New York

The Nintendo Office played up here...

In this room...
On one of these HD flat screen TV's...

But our video wasn't in HD, or any of the other shorts for that matter, so it just looked normal.

The observatory is called Top of the Rock. It costs $20 (yes, we had to pay to see our own movie) and is based around a tour of the construction of Rockefeller along with NBC's long residence there. So in between gazing out at New York and listening to fun facts from Tom Brokaw people would walk past some short films. It's basically filmmaking's equivalent of a guy playing a saxophone in the subway. He may be good and you may like, but you aint stoppin' to listen. Especially when all of Central Park is sprawled out before you.

All in all a good trip. Caught Lovedrug/Sparta show with Eric, Em, and Bradstreet. Lovedrug is RIDICULOUSLY good. I suggest you give the guys a listen.

Trib Article

Here's the link to the article about The Nintendo Office which ran yesterday in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review's evening edition, Trib P.M. (That title sounds kind of naughty.)

"Making a Game of It"

And here's an interview with Jack Paccione, director of the winning entry "Good vs. Wiivil."'

Joystiq Interview

The Nintendo Office

Vote for our video, "The Nintendo Office"

If you've got a second, please head over to http://www.nintendoshortcuts.com and vote for The Nintendo Office, out entry into the Nintendo Short Cuts Showcase contest.

Thanks!

The Luigi Story

Now you can see the "award winning" short online:

Jon Favreau Should Be Your Hero

He took this:

And turned it into this:

It looks like it leapt right of the page. Keep in mind that this is the first version of the Iron Man costume. He get into his classy red and gold duds later in the film. Now if only the rest of you director's would follow Mr. Favreau's method: take the picture and turn it into a costume. I'm talking to you Sam Raimi.

The "Lost Curse"

Here's an article I recently read:

Josh Holloway [TV's Lost star "Sawyer"] calls it the 'Lost Curse': Three cast members on his hit ABC show have been arrested for auto-related incidents and another six cited. The actor, however, says there may be other factors explaining the rash of police activity.

"We're easy targets," Holloway, 36, laughingly complains in the British edition of Glamour's April issue.

Holloway, who received a speeding ticket in Hawaii in September, says: "I told 'em they should be embarrassed about giving me a ticket for doing 53 in a 35 zone. I mean, come on! Go catch real criminals!"

Lost star Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who played Mr. Eko, was arrested in September for disobeying a police officer and driving without a license. He posted $500 bail and was released after spending just over six hours in jail.

In December 2005, Michelle Rodriguez and Cynthia Watros were arrested within minutes of each other on drunken-driving charges. Both pleaded guilty. Rodriguez is currently wearing an alcohol-detecting ankle bracelet after serving 65 hours in an Oahu jail for the DUI arrest and then another four hours and 20 minutes behind bars in Los Angeles after violating probation due to her arrest.

In a post on her Web site last month, Rodriguez complained the bracelet "is like a freaking VCR, and why do they care if I drink, what am I gonna do, drink and walk over someone, I have no license."

Six other Lost cast members have been cited for car-related incidents, but not arrested. Besides Holloway's speeding ticket, Dominic Monaghan has been pulled over twice for speeding and was also cited for driving without a license. Naveen Andrews has received two speeding tickets and Ian Somerhalder (who is no longer on the show) has one. And during a safety check in Honolulu, Harold Perrineau Jr. was ticketed for having no motor vehicle insurance.

I've got a better phrase to replace "Lost Curse." It's called BREAKING THE LAW. 53mph in a 35 zone? Yeah, that's a speeding ticket. Driving without a liscense? Very illegal. Driving under the influence? You deserve every second of jail time. The only thing that fame has to do with this is their misunderstanding that their status renders this type of behavior as permissable. Who'd a thought that out of two Sawyers, my dog would be the smarter one.

Test Footage

Here's some test footage for the next film:

What's next?

I don't want to give too much away this early, but if you want to know the next story I suggest you listen to a few songs:

1) The Times They Are A-Changin' (Dylan song performed by Keb Mo)
2) The Long and Winding Road (Beatles song performed by Ray Charles)
3) The Scientist (Coldplay performed by Coldplay)

All available on iTunes of course.

The Story Behind the Film

I haven't been particularly discreet about my negative critique of Superman Returns. I've posted at least three blog entries explaining it's shortcomings.

I think I've been a bit too hard on the film.

