World of Film Information Hotline (aka Hollywood news)

All the dirt. All the top secret stuff. Anything that has to do with the process of getting us to sit and watch something projected on the big screen.

Would you happily show a minor a full on, hardcore violence, R Rated movie?

Yes
7
39%
No
11
61%
 
Total votes : 18

World of Film Information Hotline (aka Hollywood news)

Postby silentbobafett on Wed Nov 29, 2006 5:18 am

I have one of those early morning ideas that I get and I thought I'd see how it play's out!

Its the film topics are what keeps me coming here and are fun. But I thought they could do with a bit of depth. Sometimes we talk about a film and whats happening but miss the bigger picture.

So I thought we should have a thread which posts the business (albeit the more exciting side of it - where possible) side of Hollywood and the film community.

How does this sound? Too shit? Worth a go?

Anyone with any REAL film business news can post it here, but it might be handy to say where its from. Other wise this could turn into: My brother's wife's uncle whose third removed cousin had a long los brother who told me that Lou Diamond Philips was going to be Bilbo Baggins!

And that, people, will just not do! :-)

So theres the idea... let me know what you think and I'll see if this gets legs! :-)
Last edited by silentbobafett on Tue Jan 23, 2007 10:34 am, edited 6 times in total.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Wed Nov 29, 2006 5:19 am

Okay, so first bit of news, which does indeed matter for any films people are hoping to see get made in the next 6 months. If the strike happens, they'll either rushed or posponed (or cancelled!)

From IMDB:

28 November 2006
Producers Sense Writers Strike


Appearing to foreshadow a tough year ahead for labor relations in Hollywood, the head of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) said Monday that he had been "rebuked" by the Writers Guild of America, West after he proposed early contract negotiations. J. Nicholas Counter told today's (Tuesday) Los Angeles Times that he had offered to begin negotiations in January, but that his proposed had been rejected by WGA Executive Director David Young, who proposed that the talks begin in September. The writers' contract expires on Oct. 31. Counter told today's (Tuesday) Los Angeles Times that the refusal raises the possibility of a strike and he suggested that it may cause the studios to accelerate production of films and stockpile scripts.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby havocSchultz on Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:47 am

SOURCE


Lou Diamond Phillips cast as Bilbo Baggins!!!!!!!!
User avatar
havocSchultz
is full of stars...
 
Posts: 15695
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:46 am
Location: living amongst a hazy nothing...

Postby silentbobafett on Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:31 am

Heh Heh! Havoc... you one funny fuck! I'm almost miss placed my cereal!

Heh heh! :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby havocSchultz on Wed Nov 29, 2006 10:38 am

silentbobafett wrote:Heh Heh! Havoc... you one funny fuck! I'm almost miss placed my cereal!





I took your cereal...


I needed to add a little more "malk" to it for you...



Does a body meh...
User avatar
havocSchultz
is full of stars...
 
Posts: 15695
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:46 am
Location: living amongst a hazy nothing...

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:28 am

This ain't the kind of thread where I expect much talkback. But I hope its the kinda aplace where i fyou wanna see a limited amount of information quickly about whats happening in the industry... you can have a click! If you got something that ain't on here... add it! :-)

Anyway, its that lovely time of year where they come out with those bullshit earners lists. Its the femmes this time! But its a good gauge as too who the studios wanna get in bed with. All I ask is.... how the fuck is Greasy ReeSe second!!!???!! :-)

Kidman Tops Hollywood Earners List

The Hours Oscar winner Nicole Kidman is Hollywood's leading lady when it comes to her salary, according to trade magazine The Hollywood Reporter's annual Star Salary Top 10. The Cold Mountain actress has claimed the top spot on the new list thanks mainly to the paycheck she'll receive for next year's sci-fi blockbuster The Invasion. Six of the top 10 women on the list are Oscar winners, with only Charlie's Angels stars Drew Barrymore and Cameron Diaz, Kirsten Dunst and Jennifer Aniston yet to pick up an Academy Award.

The new top 10 list is: 1. Nicole Kidman ($16 to $17 million per film); 2. Reese Witherspoon ($15 million); 3. Renee Zellweger ($15 million); 4. Drew Barrymore ($15 million); 5. Cameron Diaz ($15 million); 6. Halle Berry ($14 million); 7. Charlize Theron ($10 million); 8. Angelina Jolie ($10 million); 9. Kirsten Dunst ($8 to $10 million); 10. Jennifer Aniston ($8 million).
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby doglips on Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:29 am

silentbobafett wrote:This ain't the kind of thread where I expect much talkback. But I hope its the kinda aplace where i fyou wanna see a limited amount of information quickly about whats happening in the industry... you can have a click! If you got something that ain't on here... add it! :-)

Anyway, its that lovely time of year where they come out with those bullshit earners lists. Its the femmes this time! But its a good gauge as too who the studios wanna get in bed with. All I ask is.... how the fuck is Greasy ReeSe second!!!???!! :-)

Kidman Tops Hollywood Earners List

The Hours Oscar winner Nicole Kidman is Hollywood's leading lady when it comes to her salary, according to trade magazine The Hollywood Reporter's annual Star Salary Top 10. The Cold Mountain actress has claimed the top spot on the new list thanks mainly to the paycheck she'll receive for next year's sci-fi blockbuster The Invasion. Six of the top 10 women on the list are Oscar winners, with only Charlie's Angels stars Grande Rojo's favorite person Barrymore and Cameron Diaz, Kirsten Dunst and Jennifer Aniston yet to pick up an Academy Award.

