So You Want to Make a Movie - Distribution

You’ve caught the bug, and you’ve decided to make a movie. But where do you start? The good news is today there are fewer barriers to overcome in order to produce a film. Thanks to digital filmmaking, the costs have dropped dramatically. In reality, practically anybody can become a filmmaker. There is no shortage of books, videos, and online resources to help get you started. No one article can answer all of your questions or take you through the entire process; however, I want to offer you 20 key steps that will at least steer you in the right direction. Think of these steps as the big picture or the 30,000 foot view.

20. Distribution

I’m sure you didn’t make your film for just you, your friends, and family to watch. You want an audience. The entire reason that you spent the time and money to enter your movie into film festivals was to find a distributor. Let’s face it. You don’t have the money or the ability to get your film into theaters. And do you think you could collect the money from the theater owners anyway? What a distributor does is to help you find an audience. They finance the P and A, which is an industry term for prints and advertising. You don’t have a movie until somebody is willing to pay $10 to see it in a theater. Distributors have the means to market and promote your film. In other works, they convince the public that your film is a “movie”.

For every dollar Hollywood spends to produce a movie, they spend an additional 51 to 57 cents to promote and market the film. And you thought making the movie was hard. The truth is the real battle is finding a distributor and, hopefully, an audience. In some cases, the process could take up to five years. You really have to be committed and believe in your movie if you have any chance of finding a distributor.

You’d be surprised how many movies, and I mean good movies, NEVER get a distribution deal. There’s no logic, rhyme or reason for why certain films get or don’t get distribution. It’s going to come down to a lot of hard work and determination on your part. And sometimes it’s just dumb luck.

So what happens if you don’t get a distribution deal at the film festivals? What do you do next? The first thing you must absolutely do before talking to any distributor is get expert advice from an entertainment lawyer. If somebody offered you a deal, how would you know if it was a good deal for you? The entertainment industry is notorious for distributors who have taken advantage of filmmakers, promised them the moon and delivered absolutely nothing. In some cases, they stole their film and left them at the altar, never seeing one red cent.

You don’t want that to happen to you. That’s why you need someone on your side. Don’t rely on what I’m writing or on any other book when negotiating a deal. This topic is too complex without expert opinion. For example, there is a multitude of different types of distribution deals such as the 50/50 net deal, the flat fee deal, the net deal, the gross deal, the first dollar gross deal, the first dollar split deal, the adjusted gross deal, the sliding scale deal, and the 70/30 major deal. The question is which one is the real deal. Here’s the thing you need to know. Most of them are designed for you to never see any profits.

I’m not going to go into detail for each of these deals; however, I do want to highlight the 50/50 net deal which is basically a standard distribution deal within the industry. It pretty much goes like this. You and the distributor form a partnership. They agree to distribute your movie for a standard distribution fee plus all expenses. Then they will split the profits 50/50 with you. The problem is nobody can define what the standard distribution fee is because it’s always a moving target. And the funny thing is the expenses always seem to eat up the profits. So when they get to the 50/50 split, there’s nothing to split. The expenses magically go up.

Here’s the deal you should take. If the distributor is willing to write you a check to buy the film straight out, take it. You walk away and you’re done. Let’s say you made your movie for $200,000, and they offer you a $350,000 to $400,000 check. Why in the world wouldn’t you take it? You now have the money to pay off your expenses, repay your investors with interest and profits, take care of everybody who helped you get the movie made, plus put a little money in your pocket. And the icing on the cake is your movie now has a chance to find an audience.

The only problem is this deal is rare. A few years ago, distributors were willing to take more risks. Now they want you to take all the risks. They expect you to do the work that they used to do. Distributors want you to find your audience, and market and promote your film. And, if you are successful, they collect all of the rewards. Doesn’t sound fair, does it?

"Resident Evil: First Hour" Fanfilm als Webserie

Mit jedem Tag meines Lebens steigt meine Wut auf Paul W. Anderson immer weiter. Falls ich den Typ mal treffen sollte, muss ich mich spontan entscheiden wofür ich ich zuerst feste hauen soll: für seinen Alien vs. Predator-Murks oder dafür wie er Resident Evil für's Kino ruiniert hat? Zum Glück gibt es noch Leute die sich nicht von Andersons verbockten RE-Filmen den Spaß am eigentlichen Kanon der Spiele und der Idee von Resident Evil Filmen nicht verderben lassen.

Mit "Resident Evil: First Hour" präsentiert Machinima.com einen Resident Evil Fanfilm als Webserie die ein Prequel zu Resident Evil 2 darstellt. [Klugscheiss-Modus: an. "Ist eigentlich "Resident Evil 1" nicht schon ein Prequel zu "Resident Evil 2" " Klugscheiss-Modus: aus] In diesem Prequel begleiten wir Leon Kennedy (Protagonist von Resident Evil 2), der gerade frisch von der Polizei-Akademie gekommen ist und direkt bei seinem ersten Einsatz Bekanntschaft mit den Folgen des T-Virus machen darf.

Die erste Folge sieht schonmal ganz nett aus. Die Ausstattung stimmt, die Schauspiler sind ganz gut gewählt und bei dem Retro-Soundtrack aus Spiel kriege ich direkt weiche Knie.

Bin schon gespannt wie der Rest aussehen wird. Ich bleib mal dran.

via ShockTillYouDrop

"Danger 5"- Episode 1 Part I und II

Vor ein paar Wochen hatte ich noch über die Serie gebloggt und hab mir grad mal die ersten beiden Teile von "The Diamond Girls" reingezogen. Einfach top. Schön trashig und mit fiesem abgedrehtem Humor gespickt, ist die Serie ein Must See für jeden Exploitation-Fan. Montag kommt der dritte Teil.

via DinosaurWorldWide

"The Walking Dead" 02x08 "Nebraska" Previews

Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen. Noch knappe 10 Wochen...