Here's why. I watched a lot of the behind-the-scenes features on the film tonight. Within a few short minutes I noticed a few things about the cast and crew, Brandon Routh especially: they worked RIDICULOUSLY hard, treated the history and character with utmost respect, and had a lot of fun making it. How can I tear down an effort like that? Now I realize you're supposed to judge a film strictly on the film itself, but if that were how every film were judged, Captain Blasto wouldn't have received a fraction of the positive response it has.

A lot of people pull for Captain Blasto because of the story behind it. A first time director, a small crew, $7,000 budget, etc. Now that I've taken a closer look at the story behind Superman Returns, I suddenly found myself pulling for them. More than that all I could think of is, "I want to be there. I want to be working with them." They really were trying to make a great film. Did they miss the mark? Yes unfortunately. But it wasn't from lack of effort.

A great film is a stroke of magic that many directors will NEVER experience. Even Spielberg hasn't been able to call that magic at will. Lucas, with his billions, can't buy it. It can't be planned on. You can only try your damndest. And for the amazing attempt I was previously unaware of, an attempt that resulted in an decent film with some incredible moments, I'll support the next film wholeheartedly.

In the future I'm going to make sure I look further into the how the film was made before advertising it's faults.

Why Waste Your Time?

Back when George Lucas was under HEAVY criticism for his ridiculously boring return to filmmaking with The Phantom Menace, he was often heard using the excuse: I have to get through the boring part of the story to get to the good stuff.

Years later I read any interview by one half of the writing due behind another ridiculously boring film, Superman Returns. Here's what he has to say.

"I know that Bryan [Singer, the director] has said he's going to Wrath of Khan it, and by that he means, 'Let's take what we've already established--we've gotten that out of the way--and let's just make it shorter, tighter and more action-packed."

Get through the boring part? Get that out of the way? Here's a question: why even make that part? Why waste the time, money, and energy? Why have an entire film of exposition just to get to a sequel? Go right to the "good" movie and build what little exposition we actually need into it. Or better yet, show that incredible talent that got you to that point and make the boring movie exciting. Now when I say exciting I do not mean more explosions. I mean more power, more emotion. Even a quiet scene can be more powerful than a asteriod collision.

Audiences should NEVER be asked to sit through a boring scene to get to and exciting one, let alone and ENTIRE FILM.

Inherited Imagery

I've been reading alot of Joseph Campbell recently. He's best known for his studies on mythology and was made widely known to recent generations by his published conversations with George Lucas. In his book Primitive Mythology he discusses an idea brought about by a study conducted on newborn birds. As I read it, I couldn't help but connect his idea to the image of Colin being entranced by the strength and feats of Captain Blasto, or my own infatuation with Superman.

A wooden hawk would be flown over a baby chick by a string. The chick would instantly hide in fear. A wooden duck would be flown over the same chick and it would remain calm. Several different shapes of varying bird species were tried, but only the hawk would illicit the fearful behavior. The chick has NEVER seen a hawk, but still it is equipped with the instincts to take flight from it. The question posed by Campbell is this: if all hawks ceased to exist, would the chick still fear it's image?

Another question was also raised: what images may lie buried within animals and(or) man which they are equipped to fear, but have since vanished? Should those images suddenly reappear in some form, even art, would it illicit some seemingly irrational behavior? Does a child fear the image of a witch because they read fairy tales as a child? Or was there some creature long ago that are instincts tell us should be avoided?

The reverse of this idea, images that we are drawn to, could also be true. Take the imagery of super-heroes for example. Am I life long Superman fan because he was "given" to me in toys and movies as a child? Or were some great and terrible figures once present among humanity which we as children are inheritantly equipped to be in awe of? The idea of a super-hero is by no means new. It's traced down through characters like Hercules and Beowulf. Have we always been drawn to these characters, as the popular notion suggests, because they represent what we wish we were or could be? Or do generations keep rendering these ideas into our art because deep down it's written into each of us, although all traces of them once existing are now gone?

George Lucas Enjoys Being Hated

Here's proof via StarPulse.com...

Screenwriter Blames George Lucas for 'Indiana Jones' Delay

Screenwriter Frank Darabont has blasted George Lucas for the delays behind the fourth Indiana Jones movie. The highly anticipated sequel was ready for filming back in 2004, but despite a script from Darabont that impressed director Steven Spielberg, the film's producer Lucas blocked the impending shoot - citing problems with the screenplay.

Speaking to Moviehole.net, director Frank Darabont says, "That was terrifically frustrating. I worked for over a year on that. I worked very close with Steven Spielberg. He was ecstatic with the result and was ready to shoot it two years ago. He was very, very happy with the script and said it was the best draft of anything since Raiders Of The Lost Ark.

"Lucas read it and said, 'Yeah, I don't think so, I don't like it.' And then he resets it to zero when Spielberg is ready to shoot it that coming year, (which) is a real kick to the nuts. You can only waste so much time and so many years of your life on experiences like that, you can only get so emotionally invested and have the rug pulled out from under you before you say enough of that."

-----

Keep up the good work George.

How to Ruin a Costume: Take 2

Several years ago Spider-Man debuted with the Norman Osborne the Green Goblin as the villain. As you can see, the Green Goblin has a very simple and effective character design:It's an evil goblin with pumpkin bombs on a bat glider. That simple. So they go ahead and brilliantly cast Willem Dafoe, who without even the help of make-up looks like an evil goblin. But the powers behind the movie were able to translate the above design into this Power Ranger looking mess of a costume, officially deemed the WORST costume in film history:
But unknown to the general public is that the Green Goblin returns in the form of Norman Osborne's son Harry. The film team is given a second chance to improve the costume and redeem themselves. What have they done to "improve" the costume for the upcoming Spider-Man 3?
Yep, that's right, a snowboarder. A FREAKING SNOWBOARDER! Sam Raimi has officially achieved the impossible. He has surpassed himself, broken his own record, and created the WORST WORST costume of all time. He now owns the top two slots bumping Ben Affleck's Daredevil down to a comfortable 3.

Freaky Friday

I know this is old news, but it's GREAT news. Click on the letter below to read a LEGIT letter from the execs at Morgan Creek to the most recent child star gone wrong: Lindsay Lohan.

I'd Buy 'Em

Baby Duel

Just 'cause...

One Goal

Most of the creative projects I work on, both for my paying job and film work, involve working with a team of people. Sometimes it works amazingly. Other times, not so well. Beyond general working relationship issues, what is it that either makes or breaks the group project? The goal. Does everyone know the goal? Does everyone have the same goal? Is the goal still the same? The best I've ever heard it put was by Sidney Lumet, director of 12 Angry Men, Murder on the Orient Express, and Serpico. As a director he said his primary goal is to make sure "everyone is making the same movie."

My first exposure to this was while writing Captain Blasto. If I were to pitch a scene to Aaron and Ben one of them may spin the scene into action the other into slapstick. None of us were right or wrong, we were just coming at it from our own angle. It's my role as a director, not to make all of my own ideas rise to the top, but to facilitate all our ideas to make sure we're making one coherent story. If our goal is a comedy we'll lean into the slapstick, if it's a drama we'll lean into the action scene.

I've been involved in several projects lately where this was not the case. Either very few knew the goal, the goal consistently changed, or everyone had their own goal. What do you get? A schizophrenic project. It looks one way, acts another, and says something completely different. I can spot a schizophrenic project from a mile away and I avoid them at all costs, unless of course it's part of my day job in which it's not an option.

How do you make sure everyone is "making the same movie?" Here's my thoughts on it:

1) Make sure YOU know what "movie" you're making. No, you don't have to have every detail worked out. If you did, what's the team for? But you BETTER know the CORE idea and be able to talk about it at great length if so requested. If it's a film, what do you want the story to "say?" If it's marketing, what "feel" or "look" are you aiming for? Know that before you pull anyone else in. People don't like leading leaders.

2) Make sure EVERYONE knows the goal. Write it out. Print a banner. Do whatever it takes to make sure it's big, bold, easy to understand, and impossible to miss. For me it's typicaly a sentence. For the next script I'm working on I've got a simple sentence: memory and choices control identity. Every single person that works on this project will know that sentence and will aim their work at it.

3) Give people time to digest the goal. I've wrongfully held and attended brainstorm, writing, and graphics sessions where the goal has been presented and the team was INSTANTLY requested to provide ideas and(or) work that illuminated it. They barely understand it. How could they possibly spit out anything worthy of advancing it? The director may not realize that they've had this stewing inside for a while (hopefully), but to everyone else it's brand new. People need time to take in the idea, visualize it, and dream about how they can contribute to it. Depending on the project this is something that may be better measured in weeks than in days or hours.

4) Do NOT keep changing the goal, BUT IF YOU DO, make sure everyone knows the new goal. One of the most depressing things for an artist or creative developer is to have them spend time, energy, and resources on a piece of the project, only to have it either dropped because it doesn't match the new goal, or to have it stay but sit out there like an orphan without any tie to the rest of the project. If you say you're making a website that should look like an Etch-a-Sketch and your tech guys design a real working digital version of the famous toy, they're going to be REALLY frustrated and less likely to work as hard next time when you announce the site is now going to look like a Magna Doodle. It's just as bad if you keep the Etch-a-Sketch in the middle of the new design. They feel like they've contributed AGAINST the goal rather than with it.

This isn't to say you must be locked into a goal just because some work has already started and you're afraid to hurt some feelings. You just have to be aware of the pro's and con's of shifting your goal. If it becomes common practice, you're going to have a very difficult time getting people to contribute.

5) Make sure EVERY idea is aimed at the goal. Let's look at the movie The Incredibles. What's the goal? A comedy about a family of out of work super-heroes. What if I pitch a scene in which a villain uses a death ray to destroy the family station wagon. Does it fit the goal? It's funny and it's within the comic book genre. The idea is worth pursuing. What if I pitch a scene in which the family of super-heroes sacrifice their lives in stopping a terrorist from detonating a car bomb? Worthy of a super-hero, yes. Comic, absolutely not. It's an extreme idea, but I've seen many projects where ideas get developed and often times used that don't support or advance the goal.

6) Make sure you know the goal...still. When you get in the middle of the project it's incredibly easy to follow into details mode. When you're just taking care of the urgent details, don't lose sight of the big picture. Keep looking at your big old banner.

Agree? Disagree? Comments and such, post them here or e-mail me at chris@captainblasto.com.

The Birth of Fandango

Where did Professor Fandango come from? No, not the movie ticket website. He was created for a series of short fun and incredibly overdramatic spy spoof videos for CrossOver youth ministries in the summer of 1999.

Learn Something New Every Week

Each Sunday, when the estimated ticket sales are finally tallied up and released to the press, studio executives are often quotes as to what they have learned from the information. Today, when the estimated ticket sales for Snakes on a Plane was revealed to be just over $15 million, Brandon Gray of boxofficemojo.com released this pearly nugget of wisdom:

"This tells you that you need to have a compelling story or premise to get an audience for your movie."

Thank you Mr. Gray. Clearly you deserve whatever role it is you serve over at boxofficemojo.com.

My problem isn't the blatantly obvious statement, or the fact that Snakes on a Plane only pulled in $15 mil. It's that EVERY single Sunday the press, movie execs, and critics look at this weekend as a monumental lesson, a solid rule of the business to be followed from here on. When Mission Impossible didn't perform as expected it was "The movie has little connection to the show anymore. They've lost their roots." When Superman Returns didn't break every record it was "Superman is an outdated icon for a past time. Batman is the new hero for America." Now with World Trade Center failing to take the number one spot, what do we read? "The audience knows how it ends. There's nothing to captivate them." If that's true how did Titanic manage to rake in billions? Melanie and I probably account for at least a 1/3 of that.

What happens is studio execs force these new found rules on their writers/directors, and then when a new movie with the new rules comes out two - three years later, either 1) they were wrong or 2) the audience has changed. They give a 5 second assessment of what went wrong THIS time and make NEW rules for the future.

How bout these assessments. Mission Impossible III: Tom, we were sick of seeing your face EVERYWHERE in the months leading up to your movie. Cut back on publicity next time. Superman Returns: So you didn't break the records? Big freakin' deal. Not every movie breaks records. You can't plan for it and you can't make it happen. World Trade Center: I don't mind knowing the ending, but I won't spend an afternoon with Nicholas Cage in that stupid mustache. I realize people like Jennifer Aniston and Will Ferrel pull people to the theater. Some people like them so much they're see whatever movie they're in, regardless of it's story. Somehow Hollywood doesn't quite get that Nicholas Cage does not happen to be one of those people.

Let's try some future rules.

Beerfest: Following Mel Gibson's DUI, the mood of the country has shifted from glorifying alcohol.
Ghost Rider: Audiences weren't ready to relive a tragic story paralleling the Ben Roethlisberger accident.
Jackass 2: The teenagers that once flocked to the first film have grown up.
Hollywoodland:
Crossover: The miscasting of the Jan Elkins and Josh Wildman characters destroyed the validity of the story.
The Black Dahlia: People confused the film with the popular video game staring Dennis Hopper and Kevin Vinay.