The new top 10 list is: 1. Nicole Kidman ($16 to $17 million per film); 2. Reese Witherspoon ($15 million); 3. Renee Zellweger ($15 million); 4. Grande Rojo's favorite person Barrymore ($15 million); 5. Cameron Diaz ($15 million); 6. Halle Berry ($14 million); 7. Charlize Theron ($10 million); 8. Angelina Jolie ($10 million); 9. Kirsten Dunst ($8 to $10 million); 10. Jennifer Aniston ($8 million).


Because she's a good actress?
User avatar
doglips
MOD FAIRY
 
Posts: 6288
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 6:08 am

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:01 am

Weeeellllllllllllllllllllll what has she done to A) really prove that and B) sucess shes had over the years to put her there

I mean I thought her best 2 roles were Walk the Line (which I'm guessing her current position owes a ot to that - which is fair enouogh!) and Fear (only for the rollercoaster scene ;-) )

But lets look at her filmography and see what films have made the box office go shit dinlo and what have been critical success to earn the NUMBER 2 spot! I'm not saying she can't be top ten but NUMBER 2! That ain't exactly easy to reach! :-)

Just Like Heaven (2005) ....
Walk the Line (2005) ....
Vanity Fair (2004) ....
Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde (2003) ....
Sweet Home Alabama (2002)
The Importance of Being Earnest (2002)

Legally Blonde (2001) .... Elle Woods
The Trumpet of the Swan (2001)
Little Nicky (2000) .... Angel Holly
"American Psycho (2000) .... Evelyn Williams
Best Laid Plans (1999) .... Lissa
Election (1999) .... Tracy Flick
Cruel Intentions (1999) .... Annette Hargrove
Pleasantville (1998) .... Jennifer




Okay, okay so I stand corrected on the basis of Election (which is HER best role!) and American Psycho (Which was a better directed role of her Legally Blonde schtick!)

But American Psycho is old hat in hollywood now and they sure as hell don't give a shit about Election.

So that means its down to her recent films:

Just Like Hevean and Walk the Line.

Well... I don't buy it!

Anyway... enough of that! I'm up for Election 2! :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby Chilli on Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:53 am

Fuck Election. Overrated piece of shit.

This is quite a big announcement in terms of future movie exposure.

BitTorrent Goes Legit

Paramount, Lionsgate and 20th Century Fox are expected to join Warner Bros. in providing movies over the Internet via BitTorrent, the video web service that they once universally scorned, the Los Angeles Times Times reported today (Wednesday). As part of the deal, BitTorrent has agreed to use filtering software to prevent pirated content from going out over its service. However, the newspaper indicated, analysts generally believe that the switch-over from an outlet for pirated versions of movies to one where users must pay a fee to receive them is likely to fail; it noted that similar Internet-based movie-download services are struggling. Josh Bernoff, an analyst with Forrester Research, told the Times: "The problem is consumers are not convinced that paying for and downloading video is worth it. ... The other problem is it doesn't end up on the TV set. The mechanisms that do get it to the TV, like DVD burning, are not quite what they need to be." Meanwhile, Wal-Mart on Tuesday launched a new service that allows anyone who buys a DVD copy of certain features to download a copy of it onto their computer or portable digital device. The additional charge will be $2-4 dollars.
Bison: [to his architect] The temple above us was the wonder of the ancient world. Bisonopolis shall be the wonder of my world. But I think the food court should be larger. All the big franchises will want in.
User avatar
Chilli
The Unfriendly Ghost
 
Posts: 6869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Wales

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:25 am

Yes, I saw that - interesting!

But I think it will go the way Napster went - down hill!

But Bittorrent, thats not jus tone company as I understand it. Anyone can make a bittorrent and set it up on a site. So if one site goes legit (of which, I thought, there were already legit ones) others won't have to..

This comes down to pricing.

But it was some big and unexpected news.

Cheers for posting Chilli, friend... :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby Chilli on Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:27 am

I think its strange that they think people will pay to download films via the web. The only reason most people use the web is because its free, not because its especially fast. In the time it takes to download, you can watch the film at the cinema, go to the pub, drink six shots, come back, pass out, wake up - tell the cat to piss off, and find out that you need to install the latest driver to watch Click.

heh.
Bison: [to his architect] The temple above us was the wonder of the ancient world. Bisonopolis shall be the wonder of my world. But I think the food court should be larger. All the big franchises will want in.
User avatar
Chilli
The Unfriendly Ghost
 
Posts: 6869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Wales

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am

And find a ladyboy in bed next to you...


