Jump to content

Top Cinematographers Miss Studio Dramas - Indiewire


Miguel Angel

Recommended Posts

Weinstein used to buy up lots of indies at Sundance whether he liked them or not.  He bought films that he didn't even want just so they didn't compete with titles he wanted to push.  This is also done by studios and sometimes networks.  They'll bury I.P. they don't think is strong enough, tests well enough or is just not timed properly for release.  All so it doesn't compete with this or that title that is favored to do very well.

So, with this kind of studio / network business model of buy and bury, it's extremely high risk to make a million dollar bet on any indie drama when you don't know for certain that it will even be distributed.   I can't cry a river for either of those two DP's as they both already have very strong credits in the industry and can shoot anything.  Soderbergh shoots all his indies himself with an Iphone.  Give me a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't this pretty standard across the board. The high end dramas are going away, so you have comic book movies and Disney remakes at the top. Interesting dramas have moved to Netflix or are being made on indie budgets. We are back to the cinema of attractions, audiences are mostly seeking spectacle from their cinema visits. 

Mr Deakins has options though, he at least could get work on big franchise movies that would give him freedom to take on the lower budget passion projects.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't wan't to assume this quote represents morrison's feelings as a whole but...You need a 100million dollar films to be creatively happy? that is a little ridiculous. Especially considering I'm sure Morrison is quite wealthy. I think we need more 5-25million dollar films with strong creative vision. The fact that 20million is looked at as not enough to make a movie seems like a problem. Maybe the way we are shooting and organizing the production of these projects needs to adjust so budgets can be used in a way that benefits both crew and production. 

“I love shooting. It’s all I’ve ever wanted to do and if they were still making $100 million dramas, then that’s what I’d be doing,”

...and your directing films because you can't shoot huge breadth films for 100million with large scale crew. If your creativity is only fostered by this scale and level of capital...maybe you need to adjust. 

Just rubbed me the wrong way. 

 

 

Edited by Albion Hockney
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phil Connolly said:

Isn't this pretty standard across the board. The high end dramas are going away, so you have comic book movies and Disney remakes at the top. Interesting dramas have moved to Netflix or are being made on indie budgets. We are back to the cinema of attractions, audiences are mostly seeking spectacle from their cinema visits. 

Mr Deakins has options though, he at least could get work on big franchise movies that would give him freedom to take on the lower budget passion projects.

 

Deakins is also a very wealthy individual. He could certainly make enough money shooting lower budget films if he chose, and also can shoot commercials whenever he wants if he needs the cash

This whole thing is a sorta woe is me for the very highest end of the industry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

I think it is legitimate to complain about the dearth of mid-to-high budget studio dramas. Sure, one can shoot low-budget dramas but they probably won’t have the scale or production value or technical resources of “The Last Emperor” or “There Will Be Blood” or “Road to Perdition”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea I agree, that is well said. those movies would be very different with out the budgets they had.

However I will say much more of a concern seems to be just having films with creative intention/vision that are given budgets that are sustainable. So many talented and even acclaimed filmmakers struggle to even get 1-5million to make a movie they care for and would be valuable to be made.

and again for Morrison to not be creatively fulfilled with out that scope, it just seems like missing the point of an artist practice which is often about creative problem solving.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Creative problem solving is only one aspect of being an artist and dealing with small budgets that can be inadequate to achieve a particular vision or make it near impossible to tell certain types of stories is frustrating for a filmmaker.  Yes, that describes the majority of filmmaking but many people in love of cinema dream of making their own "8 1/2" or "Doctor Strangelove" or "Seven Samurai" or "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Citizen Kane", or any number of stories that need a certain budget to achieve a certain scale and scope. I'm not sure why this is even being debated -- is it so hard to imagine dreaming of doing ambitious works of art?  Not wanting to settle for just making little films about little subjects that can be shot cheaply?

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...