Posts by chris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I find I'm enjoying your pieces more and more Ian. Timing and execution.
-
So is a sharp saw or a blunt saw better for playing Mozart on?
-
"Quality," or "value," as described by Pirsig, cannot be defined because it empirically precedes any intellectual construction of it.
I think part of the impetus to critique with this much passion is somehow affected by the fact that film is a team assisted sport, heavily reliant on finance. There's an equation we run through in our heads in which we ascertain how much of the production process we understand, we divide the budget by our going rate, subtract the hype and evaluate whether with the same amount of resources we could do better.
If Avatar were an indie costing $2m, reactions may be very different. I don't think it really qualifies as bad, just average Hollywood fodder.To break things down such as focusing simply of Cameron's imagination and vision of another world, one would be hard pressed to say justify a 'crap' rating.
Like Michael Jackson in his dancing prime, who could justify calling that dancing anything other than quality? But the film Moonwalker on the other hand...I love it, but not everyone's cup of tea.
At least something like this, no time to think it out carefully, work awaits.
-
Legolas was shooting blanks.
-
Thanks Geoff, I'll have an ask around here before troubling you too much.
Sacha, what I would give to look out my window and see a nondescript scraggy lug of rock. those planes, mosquitoed against the seascape. It's paradise...with wind.
-
I agree Sacha, hence the beauty that is Welllington's urban planning should be allowed to breath.
-
Thanks Geoff and Recordari, yes, dark areas of consideration, best to just leave it at that... Geoff I'm still interested if you have access to any info on actual movie popularity. I'd also be keen to read that Sight & Sound interview if you can post a link.
The people who will see the sign most are ground-level Wellingtonians,
Who I'm sure are well aware of the location of Miramar.
Thanks for the heads up on the actual Hero figure Ben.
Here's a thought. The sign could say Wellington. Hollywood
Having been asked numerous times where I'm from, I'm 99% met with the standard 'beautiful country ' routine. People know this about New Zealand, tourists go there for the natural beauty. beauty such as a lush green hill in the middle of a densely urbanized area. The whole concept of ruining that with a big fuck off ugly sign shows scant consideration for the niche tourism market we inhabit. Sometimes I've tried to move the conversation onto other things "we also have a burgeoning film industry", I generally find
1. Few (relative) outside the country know the films that were made in New Zealand because they're essentially just;
English (aka American) language films, globally distributed with maximum 'splash' distribution and marketing. ie Avatar, 2012 etc etc.
2. They don't really care, because anyone can make a movie.
It's a case of stick to what you're good at it, i.e being bushy and beautiful. and once again that old Fred Dagg number is ringing in the ears.
Still on the topic Pinewood in England got it right, and something more regional like Kauriwood would at least show the mildest sense of culturally relevant creativity. From everything I've read on this topic, I think it's high time those guys at the airport were sent looking for new jobs and time Wellington elected a new mayor.
-
If only it was so easy to make 3D, just remaster the footage. Then we could watch Buster Keaton in 3D. But no, it's not that easy.
No one said it would be easy Ben, but this article is pretty inspiring in terms of how far along we are with that.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ic1a340c9e2d852e59c3ad4d9dedffb28
"Mainstream' is a short-hand way of referring to English (aka American) language films, globally distributed with maximum 'splash' distribution and marketing. ie Avatar, 2012 etc etc. There is, of course, another category of cross-over films (which suggests they are crossing from one circumstance to another).
Thanks Geoff. This interests me a great deal, because obviously the whole way the system is measured in terms of takings is affected a great deal by the fact that English speaking nations have traditionally such strong currencies, so I'm quite interested to see how movies like Sholay (1975) with 286 weeks straight showing stack up in terms of actual bums on seats (inflation adjusted $128 million). I have suspicions that beyond the hype this financial measuring system is merely in place to validate the (as you mentioned) post-colonial withering grip of the anglocentric version of events. Correct me if I'm wrong. I wish I could find reliable stats, but for the life of me I've never been able to.
A film like Hero only grossed something like $26 milllion, but you'd be hard pressed to find a Chinese person who hasn't seen it. In terms of eyes on screen the viewership would dwarf the 100 to 200 million attendance for Avatar.
If Armani's net profit for 2009 was $184.3 million, while Adidas' net profit was $333 million. How much do these figures tell us about the relative popularity of the two brands. Is the problem with the Chinese student's English or with the inherent logic of the what is being classified as 'mainstream'?
I think the major issue is not so much the language barrier of 'the chinese students' so much as the fact that New Zealand tertiary courses will often accept foreign language students with an IELTS level 6 (surely no better than a 14 year old native speaker.)
Samples here;
http://www.ielts-blog.com/ielts-writing-samples/ielts-essays-band-6/ielts-essay-learning-about-past/When this is the standard of English we accept, then obviously understanding the difference between a localised distinction of what should constitute 'mainstream' is significantly less relevant than "are they paying their fees?"
and they are. this problem is further exacerbated in your case I'm sure by issues such as the fact that Waikato University IELTS centre won an international award ....'The new award confirms the Centre's ability to offer both quality and quantity.'
http://www.waikato.ac.nz/international/blog/archives/007362.shtml
Notwithstanding the virulent corruption of the TOFEL and IELTS examinations conducted worldwide. and furthermore the selling down the river of western tertiary education standards in the name of 'international cooperation'.
So two issues here.
1. is this perceived mainstream anything more than a last gasp of colonial perception?2. How relevant are standards now in this educational money game? and what will be the ultimate effect for 'undereducated' native English users in the long haul?
In the case of Canterbury University's College of Business and Economics partnership with Zhongnan University of Economics and Law. To what extent will this undermine the qualification being offered by Canterbury university, and to what degree are we compromising the standards of our tertiary sector, accepting below par students under hollow agreements for quick cash?
-
LOTR would probably look awful in 3D, because they use 'forced perspective' a lot on the hobbits, usually in the talking scenes.
But as it wasn't filmed in 3D it simply be a case of remastering 2D footage to whatever 3D frame they had in mind, enhancing the original illusion.
-
Many are well versed through prior learning (to use the jargon) but some also have very limited or very naive experiences of film, or media generally. I find this especially so with my Chinese students, partly because of language problems and their limited access to film
The Chinese have significantly greater legal access to film than New Zealanders do - via the internet. Not having English as a mother tongue leaves countries far more open to foreign language films.
(the Chinese Govt only permits the importation of 20-25 English (aka American) features per year (setting aside the blackmarket here, of course)
If you watch a full length feature film on sanctioned sites like yukou, tudou etc you will have to endure a single advertisement before the film, paid for by companies like L'Oreal and none other than New Zealand's own Zespri. Most of the films watched in China are via the internet. The 20-25 film limit lacks relevance in that going to the cinema is expensive, $10-20(NZ), = 30x600ml beer, 10x boxes of cigarettes, etc,
Currently trying to get these students to recognise the distinctions between mainstream/global cinema, and world cinema!
Firstly that would be more an issue of growing up in a country with centralized media rather than anything to do with film importation.
But mainly it could just be that you don't have a very onto it group of students there.
Could you clarify the distinction between mainstream cinema and world cinema for us Geoff? And why such a distinction is being made? I'm genuinely interested in the angle that's been taken.