So You Want to Make a Movie - Festivals - 2

You’ve caught the bug, and you’ve decided to make a movie. But where do you start? The good news is today there are fewer barriers to overcome in order to produce a film. Thanks to digital filmmaking, the costs have dropped dramatically. In reality, practically anybody can become a filmmaker. There is no shortage of books, videos, and online resources to help get you started. No one article can answer all of your questions or take you through the entire process; however, I want to offer you 20 key steps that will at least steer you in the right direction. Think of these steps as the big picture or the 30,000 foot view.

Step 19. -  It’s your job to get an audience out to see your film.

If you have the money, you could hire a producer’s rep that has weight and pull with film festival managers, buyers and distributors. Their job is to get you noticed and get you meetings. They have the relationships. You don’t. They may be able to move you to the front of the line. But the producer’s rep does not come cheap. And remember, there’s no guarantee that the rep can get you a deal.

If you can’t hire a producer’s rep, you will have to do all of the work. One of the major goals at film festivals is to get reviewed by movie critics. Be proactive. Check to see if the local TV station or newspaper has a film critic. Call the critics directly to get them to see your film.

If your movie is not loved by one critic, move on. That’s just one person’s opinion. If you work at it, you will find a critic somewhere who is going to love your movie. Try to get your film into as many festivals as possible to generate positive word of mouth outside and inside the critics circle. It’s always better to approach a distributor with positive press and reviews. It can only help you.

Most filmmakers want to enter into as many film festivals as possible; however, you have to take the cost into consideration. I’m sure your budget is now stretched to the max. Practically every film festival requires an entry fee which is nonrefundable. And remember because you submit to a film festival doesn’t mean you are going to get in. If you enter 50 festivals say at $100 a pop, that means $5,000. If you do get accepted to a film festival, it doesn’t do you any good unless you can personally attend. That requires an airplane ticket, hotel and meals. The costs add up quickly.

You also can’t count on the festival to do your marketing. Being in a film festival does not help your cause unless you have an audience to see your movie. That means you may have to take out local ads to promote your film. You’ll have to pay for posters, promotional materials, and EPKs to help get the word out about your film. Don’t expect the film festivals to necessarily help with your press. You’ll probably have to set up your own interviews with magazines, newspapers, etc. The bottom line is you have to take responsibility for the success of your movie. You can’t count on anybody to help, and that includes the film festival director. It’s your job to get an audience out to see your film.

"The Walking Dead" Season 2 Part 1 - Review

An erster Stelle sollte ich wohl erwähnen, dass diese Review vom Leser erwartet, wenigstens die erste Season von TWD gesehen zu haben. Außerdem kann ich schlecht auf alle Rücksicht nehmen, die nicht mindestens einen Großteil der zweiten Staffel gesehen haben oder nicht direkt alle Punkte des Plots als "Spoiler" bezeichnen. Eine Review die Teile Handlung nicht mit einzubezieht macht nicht viel Sinn. So viel dazu.

Im Gegensatz zur letzten Staffel habe ich mich dieses Mal dagegen entschieden zu jeder einzelnen Episode eine Review zu schreiben und setz mich lieber mit der jeweiligen Hälfte der Season auseinander. Der Midseason-Break kommt da recht gelegen. 

Glücklicherweise hat man mit der siebten Folge dieser Staffel einen Abschluss vor der Winterpause gewählt, der einen als Zuschauer nicht zu sehr in die Röhre gucken lässt.

Was ist bisher passiert?

 Die zweite Staffel setzt quasi auf die Minute ganau da an, wo wir die Gruppe von Überlebenden in "TS-19" verlassen haben: Nachdem das CDC in die Luft geflogen ist, macht sich die Gruppe auf den Weg nach Fort Benning (einer Militärbasis in Georgia) um dort nach Schutz und anderen (lebenden) Menschen zu suchen. Auf dem dem Highway trifft man allerdings auf eine Blockade aus verlassenen Autos und versucht die Vehikel aus dem Weg zu räumen. Dabei werden unsere Helden von einer Walker-Herde überrascht. Im Durcheinander gerät Sophia (Carols Tochter) in Panik und flüchtet vor einer Handvoll Untoter in den angrenzenden Wald. Rick rennt ihr nach und versteckt das Mädchen, um die Walker von ihr abzulenken und diese auszuschalten. Als Rick zurück kommt ist Sophia verschwunden. 

Bei der Folgenden Suchaktion wird Carl von Otis, dem Bewohner einer nahegelgenden Farm, versehentlich angeschossen und muss zur Farm gebracht werden. Otis und Shane müssen zur örtlichen Schule fahren um medizinische Geräte für Carls Operation zu besorgen.

Zeitgleich findet die Gruppe Obdach auf der Farm bei Hershell, dem Besitzer der Farm, und seiner Familie. 

Die Suche nach Sophia geht weiter und gleichzeitig wird die Stimmung innerhalb der Gruppe immer angespannter, vor allem augrund der Suche nach Sophia und wegen Hershells Gruppe und seiner Ansicht darüber wie man mit den Untoten umgehen sollte...

Wie hat man das alles Umgesetzt?

 Wie schon bei der ersten Season kann man, was die Qualität der Umsetzung des Stoffes angeht, nicht meckern. Die Schauspieler arbeiten gut und haben sich super in ihre Rollen eingefunden. Besonders Norman Reedus (Daryl) hat sich zu einem der heimlichen Helden der zweiten Staffel entwickelt.

Am Registil hat sich nicht viel getan. Ist auch schwer einen konkreten Stil auszumachen wenn es keinen durchgängigen Regisseur gibt.