Oh no... just me... oh...forget that then...
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby Chilli on Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:33 am

Long as it's a ladyboy and not a boylady. Wait - crap. Wrong comment. WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Bison: [to his architect] The temple above us was the wonder of the ancient world. Bisonopolis shall be the wonder of my world. But I think the food court should be larger. All the big franchises will want in.
User avatar
Chilli
The Unfriendly Ghost
 
Posts: 6869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Wales

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:47 am

It happens to all of us Chilli...

Anyho, from the trades today:

From the trades:

Theaters To Get Touch On Cell Phone Users


Regal Theaters, the nation's largest theater chain, has begun testing devices in 25 of its locations that allow patrons to summon ushers if audience members use cell phones or become unruly. Regal Chief Executive Michael Campbell told the Reuters Media Summit in New York Wednesday that a second button will notify management of faulty projection, a third about uncomfortable room temperature, and a fourth about any other problem. Campbell said that ordinarily customers won't say anything such problems while the film is running. "They just will complain on their way out or, in the worst case scenario, they don't come back." He said that he expects the device to be available nationwide next year and that it will be given to "mature" audience members, who will receive free popcorn for their efforts.



------

Those paying attention will notice its also in the cinema stories thread, but I don't have high hopes for that until I get clearence from a mod! :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby Fried Gold on Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:16 am

User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13898
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:41 am

SBF - you have to uncheck the box that says "disable BB Code for this post". If it's happening every time you post, you probably need to go into your profile and uncheck the box there.

Lemme know if you don't understrand what I'm going on about...... :grin:
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:09 am

Wanna know why we're getting thsi steady amount of crapola as movies? Wanna know why they continue to remake films? Well... its because we love it!

From IMDB.com


Moviegoers Happy with Product, Says Survey


A recent survey has concluded that 83 percent of moviegoers are satisfied with the quality of current firms. The survey was conducted by PA Consulting and reported in today's (Wednesday) Daily Variety.In an interview with the trade publication, Mike Hunter of PA called the result a surprise and noted, "The satisfaction with the quality of films was consistent everywhere we polled." Nine cities were targeted by the company, which quizzed 2,000 moviegoers. The survey also indicated that the greatest factor keeping moviegoers away from theaters was ticket prices, with 86 percent saying that they'd attend more often if prices were cut in half.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:19 am

Sony Breaks Domestic Box Office Record
Source: Sony Pictures Entertainment December 17, 2006


With this weekend's #1 release of The Pursuit of Happyness, Sony Pictures Entertainment's box office receipts for 2006 have passed $1.573 billion, setting a new motion picture industry record for domestic box-office in a single year, it was announced today by Jeff Blake, chairman, worldwide marketing and distribution for the Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group and vice chairman of SPE. In passing the industry record, which Sony set in 2002, the studio caps an extraordinary year in which SPE released a record-breaking 13 #1 films. The studio also launched 13 films to opening weekends of more than $20 million, another industry record, and surpassed more than $3 billion in global ticket sales for the first time. Sony Pictures now holds the top two years in the all-time domestic box office record books.

Commenting on the achievement, Blake said, "We've set a bar that will be challenging for us - or any studio - to top; this has been an enormous year by anyone's definition. We successfully launched our animation division and we handled nearly every genre of movie, from broad comedies to family films, emotional dramas to event tentpoles. This kind of year is only possible when everyone is working at the top of their game, and our filmmakers really delivered exceptional product this year."

In addition to crediting the actors, producers and filmmakers behind Sony's 2006 slate of 27 motion pictures, Blake said, "This year is a true testament to the hard work and dedication of the studio's production, marketing, and distribution teams who break their backs to bring it home year after year. But particular credit is deserved by our presidents of production Doug Belgrad and Matt Tolmach, president of marketing Valerie Van Galder, our president of creative advertising Josh Goldstine, our president of domestic distribution Rory Bruer, and the leadership of Michael Lynton. Of course, none of this dream slate comes together without Amy Pascal, who has been one of the most successful studio leaders in the history of our company."

2006 marks the third time in the past five years that SPE has been #1 studio in domestic market share. As Sony finishes the year, the studio controls over 18% of all tickets sold in the United States and Canada. Led by The Da Vinci Code, the worldwide blockbuster that has grossed over $750 million at the box office, SPE has seen four films open to more than $40 million in the US and Canada; ultimately, each exceeded more than $100 million in domestic box office - including Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby, Click, The Da Vinci Code, and Casino Royale. In addition, a record 13 films opened to more than $20 million - smashing the old record of 8 films, set in 2004 by Sony and Universal.

Other highlights of the 2006 slate include The Pink Panther, Open Season, Monster House, R.V., Gridiron Gang, The Holiday, Silent Hill, Underworld: Evolution, and When a Stranger Calls, among others.



