Not one to be dishing out advice though. What was the last film he made? Rogue One? In 2016? 5 years ago? And it's because the movie sucked, and even if you liked it, everything is owed to Tony Gilroy for coming in to fix the mess Gareth created. Why would anyone hire him? He didn't even get invited back for the Andor series that Rogue One is based off of, yet Tony Gilroy was. Godzilla? Sucked ass. Monster? Eh, it was fine. But as soon as he got big budget films he couldn't handle it. He's a shit director.
I would so much like to make a film, but unfortunately I have no friends... The only thing that seems possible to me is to make a movie with puppets, lol.
I was expecting JJ Abrams to mention that when he was saying how younger filmmakers have access to high quality equipment, software etc. Given that being true the big difference is budget.
I think these days, just getting noticed is already difficult. With the amount of content that's put out every single day on streaming services, UA-cam and the wider internet. People get financed, get their movies made, learn the experience, etc. But they disappear in the content mass in like a week at most. In that sense, what Chris Nolan said plays into that. These days, you have to stand out, really have something no one else has and draw attention. Otherwise you're just another blip on the Netflix bar. Be weird.
i'm not sure you have to 'stand out'. Even if you don't 'stand out', making a GOOD film, is already difficult enough.. I'd be happy with that and even happier if Netflix or Amazon picks it up. Don't forget those streaming giants also provide more opportunities to indie filmmakers to create a movie or tv-show.
make a movie on a budget and nobody sees.'?..thats why everyone is on youtube because at least it is not costing them a leg and kidney to finance a film
Yeah well just keep in mind that what those people are describing in delicate words is their innate talent to do and handle things as they do and turn out great, but surely you have to be passionate in any way, but never forget Ed Wood 😉
I had to skip Ridley Scott because I wasn't listening to him, I was just asking, 'Oh really? Prometheus? Alien Covenant?' Those two films have destroyed any confidence I once had in Ridley Scott I'm afraid. Love Nolan and I kind of love Abrams, although he's gone very corporate rather than creative recently. Its one thing understanding that the key to making creative films is to make what you love, its a whole different thing to try and practice that in a Hollywood obsessed with opening weekends and with no confidence in a film's longevity at the box office.
You're absolutely right of course, I'm holding a grudge, like I still hold a grudge against Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection. Once upon a time you could rely on certain filmmakers not to be the people making the bad films. Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Ron Howard, etc. They've all fallen from grace recently which I don't really understand if I'm honest, they're rich so they can easily refuse work they think might tarnish their reputation so why don't they? Rich people are strange...
That is true, I personally quite liked Covenant, though I agree Prometheus was somewhat of a mess. I always think bad movies end up being made for completely unique reasons, Prometheus seems to have had a bit too much freedom and RS seemed to change his mind about the kind of film he wanted a lot. Solo seemed to have far too little freedom and Ron Howard had to mop up someone else's mess. The Hobbit movies are famous for their last-minute changes behind the scenes, so it's no surprise they are bad! I often wonder if the reason films can go so badly downhill now is that it's too expensive to change things, people make a mistake at one point or other and then they can't fix it. Once things start going wrong it snowballs. RS couldn't keep the changes to Prometheus consistent or interesting because there was too much momentum, or something like that?