Was mich nur generell ein wenig stört ist, wie schleppend manche Storylines verlaufen. Besonders im Hinblick auf die Comic-Vorlage. Mir ist klar, dass man die beiden Medien nicht vergleichen sollte, doch was das Tempo angeht könnte man sich ruhig ein paar Scheiben von den Heften abschneiden. Würde man die Anzahl der Charaktere ein wenig reduzieren, sodass nicht ständig jeder mit jedem interagieren muss und würde man außerdem ein paar Konflikte zwischen den Akteuren ein wenig straffen, sähe das Ganze deutlich besser aus. 

Die neuen Ideen in Form von Charakteren oder neuen bzw. alternativen Story-Elementen sind (wie bei jeder anderen Verfilmung eines Mediums auch) mal mehr und mal weniger interessant oder notwendig. Charakterentwicklung ist schön und gut, doch sollte man den feinen Grad nicht aus dem Auge verlieren, der eine Horror-Serie von der "gwöhnlichen" Drama-Serie unterscheidet und schnell in Richtung einer Soap abrutschen lässt. Zu viel Drama zwischen Rick, Shane und Lori kann irgendwann lästig werden. Hauptfokus der Serie sind zwar die Menschen, doch nicht alle Menschen leben wie in einer Seifenoper oder in einer Talkshow. Bisher ist es zum Glück noch nicht so weit gekommen, dass man das Gefühl hat Verliebt in Berlin mit Zombies zu sehen. Ich denke Robert Kirkman passt da schon drauf auf. Worauf man in Zukunft nur noch mehr achten sollte, sind realistische Reaktionen oder Handlungen der Charaktere. Menschen sind zwar nicht perfekt, doch so verpeilt wie es manchmal in der Serie dargestellt wird, kann man wirklich nicht sein. Zum Glück haben die Serien-Autoren ein Gespür für Karma und lassen auch nicht jedem Charakter alles durchgehen. Details oder Beispiele würden an dieser Stelle zu viel vom Finale der letzten Folge preisgeben. 

Gab es da nicht auch mal Untote?

Der Horror kommt auch in der zweiten Season nicht zu kurz und erinnert den Zuschauer in regelmäßigen Abständen daran, was er da gerade sieht: Ein Drama mit Zombies.

Was die Untoten Kollegen angeht, haben Greg Nicotero und sein Team sich nicht lumpen lassen und haben ganze Arbeit geleistet. Was die Kreation von coolen Untoten und ekeligen Effekten angeht, macht man den Leuten echt nichts vor.

Wer schon bei der ersten Staffel begeistert war, wird hier auch wieder seine helle Freude haben. Als Fan von Zombies und gut ausgeführten Gore-Effekten liegt es mir fern auch nur ansatzweise zu meckern. Besonders der Well Walker Zombie ist ein wahres Fest in Sachen abartige Effekte und toppt sogar das Bicycle-Girl aus der aller ersten Folge.

Fazit:

Trotz kleiner Schwächen, die man wohl überall finden kann wenn man denn will, kann man "The Walking Dead" noch immer zu einer der besten aktuellen Serien und zu den besten Horror-Programmen bisher zählen. Nicht umsonst hat man schon nach zwei Folgen in der zweiten Staffel grünes Licht für die dritte Season gegeben. Ein Ende scheint bisher also nocht nicht in Sicht zu sein. Hoffen wir mal, dass die Qualität der Serie entweder beibehalten oder sogar noch gesteigert wird. im Februar geht es jedenfalls erstmal mit der zweiten Hälfte der aktuellen Season weiter. Das werden lange 10 Wochen...

7von10 Punkten für die erste Hälfte von Season 2

Ganz wichtig:

Wer die erste Season von TWD noch nicht gesehen hat und/oder noch nicht auf DVD oder Blu-Ray besitzt, sollte die Finger von den deutschen Veröffentlichungen lassen. Dreisterweise hat man nämlich, bis auf die letzte, alle Episoden um ein paar Sekunden erleichtert. Sowohl im Bezug auf Gore als auch auf Handlung. Dafür sollte man niemanden belohnen. Eigentlich schade um das coole Design der Special Edition...

Die britische Box ist auch gekürzt. Ich werde wohl zur Special Edition aus den Staaten greifen.

Miracle on 34th Street

It’s that time of the year. The Christmas season is upon us. And, if you are like me, one of my favorite activities during the holidays is sitting down and watching a Christmas movie. Nowadays, there’s no shortage of new Christmas flicks. It seems like every day the Hallmark Channel or the ABC Family has a new original debut Christmas movie that’s deemed to be a ”new classic”. But most of these films are sort of like junk food or empty calories. There’s nothing really new or original about them. The same ol candy canes, reindeer, Santa Clause on vacation, and other lame plots.

I like the classics. Perhaps, the best Christmas movie of all time is the original version of Miracle on 34th Street, which was released in 1947. I’ve probably seen it at least 40 times. It never gets old. It’s an astonishing film, not just because it’s a Christmas movie, but because it’s exceptionally well made and stands on its own two feet as an authentic film. Sometimes we forget that Miracle on 34th Street has won three academy awards and was nominated for Best Picture. Here’s one thing you probably don’t know. The studio was so confident of the success of the movie that they released it in May 1947 because more people go to the movies during the summer. Today can you imagine a studio releasing a Christmas movie in the summer? It wouldn’t happen.

Yes, Miracle on 34th Street has exceptional acting, great charm and atmosphere, a beautiful story, and timeless themes. But after seeing this film so many times, and I’m sure you’re familiar with the plot, is there something we have missed? It would be easy to dismiss this film as just cute or as another family-friendly, cookie-cutter Christmas story.

