Slashdot Mirror

The first person view sounds cool, could inspire a new film technique

Ummmm... not new. Checkout the movie Strange Days (one of my favorite flicks). The opening sequence is first person of a armed robbery, shootout with the cops, and ends with a 3 story fall right onto sidewalk. One goddamn wild ride, I tell ya.

No Mars and no hellspawns.

Super virus.

I swear if a computer AI gone mad is thrown in, someone is getting kicked in the balls.

Besides, they should just make a System Shock movie. A real one and not a knock off like Virus was or Event Horizon tried to be.

Damn you, Jamie Lee, and you, Paul Anderson! Wait, wait. I take that back. She was awesome in True Lies.

No Mars and no hellspawns.

Super virus.

I swear if a computer AI gone mad is thrown in, someone is getting kicked in the balls.

Besides, they should just make a System Shock movie. A real one and not a knock off like Virus was or Event Horizon tried to be.

Damn you, Jamie Lee, and you, Paul Anderson! Wait, wait. I take that back. She was awesome in True Lies.

People, people! There is a reason that they've changed so much about the new DOOM movie, and that reason is the fact that DOOM was already made into a movie. They gotta look orignal now, don't they?

All sarcasm aside, this movie is going to totally blow. DOOM is the type of intellectual property that I think can only be made into a movie ONE WAY, and this way sure as hell ain't it. The best us die-hard DOOM fans can do now is sit back and watch it crash and burn horribly, never to be spoken of again. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have given it to someone who could at least butcher it in style like Uwe Boll, but he was probably busily turning another videogame liscence into pure tripe.

People, people! There is a reason that they've changed so much about the new DOOM movie, and that reason is the fact that DOOM was already made into a movie. They gotta look orignal now, don't they?

All sarcasm aside, this movie is going to totally blow. DOOM is the type of intellectual property that I think can only be made into a movie ONE WAY, and this way sure as hell ain't it. The best us die-hard DOOM fans can do now is sit back and watch it crash and burn horribly, never to be spoken of again. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have given it to someone who could at least butcher it in style like Uwe Boll, but he was probably busily turning another videogame liscence into pure tripe.

The first-person technique was used by Aleksei Balabanov in Brat 2. The sequence, where Danila kills a bunch of mafiosi in the basement corridors of some night-club, is filmed in a Doom-like first-person perspective, with the gun in the bottom-middle of the screen.

Gus Van Sant's Elephant hand a great deal of first person perspectives in it, including a lot of long tracks down corridors (check out the trailer on the site). Essentially a Columbine-esque story, one of the key reasons for doing this was to link the viewer's point of view with that of a Doom-like computer game reputed to have influenced the Columbine killings. It's quite chilling when you watch it.

Before that, Kubrick's The Shining was a pioneering film in using the newly invented steadicam to do some neat tracking shots - albeit at a lower angle than FPS - of Danny while he's riding his trike around the hotel.

Wasn't The Omen specifically about the evil, anti christian devil spawn?

A movie about a cool game that appeals to now grown up 20-30somethings isn't going to touch Omen on any level, so I don't see why they left it out.
Unless of course, they are going to the younger generation?
The game was rated 18, so technically no minors should ever have played it (hah!) so why target a movie at anything less age wise.

Someone pointed out to me that this film already lifted most of the elements from DOOM. I realized he was right.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119081/

Or from one of the quotes of Galaxy Quest:

[Fred tries to digitize the pig-lizard with disastrous results]
Jason Nesmith: What? What was that?
Alexander Dane: Uh, nothing.
Jason Nesmith: I heard some squealing or something.
Gwen DeMarco: Oh, no. Everything's fine.
Teb: But the animal is inside out.
Jason Nesmith: I heard that! It turned inside out?
[the pig-lizard explodes]
Teb: And it exploded.
Jason Nesmith: Did I just hear that the animal turned inside out, and then it EXPLODED?

Or from one of the quotes of Galaxy Quest:

[Fred tries to digitize the pig-lizard with disastrous results]
Jason Nesmith: What? What was that?
Alexander Dane: Uh, nothing.
Jason Nesmith: I heard some squealing or something.
Gwen DeMarco: Oh, no. Everything's fine.
Teb: But the animal is inside out.
Jason Nesmith: I heard that! It turned inside out?
[the pig-lizard explodes]
Teb: And it exploded.
Jason Nesmith: Did I just hear that the animal turned inside out, and then it EXPLODED?

Neat technique, surprised it hasn't been done more often.

Neat technique, surprised it hasn't been done more often.

Yes, but the guy who wrote the book the movie was based on has written a new book, to be released this week, suggesting that such fears are overblown.

Didn't they make a movie about this type of thing back in '71?

I think I need to weigh in here, being the only person to work on both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" and also serve as the president of SCFX (along with Eric, I was one of the other guys working on the Quantel Domino). Yes, both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" had massive amounts of effects, and both of them were too big to handle by one person alone . . . that's why SCFX exists, so that filmmakers don't have to do everything on their own.