Henry Clifford I think that is certainly one of the reasons but I've also come to suspect that it has something to do with the loss of the grip they once had on marketing films. Films used to be sold by throwing a few trailers on TV, far fewer people watch TV and tend to switch their attention off when the commercials come on, perhaps checking on their Facebook, Twitter or Instagram on their smartphone. They've clicked onto the fact that the way to sell a film is to get people talking about it (hence sequels, prequels and remakes galore) which is true. Where they're going wrong though is that they're not listening to the opinions on UA-cam, Facebook and Twitter. Just to prove how much they don't understand social media they argue with their fans online, publically thus opening themselves up to the ire of everyone who happens to agree with that person. There are two worlds and Hollywood isn't fully aware of one of them. There is the pre-millennial world, populated by people who grew up before the Internet and still watch TV quite regularly, take little to no interest in social media and find computers an irritant except where they add convenience (e.g. to do the weekly shopping). Then there is the millennial world, those who grew up with the Internet, many unable to hold an eye-to-eye conversations in full because they hear a blip then take out their phone and insist they're listening, little realising that the most efficient human communication is non-verbal - it's not what you say so much as the look on your face when you're saying it. Hollywood is only aware of the pre-millennial world because most of the people working there are pre-millennials. They use techniques to attract the attention of millennials, using social media and getting people talking, but they don't reach most pre-millennials at all. Considering they're hoping to promote films based on films that pre-millennials grew up with that doesn't sound very wise to me. They're also mainly hearing the opinions of millennials, which Hollywood either ignores entirely or people like Rian Johnson argue with the fans, telling them that's what he meant to do, and implying we're stupid for not understanding his excruciatingly stupid excuse for a Star Wars film. If they don't remedy this cultural divide any time soon, the box office will plummett, as already demonstrated by the flop of Solo.
You gave enough of a crap to comment. You can move on whenever you wish, nobody is making you hang around or comment. Speak for yourself, not the 'we' and we will do as we wish.
Hun, you don't need our permission to watch something else lmao. No one cares to read your pointless complaining about wanting to watch something else, you are fully capable of doing that for yourself.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great compilation!
What a great resource
Gareth really spoke some interesting and helpful words
Not one to be dishing out advice though. What was the last film he made? Rogue One? In 2016? 5 years ago? And it's because the movie sucked, and even if you liked it, everything is owed to Tony Gilroy for coming in to fix the mess Gareth created. Why would anyone hire him? He didn't even get invited back for the Andor series that Rogue One is based off of, yet Tony Gilroy was. Godzilla? Sucked ass. Monster? Eh, it was fine. But as soon as he got big budget films he couldn't handle it. He's a shit director.
@@ed1rko17 I respectfully disagree. I do appreciate your input though! Have a good day
Ridley SCOT-FREE
I would so much like to make a film, but unfortunately I have no friends... The only thing that seems possible to me is to make a movie with puppets, lol.
Join film clubs, attend workshops, even acting classes lol, everything related, and don't be shy! Best of luck.
join your local filmmaking communities one step at a time, first in the online circles, the forums, go to free workshops, get out there mate.
I feel you.
A lot of struggling actors and directors get their start in porn before they get to make mainstream movies. You could make a puppet porno!
the biggest challenge is financing
I was expecting JJ Abrams to mention that when he was saying how younger filmmakers have access to high quality equipment, software etc. Given that being true the big difference is budget.
Agreed, but i think very few people mention how important it is to know how to sell your film and keep pushing it.
Agreed. You've just got to look at these lower budget films that breakhrough the mainstream and become huge successes.
Make your movie that no one will see.
Steven Spielberg was jj abrams mentor, it's all about network and who you know..
I think these days, just getting noticed is already difficult. With the amount of content that's put out every single day on streaming services, UA-cam and the wider internet. People get financed, get their movies made, learn the experience, etc. But they disappear in the content mass in like a week at most. In that sense, what Chris Nolan said plays into that. These days, you have to stand out, really have something no one else has and draw attention. Otherwise you're just another blip on the Netflix bar. Be weird.
i'm not sure you have to 'stand out'. Even if you don't 'stand out', making a GOOD film, is already difficult enough.. I'd be happy with that and even happier if Netflix or Amazon picks it up. Don't forget those streaming giants also provide more opportunities to indie filmmakers to create a movie or tv-show.
JJ the destroyer of franchises
Why?
🔥🔥🔥
Try to pretend properly.
JJ doesn't really belong with the other directors, not good not bad.
make a movie on a budget and nobody sees.'?..thats why everyone is on youtube because at least it is not costing them a leg and kidney to finance a film
JJABRAMS had a bell end for a nose . . . Not insulting the guy, it is what it is.