Let’s take a closer look and see what this movie is really about. Maureen O’Hara plays Doris Walker, a divorced mother who is raising her daughter to believe in a world governed by logic and reason. Fairy tales and Christmas have no place in this modern interpretation of the world they live in. Doris is a young, mobile executive working at Macy’s, the largest retailer in New York City, who is determined to get ahead in life.

Doris also organized the annual Macy’s Thanksgiving parade where the Santa Claus she has hired becomes intoxicated on the day of the big parade. Enter in Kris Kringle (Edward Gwenn), who discovers the drunken Santa. Doris convinces Kris to take on the role of Santa and save the day. The only problem is Kris Kringle believes he is the real Santa Clause.

Back at her apartment, Doris discovers her daughter Susan (Natalie Wood) has taken a liking to her next door neighbor Fred (John Payne), who is a young, idealist up and coming lawyer. He teaches Susan a very different way about how to view the world, one where anything is possible, including giants, fairy tales and even Christmas. This sets up the central conflict which drives the main theme of the film. Eventually, Kris Kringle goes to work for Macy’s. Through a series of events, Kris is put on trial for his mental stability, which could land him as a permanent resident in a mental institution. Fred takes on the case and is determined to prove that Kris Kringle is the one and only Santa Clause.

At this point in the story, Doris and Fred have developed a friendship which could lead to something more. However, Doris sees Fred’s decision to take on this case as foolish, which could potentially destroy his legal career. There you have it—a discussion of two vastly different world views disguised as a Christmas movie.

The issue is faith, believing in the things we cannot see when logic tells us it’s not possible. On the other hand, we have common sense, logic and reason—the things we can feel, touch, and smell. It’s the same thing we struggle with in our daily lives. How do we believe in a God that we cannot see or feel? We know faith is a central part of the Christian message. But to embrace it means that our common sense, logic and reason will not help us make that leap of faith which is necessary to please God. Although, Miracle on 34th Street never directly mentions God, it’s pretty clear that Kris Kringle is a metaphor for our ability to believe in the things we cannot see, such as our faith in Christ. Which road will we ultimately choose and embrace?

It’s rare for any film from 1947 to express such dark themes as Doris’ view of the world. Her world has been ripped apart. She can’t believe in anything apart from reason and logic. It’s really all she has. Can Doris find redemption and the ability to believe in something greater than just the stability of a good job? Maybe, as you watch this film, you will see that the themes are a little more complex than you originally thought. I can’t think of anything that’s more challenging for any of us to deal with. How do we handle belief and faith and our natural tendency to relay on logic and reason?

Here’s something else to think about during this Christmas season. If you call yourself a Christian, then that means you believe that God himself, born of a virgin birth, came to this world in the flesh. Think about it. That’s an incredible statement. You ask me, that takes a lot of faith and belief. As far as I know there’s no video on You Tube to prove it. But we still believe it. Right? How is it then that we can believe this, but the way we live our lives is through logic, reason and common sense? Now, does that make any sense?

2011: THE YEAR HORROR WENT TO TELEVISION?

As the changing seasonal winds begin to blow throughout my Midwestern campus, I find myself reflecting about the year 2011.  As a proud survivor of TWO raptures and someone who managed to choose a school other than Penn State, I was lucky enough to ultimately deem this year as satisfying.  While my personal life has been decently satisfying, I fear that the world of the horror genre may be signaling a drastic change.  2011 was undoubtedly the year of unoriginality.  A whopping amount of the horror films that were released this year were sequels, remakes, reboots, or films heavily inspired by already beloved ones.  Obviously there were some "little indie films that could", (Hobo with a Shotgun, anyone? Anyone? Bueller?) but as a whole, this year was a little more than lackluster for quality horror films.  To contrast to this, television shows within the horror genre EXPLODED with creativity and entertaining themes. 

Previously mentioned on this blog, Ryan Murphy's sensational hit American Horror Story has completely taken the horror television genre by the collar and threatened it for its lunch money.  AHS is the combined effort of every staple within the genre and shaken all together like a bottle of glitter at a Ke$ha concert.  As a horror fanatic (and I huge Ryan Murphy fangirl) I feel it is my duty as a genre fan to try and expose everyone I know to this masterpiece, and pray that it continues on to earn the viewership it deserves.

Back for its fourth season is everyone's favorite Vampire series, True Blood.  I'll admit...I stopped watching the show halfway through the train wreck that was season three.  My hopes were crushed and I found myself unable to pay attention any longer to the ridiculous storylines and unbelievable character arcs.  A friend of mine is a complete and total diehard fan of the series and assured me that season four was more than making up for season three.  Against my better judgement, I gave the show another chance.  You know something, I'm so very glad that I did.  Season four packs a hell of a punch and Anna Paquin is as cute as ever.  Luckily for fangbangers everywhere, season four was powerful enough for HBO to renew the show for a fifth season to come out this summer. 

Earlier this October, AMC finally brought back the most talked about show of 2010, The Walking Dead.  Even after the very public firing of Frank Darabount, the season premiere, "What Lies Ahead" broke the record for the most watched cable drama in basic cable history, attaining 7.3 million viewers.  Not too shabby for a season opener, eh?  What excites me even more is that the episode was directed by Gwyneth Horder-Payton...A WOMAN. Holla. Anyway, TWD has been bringing in the audiences with record numbers and although hitting a bit of a low spot throughout the middle of the season, last nights' mid-finale (directed by another woman, Michelle MacLaren) more than made up for it.  I am thirsting for it to be February just to find out how the rest of the season is going to go.  Last night really hit me in the gut, but it's exactly the jump start the season needed.  Is it a shock that the best two episodes of the season were directed by women? Not. One. Bit.