-----------------------


Now is it me or didn't Titanic break 1 billion on its own? So surely Fox (I believe it was a Fox film) was first to do this. Cos Titanic made 1.5billion or thereabouts on its tod...

hmmmm

interesting though :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:56 am

Restored Movie Prints Sharper Than Originals


Ultra Resolution, a digital process used to restore old Technicolor movies, has succeeded in making the newer prints sharper and more realistic than the originals, the Hollywood Reporter observed today (Wednesday). The process, which has been nominated for a Scientific and Technical Academy Award this year, can correct registration glitches that occurred in making the original prints, the trade paper noted. Technicolor used a printing process -- rather than a chemical-developing process -- similar to the one used by magazines and newspapers to produce color prints; three separate rolls of film were exposed in the huge Technicolor cameras to produce the color-separation negatives that were used to make the prints, with one color laid over the other. Ultra Resolution, devised by sisters Keren and Sharon Perlmutter, lines up the images of each frame precisely, something that was not always possible when the original prints were produced.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:58 am

Really don't know if anyones bothered by any of it, but I like reading industry news, so it gives me a bit of a purpose when I scourng for it! So gonna keep chucking some out at yah... you never now! Its one of my new years resolutions... try and be commited to something on the zone! :-)

Anyway, heres one for me UK ZONERS:

Orange Extends Deal To Provide Two-for-One Movie Tickets


The British wireless phone service Orange has extended a deal with major movie houses in the U.K. to provide two tickets for the price of one on Wednesday nights for anyone who dials the numbers 241 and sends a text message on their cell phones to their local theater. The promotion by the cell-phone company, which is owned by France Telecom but headquartered in the U.K., has been highly visible in movie theaters during the ad blocs that run on screen prior to the features. Orange said that more than 90 percent of British theaters are participating in the Wednesday-night offer. Traditionally, Wednesday night is the slowest night of the week for movie ticket sales.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:26 am

WOW! I consider this rather important!

A movie changing the ways movies work? Surely this works towards a goal of the movie makers. NOt their main goal (I haven't seent he doco so not too sure, but have read a ot about it)

I might put this in its own thread but I did want to try and keep all industry news in here! :-)

MPAA To Revise Ratings System


The Motion Picture Association of America, always resistant to changes to its movie ratings system under its previous chief, Jack Valenti, is now planning to make some key alterations to the system, Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult. Another change will allow a filmmaker to cite scenes in another movie when appealing a severe rating. In an interview with Variety Dan Glickman, who succeed Valenti in 2004, said that the organization had been influenced by criticism of its ratings system presented in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which debuted at the Sundance film festival last year. Glickman plans to discuss the new revisions of the ratings rules with independent filmmakers attending this year's Sundance festival, which gets underway on Monday, Variety said.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby buster00 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:19 am

silentbobafett wrote:WOW! I consider this rather important!

A movie changing the ways movies work? Surely this works towards a goal of the movie makers. NOt their main goal (I haven't seent he doco so not too sure, but have read a ot about it)

I might put this in its own thread but I did want to try and keep all industry news in here! :-)

MPAA To Revise Ratings System


The Motion Picture Association of America, always resistant to changes to its movie ratings system under its previous chief, Jack Valenti, is now planning to make some key alterations to the system, Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult. Another change will allow a filmmaker to cite scenes in another movie when appealing a severe rating. In an interview with Variety Dan Glickman, who succeed Valenti in 2004, said that the organization had been influenced by criticism of its ratings system presented in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which debuted at the Sundance film festival last year. Glickman plans to discuss the new revisions of the ratings rules with independent filmmakers attending this year's Sundance festival, which gets underway on Monday, Variety said.


I haven't seen This Film Is Not Yet Rated yet, but I can't imagine what kind of "revisions" are necessary.

It breaks down like this: If you take your children to an R-rated movie, then you are a bad parent. It's exactly that simple.

What? Did you not understand? BAD. PARENT. The fuck up you must shut.
User avatar
buster00
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6401
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:12 pm

Postby MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:23 am

thedoglippedone wrote:
silentbobafett wrote:This ain't the kind of thread where I expect much talkback. But I hope its the kinda aplace where i fyou wanna see a limited amount of information quickly about whats happening in the industry... you can have a click! If you got something that ain't on here... add it! :-)

Anyway, its that lovely time of year where they come out with those bullshit earners lists. Its the femmes this time! But its a good gauge as too who the studios wanna get in bed with. All I ask is.... how the fuck is Greasy ReeSe second!!!???!! :-)

Kidman Tops Hollywood Earners List
The Hours Oscar winner Nicole Kidman is Hollywood's leading lady when it comes to her salary, according to trade magazine The Hollywood Reporter's annual Star Salary Top 10. The Cold Mountain actress has claimed the top spot on the new list thanks mainly to the paycheck she'll receive for next year's sci-fi blockbuster The Invasion. Six of the top 10 women on the list are Oscar winners, with only Charlie's Angels stars Grande Rojo's favorite person Barrymore and Cameron Diaz, Kirsten Dunst and Jennifer Aniston yet to pick up an Academy Award.

The new top 10 list is: 1. Nicole Kidman ($16 to $17 million per film); 2. Reese Witherspoon ($15 million); 3. Renee Zellweger ($15 million); 4. Grande Rojo's favorite person Barrymore ($15 million); 5. Cameron Diaz ($15 million); 6. Halle Berry ($14 million); 7. Charlize Theron ($10 million); 8. Angelina Jolie ($10 million); 9. Kirsten Dunst ($8 to $10 million); 10. Jennifer Aniston ($8 million).


