Spitballing is a surprisingly apt metaphor for the process writers, or filmmakers in general, go through to come with a concept. It revolves around throwing ideas out there and bouncing them off others, until something sticks. It has become a bit of a Hollywood stereotype; the table of corporate-focused producers attempting to think like the
‘Bad taste creates many more millionaires than good taste.’ — Hollywood by Charles Bukowski (pg. 94) While discussing story ideas and concepts in our Film-TV tutes at uni, I’ve found one thing that came up a lot was the tastes of our tutors, and what types of films would be received well by them. Something I think
I think for once I can genuinely say there really aren’t any spoilers, unless you don’t want insights into Malick’s process – but who wouldn’t? I’m already excited. It’s a shame Australia has to wait till April.
Originally posted on Media Myth Alert:
The Sunday “Outlook” section of the Washington Post usually is such a jumble of thumbsucker essays and middling book reviews that it deserves just passing attention. What made yesterday’s “Outlook” an exception was an engaging critique of Zero Dark Thirty, the controversial new movie about the CIA’s years-long hunt…
Originally posted on leeshausoftherisingsun:
“Well. Hmmhmmhmm. Because, if the gunner had shot the pod that C-3P0 and R2 were in, they wouldn’t have got to Tatooine, they wouldn’t have met Luke, Luke wouldn’t have met Ben, they wouldn’t have met Han and Chewie, they wouldn’t have rescued Princess Leia. None of it would have happened.”…