i’m losing it

this stupid script is continually biting me back.  it’s a simple concept, and yet presented simply it comes across as banal.

what do i think people want to see from a short by an unsigned nobody?  i think they, or you, want to be surprised by something clever.  you don’t want smiles at the end.  you want bling, but with a point.  story story story.

i saw pete jackson one day last year, and i thought afterwards what question i’d ask him.  i thought it’d be,

“does this ordering sound right?
1. plot 2. edit 3. camerawork 4. location 5. acting 6. effects”

November 21st, 2006 | Uncategorized

2 comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

crank was more edit and camerawork than plot. that actually sorta fits. 1 was eh, but 2 and 3 took up the slack.

meh. plot’s what i care about most, which is why i didn’t see crank. brick was great, though.

Comment by mkoperwas — February 19, 2007 @ 9:54 am

Sounds like… a party. I’d list them as:

1. plot
2. plot
3. plot

Once you’ve dug the plot, throw the script, the editor, the camera guy, and the actors in it. Fill the hole with dirt. Pat it down. Make an appletini. Throw it away, because it’s gross.

You haven’t lost it. Yet. Attach it to your car keys first.

Then again, who needs plot? Crank was entertaining, and yet it had no discernible plot whatsoever… except maybe that Amy Smart is kinda hot as a useless potsmoker.

Comment by Sierra — February 18, 2007 @ 11:29 am