To put it bluntly, horror movies this year were less than stellar and horror television shows seem to be paving the way for genre fanatics everywhere.  Horror filmmakers everywhere should take a page from the book of these shows.  Remakes and sequels don't have to be the status quo, your audiences are THIRSTING for originality and characters they actually care about.  Quit slacking off and relying on jump scares and CGI and focus on what they teach you the first day of film school...the storyline matters. 

"Silent Night of the Living Dead" Teaser-Poster

Das ist doch mal ein schickes Poster. Nicht nur das Poster an sich ist cool, sondern auch die Tatsache das es von einer wahren Ikone in Sachen Horrorfilmposter stammt. Graham Humphreys, der Mann der auch die Poster zu Evil Dead I+II und Nightmare on Elmstreet ff. gezeichnet hat,  hat das Poster zu "Silent Night of the Living Dead" gestaltet. Besonders sein Poster zu The Evil Dead 2 hat es mir angetan. Einfach top.

Zum Film "Silent Night of the Living Dead" sind bisher nur wenige Fakten bekannt, doch diese haben es schon in sich: Regie wird Paul Davis führen, der eine sehr schöne Doku über John Landis' "An American Werewolf in London" namens "Beware the Moon" gemacht hat. Das Drehbuch wird James Moran zu Papier bringen. Den meisten dürfte er wohl von "Severeance" oder der Doctor Who Episode "The Fires of Pompeii" her ein Begriff sein. Was Zombies angeht, scheint er auch nicht mehr ganz jungfräulich zu sein. Immerhin hat er schon das Script für "Cockneys vs. Zombies" abgeliefert. Ein Film über Bankräuber die sich durch ein von Zombies verseuchtes London käpfen müssen. Klingt auch nicht verkehrt. Diesbezüglich bleibe ich auch mal am Ball.

Soundtrack-technisch kriegen wir was von Osymyso auf die Ohren, dem wir den Score von Shaun of the Dead verdanken. Was das MakeUp angeht, befindet sich der Film auch in guten Händen. Dave Elsey kümmert sich um den Look der untoten "Helden" des Films. Mit einem Oscar für "Revenge of the Sith" und Beteiligung an "The Wolfman" (2010), kann man da bestimmt mit Qualität rechnen. 

Eine der ersten Rollen wurde übrigens schon mit Tom Savini besetzt. Er spielt einen Vater der sich mit seinem Sohn an Heilig Abend in einer Highschool gegen Zombies verbarrikadieren und verteidigen muss.

Wer jetzt noch nicht überzeugt ist, sollte sich noch ebend dieses Statement vom Regisseur Paul Davis reinpfeifen:

"With this I want to go back to Romero and Fulci in terms of making the zombie scary again," Davis said. "To help me in that department I have enlisted the special effects make-up talents of recent Academy Award winner Dave Elsey [The Wolfman]. I met Dave, and his wife Lou, on The Wolfman at Pinewood in 2008 and just fell in love with both of them. They're so talented and so incredibly sweet and adore that they are just utterly besotted with monsters - A couple after my own heart. I came away from that first meeting with them knowing that if and when I made my first monster movie, that I wanted to work with them and was delighted when Dave said yes. Some the ideas we've already bounced between us are very exciting and I know that the kind of variety I'm going for with regard to the look of the zombies is exactly what Dave wants to do."

Das klingt alles einfach zu cool um wahr zu sein. Eine Ansammlung so vieler vielversprechnder Namen, lassen bei mir eine Menge Hoffnung und Vorfreude aufkommen. Wenn das kein kein legitimer Nachfolger für Shaun of the Dead wird, dann weiß ich auch nicht mehr... Sofern der Film als Komödie angedacht ist, heisst das.

Schade ist nur, das wir uns noch bis Weihnachten 2013 gedulden müssen.

via ShockTillYouDrop Quelle 1 und 2

Yoda in japanischem Nudel-Werbespot

Star Wars - das Lunchpaket, Star Wars - der Flammenwerfer und nun auch Star Wars - das Nudelgericht! Muss man dazu noch viel sagen? Anscheinend braucht man nicht mal mehr irgendwo das Star Wars Logo draufpappen um Zeug zu verkaufen. Einzelne Charaktere in entsprechende Spots zu packen reicht schon.

via YouTube

Frank Miller is a Douchebag

Frank Miller, einer der wichtigesten Comic-Autoren unserer Zeit, ist ein Arschloch. Aber so richtig. Es ist echt übel wenn ein Mensch es schafft all das was er kreiert hat, innerhalb weniger Minuten zu relativieren und wie ein totaler Pisser da zu stehen. Ich bin großer Fan seiner Comics und seiner Schreibe, doch bei DIESEM Blogeintrag aus Millers Feder krieg ich das kalte Kotzen. Solche Kommentare zum Occupy-Movement in Form von konservativem gew*chse und Fahnengeschwenke für die Army, sind das letzte was man lesen will. Solange man nicht gerade meint ein echter Kerl zu sein nur weil er in der Armee (oder Bundeswehr) war, wirkt das schon wie ein Schlag ins Gesicht... An dieser Stelle sollte man vielleicht noch erwähnen, dass Miller selbst nie in der Army war.

Sowas lässt einen schon darüber grübeln, ob man noch weiter Geld für seine Comics ausgeben will oder das Geld doch lieber spendet...

via GrantbridgeStreet

Was Courageous a Success?

There’s no secret that Christian movies have recently struggled at the box office. The numbers speak for themselves. To Save a Life grossed only $3.7 million, Letters to God grossed $2.8 million, The Grace Card grossed $2.4 million, and most recently The Mighty Macs managed to make only $1.8 million.

