that also addresses how humans feel and express their feelings about such an encounter. And a story would be nice. And maybe some backstory on the mysterious government described obliquely in the book.
But hey, that's just me.
Have you seen it?
I'm in for the chain pulling action alone. Looks fun if not actually "good".
Is it just me or has YouTube become almost as bad as WIRED's worthless Brightcove player?
OK, OK. Valid. I get you.
But no, I wasn't calling non-filmmakers out to make their stuff. I would have thought that was obvious by the "If you can't make it, support artists by buying what they produce." Part. You may not be aware but IO9 is CRAWLING with film professionals, filmmakers and many other talented artists like writers and musicians. My point was and remains - Look, even Moore thinks something is wrong. Let's do better.
I insist and stand by my assertion that I was challenging everyone here - the majority of whom I assume to be artists - to take advantage of this opportunity. I'm sorry but I just don't see anywhere that I made a demand of those otherwise employed. I was speaking to those who read the writer's workshop posts and the short film posts and the call for entry posts - which are numerous.
Honestly if anyone with a demanding full time job somehow thought that I was expecting them to somehow be a part of the entertainment industry, I suggest that they may be suffering under the heel of an overbearing boss. As to those of us here who are artists - sometimes we need a call to arms.
Seriously we have the tools and we have the means to distribute and the mainstream is starting to stall. This is the time.
But you still haven't been able to vet your comment about it being lazy - since your interpretation was the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I meant (I talk in caps so I write in caps - it's just a thing).
"prove you can do better, bet you can't."
Is exactly the opposite of what I meant. I even STATED that I saw films BY independents that PROVE this is the case. In the very first statement I posted.
I never implied "...bet you can't." Nothing I said subsequent to my initial statement supports that. I meant "You CAN do better. So get busy." If you read every response I have made to the various comments, I have never wavered on this point. Further, if my point IS that we as independents SHOULD make better media AND those who like this media should BUY it you still haven't pointed out where the comment was lazy.
Again, I can not for the life of me see where Moore is cheering on independents. I think that is OUR OWN bias being read into Moore. And I submit that Moore is often a voice for the independent. Just not here. It still seems to me he is citing their movement out of the mainstream as a consequence of the mainstream not doing its job. The Captain Crunch movie being the inevitable conclusion (which I LOLed at actually). I'm happy to be proven wrong on this point, I'd like Moore on my side here but that's not the read I get. But again, I'm not infallible.
So again, it's not a lazy argument. It never was. It was a call to action and it remains so.
And who said you couldn't voice your opinion?
This is a thought provoking article and I think much of it is irrefutable. The time scale (largely implied) is a little off.
Two major issues were ignored. The first and most obvious is that for decade if not centuries many manual labor or skilled labor jobs will exist side by side with despite competition from automation. This is an observable phenomena now. Most factories are not fully automated despite the capability to BE completely automated. This is true for many reasons. First automation is more expensive than labor in many skilled areas. This obviously will not continue indefinitely but it is enough to ensure that some part of every piece of furniture and flat screen TV was assembled by hand. This is exceedingly common. Second, many robots or automated systems themselves cannot be mass produced. This is especially true of food and automobile production. Each assembly line is manufactured piecemeal from all over the world and skilled labor is required to assemble on sire and integrate the many components necessary to make an assembly line work. Third, automation hardware is so expensive that any market producing fewer than millions of units (even with 3D printers) is often better staffed by people who can deal with producing a varied number of products in a varied number of configurations without complex programs or careful monitoring of the assembly process. And I do not mean luxury items, I mean - for example - office chairs.
All of these factors will retreat with time but for the foreseeable future, skilled assembly line workers will share a portion of the market until robots can be manufactured with technologies like 3D printing and cost no more than say, a motorcycle.
The other point not adequately addressed is that once you have a sufficiently robust list of job descriptions, you CAN'T create any new types of jobs. Almost any new job, profession or skill set created today is going to fall into one of many older categories even when the new profession bears little resemblance to the profession which gave birth to its own classification.
Bottom line: carriage drive and bus driver and taxi driver are all EXACTLY the same jobs from one vantage yet none of them share much beyond the purpose of moving a passenger from point A to point B. Yet they might easily fall under the category of "driver" even though taxis and buses did not exist prior to the nineteenth century. The fact that not a single new profession has arisen in the last fifty years owes more to the fact that humans aren't doing many completely new things. They are doing things we have always done...better.
And again, this will inevitably change with coming technology.
I still feel that the bottom line of this article is correct. And we will one day face the end of labor - or an end of sorts. I just suggest that these changes in technology seldom completely change the market even on the scale of decades even though the potential for them to also exists for decades. It's tough to revolutionize an entire world in less than a human lifetime.
And of course, there will come a day when even THIS is no longer true.
All good things to ponder.
