True Filmmaking

haha.. yes.. we know.. & we're ashamed of our last few posts.. well dimp is.. I'm not.

but yes.. continue to add to the topic as it was.
 
Hey, I enjoy a little levity in a thread!

I agree with Mr.(Miss) Blonde...I don't think there is any substitute for knowing the history of technique within your chosen medium. If you know all the options, then expressing your aesthetic has a more direct route. For me, the moving art starts with the single composition ...it's just easier to envision that as a static frame of film.

I don't think there are enough musicals..
Click to expand...

I want to see Christopher Walken in a musical again!
 
Last edited:
hey bird, not meaning to start anything here but really, it's not necessary to point out that Mr. Blonde is a girl, it has no relelvance to the discussion that she is female, the other Mr Blonde hasn't posted in here (yet at least) so there's no room for confusion, i just think it was unnecesarry..
 
Personally I simply see digital movie making being just as much a part of film making as more regular 16mm, 35mm, etc. Saying it isnt is like saying stop motion animation isnt 'proper' animation because it dont have no flippin' paper.


And good point about Christopher Walken bird. He should do another musical. Have you guys seen Fatboy Slim's 'Weapon of Choice' music video? Now THATS some cool film making :P
 
Dimp Paddy said:
i was talking with a few people the other day, and someone brought up that using digital means in the upcoming film Sin City is wrong because it's not "true filmmaking". That because Robert Rodiguez is using HD rather than 35 or even 16mm, it isn't "true filmmaking". I, along with a few others argued that the medium in which you film doesn't determine what "true filmmaking" is and that the term "true filmmaking" doesn't make much sense. I wanted to see what everyone here thought...

Discuss, haha.
Click to expand...
I don't see a problem with digital filmmaking (or movie making) at all. At the moment I am a digital movie maker. If you don't want to waste your money on film, film shipping, and development - why not use a digital medium? There is also less stress involved with digital movie making. You don't have to worry about exposing your film, or if your film is loaded wrong, etc - etc.
 
hey bird, not meaning to start anything here but really, it's not necessary to point out that Mr. Blonde is a girl, it has no relelvance to the discussion that she is female, the other Mr Blonde hasn't posted in here (yet at least) so there's no room for confusion, i just think it was unnecesarry..
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you felt you needed to lecture me on posting protocol.....When I came to this forum, Mr.Blonde introduced herself to me as the other Mr.(Miss) Blonde, I assumed this is how SHE wanted to be addressed, if not Mr.Blonde can let me know. I'll stay off your threads Dimp Paddy.
 
Mr.(Miss) Blonde is a female no? It may not have anything to do with the conversation but it is true. And I don't think bird meant it in a bad way. After all, bird (I believe) is a member of the fairer sex as well. As lord supreme chancellor of moderation, I proclaim the labeling of Mr. Blonde as a female to be okily dokily.

Now back to the discussion.

Poke
 
Everybody knows I'm a film diehard and am not a big fan of HD (nor do I hate it either), but I think people can be considered filmmkakers who work in video formats. It's about story telling and if the medium fits I'm ok with it. If you want to get technical yes, they are not filmmakers without shooting film, but what happens to those who shot video and transfer to film? That's a film product. Hmmm, interesting. Maybe people should just say they make motion pictures and that covers everything that moves, even phone cameras.

Scott
 
I really don't have a major problem with it.. but I'd prefer to be adressed as my screen name yeah.. coz while I am a girl.. I don't usually make a thing of pointing out people's genders here. It's ok bird.. you didn't know so you can't be blamed for anything... but that is why I took it out of my sig.

It's just I am first & foremost a film maker.. then a girl.. so I'd prefer to just be known as a filmmaker.. as opposed to one of the girls here.. if you get me..
 
It is nice to know peoples real names too.. most of the people I've talked to in the chat room have shared their names, and it makes those discussions more personal.. but then, maybe that's just me, as I'm one of those who uses my real name rather than a nick. ;)

After 15 years the nickname thing just kind of lost its luster, though I do still use it from time to time. I figure I'll be known by my name eventually anyway, so why hide it now. :D
 
I tend to agree with Will on this one. Screen names can only go so far. My username is actually my last name (an old holdover from football).
 
Here's my theory to filmmaking: The video does not make the film. The film does not make the film. The people who come in every day and without question do their best to make a story realized: the directors, writers, producers, actors, musicians, editors, lighting, cinematographers, art department, production assistants, even the grips and craft services, make the film. The medium simply records and displays the amount of effort everyone truly put in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top