Well, here we go again... without getting into the dirty details things have been delayed on getting the final color correction done on "Killing Down". I will keep silent for now to protect the guilty - but suffice it to say I am not happy. Quite pissed-off actually.
So, we're going to Plan B for our grading now and hope to get the film done by mid to late August. Keep your fingers crossed... AFM is in November and we need distributors to see the film ASAP.
-Blake
Yahoo! News (via the AP) has a cool little story on movie titles... the good, the bad and the ugly.
Check it out:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060725/ap_on_en_mo/film_titles
I personally like titles that say what the movie is about. Of course that can be subjective, unless you're talking about "Snakes On A Plane". ;)
-Blake
Mark Cuban has a very interesting blog entry concerning how to get people back to seeing movies in the movie theater...
http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000960073808/
The really interesting thing is that if he likes your idea he might hire you to work for him. I was just reading the post and there are currently 521 comments. We'll see if he likes any of them.
-Blake
I slightly revised the latest version of the poster...
I'm about to get 1000 postcards made of this look (and in the near future some posters too). BTW, the orginal poster (on the movie website) is still in play, but we're just keeping all options open and creating different looks for marketing. If you like this new look let me know - and if you don't let me know too. :)
-Blake
iKlipz is a new "networking" website geared towards film and filmmakers. Think of it sort of as Myspace for filmmakers.
I definitely like the vlog they do with David Poland. Good stuff.
Anyway, I created a page today for "Killing Down":
http://www.iklipz.com/Movies.aspx?MovieID=1bea7e3a-d2ef-453b-91c7-66009cc6920d
Will it help market the movie? Don't know. There are a lot of these sites competing with each other. We'll see...
In the meantime please check it out.
-Blake
Mark Cuban has an interesting post on his blog this week about how broadband video is overrated. As a lot of people who use the net know - video is very hot right now - especially on sites like YouTube.
As usual, he takes a very no nonsense approach to his argument and I must say he makes some great points that apply to distribution of movies and/or TV, etc.
Unfortunately, his outlook for the future of broadband video is pretty gloomy.
I hope he's wrong. I think (and hope) broadband video can be a huge boon for indie film distribution once bandwidth improves and more folks get used to the idea of downloading content versus renting (or buying) it from a brick and mortar store. As Apple's iTunes has proved (so far) people seem to like it.
What will the future hold? No one knows, not even Mark Cuban. But, I probably wouldn't bet against him...
-Blake
Check out this article in the LA Times. It's slightly depressing for indie filmmakers trying to work their way up to the big time - but it's also reassuring (to an extent) as to why folks make movies independently...
THE real magic of Hollywood is not the knee-buckling resonance of a perfect screen kiss or the ability to conjure an army of Orcs from the plains of New Zealand. The real magic of Hollywood, as any agent, screenwriter, director, actor, producer or studio executive will tell you, is that movies get made at all. Especially now.
Some years back, a commitment from an A-lister, those actors or directors whose track records proved they could deliver a big opening weekend at the box office, usually guaranteed a big-budget project would get a green light. Then the formula changed — it often took getting a star to commit to the project and then trying to get them to cut their fee. But now, apparently, even that is not enough, as filmmakers on a variety of projects are beginning to learn.
So tell me again why I'd want to work in Hollywood?
-Blake
Been playing around with a few new poster looks...
Working on alternative artwork for our upcoming industry screenings. I'm kinda diggin' this look myself. Do you like it?
-Blake
I keep hearing the term "cutting edge" about what we're doing with the post side of things with "Killing Down". This routinely surprises me too. We are finishing the film in HD, which to me seems like old news. Understand of course I don't mean it's not cool - it is very cool - but as much as I read about HD, etc. I don't feel what we're doing is that "cutting edge". However, I could be wrong...
If you follow this blog (and the progress of "Killing Down") you know we're doing our final color correction as we speak. I was in Austin twice last week working with Omar Godinez and his boutique company Color Cafe (they hadn't done an HD feature until ours).
For our correction we decided to go with a "desktop D.I." using FinalTouch HD. "D.I." stands for Digital Intermediate - which is really used for filmouts today in Hollywood (and some indie projects) - but it's traditionally very cost prohibitive. However, FinalTouch HD has put D.I. in the reach of low budget indies like ourselves. Of course we're not doing a "true" D.I. because we're not going out to film and it's not at 2K resolution (not quite anyway, we're at 1920x1080 HD resolution - just shy of true 2K).