SCFX was actually founded sometime in the 1980's (former members include John Knoll, Gray Marshall, and Scott Souter). It was founded and has been maintained by students who are interested in visual effects, and one of its main purposes has been to provide free visual effects for USC student films, while providing the instruction for those interested in learning. Last year SCFX provided FX for approximately 20 student films, not just the two highlighted in the original /. post. SCFX has no control over the content of those films, but chooses to assist as many students as they can (seeing as most film students cannot afford to get FX done by ILM, DD, R&H, SPI, etc.).

Unfortunately, the USC School of Cinema-Television has only recently begun to teach visual effects (only one class has been running for just over three years now), and previous to that, had only one special effects class for about ten years (involving miniatures, in-camera, and practical effects). Both of these classes were started in response to massive lobbying by SCFX members, and they are still trying to get additional curriculum today. Their goal has never been to have visual effects supersede good storytelling, but instead be able to supplement their classmates' work.

It's too bad that the /. post was slightly misinterpreted by everyone . . . the unique thing about SCFX is that it's the only student group of its kind that provides visual effects for fellow students, teaches people interested in learning, and helps prepare them for the industry when they graduate. It's also the only type of place to learn ALL about effects . . . not just CG, but how to be a visual effects supervisor in pre-production and on set, how to properly shoot weather effects, how animation and miniatures work together, etc. In the words of the SCFX slogan, "Better Films Through Trickery and Deceit."

I think I need to weigh in here, being the only person to work on both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" and also serve as the president of SCFX (along with Eric, I was one of the other guys working on the Quantel Domino). Yes, both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" had massive amounts of effects, and both of them were too big to handle by one person alone . . . that's why SCFX exists, so that filmmakers don't have to do everything on their own.

SCFX was actually founded sometime in the 1980's (former members include John Knoll, Gray Marshall, and Scott Souter). It was founded and has been maintained by students who are interested in visual effects, and one of its main purposes has been to provide free visual effects for USC student films, while providing the instruction for those interested in learning. Last year SCFX provided FX for approximately 20 student films, not just the two highlighted in the original /. post. SCFX has no control over the content of those films, but chooses to assist as many students as they can (seeing as most film students cannot afford to get FX done by ILM, DD, R&H, SPI, etc.).

Unfortunately, the USC School of Cinema-Television has only recently begun to teach visual effects (only one class has been running for just over three years now), and previous to that, had only one special effects class for about ten years (involving miniatures, in-camera, and practical effects). Both of these classes were started in response to massive lobbying by SCFX members, and they are still trying to get additional curriculum today. Their goal has never been to have visual effects supersede good storytelling, but instead be able to supplement their classmates' work.

It's too bad that the /. post was slightly misinterpreted by everyone . . . the unique thing about SCFX is that it's the only student group of its kind that provides visual effects for fellow students, teaches people interested in learning, and helps prepare them for the industry when they graduate. It's also the only type of place to learn ALL about effects . . . not just CG, but how to be a visual effects supervisor in pre-production and on set, how to properly shoot weather effects, how animation and miniatures work together, etc. In the words of the SCFX slogan, "Better Films Through Trickery and Deceit."

I think I need to weigh in here, being the only person to work on both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" and also serve as the president of SCFX (along with Eric, I was one of the other guys working on the Quantel Domino). Yes, both "Writer's Block" and "Eliza" had massive amounts of effects, and both of them were too big to handle by one person alone . . . that's why SCFX exists, so that filmmakers don't have to do everything on their own.

SCFX was actually founded sometime in the 1980's (former members include John Knoll, Gray Marshall, and Scott Souter). It was founded and has been maintained by students who are interested in visual effects, and one of its main purposes has been to provide free visual effects for USC student films, while providing the instruction for those interested in learning. Last year SCFX provided FX for approximately 20 student films, not just the two highlighted in the original /. post. SCFX has no control over the content of those films, but chooses to assist as many students as they can (seeing as most film students cannot afford to get FX done by ILM, DD, R&H, SPI, etc.).

Unfortunately, the USC School of Cinema-Television has only recently begun to teach visual effects (only one class has been running for just over three years now), and previous to that, had only one special effects class for about ten years (involving miniatures, in-camera, and practical effects). Both of these classes were started in response to massive lobbying by SCFX members, and they are still trying to get additional curriculum today. Their goal has never been to have visual effects supersede good storytelling, but instead be able to supplement their classmates' work.

It's too bad that the /. post was slightly misinterpreted by everyone . . . the unique thing about SCFX is that it's the only student group of its kind that provides visual effects for fellow students, teaches people interested in learning, and helps prepare them for the industry when they graduate. It's also the only type of place to learn ALL about effects . . . not just CG, but how to be a visual effects supervisor in pre-production and on set, how to properly shoot weather effects, how animation and miniatures work together, etc. In the words of the SCFX slogan, "Better Films Through Trickery and Deceit."

Still, I can't think of a single action, adventure, or action adventure with a female lead

The irritating blond chick who was screaming the whole movie

You mean Mrs. Steven Spielberg?