EDIT: Nicole # 1??!?! Did you ever see BMX Bandits or Bush Christmas? You may revise any good actress ideas you have for # 1... :)

And yes, I know that she's only a kid in those flicks but I stand by my point!
Last edited by MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:05 am, edited 12 times in total.
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby tapehead on Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:31 am

But Reece Witherspoon isn't in either of those movies!?

Monkey, you're confusing the shit of of me.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:50 am

--- :?
Last edited by MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:01 am

buster00 wrote:It breaks down like this: If you take your children to an R-rated movie, then you are a bad parent. It's exactly that simple.

What? Did you not understand? BAD. PARENT. The fuck up you must shut.


Whoa there, Oprah! In the UK, you can't take your kids into our equivalent of an R-rated movie, but when I was a kid my dad freely let me watch many an R movie at home - and I have him to thank for my love of film.

It didn't mess me up really - apart from the fact that I now have a penchant for murder and rape.

On second thoughts, you're right: he was a terrible parent...



Monkey: I think Tape knows you were talking about Nicole Kidman. The confusion has arisen from the fact that nobody else was.... :wink:
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:03 am

AAhhhh. Well that makes more sense. I read the article stating that she's #1 and just had to post my annoyance. I'll edit my post to reflect that (I thought it made sence :oops:, sorry everybody.... SORRY! My bad...)
Last edited by MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby tangerine on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:05 am

Thank god we have TITG to clear these things up eh?
Image
User avatar
tangerine
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2344
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 4:31 pm
Location: scouting

Postby MonkeyM666 on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:07 am

I know, Tape would have chastised me by now I'm sure! :wink: :)

Great, now I'm having troubling editing... bloody work computer. :evil:
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby havocSchultz on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:35 am

silentbobafett wrote:WOW! I consider this rather important!

A movie changing the ways movies work? Surely this works towards a goal of the movie makers. NOt their main goal (I haven't seent he doco so not too sure, but have read a ot about it)

I might put this in its own thread but I did want to try and keep all industry news in here! :-)

MPAA To Revise Ratings System


The Motion Picture Association of America, always resistant to changes to its movie ratings system under its previous chief, Jack Valenti, is now planning to make some key alterations to the system, Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult. Another change will allow a filmmaker to cite scenes in another movie when appealing a severe rating. In an interview with Variety Dan Glickman, who succeed Valenti in 2004, said that the organization had been influenced by criticism of its ratings system presented in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which debuted at the Sundance film festival last year. Glickman plans to discuss the new revisions of the ratings rules with independent filmmakers attending this year's Sundance festival, which gets underway on Monday, Variety said.




In Canada, if a movie is R-Rated, anybody under the age of 18 needs to be accompanied by someone above the age of 18...
If it's rated 18+ then nobody under 18 us allowed in...and if there is excessive Smokey Thingie use, it effects the rating...but the use of the french language is somehow still widely accepted...
User avatar
havocSchultz
is full of stars...
 
Posts: 15695
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:46 am
Location: living amongst a hazy nothing...

Postby WinslowLeach on Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:43 am

I actually dont like the business side of movies. I'm into the artistic side of it. Unless I'm getting paid somewhere in the scheme of things I could care less about all that stuff.
User avatar
WinslowLeach
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 4079
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:39 pm
Location: The Deuce

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:15 am

havocSchultz wrote:In Canada, if a movie is R-Rated, anybody under the age of 18 needs to be accompanied by someone above the age of 18...
If it's rated 18+ then nobody under 18 us allowed in...and if there is excessive Smokey Thingie use, it effects the rating...but the use of the french language is somehow still widely accepted...


Le ZING!
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:18 am

I actually dont like the business side of movies. I'm into the artistic side of it. Unless I'm getting paid somewhere in the scheme of things I could care less about all that stuff.


Thats all well and good and my fave part is the "art" (or the less wanky version: the movies themselves!) However what happens in the business side of things greatly effects what you see up on screen. Every single film made is part of some kind of political battle to finally make it up on that big screen.

By looking at the business side of things you can see what the directors and producers (to name but 2) have to go through to get a movie on screen. You can see how a great script can turn into a shit movie. You can see how a great movie gets edited to a shit movie. Or why the film you want to take you son or daughter to gets slapped with an adult rating etc

There are billion and one things that can happen to a movie that have nothing to do with art. It learning how to navigate this treacherous warzone so you can have a film up on the big screen.

It doesn't matter for shit if people who like films are interested in movie politics. But it matters if you one day want to make films AND its also VERY VERY interesting if you ARE a film luva! :-)

After, all, please, please, please don't forget, like my stupid fucking film school teachers did, its Show Business and with out the Business you got no fucking show... :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:28 am

And as for under age people seeing adult rated movies. Its a fucking tough one!