Yeah well just keep in mind that what those people are describing in delicate words is their innate talent to do and handle things as they do and turn out great, but surely you have to be passionate in any way, but never forget Ed Wood 😉
There is no excuse 😂💀
I had to skip Ridley Scott because I wasn't listening to him, I was just asking, 'Oh really? Prometheus? Alien Covenant?' Those two films have destroyed any confidence I once had in Ridley Scott I'm afraid.
Love Nolan and I kind of love Abrams, although he's gone very corporate rather than creative recently. Its one thing understanding that the key to making creative films is to make what you love, its a whole different thing to try and practice that in a Hollywood obsessed with opening weekends and with no confidence in a film's longevity at the box office.
FX Lord I mean, he has been making multiple movies per year for like 40 years... you'd expect him to have two bad movies
You're absolutely right of course, I'm holding a grudge, like I still hold a grudge against Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection.
Once upon a time you could rely on certain filmmakers not to be the people making the bad films. Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Ron Howard, etc. They've all fallen from grace recently which I don't really understand if I'm honest, they're rich so they can easily refuse work they think might tarnish their reputation so why don't they?
Rich people are strange...
That is true, I personally quite liked Covenant, though I agree Prometheus was somewhat of a mess. I always think bad movies end up being made for completely unique reasons, Prometheus seems to have had a bit too much freedom and RS seemed to change his mind about the kind of film he wanted a lot. Solo seemed to have far too little freedom and Ron Howard had to mop up someone else's mess. The Hobbit movies are famous for their last-minute changes behind the scenes, so it's no surprise they are bad!
I often wonder if the reason films can go so badly downhill now is that it's too expensive to change things, people make a mistake at one point or other and then they can't fix it. Once things start going wrong it snowballs. RS couldn't keep the changes to Prometheus consistent or interesting because there was too much momentum, or something like that?
Henry Clifford I think that is certainly one of the reasons but I've also come to suspect that it has something to do with the loss of the grip they once had on marketing films. Films used to be sold by throwing a few trailers on TV, far fewer people watch TV and tend to switch their attention off when the commercials come on, perhaps checking on their Facebook, Twitter or Instagram on their smartphone.
They've clicked onto the fact that the way to sell a film is to get people talking about it (hence sequels, prequels and remakes galore) which is true. Where they're going wrong though is that they're not listening to the opinions on UA-cam, Facebook and Twitter. Just to prove how much they don't understand social media they argue with their fans online, publically thus opening themselves up to the ire of everyone who happens to agree with that person.
There are two worlds and Hollywood isn't fully aware of one of them. There is the pre-millennial world, populated by people who grew up before the Internet and still watch TV quite regularly, take little to no interest in social media and find computers an irritant except where they add convenience (e.g. to do the weekly shopping). Then there is the millennial world, those who grew up with the Internet, many unable to hold an eye-to-eye conversations in full because they hear a blip then take out their phone and insist they're listening, little realising that the most efficient human communication is non-verbal - it's not what you say so much as the look on your face when you're saying it.
Hollywood is only aware of the pre-millennial world because most of the people working there are pre-millennials. They use techniques to attract the attention of millennials, using social media and getting people talking, but they don't reach most pre-millennials at all. Considering they're hoping to promote films based on films that pre-millennials grew up with that doesn't sound very wise to me. They're also mainly hearing the opinions of millennials, which Hollywood either ignores entirely or people like Rian Johnson argue with the fans, telling them that's what he meant to do, and implying we're stupid for not understanding his excruciatingly stupid excuse for a Star Wars film.
If they don't remedy this cultural divide any time soon, the box office will plummett, as already demonstrated by the flop of Solo.
He's made a few turds but he's also made Alien and Blade Runner so all is forgiven.
Honestly, who gives a crap? Yeah, I get, digital doesn't look as good as film. Yada-yada-yada, can we move on? Thx.
You gave enough of a crap to comment. You can move on whenever you wish, nobody is making you hang around or comment. Speak for yourself, not the 'we' and we will do as we wish.
Eventually it will and the grain etc can be added with filters
Hun, you don't need our permission to watch something else lmao. No one cares to read your pointless complaining about wanting to watch something else, you are fully capable of doing that for yourself.