"If i was a director, these would definitely be in my movie" thread

[Movies205]

Rope.
It was shot on a single set, aside from the opening establishing shot street scene. Each shot ran continuously for up to ten minutes without interruption. Camera moves were planned in advance and there was almost no editing.

Great movie, see here's the thing that movie was highly suspensful and relied heavially on the actors, and part of the reason he probably went without cuts was to build up tension, anxiety, and to slow things down incredibly. To simply do a 5 minute scene with no cuts with no rhyme or reason is going bore the hell out of the audience because the audience practically yearns for it in this add culture.

 

[The Chairman]

I have Rope. I saw it awhile ago. Not a bad movie by any means at all, though not one of his all time best.

 

[JLBats]

I actually hate when Hitchcock does things all in one set. The only time I've liked it is Rear Window.

 

[porchmonkey408]

That's ******ed, CGI is a handy-tool when it's used properly, both extremes are dumb. Also as for "What would be in your movie" is ridiculous because trademarks and things come over time when you discover your style and more often than not you'll be surprised what you find... Just my two cents...

You suck.

 

[Incrediblejeff]

The perfect summer blockbuster

-Lots of Matrix slow-mo shots
-Dramatic Rain shots.
- A Plot twist
-Score by the RZA
-Twist ending
-Samuel L. Jackson(must have)
-A Slasher

 

[cryptic name]

God, I have wanted something like that forever.

I may have to make my own movie just to see that ever happen in a movie

About the scene with no cuts, Hitchcock has one movie with absolutely no cuts, except the ones when the film had to be reloaded.

It must have been HELL to shoot.

it's all stuff from a movie i wrote and am currently in pre production on called "No Such Thing". it's like my final farewell and f you to highschool.

 

[The Chairman]

I actually hate when Hitchcock does things all in one set. The only time I've liked it is Rear Window.

Rear Window is probably my favorite movie by him, actually.

 

[porchmonkey408]

ANYway...

What would I do with my movies? Easy.

- Quick editing (no fading transitions or slow-mo...a'la Chicago)
- Industrial soundtracks (original, instrumental compositions)
- I will tell all 3-hour epics of stories in 2 hours with the use of editing and NO exposition!

 

[Flexo]

The name escapes me, I'll look it up.

There was a Bruce Campbell film like that, too.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120042/

 

[JLBats]

Rear Window is probably my favorite movie by him, actually.

The nice thing about Rear Window was that there was a lot going on in the windows outside. It never felt like just one room to me. And it felt nicely voyeuristic.

 

[The Chairman]

The nice thing about Rear Window was that there was a lot going on in the windows outside. It never felt like just one room to me. And it felt nicely voyeuristic.

I agree.

Also, Grace Kelly's entry into the film when she kisses Stewart for the first time is amazingly shot. And she looks fantastic.

 

[cryptic name]

Great movie, see here's the thing that movie was highly suspensful and relied heavially on the actors, and part of the reason he probably went without cuts was to build up tension, anxiety, and to slow things down incredibly. To simply do a 5 minute scene with no cuts with no rhyme or reason is going bore the hell out of the audience because the audience practically yearns for it in this add culture.

the scene i intend to do this with is at a party. it involves the camera staying with a character for a short time, following them as they leave the room, then picking up on another character as they pass each other in the hall.

 

[Flexo]

the scene i intend to do this with is at a party. it involves the camera staying with a character for a short time, following them as they leave the room, then picking up on another character as they pass each other in the hall.

So... it's exactly like that one Twix commercial?

 

[JLBats]

the scene i intend to do this with is at a party. it involves the camera staying with a character for a short time, following them as they leave the room, then picking up on another character as they pass each other in the hall.

Yeah, that?

Will be hell to shoot.

 

[aaron]

Instead, Id be the producer, and give directing to Wes Anderson, there you go...

 

[porchmonkey408]

cryptic name...good luck. Thats all I'm going to say. Is this your first film?

 

[porchmonkey408]

cryptic name...good luck. Thats all I'm going to say. Is this your first film?

 

[Movies205]

the scene i intend to do this with is at a party. it involves the camera staying with a character for a short time, following them as they leave the room, then picking up on another character as they pass each other in the hall.

It's been done, it's called "Boogie Nights" the Opening Scene, sorry try again

Hell here's the IMDB.com trivia fact:

The opening scene is three minutes long, taken in a single camera shot, beginning in the street where Jack Horner and Amber Waves drive up and follow them as they get out of the car and walk into a night club. Most of the characters in the movie are introduced in this shot.
---

Of course you can still do it, and it could be a great scene... Then there's Garden State which has a similar shot where the camera stays stationary and people come and go in fast motion at a party.

 

[cryptic name]

So... it's exactly like that one Twix commercial?

not exactly. i know what you're talking about though, but there's a different rhythem to the scene. it breaks down like this.

main character talking to friend.
main character's girlfriend jumps on him.
friend leaves, we follow him.
someone hand friend disposable camera (a ritual at parties where i live, one camera gets passed around)
friend kicks open bedroom door and takes a picture of couple inside
continues on, he passes open bathroom door.
we stay behind and see girl washing vomit off her shoes (this is connected to incident at beginning of party.)

so no, it's not really like the twix comercial.

 

[porchmonkey408]

THAT is what I'm talking about. Introduce all characters in 3 minutes and throw the audience into the plot first off. Perfecto.

 

[cryptic name]

cryptic name...good luck. Thats all I'm going to say. Is this your first film?

not even close. thank you for the encouragement. i just really want to tell this story.

 

[Movies205]

THAT is what I'm talking about. Introduce all characters in 3 minutes and throw the audience into the plot first off. Perfecto.

Well the golden rule is to introduce the plot/conflict as soon as possible but some movies that isn't possible. If your dealing with common archtypes that's fine, but a movie like Rocky, the conflict isn't introduce till 30 minutes in. But most movies strive to do just that.

 

[porchmonkey408]

My films are going to be break-neck character studies with no exposition so everythign will unfold over the course of the film but the audience is thrown into the conflict at the beginning, the characters all in within 5 minutes. Maybe thats why I enjoyed the SAW films, you got set up right away in the beginning but all the "why's" and "how's" ingeniously came later and smoothly.

 

[Movies205]

That's cool, but all humans have a back-story, they have a history, this history is what leads them to be what they are, and usually to there conflicts, exposition isn't bad, it's only bad if you write scenes purely for exposition and if you don't cleverly write it into the plot, but your stories sound cool none the less, if you ever post one up send me a link, I love to give em a read

 

[cryptic name]

Yeah, that?

Will be hell to shoot.

hell to shoot was a batman scene involved ruuning over rooftops using two cameras, a single boom mic, one light, and actual rooftops. that was hell, this will just be long and tireing