However, there is one exception. Sherwood Pictures has constantly achieved remarkable results. In 2008, their third film, Fireproof, made an impressive $34 million at the box office. It created an enormous buzz within the film industry, especially in Christian circles. As a result of their success, there was much anticipation for the upcoming release of their new film, Courageous, which hit the theaters back in September. Some industry experts speculated the new film could make $50 million or $60 million in its initial theatrical run.

So was Courageous a success? Defining success can be very subjective. There are two ways to approach success in terms of evaluating Courageous—spiritually and financially. Were people impacted by the movie? Were lives changed? Did Courageous encourage men to be better fathers and better husbands? There is no way I can answer those questions. Only the producers will be able to evaluate the spiritual effectiveness of their film. However, financially we do have the numbers. Currently, Courageous has made $32.7 million and is nearing the end of its theatrical run, so that number will not likely increase by much. Most Christian filmmakers would be thrilled with those results. It’s an impressive number.

But I’m not sure that’s what Affirm, a division of Sony Pictures, had in mind. They put a lot more money, time and effort in promoting and marketing Courageous than they did Fireproof. And, basically, they have achieved the same results. As we know, costs have risen over the past three years. Financially the results they have achieved are probably less.

Courageous, perhaps, has proven a point. Is there a ceiling for a Christian film? Sherwood Pictures has developed an extensive network to help promote and market their films. Their use of social media has been groundbreaking in terms of reaching their audience. So they know how to get the base out. But in order to really hit the big numbers, say $60 million plus, it is going to require a different kind of movie. The industry calls it a crossover. For example, Soul Surfer and Blindside are films that play well within the Christian audience but are also capable of impacting a larger, more mainstream movie audience.

I don’t see Sherwood Pictures changing the type of pictures they make any time in the foreseeable future. I think the question is what does Affirm plan to do in the future. If they are interested in achieving bigger results, they may very well embrace films that have the potential to become a “crossover” movie.

I suppose the issue of success is tied to whomever you talk to. There’s no doubt that some people will see a $34 million to $36 million gross as a failure. Maybe expectations were just too high.

But I think we have to put it in perspective. Courageous had an opportunity to play for several weeks on over 1,200 screens nationwide. It reached a significant audience. Consider, at the same time, that Sony released the George Clooney film, The Ides of March, which made only $39 million. Obviously, Clooney had many more resources at his disposal. Courageous was made for only $2 million. That amount is basically what Hollywood pays their caterers for a typical film shoot.

Weekend Report: 'Twilight' Leads,' 'Muppets' Succeeds Over Thanksgiving Weekend

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 easily repeated in first place at the box office over Thanksgiving weekend, while The Muppets revived the long-dormant franchise with a strong second place debut. Arthur Christmas and Hugo weren't quite as fortunate, though the true measure of their success will be determined over the next month.

Breaking Dawn added an estimated $62.3 million for the five-day weekend, which is a bit off from New Moon's $66.3 million over the same time period in 2009. On Saturday, Breaking Dawn passed $200 million, and through its first 10 days the penultimate Twilight movie has earned $221.3 million.

The Muppets opened to an estimated $42 million, which is down from past Disney Thanksgiving entries Tangled ($68.7 million) and Enchanted ($49.1 million). Considering the previously-dilapidated state of the Muppet brand, though, that number is an enormous accomplishment, and credit is due to Disney's marketing team for reintroducing the puppets in a fun, engaging advertising campaign. In just five days, the movie eclipsed the total of all previous Muppet movies with the exception of 1979's The Muppet Movie, which it will pass by next weekend. Of course, it still lags behind all of the movies in attendance except 1999 dud Muppets from Space, though that will quickly change over the next week or two. The audience was 53 percent female and awarded the movie an "A" CinemaScore.

Happy Feet Two fell 14 percent to $18.4 million for the five-day frame. In comparison, the first Happy Feet improved 22 percent to $50.6 million over Thanksgiving weekend in 2006. The sequel's $44.8 million total is a far cry from the original's $99.3 million through the same point.

Arthur Christmas debuted in fourth place with an estimated $17 million. It's $12.7 million three-day start ranks at the bottom of Aardman Animation wide releases, though it surely relieved some demand with its Wednesday opening. While this isn't a very impressive debut, the movie's direct connection to the upcoming Christmas holiday should translate in to strong holds throughout the month of December. 3D presentations accounted for 53 percent of the gross, and the audience was 59 percent female and 31 percent under the age of 25. The movie received an "A-" CinemaScore.

Hugo claimed fifth place with an estimated $15.4 million at just 1,277 locations. As hard as this may be to believe, Hugo's $11.35 million Friday-Sunday gross is actually director Martin Scorsese's third-highest debut ever behind Shutter Island and The Departed. Throughout the marketing effort distributor Paramount Pictures consistently emphasized the benefits of seeing Hugo in 3D, which paid off with a 75 percent 3D share. Paramount is currently planning to expand Hugo in to many more theaters on Dec. 9, which should help the movie hold well throughout the season.

Down in 10th place, Alexander Payne's The Descendants added a massive $9.24 million from just 433 locations. That's an incredibly strong expansion for the Fox Searchlight awards contender, and the movie will surely be making a nationwide expansion in the next week or two.

Aside from the onslaught of new family movies, the weekend also saw a few noteworthy limited releases targeted at adults. My Week with Marilyn burst on to the scene with $2.1 million over its first five days. After playing at 123 locations on Wednesday and Thursday, it expanded to 244 theaters for the traditional three-day weekend and claimed a spot in the Top 12 with $1.77 million.