I come from a family of film fans. My dad is the biggest film buff I could ever meet. Its great. I too consider myself to have become a film geek as appose to a film buff.

But I NEVER saw 18 films (UK HERE!) when I was young. Sure, its down to discretion, I would see some stuff, but the best person after my self (and when I was young THE BEST person to decide) was my Dad. He knew me and would work out what he was happy to show me.

I don't think you have to have seen age restricted film to become a film geek. TItG I KNOW this is not what you're saying and its not directed at you (just wanna clear this up!) but it stems from this feeling that if you didn't do a Tarantino and grow up on hard R films from the Grindhouses then you're some how less of a film geek.

I disagree.

I am totally against cencorship but I'm for classification.

If a film like Ichii the Killer comes out then it in no way should be available for young viewers. I'm a liberal fuck, but I don't see any merit in this!

You have forever to watch this crazy vilent shit. But when you're young hack through the good shit. Cos violent films are rarely childhood faves (thats not to say that are not good films but I'm on about childhood memores here) Back to the Future, Indy, Star Wars... all films with the family and the wild imaginated child (of all ages!) in mind...

I hate it when people say games like Grand Theft Auto should be banned and films like Pulp Fiction should be.

Well, no, they shouln't be. They are clearly labeled that they are for 18 year olds +. Oh, I think thats to high btw - I think once you get to 16/17 and can have sex, leave school, get a job and earn money... what the fuck is there in an 18 you don't know already.

School is the most horrible violent, cuss filled, sex driven time of your life... but I can't see any of this in a realistic way until I'm 18? Hmmm

But anyway, thats a side note. The point is... if a parent wants to let their child play on an 18 game or watch and 18 movie its there discretion. But I don't get it myself...

I'd have rather watched Goonies at 6 than Wild Bunch or I'd rather play on a Star Wars game or go on some crazy, multiworld adventure then shoot hookers in some blood crazy game I don't really get (GTA btw)!

So, my thoughts, kinda in the middle as always: each to their own etc etc

But I just worry that parents not giving a shit what their kids watch will affect US in the long run! :-)
Last edited by silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby Doc Holliday on Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:51 am

Seeing as how sometimes I can be quick to disagree with you Boba, on this occasion I thought I'd just chime in and say I go along 100% with you on your last post.

Now...if only I had an opinion of my own to add.

Dammit.
User avatar
Doc Holliday
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:11 am
Location: Crawling along a razor's edge

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:18 am

Thanks Doc... that means a lot... never has someone agreed with me that I was so pleased! :-)

sniffle... thank you :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby buster00 on Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:48 am

Yeah, I suppose I should have qualified my sweeping statement just a bit.

There may be some merit in showing something like Saving Private Ryan or JFK to a youngster who's mature enough to handle the subject matter with a bit of parental guidance. I'm talking about, say, a 10-year-old watching a realistic depiction of life.

But when I see trailer-trash parents taking their 4-and-5-year olds to see Pick of Destiny, Silent Hill, or Bad Santa (and I did, at all three films), I just wanna slap 'em shitless. What the fuck kind of parenting is that?

If you can't afford a babysitter, then don't go to the goddamn R-rated movie...and don't come bitching when your kid acts like an obnoxious little shit because of the movie he just watched. You'd think it would be common sense.
User avatar
buster00
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6401
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:12 pm

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:27 am

I liked what you wrote too Boba - and I totally agree. I used to LOVE Elston Gunn's weekly recap on the main page, I'd print it out religiously every week and keep it in a binder. Does anyone know what happened to the recap? I miss it :sad:
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:31 am

Does anyone know what happened to Elston Gunn is the question! :-)

I think the two diatribes by above (show business and R rated films and sprogs) are among the two best things I've written on here..... mainly cos the typo's are down to a minimum and I didn't call anyone a fudgepacking gentleman! :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:33 am

Hahahahahahahaha - yeah, that does help!

Elston still does stuff on the main site, occasionally...

Alas, no recaps though!
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby Cpt Kirks 2pay on Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:36 am

I saw a lot of horror films as a kid, and they sorta shook me up and educated me about how nasty this world and the people who live in it can be. I think it has made me a better person for it, as it is the better the Devil you know. Plus it teaches you the difference between right and wrong but most importantly, WHY! It teaches you just how horrific and monstrous the effect can be of hitting someone over the head with an axe, and then sticking a girl on a meet hook and carving her boyfriend up in front of her, etc. - and that these people do exist, so watch out also. So it wisens you and makes you defensive to Evil. It teaches you about survival.

It sorta depends on the kid I suppose. These movies can either turn you off of violence, or turn you onto it. As a kid, the effect is more dramatic, either way, than to see it as an adult, so you should be aware that your taking a huge gamble on your child's psyche. It could be the best or worst thing for them.
User avatar
Cpt Kirks 2pay
The Dark Tower
 
Posts: 16454
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:49 am

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:47 am

Exactly... it's each to their own. But I can think back to loads of kids watching 18/R movies at school and using phrases (swearing) and getting violent ideas from them etc

That doesn't mean they are going to be killers or anything stupid like that. It just means kids are impressionable!

