Loo.me

Wes Anderson was rumored to be directing the new Spider-Man. Here’s a take of what that’d look like

I was listening today to an NPR podcast with George Lucas (download). He has a new book out where he discusses the 300 most influential and impressive blockbuster movies to him. For each film, he does some significant research into the casting, the shooting schedule, the budget, and the result. He adjusts for inflation so you can see the true impact older films had. Some interesting tidbits:

• The average ticket price in 1910 was $6 and the average ticket price today is $6. I find that amazing.
• The music licensing for Lucas’ first film American Graffiti cost him 70k because he was instructed to keep his costs under 10% of his 700k budget. He licensed 2 albums worth of rock. People told him that he was insane to do that. Every other film prior to that had be scored. Nobody had thrown music on top of film. First, it’s amazing that this is the film that changed that. Second, a year later the studio was trying to license all the music for an album to be released and it cost them $1 million. In one year, the industry changed that much. Wow
• Jurrasic Park was the one movie that really changed the digital landscape.  Prior to that everything looked like an effect. After JP he knew you could make anything
• Star Wars was revolutionary to Lucas in that you could make a 2 foot green person seem lifelike. That was the first time there had been an imaginary life-like character in film. Really changed the game. 2001 was the biggest movie at the time and was seen as the best, most creative sci-fi film ever. However, Lucas saw it as a set of still shots and wanted to introduce energy into special effects shot. He wanted to be able to pan the camera through space and not just have one shot.
• 3D is new and Lucas looked at using it for Episode I but the techology wasn’t there.
• He and Spielberg used to trade equity points in their films.  Lucas always thought Spielberg’s films were better than his and Spielberg thought the opposite so each trades a few points of equity in each of their films before they were released.  For example, Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind came out when Star Wars came out and Lucas preferred Close Encounters and Spielberg thought Star Wars would crush it.  Guess Steven knew better

There’s a good article in the NY Times about Vengence films.  It describes how the genre as existing, writing,

The formula’s popularity stems from the permission it gives viewers to experience the rush violence provides without feeling guilty about it. The plot gives the hero the same permission when a wife or daughter or brother or girlfriend (in Jodie Foster’s case a boyfriend) is abducted, injured or killed….

Once the atrocity has occurred, the hero acquires an unquestioned justification for whatever he or she then does; and as the hero’s proxy, the audience enjoys the same justification for vicariously participating in murder, mayhem and mutilation. In fact, the audience is really the main character in many of these films.

Personally, I really like these films.  I remember watching “Payback” with Mel Gibson and loving the gritty, matter-of-fact way he dispensed with the people who screwed him out of 80 grand.  The author of the article lists these 10 as his favorite:

• “Death Wish,” “Get Carter,” “A History of Violence,” “The Limey,” “Mad Max,” “Out for Justice,” “Point Blank,” “Straw Dogs,” “Taken,” “Valdez is Coming.”

I haven’t seen some of those.  My tops are:

• The Limey
• Payback
• History of Violence
• Braveheart
• Kill Bill
• Man on Fire
• Out for Justice
• Die Hard

What about you?

I saw the new James Cameron film Avatar this weekend and loved it.  Loved it. Once again, JC totally delievered.  The movie is quite a spectacle.  It’s not so much the chracters, but the story and the visuals that make this film.  Even if you’re not a sci-fi fan, you need to check this out to see how $250 million bucks should be spent. Or as Ebert says in his review:

“Avatar” is not simply a sensational entertainment, although it is that. It’s a technical breakthrough. It has a flat-out Green and anti-war message. It is predestined to launch a cult. It contains such visual detailing that it would reward repeating viewings. It invents a new language, Na’vi, as “Lord of the Rings” did, although mercifully I doubt this one can be spoken by humans, even teenage humans. It creates new movie stars. It is an Event, one of those films you feel you must see to keep up with the conversation.

If you haven’t seen the movie, the rest of this post isn’t for you.  If you have, here are some thoughts:

I found the plot to be a mishmash of movies i’ve already seen:

• So much of the story seem extremely similar to the Kevin Costner film Dances With Wolves.  Not a bad movie to rip off considering it took home 7 Oscars.  But seriously, check this out: a guy from a modern culture sent to live with the natives. He falls in love with the native ordered to teach him their ways and in the process begins to prefer their “primitive” ways to his.  He then switches sides in an epic battle for the natives’ survival.   Of course, Avatar does this battle is a much cooler way and the natives are 12 foot blue people.  But still, it’s much of the same
• When the machines are stampeding through the forrest and the natives are with bows and arrows and rocks trying to stop them, i couldn’t help but think of the Ewoks scene in Star Wars where the cute and awesome rebels put the kibosh down to destroy the shield.

The look of the film was incredible.  Really amazing.

• The colors and lighting in this film are a sight to see in the theater and in 3D which is the best 3D experience i’ve ever had.  None of the dimming that typically occurs happens here.
• I was worried about the Uncanny Valley effect.  This effect states that when a robot or CG person is made more and more humanlike in its appearance and motion, the emotional response from a human being to the robot will become increasingly positive and empathic, until a point is reached (the valley) beyond which the response quickly becomes horrible (or a strong repulsion) which is what happened to me with most movies like this (remember Jar Jar or Polar Express).  However, the fact that Cameron was able to make the Na’vi human-like with CG opens the door for truly imaginative films to emerge.  This has NEVER happened before.
• The last time i saw CG so clear and real was when i saw the Lord Of The Ring films, so i wasn’t surprised to see that Peter Jackson’s New Zealand shop, WETA, was the shop responsible.  Those guys are just getting better and better

If you know James Cameron, you’ll recognize some of the pieces of his past films showing up here.  Some things that stood out for me

• I remember how obsessed Cameron was with the Harrier jets in “True Lies” and how he made Arnold hang from it for a major sequence.  So I wasn’t surprised when the main plane in this film was a smaller, sleeker Harrier.
• If you read Wired you’ll know that JC loves going underwater.  He’s built and patented his own submarines so he can go deeper than anyone has ever gone.  Also, you’ll remember Titanic has a big chunk dedicated to the team going through the wreckage. Thus, it was no surprise to see that the land of Pandora looks very much like an underwater environment.  There are Jellyfish floating, sea-like creatures flying in the air, and tropical coral as vegetation.
• Breathing is a big theme in the movie.  Similar to how the final scenes of “The Abyss” involve the main character running out of liquid air, this film ends in with Sully fighting to breathe.
• Am I the only one who remembers the big human-like machines in (Cameron-directed) Aliens that Sigourney Weaver used at the very end where the machines mimic your movements but with more power? (see this pic to remember what i’m talking about) Well those things are back in this movie and while they are a bit more nimble, they are exact ripoffs from Aliens.

Anyway, just some thoughts.  What did you think?