So far things are going fairly smoothly. There have been of course the normal hiccups along the way. Mainly dealing with PC to Mac translation issues. Since we are onlining the film in an Avid DS Nitris suite (running on Windows) and FinalTouch runs on a Mac (really working in conjunction with Final Cut Pro) we've had problems reading/writing back and forth to drives and getting our QuickTime codecs straight. There have also been issues with the EDLs and some timecode problems, but I think we're about to get all this figured out.
In the end, the color correction is what matters most to me. These workflow issues suck, but the final product is what is important. That's one of the main reasons we went with Omar - he has over 20 years experience color correcting.
But as much HD production that goes on out there it seems that most do not finish in HD. They downconvert to SD and then to DVD or whatever. So, all the HD post we're doing - and btw it's all uncompressed HD that runs about 120 MBs a second (that's 35 times larger than DV) - really might be "cutting edge"? Most people I talk to or try to get advice from have never done what we're doing.
I plan to post a real "tech geek" entry soon as to the exact workflow we used covering the entire post process from offline, to audio post, color correction and final online conform. It's been very interesting and a great learning experience, but I'd probably never do it this way again (the workflow that is, I've really liked the various software and gear we used).
So I guess maybe this is all "cutting edge" stuff? Or, maybe a lot of folks out there are just slow to catch on. :)
-Blake
As a filmmaker I must admit that piracy scares me. No, I'm not worried about being held up on the high seas by a pirate looking like Johnny Depp. I'm talking people stealing your copyrighted video/film content and selling it. Movie-piracy.
The music industry has been going through this for years and of course movie studios too have had major concerns. And with all the new HD content on it's way to the marketplace on DVDs, etc. it will inevitably happen even more and the thieves will have a "perfect" copy of the original work to duplicate (and sell). Pretty scary.
Another form of movie-piracy of course is simply videotaping a film in a movie theater. Evidently this is one of the biggest problems of all and last week the FBI broke up a big international ring and arrested 13 people.
Authorities estimate that 90 percent of the pirated, newly released movies that become available through bootleggers and on the Internet come from camcorder copies made in theaters.
Here's a link to the story in Reuters.
Just think if it were your hard work being stolen? Believe me, it's not a pleasant thought.
-Blake
I haven't taken the plunge into Myspace yet, but I plan to for "Killing Down" (and maybe for myself showcasing my directing efforts).
I've of course known about it for quite a while, but haven't taken the leap because I used to think it was "only for teenage kids" and mainly geared towards music. While I still believe the vast majority of Myspace members are teenagers (and music folks), I do know a growing number of "grown-ups" using it and the new Myspace Film section looks interesting as well.
Anyway, I plan to have a "friend's list" soon, but in the meantime check Natalie Raitano's Myspace page at http://www.myspace.com/natalie_raitano.
She runs it in conjunction with a fan, so it's a legit deal. No 14 year boy from Ohio posing as Natalie. It's her and she replies to most postings.
-Blake
Well, I FINALLY got some more of the photos back from the after party of the movie premiere. We've had issues getting the pix from the photographers. We still actually have one photographer that is MIA - so, we'll have even more pix hopefully soon. In the meantime here are a few select shots...
Matthew and his fiance' Shauna (she plays "Lisa")
Natalie Raitano, Jimmy, Rachel, Rey and Nat's friend (can't recall her name!)
Oliver Tull with DP Alan Lefebvre and his wife
Jesse Cortez and Shauna
Natalie Raitano and Sheree Wilson
Jesse and Natalie
Sheree, Matt and Natalie
Natalie and Blake (yep, on the phone at the party)
Thanks to Jesse Cortez for getting me these pictures. As mentioned, I hope to have the last round of them up soon.
Oh, and the final version of the movie is ALMOST DONE. :)
-Blake
We're starting our final color correction and have done some test this past week.
We're doing what I'm calling an "indie DI" using FinalTouch HD at Color Cafe in Austin. Omar Godinez is the colorist (and owner of the company) and has over 20 years experience working at places like Filmworkers Club and Video Post & Transfer (both in Dallas).
Here's a quick sample of what we're doing...