I used to watch superman and jump across the room trying to fly.

I just think I'd like my kids to enjoy their innocence while it lasts! The world is a shit place and until you hit school you can hide away from that. You can enjoy Superman and Goonie and BttF and all these other films and cartoons for what they are.

I just feel that why would I NEED to show my young child Texas Chainsaw Massacre at aged 6? What good is it doing? It might now do any bad... but is really that important that they see it?

I'll up for explaining the real world to them and being honest about everything from Sex through to my obbsession with Yorkshire Puddings. But why when there young?

I don't get the point! I really don't!

I don't think films create adults to become violent - I think they have to have something in them already. I don't think it will, big time, in childeren. But I KNOW FOR A FACT that kids are impressionable and so show them some cool ass killing action and they might want to copy it in some how.

Thats not cos they are deranged, but because there mind and body aren't ready for it.

Film makers make their films for a target audience. If you respect these film makers then you jump into their world. How can you expect a 7 year old to watch films like Ichii the Killer, Old Boy, Regquiem for a Dream, TCM, Last House of the Left and expect themt o enjoy the film!

I'd rather wait till they are at an age to respect and understand the film and then show it to them (and depending on the person in question that could be a range of ages - not 18 etc)

But I put money that a 6 year old doesn't get the film as well as someone who is older...

So then why not let the 6 year old enjoy life with a more innocent view on things until they get to the age where they hate the world, are aware of the evil in the world, know there is no Santa, have had some real fucking fights, have lost their belief in innoncence and, most of all... they are now mature... because the world isn't all roses, toys and Spielberg movies...

But, boy, I'd love to be the age where everything was simply good and bad and I could watch everything with out the weight of the world on my shoulders... :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby MonkeyM666 on Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:07 am

Cpt Kirks 2pay wrote:I saw a lot of horror films as a kid, and they sorta shook me up and educated me about how nasty this world and the people who live in it can be. I think it has made me a better person for it, as it is the better the Devil you know. Plus it teaches you the difference between right and wrong but most importantly, WHY! It teaches you just how horrific and monstrous the effect can be of hitting someone over the head with an axe, and then sticking a girl on a meet hook and carving her boyfriend up in front of her, etc. - and that these people do exist, so watch out also. So it wisens you and makes you defensive to Evil. It teaches you about survival.

It sorta depends on the kid I suppose. These movies can either turn you off of violence, or turn you onto it. As a kid, the effect is more dramatic, either way, than to see it as an adult, so you should be aware that your taking a huge gamble on your child's psyche. It could be the best or worst thing for them.




For some reason I thought that you might have watched lots of Horror Movies as a kid. Don't ask me why, I just had a 'vibe'. :wink:

I think that parents should take more responsibility for their children. They are your offspring, how do you want them to turn out? I'm not saying that watching violence or playing violent games will destroy a child’s moral fibre but it does screw with a kid’s sense of reality. Kids will turn out different than if they were watching Transformers or My little Pony. We all know that. We’re all desensitised to a lot of stuff. I've only been watching Horror movies for the past two years, before then Gremlins and Scream were are hard core as I would go (yes, I’m a big chicken). I've noticed that even in the past couple of years that I laugh at the moments I use to cringe at. Put this on a scale of 10 years and add a child’s mind to the equation and there has to be something going on.

The argument of 'the government should control what our children watch through ratings and censorship’ is completely futile. In a day and age where you can log on to a website with no passwords, no warnings, nothing. You punch in 'XXX', 'dirty cowboy midget porn' or ‘Saddams Hanging’ and a couple of hours later a video is sitting on your PC in your own home. The parents are the only one's who can stop this. Kids are more tech savvy as well, so often using child filters can just result in making the undesirable, desirable just due to the fact that it's contraband. Parents need to play an active roll in their children’s entertainment and viewing habits. To add to this, it's called the world wide web for a reason. The only way that content can be controlled for younger viewing is parent partisipation. What can the UK government do against a Canaidian or Korean website?

The only thing that I can think of that the governments could do is educating the public on the importance of a solid moral upbringing. 'Prepare your child for the world ahead'... but a lot of those campaigns get a response of 'my child my rules, the government can't tell me how to raise my child'.

I will educate my child and warn them that it's all fake, and a lot of things are made only for money by corporations. But untill they understand that fully, I'll be controlling what they watch/play.
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5403
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:26 am

Well, I know my dad's justification for showing me stuff like Friday the 13th when I was a kid was that it would "toughen me up", although I don't remember feeling very tough when I was cowering under my duvet that night. However, when watching that kind of horror film with him, he always emphasised the fact that what I was watching wasn't real, whereas I can't begin to imagine what I'd have made of something like Ichi the Killer if I'd seen it at such a young age (I'm talking 6-9 years old here). I do recall seeing Shogun Assassin when I was still in Junior School, but the crazy blood spurts seemed more unreal than a lot of the other stuff I'd seen at the time, so it didn't affect me much - I was aware that the violence was almost cartoonish, whereas Friday 13th and its ilk seemed more realistic to my young eyes
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby John-Locke on Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:40 am

silentbobafett wrote:WOW! I consider this rather important!