David Cronenberg's A Dangerous Method opened to $241,000 from four theaters over the five-day weekend for a solid $60,250 average. The period drama about Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung stars Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen and Michael Fassbender, and it should be in good shape for a solid limited run.

Finally, The Artist opened at four theaters on Friday and earned $210,000 for the three-day weekend. That's 59 percent of The King's Speech's opening at the same time last year. The Weinstein Company will almost likely expand the movie gradually over the next two months to take advantage of inevitable awards buzz and strong word-of-mouth, though it's hard to imagine this black-and-white silent movie playing well outside of arthouse theaters.

Zoom vs. Moving Camera - What's the difference?

Zoom vs. Moving Camera from Vimeo Video School on Vimeo.

So You Want to Make a Movie - The Festival Circuit

You’ve caught the bug, and you’ve decided to make a movie. But where do you start? The good news is today there are fewer barriers to overcome in order to produce a film. Thanks to digital filmmaking, the costs have dropped dramatically. In reality, practically anybody can become a filmmaker. No one article can answer all of your questions or take you through the entire process; however, I want to offer you 20 key steps that will at least steer you in the right direction. Think of these steps as the big picture or the 30,000 foot view.

19. The Festival Circuit

Over the past few years, the number of film festivals has exploded. Today, you can find film festivals playing everywhere from college campuses to small and big towns. But, in reality, there are only a few that really matter. Sundance, Toronto, South by Southwest, Cannes, Tribeca and Berlin International Film Festival are the big players. This is where you are going to find the distributors, buyers and film critics necessary in helping you to make a deal.

Of course, the number one reason why you as an independent producer and filmmaker spend the time and the money exhibiting your film in festivals is for a distribution deal. It used to be that if you were accepted as an Official Selection at the Sundance Film Festival, you were practically guaranteed a distribution deal. That’s not true any longer. Today excellent films that play at Sundance are being bypassed. There are no longer guarantees that playing the festival circuit will get you to the Promised Land. Today, you just have to think of it as one tool to get your film noticed.

There is a significant amount of resources from books to videos that can help you to formulate a film festival strategy. So I am only going to hit a few high points. First, you want your film seen. Second, you want to get your film reviewed. And finally, you want to create some kind of buzz about your film. Film festivals are still the best option to achieve those goals. In order for that to happen, you need to get into the right festival. Remember, there are hundreds of film festivals, and they come and go like the the wind. Some are just a total waste of your time and money.

The big festivals are very difficult if not impossible to get into. You will need a big time actor or a director who has a good reputation. If you are lucky to get into a big festival, you might be assigned a 9:00 a.m. showing—not exactly the best time. This could kill your movie. On the other hand, small or mid-size festivals could feature your film on an opening night allowing you to make a big splash.

Do your research. Know the types and varieties of festivals. Go after a few that you think would be a good choice for your film. For example, if your film is a western, look for festivals that specialize in showing the western genre. Do you have any contacts or know people who work within the festival circuit who can help you? Find out the names of the festival directors and managers of the film festivals you are most interested in. The more you know the better. Festival directors are a rare breed. What they want most is a chance for a world premier. They love to discover films and find the next big thing. So use that to your advantage; however, once you give your world premier away, it’s gone forever. So it’s a big decision which festival you start with. It could lock you out of other film festivals because you can no longer offer the one thing that festival directors love the most - a world premier.

Thanksgiving, a State of Mind

by Harold Hay
President, Flannelgraph Ministries / Media Missionary School

As we go through the normal routine of our lives, we often overlook the things that we should be truly thankful for. It’s human nature to focus on our problems and what we lack in life. I’ve certainly been guilty of this. But recently I was reminded of the things that I should be thankful for.

Last Thursday we had an open house at our new site for Media Missionary School. It dawned on me just how many friends I have—people who will stand with you and support you no matter what. In fact, this open house wouldn’t have happened without my friends. I especially want to thank Jenny Stambaugh for her tireless efforts organizing the event. She made the evening a big success by taking care of every detail.

Open house would not of been as nice without the help of Chris and Monica Human who came out to get the space ready and to clean things up. They made it possible for everybody to enjoy the evening. Thank you guys for all of your support and love.

I must send a big thank you to Jerri and Ryan Hamrick, who have a catering business called Cake by Jerri, for donating all of the food. Not only that, they brought their staff to serve: Mickenzie Marie Friscus, Felecia Carolyn Smith, and Joanne Schulte Arnott. Thank you so much guys for coming out. By the way, Jerri’s food is amazing. If you are thinking about catering an event, you should check them out. I am also thankful for friends like Isaac Stambaugh, who has been my partner here at Media Missionary School from the very beginning. I can always count on his support. You are truly blessed in life when you have good friends.

There were so many people who came out for the open house. I want to also personally thank my pastor, Bo Weaver, from The Bridge Church in Wilder, KY; Gary Dawson, who provided space in his building for our new media center; Dwight Young from Bloc Ministries; Thomas S. Green, who recently was graduated from film school; Lori Roberds; Jalyssa Eliasen; Eric and Kurt Tuffensam; Marcus King; Devra Rochelle, Mark Denney; and of course my partner for many years from the old days at Victory Videos Ministries - Dave Dobbins.

We may not have raised much money; however, having the support of people behind you who believe in your vision is priceless. I’d rather have friends who will stand with me than all the checks in the world.

The last couple of years have been challenging to say the least. The ministry I founded over 20 years ago decided to take a different direction in which I had no future. The good news is we’re moving forward. God has given me a second chance, and this is something I am most thankful for. That doesn’t often happen in life. But this time around, I have an opportunity to build something special and to get it right. One thing I am determined to do here at Flannelgraph Ministries and Media Missionary School is to follow, without hesitation, the will of God.

No matter where you are in life, I’m sure there is something you can be thankful for. As I said, it’s easy to focus on the negative and the things that are not right. If you take that route, you might as well cash in your chips. During this time of thanksgiving, take stock, look around. You will be amazed what you have to be thankful for. I know I am.

What I have come to realize is Thanksgiving isn’t just a day. It’s a state of mind. We should be thankful for the things God has given us like friends and family. But most of all, we should be especially thankful if we know Christ as our Savior. The truth is everything else we receive in life is just gravy.

So You Want to Make a Movie - The Sound Edit

You’ve caught the bug, and you’ve decided to make a movie. But where do you start? The good news is today there are fewer barriers to overcome in order to produce a film. Thanks to digital filmmaking, the costs have dropped dramatically. In reality, practically anybody can become a filmmaker. There is no shortage of books, videos, and online resources to help get you started. No one article can answer all of your questions or take you through the entire process; however, I want to offer you 20 key steps that will at least steer you in the right direction. Think of these steps as the big picture or the 30,000 foot view.

Step 18 - The Sound Edit

The sound edit is one of the major areas of the entire filmmaking process that is often overlooked by first time filmmakers. What makes a movie “a movie” is the sound track and sound effects. Without it you don’t have a film. Most editors are good at editing pictures but are not experts in sound; therefore, you need a sound editor. The sound editor is responsible for editing a soundtrack that includes dialogue, sound effects, and music score. The process involves creating multiple sound tracks layered on top of each other. The mix is essential in developing a dimentional sound and direction.

Chances are the sound you captured in the production process will not be sufficient. That means you will have someone to do foley, which is the process of creating sound effects. For example, when someone walks across the floor, we expect to hear the footsteps. During production, no matter how hard you try, you will never capture this sound effectively. It must be created in the post-production process. Just remember this, usable sound isn’t recorded, it must be manufactured.

You also are going to need a composer to create a sound score for your film. Music is essential for creating the emotional impact for each scene of your movie. Can you imagine watching a movie without music? It would be unwatchable, boring, and devoid of emotion. Most large churches have music directors who are capable of composing music. More than likely, they would love to have an opportunity to write a music score for your movie. The key to being a good producer is finding alternatives to the expensive process of making a movie, and that no truer than in the post-production phase.

Editing is a tough process with a lot of hard decisions. You are going to have to trust your editor. Knowing where to cut is essential. A frame here or a frame there can make all the difference. Whether you’re the producer, director, or writer of your film, sometimes you have to be willing to have your favorite scene to be left on the cutting room floor. Just because you shot 130 minutes of footage, you don’t have to use all of it. Your editor should be good at knowing what kind of pace and rhythm your film needs to be successful.

Based on the money you have, you can’t hire a fulltime editor. That means that your film editor and sound editor will have day jobs. They will have to work on your film during the evening or on weekends. For good or bad, this is going to extend the amount of time it will take you to get a finished edit. This could be as long as 12 months. I highly suggest if at all possible do not allow your edit to go longer than a year. You don’t want to lose your momentum nor do you want your investors to start to think that they made a bad decision. The longer the process goes the more the pressure builds.

On a lighter note, you’re hiring a freelancer who has a day job. That usually means that he/she will have access to editing facilities. So in essence you’re getting a two for one deal—the editor and the edit bay.

So You Want to Make a Movie - The Wilderness

You’ve caught the bug, and you’ve decided to make a movie. But where do you start? The good news is today there are fewer barriers to overcome in order to produce a film. Thanks to digital filmmaking, the costs have dropped dramatically. In reality, practically anybody can become a filmmaker. There is no shortage of books, videos, and online resources to help get you started. No one article can answer all of your questions or take you through the entire process; however, I want to offer you 20 key steps that will at least steer you in the right direction. Think of these steps as the big picture or the 30,000 foot view.

Step 18. The Wilderness

Just when you think it is time to come up for air and a break, you are now going to face one of your most challenging aspects of making a movie (the edit). Post-production often feels like a wilderness experience—a time in which you feel like you are wondering around looking for a way out. At this point, you really don’t have a film. You have hundreds of pieces that somehow must fit together and emerge as a watchable movie.

In reality, a lot of productions never emerge out of the post-production process. They fail for the most obvious reason, a lack of money. I hope you’ve budged your film in a way that will allow you to get to the finish line. If you’ve run out of money at this point, you may be facing a very long uphill battle.

Where do you start? Hopefully, you’ve talked to an editor way back in the pre-production process. It just makes sense to have an editor onboard as early as possible. If you haven’t, my guess is you really don’t have the money to hire a professional film editor or to pay enormously expensive hourly rates at a post-production house. A good editor knows how to edit even if he/she has never tackled a feature film; therefore, look for someone who is looking for an opportunity to move into feature films. A good place to look for an editor is at commercial and industrial video production companies, local television stations, and large churches with media departments. Always get a demo reel.

The one thing you really need to think about when looking for an editor for your film is whether or not he/she has experience in color correction and has the software and filters that will make your movie look like it was shot on film. This is absolutely critical. More than likely, you’ve shot your movie on a digital format, which is nothing more than ones and zeros.

Film is a chemical process; therefore, it is a completely different look than a video. Film has a layer of grain and texture that makes it look a bit dreamy. This is what people expect to see when they watch a movie. If it looks too realistic, it resembles what you would see on your nightly newscast or documentary. Color correction is the process that helps turn video into a film.

The post-production process is very complex and technical. You definitely need to get someone who is not only artistically capable but also technically proficient. There are a thousand and one things that can go wrong, including frame rates that don’t match, incorrect aspect ratios, sync issues between audio and video, and dead sync. You don’t need to understand every aspect of editing. Just find someone who knows his way around the edit bay.