Original Image:
Corrected Image:
The original was shot very flat, low contrast with a lot of dynamic range knowing we would be doing color correction.
Pretty cool process and fun seeing it "come alive".
-Blake
In the article below, Jacques Thelemaque of withoutabox.com has a different take than most today on the idea of using "stars" in independent films. He doesn't think you need them. He cites examples of successful films that didn't have them (or they weren't stars at the time).
This is all great and I really like his list of "facts" - BUT it's really all based in theory and unfortunately not the case in today's real world marketplace.
For every "Napoleon Dynamite" success with "no stars" there are literally thousands of other "no star" failures.
Do stars actually help low budget indie films? Depends. If their performance is good, then yes, absolutely. If it's not good, then yes, absolutely. Why? It's all about getting attention for the work. Do I like this? Not really. But it is a fact.
We live in a celebrity driven culture and having a "star" in your film just gives it that extra "legitimacy" that some folks need (i.e. festival programmers, media outlets, distributors, etc.).
Here's Jacques article...
TIP OF THE MONTH: Avoid The "Star" Trap
I don't know how many financing and distribution seminars I've sat in on where filmmakers were sold on the importance of putting a "name" or a "star" in a film to make it more attractive to potential buyers/audiences. The logic of this is, of course, obvious. Until you break it down. Like much of the information (and people) orbiting around the filmmaking universe, the "star" thing is a superficiality embraced by the starstruck, naive, desperate and/or lazy filmmaker that doesn't hold up to substantive thinking.
Let me clarify that I am not saying there aren't benefits to having recognizable actors in your film. There are indeed. Many people in and out of the industry, including festival programmers, are star-obsessed. They put name actors on a pedestal and reward the film accordingly. But do you really want to pander to the "cult of celebrity" mentality? Especially when you do a cool-headed cost/benefit analysis (in terms of time, money, AND energy) of doing the "star" trip.
Fact #1: Very few stars can meaningfully affect a film's bottom line. Any distribution executive will tell you truthfully that there are very few actors that will significantly impact a film's potential revenue despite the widely held contrary notion. The film needs to be the star. The film needs to work.
Fact #2: Stars are hard to get. You can spend months, even years, trying to get stars interested in your project no matter how good your script is. Even if you figure out how to make contact, you are often sent from agent to manager to lawyer to publicist to dogwalker back to agent, and so on - with each one taking months to respond.
Fact #3: Stars can be expensive pains-in-the-ass. Even if you can get them to work for free (or practically free), they are still used to a certain level of treatment and perks that can wind up costing the production considerable amounts of money. Or, they just can't/won't meet the demands of your production - costing you more time, which equals money. Also, stars can often wield their experience and status to run roughshod creatively over a fledgling director and, in fact, over a whole production. Of course, there are many exceptions to this fact - known actors who are respectful and generous with their time and creativity. But there are many more horror stories.
Fact #4: Stars can upset the tone of a film. I don't know how many times I've been thrown out of the authenticity of a film by the sudden appearance of a recognizable actor - bringing with them the baggage of what we know about them from other stuff. I don't want to be lost in a film just to be pulled out when Paris Hilton shows up for a mise-en-scene-chewing cameo.
And really, what is a "star"? Or a "name"? Does it really benefit your film to have a world famous socialite or minor regular from a popular T.V. show (which is what most emerging filmmakers are lucky to have access to) in your film unless their acting ability truly benefits the film creatively? Answer: No. Instead reframe the whole star thing in your head.
First, make your film the star. Think of the film as a whole as the marketing hook that will attract investors and audiences. Your distinctive ideas and creative energy will "sell" the film. If you look at the Sundance successes over the past several years, almost none had "name" actors. From "Chuck and Buck" to "Blair Witch Project" to "Napolean Dynamite." Think of some the great films in world cinema history - DiSica's "The Bicycle Thief", Resnais' "Hiroshima, Mon Amour" or Lynch's "Eraserhead." Now, name the "stars" in them. Good luck.
Second, think in terms of casting the actor that will bring the most CREATIVELY to your film. Yes, there are plenty of "name" actors whose work you love and would be great for your film. If you can get 'em (and they won't make you pull your hair out), go for it. But always make the film, and the process of making the film, your priority in terms of deciding which actor is appropriate to cast. There are plenty of brilliant/and or perfectly appropriate actors for your film who are not "stars" or "names". Have the courage to champion them. Take advantage of their accessibility and collaborative energy. Keep your film authentic. Use them to make your film great and you will then have your "star."
Again, I completely agree with him in theory and wish it were the case. And I do definitely agree that cameos don't do much for a film. I also really like the idea of "making your film the star". But in today's marketplace it just makes sense to protect your investment by using at least a recognizable face, if not a "star", in one or more of the principle roles (if you can afford it and if the role is right for the actor).
Just use your head and don't cast the 60-year-old male cowboy "star" in a role written for a 25-year-old female lifeguard. :)
-Blake
Haven't posted anything in a while. Been busy trying to get final version of "Killing Down" wrapped up. Hope, I repeat, HOPE to have finished movie in my hand second week of July.
What do we have left to do?
1. A couple music cues and then the final sound mix
2. Two tweaks on two of the last VFX shots
3. Exporting all the HD reels for final color correction at Color Cafe in Austin (we're putting the footage on three 400GB Seagate firewire drives - it's just shy of 1.2TBs)
4. Once color correction is done, we'll re-import the footage back into the Avid DS to add the necessary effects and titles - then output the final movie to D5-HD tape.
I'll also make a simple version of the DVD (movie and trailer only) for marketing and giving to potential distributors. Plans are to arrange some industry screenings in LA and possibly NY in late July and into August.
If I've learned anything about independent filmmaking it's that everything always takes longer, costs more and doesn't go as planned - but that's what makes it fun too! :)
-Blake
Has anyone seen this?
http://kinooga.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
Basically you presell downloads to your film via Kinooga to actually finance the project. Similar concept to foreign presales, but on a smaller scale...
Kinooga lets you raise finances for your film project at any stage of its conception. You could be looking for development money for a script, looking for another few thousands bucks on an overspend, or simply trying to get the cash together to edit what you've already shot.
Interesting concept. My guess would be though there are a lot more people looking for money than there are people investing.
Check out their site for detailed info.
-Blake
Brian Abrams of the Fort Worth Weekly called me last week requesting a screener of "Killing Down" to do a story/review of the film. I must admit I was hesitant because the film is NOT done and I prefer to put our best foot forward when we go out to the public. But, I did screen the movie at the USA Film Festival so it is in pretty good shape - just not completely finished (mainly the score, some visual effects, color correction and some final editing tweaks).
I decided to go ahead and send it to him warts and all, primarily to piggy back off the USA Film Festival screening and the press we received from that. So I sent it and here's a link to the review (it's at the bottom of the page).
I typically don't put a lot of weight on reviews - positive or negative - filmmaking is very subjective and so are audiences responses. I tend to fall into the camp of "any press is good press just as long as you spell my name right". Of course I prefer positive reviews and in this case Brian liked the work, which I'm happy to hear.
BTW, still waiting to get pictures from the photographers from the premiere and the after party. As soon as I get them I'll post them to the blog.
In the meantime, please check out the review and remember he saw a "work-in-progress" version of the film. :)
-Blake
Came across this info on the new HD Blu-ray DVD and thought it was useful...
What's the capacity of a Blu-ray disc?
A single layer 12 cm (4.72") diameter Blu-ray disc (BD) holds 25 gigabytes (GB) of data. A double-layer BD holds 50 GB of data.
Where does the name "Blu-ray" come from?
The name Blu-ray is derived from the blue-violet laser which is used to read and write Blu-ray discs. DVDs and CDs, on the other hand, use a red laser to read and write discs. The shorter wavelength of a blue-violet laser is one of the factors that enables more data to be written in the same amount of space versus a red laser.
What are the differences between Blu-ray and HD-DVD?
Capacity. Even though both use the blue-violet laser technology, BD offers greater storage capacity, 25 GB versus 15 GB for HD-DVD.
Support.
Blu-ray is backed by the Blu-ray Disc Association which has over 170 members. Companies included are Apple, DELL, Hitachi, Panasonic, Sony, TDK, 20th Century Fox, and Buena Vista Home Entertainment. HD-DVD is approved and endorsed by the DVD Forum, which includes over 230 companies. Some companies in the DVD Forum endorse both formats, but the major HD-DVD supporters include Toshiba, Memory-Tech, Microsoft, Universal Pictures, and New Line Cinema.
Structure.
The thickness of both Blu-ray and HD-DVD discs is the same, 1.2 mm. HD-DVD, like a DVD, is composed of two 0.6 mm substrates with the record layer sandwiched between them. On the other hand, a BD is composed of one 1.1 mm substrate and a 0.1 mm protective coating over the record layer. Therefore, the record layer (content layer) is brought closer to the laser in the BD enabling greater accuracy when reading the disc.
I'm now seeing ads on TV for release of Hollywood movies on DVD and Blu-ray. I'm not 100% sold on buying movies this way yet. Do I really want to buy all my favorite DVDs again? Do I want to spend $800 on a Blu-ray player? Pricing will come down, but I'm not so sure that downloadable movies won't be prevalent by the time they do. Then, you can just watch them on your computer OR your TV (and PSP or iPod) and not worry about a DVD.
I see more value in Blu-ray as a storage device for all kinds of back-up data (video, audio, etc.). But time will tell...
-Blake
If you are in the film business it is VERY LIKELY you are familiar with the website IMDb.com a.k.a. The Internet Movie Database.
I personally visit this site all the time. I use it not only as a fan of other people's work, but as a tool to research films and primarily to research actors I'm interested in for future projects. This is one reason anyone who is an actor and has done any short film or feature film work should list their name on the site. Or, have the producer or director of the film you were in list it for you (they will be listing the project I assure you). It's actually very easy to do and a great way to get some publicity. AND, it's actually the main site that everyone (including Hollywood folks) use to look people up - from grips to actors to directors. If you are in the entertainment industry you should be on IMDb.
This brings me to the main point of this post. The NY Times has a really good article on the relatively unknown founder of IMDb. His name is Col Needham. I have been using the site for at least 8 or 9 years and I had never heard of him. All I knew was that the site originated out of England - and sure enough - that's where Col is from.
From the article:
As the founder and managing director of the Internet Movie Database, Mr. Needham might just be the archetype of the telecommuting Web-head. The site he founded and runs, http://www.imdb.com/, ranks as the 10th-most-popular entertainment spot online, according to ComScore Media Metrix. It had 18.6 million unique visitors in April, a 67 percent surge from a year earlier.
Internet Movie Database began in 1990 as a bulletin board database of movie credits. It was started by Mr. Needham and some film-buff friends. At the time, Mr. Needham was working as an engineer in Bristol at Hewlett-Packard (or, as he says in his native Manchester lilt, "Hewlett Pa-Cod") and had only a rudimentary strategy for financing the site.
"We didn't sit down and think, 'What's the best way to make money on the Internet?' " Mr. Needham said. "This is very much a labor of love. When we started the company, there was no commercial use of the Internet."
By 1998, the database had established itself as a favorite on the early Internet, and Mr. Needham was amused to receive a number of buyout approaches.
One was an invitation to a London hotel in January to meet with Jeffrey P. Bezos, the founder of Amazon. Mr. Bezos told Mr. Needham that he thought the movie database could help Amazon sell VHS cassettes and DVD's — Mr. Needham points out that it was in that order in those days — but also recognized that the site would need to be run separately to maintain its personality. Amazon, of course, could handle the technological end and pour resources into upgrades.
I didn't know that Amazon OWNS IMDb. I've always seen the links to Amazon, but they are very subtle. This might be changing soon though. In the article it mentions that Amazon might start using IMDb as a "front door" to their new movie download service that will allow users to burn their own copy of a DVD at home. Details are still being worked out, but there are several Hollywood studios involved. Sounds interesting for sure.
I just hope they keep IMDb the same. Without it no filmmaker or actor would have proof that they even existed (except of course their films, and they may not want to show them). ;)
Read the full article from the NY Times (you might have to register to read it).
-Blake
THE eternal question for us "outsiders" - by screenwriter John August:
http://johnaugust.com/archives/2006/how-do-i-break-into-hollywood
I love his ending quote...
So I’d ask everyone to disabuse themselves of the idea of “breaking into Hollywood.” It’s not like pledging a fraternity, losing one’s virginity, or pulling off a heist. It’s just getting a job, which is boring and real, and difficult enough without any inflated imagery.
Have a great Memorial Day Weekend!
-Blake