A movie changing the ways movies work? Surely this works towards a goal of the movie makers. NOt their main goal (I haven't seent he doco so not too sure, but have read a ot about it)

I might put this in its own thread but I did want to try and keep all industry news in here! :-)

MPAA To Revise Ratings System


The Motion Picture Association of America, always resistant to changes to its movie ratings system under its previous chief, Jack Valenti, is now planning to make some key alterations to the system, Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult. Another change will allow a filmmaker to cite scenes in another movie when appealing a severe rating. In an interview with Variety Dan Glickman, who succeed Valenti in 2004, said that the organization had been influenced by criticism of its ratings system presented in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which debuted at the Sundance film festival last year. Glickman plans to discuss the new revisions of the ratings rules with independent filmmakers attending this year's Sundance festival, which gets underway on Monday, Variety said.


That is brilliant news, it means that film makers can show the things integral to the plot without getting slapped with an NC17 certificate which basically stops them from making any money as Studios won't distribute them and chains like Wal Mart and Blockbusters won't carry them on their shelves. I'm sure there will still be a few films rated NC17 but at least now there will be an option for the MPAA to simply say that it's an R but not suitable for kids in any way.

This Film is not yet Rated is a must see film, I'm glad Kirby Dick has managed to shake up the organisation.
Image
User avatar
John-Locke
BULLETPROOF TIGER
 
Posts: 12365
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:49 am
Location: Unknown

Postby John-Locke on Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:46 am

ThisIsTheGirl wrote:Well, I know my dad's justification for showing me stuff like Friday the 13th when I was a kid was that it would "toughen me up", although I don't remember feeling very tough when I was cowering under my duvet that night. However, when watching that kind of horror film with him, he always emphasised the fact that what I was watching wasn't real, whereas I can't begin to imagine what I'd have made of something like Ichi the Killer if I'd seen it at such a young age (I'm talking 6-9 years old here). I do recall seeing Shogun Assassin when I was still in Junior School, but the crazy blood spurts seemed more unreal than a lot of the other stuff I'd seen at the time, so it didn't affect me much - I was aware that the violence was almost cartoonish, whereas Friday 13th and its ilk seemed more realistic to my young eyes


Fuck man, I can't watch Ichi the Killer now, lcan't imagine how that would have fucked me up if I was a bambino.

Kids watching Horrors is one thing, they still have an active imagination so they get a lot from them, I adored Horror as a kid, loved the spooky stuff, like Poltergiest or things with monsters, it was Psycho killer men I had problems with because it was too real, I didn't get into the Friday the 13trh films until I was about 9 or 10 but I loved films like House and Fright Night when I was much longer.
Image
User avatar
John-Locke
BULLETPROOF TIGER
 
Posts: 12365
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:49 am
Location: Unknown

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:49 am

Very true, JL - I think kids are quite smart about discerning what's "real" and what's fantasy. I think that's why the first Friday messed me up a bit, because it doesn't really rely on any supernatural or magical concepts to explain anything.

So true about Ichi - I pity the kid who is forced to watch that piece of insanity!
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Postby silentbobafett on Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:01 am

So true about Ichi - I pity the kid who is forced to watch that piece of insanity!


But in the UK this has the same certificate as Friday the 13th!

So whose to say that Ichii is bad for a child and Friday isn't?

its the parents... parents,as MONKEY666 the genius said, must take resonpsibilty!

But for, me, I don't see the point in showing R movies to young kids... I figure they'll understand that a shit load of blood is flying about the place and that spooky music (if its a horror of course) means something... but I'd rather them see it later when they "get it"

Perfect example: I saw Silence of the Lambs when I was young. I thought it was proper shit. So I grew up telling people how shit it was. It was until I watched it again at Uni when I was in my 20's that I realised how wrong i was. The difference was that I understood what the fuck people where talking about!

It didn't have the same effect, I remember lots etc, but what I viewing it would have been if I'd seen it when I was an age to appreciate it.;

I just don't get the buzz out of showing a young person, your own fucking child, a R rated movie... :-)
silentbobafett
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: In The Night Garden...

Postby thebostonlocksmith on Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:22 am

I watched loads of R rated films or 18's in the UK when i was about ten. The only problem that i have now is that those films when revisited will never be as cool as when i watched them as a kid, hiding behind my hands and shaking like a shitting dog...

I got so scared when i was watching hellraiser 2- hellbound that i was sick... literally...
User avatar
thebostonlocksmith
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2433
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:31 am

Postby ThisIsTheGirl on Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:24 am

silentbobafett wrote:Perfect example: I saw Silence of the Lambs when I was young. I thought it was proper shit. So I grew up telling people how shit it was. It was until I watched it again at Uni when I was in my 20's that I realised how wrong i was. The difference was that I understood what the fuck people where talking about!


Funny that - this was pretty much the experience I had with Spinal Tap :lol:
User avatar
ThisIsTheGirl
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:42 am
Location: London, England

Next

Return to Movie News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron