REMAKES??? AGAIN? I MEAN, AGAIN, AGAIN?!!

[wridingrlm]

Hurt Locker were indies as well, right?

Not sure if you are joking or not and I'm going to suspect not.

It's really sad that distribution companies has taken a term such as independent and made it their own. I mean, is a 20 million dollar film really an independent? Heck, is a 5 million dollar movie an independent? I would say maybe for the 5 million dollar film but it would really need to follow some criteria.

Main Entry: 1in·de·pen·dent
Pronunciation: \ˌin-də-ˈpen-dənt\
Function: adjective
Date: 1611
1 : not dependent: as a (1) : not subject to control by others : self-governing (2) : not affiliated with a larger controlling unit <an independent bookstore> b (1) : not requiring or relying on something else : not contingent <an independent conclusion> (2) : not looking to others for one's opinions or for guidance in conduct (3) : not bound by or committed to a political party c (1) : not requiring or relying on others (as for care or livelihood) <independent of her parents> (2) : being enough to free one from the necessity of working for a living <a person of independent means>


Can't they finally drop the term since it's been 10 years since the 90's. I'm sure there are some 20 million dollar independents, but I would say there are just a few without insider influences.

Now back to what ROC said, "Is the Hurt Locker a "independent" film?" To me, no, because if my ex-wife had a billion dollars and I got a sweet amount of cash off her, if my name alone allows me to walking into any office in LA, and if I have access to any talent I want then is it really independent? Yes, the term independent has pretty much been washed away but maybe it's time for a new name for such films. So they can stand on their own legs rather then be bunched up with a bunch of fakes.

I remember when independent really did mean something, now, it seems like a fake schtick.

Just throwing in my two cents.

Good luck.

 

[Utopia]

Hmmm...

That's a good argument if Hurt Locker is an indie film.

Then what makes an indie film? The fact that you can't spend more than a certain amount of money?

The sound crew consisted of 3 people and the sound was edited, sound designed mixed in it's entirety by one person. One person did the production sound.

Just because a big name is in the film means it's automatically not an indie film?

Can one of Jack Nickelson's X-girlfriends go and star in "Space Aliens from Mars XXII" and say "Since I was going out with Jack Nickelson, this is now a non-independent, major film"?

It wasn't made by Paramount, Fox or WB... Wikipedia says it's an indie film... I don't believe everything Wiki says but maybe they're right this time.

 

[wridingrlm]

I don't believe everything Wiki says but maybe they're right this time.

That's a relief.



Here, let us review the word again.



Main Entry: 1in·de·pen·dent
Pronunciation: \ˌin-də-ˈpen-dənt\
Function: adjective
Date: 1611
1 : not dependent: as a (1) : not subject to control by others : self-governing (2) : not affiliated with a larger controlling unit <an independent bookstore> b (1) : not requiring or relying on something else : not contingent <an independent conclusion> (2) : not looking to others for one's opinions or for guidance in conduct (3) : not bound by or committed to a political party c (1) : not requiring or relying on others (as for care or livelihood) <independent of her parents> (2) : being enough to free one from the necessity of working for a living <a person of independent means>


I think these are a good start.

Also, let me throw in low budget too. Nowadays low budget films seem to be in the 20 million dollar mark. Boy, I wonder how they got that movie made with that kind of cash?

 

[2001 Productions]

Originally, the term "independent" meant not studio-financed. By that criterion, the last 3 Star Wars pictures were technically considered independent.

Maybe us low/zero-budget filmmakers need a different term.

 

[wridingrlm]

Maybe us low/zero-budget filmmakers need a different term.

Most def., I don't want a $100,000 to be bunched in with ROC's 20 million dollar "independent" films.

 

[Utopia]

@wridingrlm So since your mom bought your camera you shoot films with, your films can't be considered independent. You were assisted by a larger controlling unit.

I don't get what that definition has to do with anything. Can you not have any help to be considered "truly l33t indie"?

They probably got it from investors.

Tell me your motive in making indie films, then. Is it to be considered bada** to do a film with an iPod nano? Because you did it with under 200$?

Hurt Locker was not made with one of the major studios. The fact that they had 20 million to do it with doesn't negate the fact it was indie.

A good film is a good film. I like to watch good films, regardless of how they are made. And I like learning how to make them on this site.

 

[Utopia]

Here's a cool quote for you:

Ifta-online.org - INDEPENDENT Film & Television Alliance

The Hurt Locker was the 18th independent film to win Best Picture in the past 30 years. Since 1982, IFTA Members have been involved with the financing, development, production and U.S. and international distribution for 63 percent of the Oscar-winning Best Pictures, including: Gandhi (1982); Amadeus (1984); Platoon (1986); The Last Emperor (1987); Driving Miss Daisy (1989); Dances With Wolves (1990); The Silence of the Lambs (1991); Braveheart (1995); The English Patient (1996); Shakespeare in Love (1998); Chicago (2002); The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (2003); Million Dollar Baby (2004); Crash (2005); The Departed (2006); No Country for Old Men (2007) and Slumdog Millionaire (2008).

 

[Utopia]

I don't think anyone knows the definition of independent film if the Independent Film & TV alliance considers Braveheart and LOTR both independent films. I mean, gosh, they must have spent over 100 million on each of those productions. No way is it indie...

 

[wridingrlm]

Looks like someone is having a meltdown, you ROC man.

 

[Utopia]

eh?

 

[2001 Productions]

I don't think anyone knows the definition of independent film if the Independent Film & TV alliance considers Braveheart and LOTR both independent films. I mean, gosh, they must have spent over 100 million on each of those productions. No way is it indie...

The amount is irrelevant. It's where the money comes from that determines the designation.

 

[Utopia]

But I thought riding established it was the amount of money.

I'm confused. Where's wheatgrinder when you need him.

Most def., I don't want a $100,000 to be bunched in with ROC's 20 million dollar "independent" films.

Sorry, maybe it's just me but I'd rather spend 20 mil on a film and win an Academy Award than to spend 100,000 and get 26 hits on you-tube...

That's just me, though.

Why so mad about other people having money?

 

[Slugwriter]

Whoa, most of the movies you guys posted are adaptions from Novels lol. So, yea. And I agree, movies are still very much alive. Just thought the amount of remakes and reboots and super hero films are at a all time high. Which they are. Slum dog millionair was also a novel as well as No Country for Old men, great book and love the COHEN BROTHERS.

But I agree with most of you and have my own opinions. And when I say 95% of the world is stupid, it's mainly because everyone is so brainwashed and oblivious to the things around them, but hey, that's another thread.

 

[wridingrlm]

But I thought riding established it was the amount of money.

I did? Funny, I thought I quoted the Webster dictionary twice to show what the word "independent" means. Now if a film is made with a bunch of cash, I'm gonna wonder who is involved when it's called "independent". Kind of like when Politician gets money for their campaign, I guess by your theory the people are just giving that money to them because they are nice people with no interests.

I'm confused. Where's wheatgrinder when you need him.

Hahahaha, why does he need to say anything, a rich boy like you should stand on his own two feet?

 

[Utopia]

LOL, flame wars are interesting with people "straight out the ghetto" of Simi Valley, CA.

My question was what an independent FILM was. Not what an independent teenager was.

The definitions you quoted don't fit to the term Independent Film as exact as how 2001 defined it. Money has nothing to do with it.

Then again, are you one of those people who consider a You-Tube blogger an independent filmmaker? I sure don't.

 

[wridingrlm]

LOL, flame wars are interesting with people "straight out the ghetto" of Simi Valley, CA.

My question was what an independent FILM was. Not what an independent teenager was.

ghetto



From your friend the Wiki - "Simi Valley repeatedly appears on Safest Cities in America lists". Heck, LA sure doesn't have any ghettos, heck, after the win last night they all just celebrated with flowers and hugs.

Then again, are you one of those people who consider a You-Tube blogger an independent filmmaker? I sure don't.

What's wrong with people making small films and placing them on youtube or any other web media outlet? Seems like there are plenty (if not most) who do this on here. Well, I guess you are better then everyone else.

The definitions you quoted don't fit to the term Independent Film.

Yeah, it's a wonder why they even use the word independent then. Must of been some smart adults like you who thought of the idea.

 

[Utopia]

While you have the dictionary open, look up Sarcasm with regard to my Simi Valley comment.

There's nothing wrong with people making Small Films and placing them on You-Tube. I help them all the time on this forum. I said Blogger, didn't I? I consider a Blogger to be someone who uses their MacPro video camera to talk about Justin Beiber and Robert Pattinson. Look that word up, too and tell me what you find.

Hmm. It's my opinion that most of the people on here have dreams of making it in the industry and making money at this sort of thing. Is that not the case with you?

 

[wridingrlm]

While you have the dictionary open, look up Sarcasm with regard to my Simi Valley comment.

There's nothing wrong with people making Small Films and placing them on You-Tube. I help them all the time on this forum. I said Blogger, didn't I? I consider a Blogger to be someone who uses their MacPro video camera to talk about Justin Beiber and Robert Pattinson. Look that word up, too and tell me what you find.

Hmm. It's my opinion that most of the people on here have dreams of making it in the industry and making money at this sort of thing. Is that not the case with you?

Why the different tone ROC? I thought I was some dumb teenager whose mom gave me a video camera and posts them on youtube.

"Sarcasm"

I smell back peddling.

 

[directorik]

I fall into agreement with ROC. I don’t believe budget is
the determining factor of what makes a film “independent”. If a
movie is made outside of the studio system (no money, no
distribution guarantee) then it’s indie. To me, anyway.

So yes, a 10 million dollar film can be an independent films. “The
Passion of the Christ” was budgeted at $25,000,000. No studio
would even look at it. Financed by one person. Just like the
$2,500 and $25,000 movies we all make and finance. I don’t believe
a project becomes a “studio” project (as opposed to an “indie”)
because you get a name actor or spend a lot of money.

The crappy Star Wars films were financed independently from any studio
without any distribution guarantee. Seems to me to be the definition
of independent.

Us low/zero-budget filmmakers already have a term.

 

[Utopia]

Huh? You said it yourself. Simi Valley is a town of white-picket-fences and mini-vans.

Back peddling? Yeah, I really care about who's better at typing insults on a message board.