San Fernando Jones & the Temple of Poon (2000). Starring Ron Jeremy, no less!

I just tell myself that "James Bond" was never that guy's real name. Nor was it the real name of the James Bond before him, and when he dies, it won't be the real name of the next James Bond.
To me, it is not the same role with a different actor, to me it is a secret identity that is granted to one special agent every generation, and then he's relaced with another kid with the same psych profile and skill set later on, and everyone stays quiet about it.

A play is not a movie, nor is another version of a play a prequel/sequel of the play - it is a remake.

There are plenty of Hamlet movies, and though most are pointless and simply bad - some bring new ideas and concepts.

A prequel/sequel where the integrity of the story/cast is broken just won't be as good as the original. This is especially true when you're talking about a series of movies, like Indie, where the story/cast is defined in a very strong manner over time. A few good example of why this change of original story/cast/author can't be good are the new Godfather and Dune books, and all the shitty sequels of the world (Alien 4 stands out produly).

And in this case, especially - in my mind and I bet in the minds of many others, Indie simply is Harrison Ford. No other actor would do.

I agree. Indiana Jones is a composite of character's like Alan Quartermain http://imdb.com/title/tt0042646/ and Captain Blood http://imdb.com/title/tt0026174/.

It should be possible to roll another composite hero.

I agree. Indiana Jones is a composite of character's like Alan Quartermain http://imdb.com/title/tt0042646/ and Captain Blood http://imdb.com/title/tt0026174/.

It should be possible to roll another composite hero.

Roger Moore is 3 years OLDER than Connery. Moore was born Oct 1927, Connery Aug 1930.

Connery came back after Lazenby for $1.25 million up front, 12.5% of the gross. He gave it to the Scottish International Trust. That was Diamonds are Forever in 1971.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066995

The whole thing reminds me of The Gladiator, armouring his truck to physically push drunk drivers off the streets after his brother was killed by one. One day he manages to stop a speeding driver, only to learn that the driver is not drunk, but eager to get his pregnant wife to hospital. Maybe Lycos has learned a similar lesson now? Nah, corporations never learn from their mistakes...

It's interesting that we all say, "No! Only Harrison can ever be Indy!" but people have no problem with Tom Baker being replaced by Peter Davison, then Colin, then Sylvester, etc...

I think more Indy movies will fail (though this one may pull an audience like Connery did in Never Say Never Again) not due to anything having to do with Mr. Ford.

When Spielberg made the Indy movies, he was reviving the Saturday serials of distant movie lore. He had a sense of nostalgia and a sense of love for the project. After seeing some recent Speilberg work, I don't think he is capable of the innocent fervor needed to cut a successful Indy movie together.

It's better than just true, it's a true story that's been made into a movie.

Danny Deckchair was a pretty good little movie based on the same urban legend.

Check out Danny Deckchair. Its relativly new, and recieved decent reviews.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337960/

...and I'd like to order one Boomstick Edition with chainsaw hands, please.

So how long before this is the future?

"It is post-World War III. War is outlawed."

War is outlawed, that statement is priceless.

Can you mount rockets in the hands so you can launch them at your enemies?

Guess again!

More likely to give you a paper cut.

If not on paper, won't do anything during a power outage.

Can't cook or help you do laundry.

Can't go to plays with you without making you look like a noob.

Didn't you ever see Cherry 2000?

Lots of great geek-pop references as well.

You mean like Gem and the Holograms.

oh wait...

General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream.

Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Lord, Jack.

General Jack D. Ripper: You know when fluoridation first began?

Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I-- no, no. I don't, Jack.

General Jack D. Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.

but really, who will this report convince?

Everyone go see the day after tomorow !! While it supports a "different" kind of weather change and has no ... hhmm ... let's say err ... "scientifical background" it makes a great point in favor of the Kyoto protocol ! (even though it's not close to a 10th of what should be done, the kyoto protocol is at least something in the correct direction) .

It's Hedley !

This makes me think of Johnny Mnemonic .

Johnny Mnemonic: I'm a dead man if I don't get this out of my head!
Spider: I can get it out.
Johnny Mnemonic: How?
Spider: A cranial drill and a pair of forceps.
Wave link for the visualy challenged

It sums up my experiences with spyware rather nicely I think. To bad my customers become upset when I secure their machines by drilling a hole in the hard drive and install a padlock through the platters.

SD

Michael Moore has already made a movie about Canada attacking the U.S.

You know, I'm not even supposed to BE here today. Dante.

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0264277/
http://us.imdb.com/name/nm1335251/
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0075376/

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0264277/
http://us.imdb.com/name/nm1335251/
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0075376/

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0264277/
http://us.imdb.com/name/nm1335251/
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0075376/

How could that possibly go wrong ?

Put very simply: it
just can't!

How could that possibly go wrong ?

Put very simply: it
just can't!

How could that possibly go wrong ?

Put very simply: it
just can't!

How could that possibly go wrong ?

Put very simply: it
just can't!