OK, the argument is not lazy. I'm not even sure how you could rationalize saying so. Because "making your own stuff" is HALF the argument.
Please take what I said in CONTEXT.
The other important half is "support those who do." And I don't mean support them JUST because they are "indy". There is a LOT of "indy" CRAP out there. I mean that when you shop - shop both markets. Either you will help the independent market grow or you will show that imagination and creativity draw dollars and the mainstream might start showing a little imagination and creativity.
Frankly, I don't care which happens.
So for the last time, here is what I ACTUALLY said:
1) (Hey artists) Make and distribute your own (better) stuff.
And for the love of farting cows
2) Those who don't...BUY independent stuff. Or at the very least peruse the independent market to see what you are missing.
I have found so much wonderful stuff this way and I have helped increase the market for media I enjoy at the same time.
That is NOT a lazy argument. It's a growing economy AND it nudges the mainstream in the right direction.
First of all, thank you. I know and support many independent musicians and I use some of them in my films and shorts. So I thank you both on behalf of my friends and for keeping music like this available for mixed media artists like myself.
Second, I honestly believe Moore isn't a fan of indy projects. I think he sees it as a symptom of the mainstream media loosing touch with the artists who create for them. And their audience. I'm sure he doesn't dislike independent artists but from the quote above (and admittedly nothing more) he seems lukewarm on the topic.
But we do both address the issue, yes.
Tell me this: who's idea was it AFTER the web series to exorcise all of the humor from the material? It took them more than three seasons to get it back and the series was PAINFUL when it took itself that seriously.
Again, I unabashedly love Sanctuary. I've watched it grow from a promising web series to a thoroughly disappointing series back to an enjoyable character based series.
It is just about eight pounds of cheese with a rough approximation of an English accent but it was fresh, became funny and I just can't get enough Tesla.
I want a final season to cap things off. I've enjoyed every Canadian moment of that show.
Nice. Very nice.
Did you read the next bit?
"If you can't make it, support artists by buying what they produce. "
Do you? The shorts and independent films on IO9 are among the best I've ever seen. Whenever I read about a short or an independent film HERE I go to Amazon and BUY IT. They cost less than the mainstream features at Walmart. I have yet to be disappointed.
I have no doubt that you are very good at what you do. And I bet you work nearly the hours I do ;-p
(remember - I used to work feature films - I know how many hours you can ACTUALLY put in a 24 hour day)
I am neither an engineer nor am I an architect. My stepfather is both and and I have the utmost admiration for what he does. But what I do and what I create is just as fresh. All I ask is that people like you shop in BOTH markets and at least CONSIDER the off-brand offerings made by people who have none of the restrictions that come with a hundred and eighty million dollar budget.
OF COURSE you can't make your own films. But you can support those who do. And what you get in return is often much better than what we complain about at the local ceniplex. Don't believe me? Did you watch "Cost Of Living" right here on IO9?
Almost made the cancellation of Reaper bearable.
Lazy? Have you ever shot a feature?
The point of creating is to make something that someone ELSE perceives as 'good'. I'm not talking about home movies - I'm talking about producing independent media for mass distribution. We have the tools and we have the means to distribute. Instead of complaining about the upcoming spate of breakfast cereal movies, we need to be writing and producing more comics, books and movies on our own. The best films I have seen this year were home efforts found on IO9 and other sites like this. All the comics I read are now made by artists like myself - and yes, my comic is five years old and counting. All my author friends are or started as self published authors and they are all writing books I enjoy as much if not more than the stead stream of commercial fiction that covers the shelves at B&N.
I'm working on my second feature. I also teach cinematography and editing for aspiring filmmakers. My friends and I have a four day seminar we give at Dragon Con every year for just this reason.
Lazy is paying twelve dollars to see Transformers Three and hoping that THIS TIME it won't be an abortion. Industrious is writing a screenplay, gathering a crew and talent and shooting a film for eighteen months then hitting the festival circuit for another twelve.
Lazy is hoping that anyone else might do a job that YOU are better suited to do.
Nope, I didn't miss that at all. But he seems to be completely dispassionate about that fact. He just says that it is occurring. The subtext - it could be argued - is that this is a shame and it wouldn't happen if only the studios would get their collective heads out of their collective asses. He simply does not say anything to promote this activity, he merely indicates that it is a reaction to the current state of the industry.
I think BECAUSE you and I agree about the independent creator that you have biased his reference to independent media as being the thrust of his commentary. It simply is not. The thrust is that films are becoming more and more derivative - as given evidence by the fact that many are choosing alternative routes to create and distribute. Then he returns to his initial point and drives it home with the Captain Crunch comment.
I would hope that he agrees with us but he certainly didn't ask artists to leave the mainstream. This is something I would hope Moore embraces with all his heart. And as I said above - for all I know he may. But in this quote, he is pretty dispassionate about it and I by contrast am not.
That is the difference.
