Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/19/2008 1:12:14 PM PDT by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: 04-Bravo; aimhigh; andyandval; Arizona Carolyn; backhoe; Bahbah; bert; bilhosty; Caipirabob; ...

ping


2 posted on 10/19/2008 1:12:46 PM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

I prefer America over Hollywood any day.


3 posted on 10/19/2008 1:14:05 PM PDT by Doctor Raoul (It's no longer the Press Van, it's a "Tanker" Truck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb
"Everybody's been riding the gravy train and nobody wants to get off," says one agent

Don't those big stars feel guilty for making all that money...they should be willing to "spread the wealth around" and take lesser saleries so that others can make more./sarc

5 posted on 10/19/2008 1:18:26 PM PDT by Dawn531
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

When they make movies people want to see with stars who have not ticked off 50% of the population with their anti-American, anti-conservatives comments people still go to the movies. Body of Lies likely suffered from having Leo in one of the starting rolls; I don’t think I am the only one who will not pay to see a DiCaprio, Afleck, etc. movie.


7 posted on 10/19/2008 1:21:17 PM PDT by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb
says producer Mark Johnson. "So much of what we've counted on isn't working

It couldn't be that you start out by trashing half the viewers before the movie ever gets off the ground. /s

8 posted on 10/19/2008 1:22:36 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb
When the stars are paid tens of millions; that also pushes other costs up — particularly marketing. (Studios have to promote the movie hard, to recoup the cost of the stars.)

The change from film to digital distribution (digital in theatres that is); will fundamentally change the economics of film making.

The cost of the 2,000 or 3,000 prints required for a “block buster” is over $10 million. That's on top of the film stock used in shooting, and the higher cost of post-production work in film, compared to digital media.

The high cost of distribution leads a studio to spend millions on “A”-list stars, who have a track record of selling tickets. That, in turn, leads to higher marketing costs, etc. etc.

The use of over-paid “A”-listers as voice actors for animated films is particularly extravagant. As the cost of producing animations drops with advances in computer animation & when full digital distribution kicks in — there won't be the perceived “need” to have big name stars on the marquee. The main advantage of the stars in an animation is the promotional work they do — appearing on the talk-show circuit to talk up the movie. When the costs of production and distribution are lowered, the need for such high-profile promotion will drop.

10 posted on 10/19/2008 1:26:48 PM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

The day is coming (and not too far off I predict) when human actors will, to some extent, be replaced by those which are computer generated.

Producers can save a lot of money by not having to pay “movie stars” loads of money, when they can hire a company to “create actors” on a computer and then insert them in a movie.


12 posted on 10/19/2008 1:29:56 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

I don’t know about anyone else, but I won’t go to see movies because of who’s in it, but for the story. I don’t remember enjoying a movie more than “Fargo.” I’d never heard of anyone in it, but it was a good story. OTOH, I will avoid seeing a movie with people like Tim Robbins, Jane Fonda, or Danny Glover in it because I just don’t like them, and paying to see them in a movie is like “hanging out” with them, which I wouldn’t want to do.

I remember Elvis at an interview when some reporterette asked him how he felt about the Viet Nam war, and his response was great: “Ma’am, I’m just an entertainer.” I wish they all had that kind of class.


15 posted on 10/19/2008 1:37:32 PM PDT by Marauder (Let's elect a man who's fought against communism, not a communist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

Actually I think America is hungry for new heroes, like Joe the Plumber, who accidentally stumble into the role. American is sick of the Hollywood fakes.

Oh and Madonna, who is it you are making fun of? Sarah? Well guess what you crotch-worshipping skank - Sarah has managed to stay married to the same guy and raise a family while serving our country in government. Hollywood has no heroes anymore. The sooner all the celebs disappear from the public radar, the better, IMHO.


17 posted on 10/19/2008 1:43:31 PM PDT by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

There’s plenty of both karma and irony in the fact that “Body of Lies” with the arch-enviro DiCaprio in it, is full of enormous petrol explosions. It’s good that the public, forced to note the actor’s position can see what a “do as I say, not as I do” clown he is. Shouldn’t the ideal movie for DiCaprio be him, his bare feet, a field of clover and a love song to Gaia? He tanked in the completely ridiculous “Speed Racer” and now this dud.


27 posted on 10/19/2008 2:38:43 PM PDT by februus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb
“So much of what we've counted on isn't working.”

You don't know how to tell a story.

Ever since Speilberg (who's a pretty talented filmmaker)came along with his way of making it look so simple (much the way many old Blues players make blues guitar playing look simple)many in Hollywood labor under the conviction that story-telling and film making are purely mechanical and reducible to a modular process, ie; put this type of scene here, have this type of character there, put one of these about the middle, then add the same high end musicians playing the same type of score in the same high end room and mixed thru the same monster high end board, edit and--viola! A movie! Hollywood has never been better on the technical end but the brain dead imposition of pure formula on a script (and even to the writing of the script itself)robs the outcome of the force it might otherwise have.

28 posted on 10/19/2008 2:45:11 PM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb
The brutal truth about today's Hollywood is that the majors have been releasing too many films that cost too much money

The brutal truth about today's Hollywood is that they have no stars worthy of the title, just a bunch of overrated overgrown adolescent posers, punks and sluts. And by and large their movies suck.

29 posted on 10/19/2008 2:55:59 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: abb

I will no more mourn the death of hollywood than I would the death of osama bin laden, both are mortal enemies of America and the good and decent people who live here.

Where the vast majority of hollywood scum are concerned, I say good riddance to bad rubbish.


36 posted on 10/19/2008 3:50:21 PM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg ("Shut the hell up, New York Times, you sanctimonious whining jerks!" - Craig Ferguson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson