Justin Hayward

It's showing at Cannes? That's an accomplishment in itself. I'm looking forward to seeing it.

There would be many upset directors if switching screens to 1:85 and cropping from the top to 2:39 were the trend. I have seen it though, but only in the old dollar theaters.

What theaters don't offer scope and flat on every screen? And where are they?

What?

You could drive a truck.

My health care is fantastic. If I stub my toe, the doctors will trip over themselves to get me some ice. It's because my wife is insured, therefore so am I. To be honest, I don't want to lose my health insurance as it's the best I can possibly imagine. All I have to do is show up... that's it. It's true, I'm a greedy bastard. But, I'm doing well... at the moment...

We use a gold shiny card cut thin (just smaller than the glass or bottle) and reflect it straight into the lens. Look at "Macallan: 25 Years" under General Reel... http://spfilms.com/ There is a gold shiny card behind the glass and one behind the bottle on the right.

I'm feeling Richard's pain.

Nah, it's just the standard practice with this website, and it's quite appreciated. It's not like they ask for the last four digits of you social security number. My real name is Justin Hayward (total coincidence) and if anyone tried to steal my identity, they would be trying to steal the identity of the Moody Blues singer. Thing is, it's weird to answer a question from somebody whose name is "joeymainiac4eva"... or something. I do follow some other websites and it's weird to answer questions from people that are so anonymous, we know they could care less what they respond. They may say anything (true, untrue, outrageous, despicable, brilliant, absurd, incomprehesible, sickening or silly) but it doesn't matter cause their name is miles away from it.

Hi Richard, So how long has it been since you started working on this movie? When did you shoot it?

In general I find backlight usually looks the worst when it's unmotivated, but I agree will all your points as well. My biggest pet peeve is the outdoor shiny board edge light. The sun is clearly coming from one side then there's this desaturated, terribly unnatural edge skimming their ear and cheek, making them look greasy and sweaty. And it usually appears out of nowhere in the close up.

Looks good. It's always inspiring to see creativity overcome low budgets.

What's the ASA equivalent of Red with the standard "flattest" setup (whatever that is)?

No, Max just holds Hollywood to a higher standard than he probably should. I liked the movie a lot, but I was thrown a bit by the reviews. They compared it to some very realistic and complex movies, so I assumed going in that this would be more than a comic book movie... almost a guy in a bat suit set in the real, real, world. I found out I was wrong right away. This is a comic book movie. I saw it again with that in mind and really liked it. It's certainly the best comic book movie I've ever seen and I generally don't like comic book movies, so I guess that's saying something. What made me sad was watching Hong Kong make Chicago look like an ancient American wasteland as I live in Chicago.

No, it just seems that in general the most outspoken, when it comes to the "proper" terminology, are the film dabblers. Although, David Rakoczy has certainly proven different.

It's the opposite. The biggest opposers to people shooting HD and using the term "filmmaker" are the ones who hardly shot any film and, of course, zero HD or video (cause it's beneath them). They probably shoot some super 8 or 16mm, but they're generally not the professionals that make a living off shooting 35mm. It seems the more professional the filmmaker, the more open they are to format and "terms".

I don't remember that as I saw it when it first came out, but I hear what you're scream'n.

I agree with you Tom... it looked fine. What I really liked was the movie as a whole. There wasn't anything that stood out in particular with the photography (except maybe all the extreme close ups. The exterior landscape stuff was kind of a given.), but I was immersed in the story overall. Probably because I'm terrified of death and this kid seemed to not even think about it. The cinematography combined with the editing combined with the score got me involved. Although in the hands of a truly visual director (nothing against the DP) it might have been breathtaking, but I don't know if I would have been more interested in the cinematography than the movie itself. I wonder if "Lawrence of Arabia" (or whatever epic lends itself to this style) type visuals would have truly earned the term "style over substance"?

Which makes it a universal term.

Do you consider anyone a filmmaker outside the student world?

Trouble is, I always shoot 35mm professionally. It's my job. Whether I'm gaffing a commercial or DPing one, it's always on 35mm. The feature I'm finishing right now was shot many different formats (I sometimes forget which camera was used for certain scenes). I've had two mildly successful short "movies" that got me the money to make this feature. One was shot on film and one shot on video. What am I?

It's such common knowledge that indie films like this don't reveal their budget, I'm wasting my typing fingers typing this.

I'm sure these movies are funny, but judging from only their trailers, it seems the jokes aren't much different than the jokes in the actual movies they're making fun of. Like the Hancock joke of Will Smith flying into the street light... I've only seen the trailer to Hancock as well, but that joke looks like something that would actually be in Hancock. In fact, Will Smith flying through a billboard by accident in the real movie is kinda funnier.

I hear what you're scream'n Richard, but (having spent the last year of my life making my first feature) not even submitting to a couple fests because the odds are against me seems to short-change all my really hard work.

Maybe after the first five minutes... But I certainly don't think they're mostly a total waste of time and money. Many fests have midnight shows specifically for genre stuff. I saw "The Descent" for the first time at Sundance. I don't know anybody that's done as well as these guys with such little money... http://www.sonyclassics.com/baghead/ I've actually heard "Baghead" is really scary even though it's sold as a comedy. These guys did quite well in the midnight section of South by Southwest this year... http://www.danceofthedeadmovie.com/ If anything, they give films a little street cred before the filmmakers go in to the very difficult task of actually selling it.