Which movie shall one make first?

[iellioz632]

A new independent filmmaker has written about 8 feature film scripts. As is the case most of the time, one out of the eight screenplays is the strongest or best script - maybe the 'Godfather' of the 8 scripts. The remaining seven scripts are regular films, but not as great or strong as the single one script.

Now for the independent filmmaker who wants to make his/her first movie, which would you think would be the best advice or best choice - - make the strongest movie or choose one from the remaining seven regular scripts and make that one?

There is a bit of a dilemma or confusion here because on one side of the fence, the mind is saying break into the film world with a great movie, and on the other side of the fence the mind is saying, use a normal film as your first film so you can learn the techniques and learn from mistakes etc. The part of the mind that is saying to make the strongest film first is kind of winning the race and really wants this but there seems to be a fear that this first film can be a failure or not so well received due to production technique etc. and that a regular normal first film should have been used instead.

Are there any resources or articles that you can point me to which surrounds this same topic? I am sure this question may have been asked before but google etc. did not help me to find any.

Your thoughts?

 

[WalterB]

............

However, a living and breathing fact is that art cannot be truly defined by no being on earth, just as how religion cannot be truly defined by no being on earth. This is a fact.

....

Although an interesting point and subject, diving into religion would take to long, derive from the subject and probably upset many people.
But: religion is defined by humans.
What makes it complicated is all the paradoxes most entail.
And that is the common denominator with art nowadays.
Ever since Marcel Duchamp exhibited a toilet in a museum the definition of art became very confusing.
Before that it was already getting blurry with the invention of photography and with the rise of modern styles of expressionism and impressionism. Art was taken out of the realm of beauty and suddenly it could be ugly as well.


Anyway, any thoughts on/plans to make something short?

 

[iellioz632]

Although an interesting point and subject, diving into religion would take to long, derive from the subject and probably upset many people.
But: religion is defined by humans.
What makes it complicated is all the paradoxes most entail.
And that is the common denominator with art nowadays.
Ever since Marcel Duchamp exhibited a toilet in a museum the definition of art became very confusing.
Before that it was already getting blurry with the invention of photography and with the rise of modern styles of expressionism and impressionism. Art was taken out of the realm of beauty and suddenly it could be ugly as well.


Anyway, any thoughts on/plans to make something short?

Good post kind sir. I would indeed say that religion is a broad topic which I tend not to raise an example to, but it is the only unexplainable medium, that I can think of, that art can truly be paired with in term of something that cannot be explained in its entirety. I would agree that religion is defined by humans, but to a limited extent as the same with art.

LOL on the toilet exhibition example; I got to research that one!

Yes, I do at some stage want to find the time and make something.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

The basis of your statements swim in the realm of an opinion - and they are just that - your opinion.

Absolutely it is and that's the point you seem to be missing because ...

However, a living and breathing fact is that art cannot be truly defined by no being on earth, just as how religion cannot be truly defined by no being on earth. This is a fact.

Only a fool would quote something as fact which patently is not a fact and just repeating that your opinion is fact does NOT make it a fact!! The fact is, that almost EVERYONE on earth can define art (and religion). I can't see any logical/mature/educated basis to argue any different! The problem is purely one of "opinion", people have differing opinions on the definition of art and there is no one definition which encapsulates all these differing opinions. The proof of this is that people have been arguing for centuries about what "art" is, people far more intelligent and educated than you (or me). To state that people are fools if they question your opinion is itself foolish, as well as arrogant, immature and uneducated.

At the end of the day, you have presented something here as "abstract art". Just because you state it's abstract art does not actually make it abstract art or at least, does not necessarily make it abstract art to anyone but you! As an aspiring filmmaker, who presumably wants to make films to be watched by people/audiences other than just yourself, this is something you are going to have to learn, understand and employ, otherwise you will never succeed beyond getting a small number of viewers on YouTube. Of course, this too is just my opinion and you're perfectly free to argue and/or ignore it but you're not free to effectively call me a fool if I choose to disagree with your opinion!

G

 

[iellioz632]

Absolutely it is and that's the point you seem to be missing because ...



Only a fool would quote something as fact which patently is not a fact and just repeating that your opinion is fact does NOT make it a fact!! The fact is, that almost EVERYONE on earth can define art (and religion). I can't see any logical/mature/educated basis to argue any different! The problem is purely one of "opinion", people have differing opinions on the definition of art and there is no one definition which encapsulates all these differing opinions. The proof of this is that people have been arguing for centuries about what "art" is, people far more intelligent and educated than you (or me). To state that people are fools if they question your opinion is itself foolish, as well as arrogant, immature and uneducated.

At the end of the day, you have presented something here as "abstract art". Just because you state it's abstract art does not actually make it abstract art or at least, does not necessarily make it abstract art to anyone but you! As an aspiring filmmaker, who presumably wants to make films to be watched by people/audiences other than just yourself, this is something you are going to have to learn, understand and employ, otherwise you will never succeed beyond getting a small number of viewers on YouTube. Of course, this too is just my opinion and you're perfectly free to argue and/or ignore it but you're not free to effectively call me a fool if I choose to disagree with your opinion!

G

You can carry on with your tirade guv'ner, but fact remains fact. The origins of and true meaning of art and religion can never be truly defined with 100% accuracy.

Also, I did not call you a fool, however you said so.

Shalom.

 

[Filman]

The 100% true meaning of religion is what we all agree with:

Gain advantages by licking creator's ass = over proportional greed.

At the same way art has a purpose to stimulate - like eating a candy.

 

[Morris]

Sounds like Truthiness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

 

[iellioz632]

Nah, Filman and Morris, the 100% origin of and true meaning of religion will always be vague, as is will be art. If you don't understand this now, I have faith and pray that you would understand this in the future, brethren.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

The origins of and true meaning of art and religion can never be truly defined with 100% accuracy.

What have the origins and a 100% accurate definition of art got to do with filmmaking? If you are making films for others to watch, then their definition of art is what you have to work with. If you are making films just for yourself to watch, you can use any definition of art you want, including no definition at all. What you have done is make a short sequence to your own bizarre definition of art and then when no one but you gets it, you stamp your little feet and tell everyone they don't know what art is and that they are fools to question your personal definition.

Also, I did not call you a fool ...

"Fools/people that don't know about art would go to length to argue this statement is not true." - These are YOUR words, quoted from YOUR post! But, why let the truth get in the way of a good argument?!

You can carry on with your tirade guv'ner, but fact remains fact.

If you don't understand this now, I have faith and pray that you would understand this in the future, brethren.

Spoken like a true blinkered fundamentalist!

The problem isn't our understanding, it's yours (!) but being blinkered, you're never going to be able to see that. So, what happens when your faith and prayers do not change our understanding? Will you change your understanding? Will you just sit there not understanding why no one wants to watch your films or will you become the world's first filmmaker jihadist? Will you start a campaign of terror until we adopt your "facts" about what (filmmaking) art is?

Of course my words here are wasted, extremists are incapable of recognising themselves as extremists because to them, their extreme views are neither extreme nor views, they are indisputable facts! Therefore, regardless of how surreal-ly entertaining this thread has become, I'm now out of it.

G

 

[iellioz632]

What have the origins and a 100% accurate definition of art got to do with filmmaking? If you are making films for others to watch, then their definition of art is what you have to work with. If you are making films just for yourself to watch, you can use any definition of art you want, including no definition at all. What you have done is make a short sequence to your own bizarre definition of art and then when no one but you gets it, you stamp your little feet and tell everyone they don't know what art is and that they are fools to question your personal definition.



"Fools/people that don't know about art would go to length to argue this statement is not true." - These are YOUR words, quoted from YOUR post! But, why let the truth get in the way of a good argument?!



Spoken like a true blinkered fundamentalist!

The problem isn't our understanding, it's yours (!) but being blinkered, you're never going to be able to see that. So, what happens when your faith and prayers do not change our understanding? Will you change your understanding? Will you just sit there not understanding why no one wants to watch your films or will you become the world's first filmmaker jihadist? Will you start a campaign of terror until we adopt your "facts" about what (filmmaking) art is?

Of course my words here are wasted, extremists are incapable of recognising themselves as extremists because to them, their extreme views are neither extreme nor views, they are indisputable facts! Therefore, regardless of how surreal-ly entertaining this thread has become, I'm now out of it.

G

I have concluded that you seem to be my biggest fan with perhaps the most posts on this thread. I have also concluded that you seem to be lost. Nevertheless, I reiterate to you, so that you shall know and hear it again - i.e. the true origins and meaning of art and religion can never be 100% defined, therefore these two topics will always be the subject of debate, and a classic example is your many posts and that of a few others to this effect in this thread. Hence, art and religion can never have a final end of story debate, therefore it is best to just let these two topics be as they are.

Now why would you go to the various lengths, and now hijack this thread with your self-made dark fundamentalist views/elements which you raised above? I really don't know your motive in this thread but I hope you can find peace in your heart whilst you seek the truth, because it is only the truth that shall set you free. For peace I would recommend reading the Bible - it is a great book! However if that is not your thing, meditation and/or yoga may work for you. Perhaps you can try either or both.

Sometimes if one hasn't got a positive thing to say, such as introducing dark matter or dark elements/views into a thread, it may be best for one not to say anything at all in the first place. This is a lesson from the invisible course of Life 101. Therefore I think you have made the best decision, as you said, to stay out of this thread. In fact, it may be better if you do us a favor and don't post in any of my future threads.

Peace to you always.
Cheerio.