I didn't see any threads about this, but if there is one already, please move this one to it appropriate place.

Is anyone going to watch this tonight?

I know there are a lot of filmmakers to be at SS so I'm just curious.

I normally don't watch TV, but I thought I'd give this a try. I found my dusty remote, fumbled around with it for a while, finally figured out how it works and turned on the TV. Let me know what you guys think of the show.   

I've been waiting for this show for a long time and signed up for onthelot.com a few weeks back.  It's a good site, but not one where you start threads, saying, "Who wants my scripts?"

The site actually has a lot of bad movie shorts on it.  Some of them don't even belong on youtube, IMHO.  There are a number of really good shorts.  My favorite, so far, is a sci-fi short called 'Man vs. Woman.'  Unfortunately, the site doesn't make it easy to find the shorts.

The show is very quick in its pacing and you feel for all the participants, the winners and the losers.  I see this show being very successful and look forward to next week's episode.

And WTF happened to Carrie Fisher?  She looked terrible!


Phil

Dang, seems like u gotta be more of a writer to make on the show so far

Actually, based on the first challenge, you have to be more of a salesperson.


Phil

You have to know how commercial hollywood works. They're not looking for a genius or a visionary, just someone who will connect with a large audience.

To my delight, there was a lot of emphasis (sp) on writing. Rather than giving the directors scripts to direct/produce they had to come up with a story first. I loved that part!!

As far as the selling bit, I think everyone that aspire to sell something to Hollywood has to learn how to pitch. That means selling yourself and your script just like a salesman selling a car.

I use to sell fire/safety equipment.  After four or five years of that, I can sell anything.  Ideas popped in my head right away, based on the pitch ideas the contestants were given.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe Actually, based on the first challenge, you have to be more of a salesperson. Phil

I'm talkin about more of it in a whole. not just the pitching. They had to think of a story for the log line and then next phase write own script 1st then direct.

I only caught the end of the show tonight so unfortunately, I missed the writing part as well as the pitching. I did hear a lot of people didn't make it though. Apparently, the judges didn't think some people were enthusiastic enough. That makes sense. I did catch these guys in production though. Producing a film in 24 hours is a huge challenge IMO. I saw a lot of these guys yelling, pointing fingers, and, overall, being very demanding. These are the guys who are going to make it the farthest IMO. The fact is you can't always be a nice guy if you want to make a quality film. You've got to take charge and make sure everyone knows what they're doing in order for the production to run smoothly. I think the people who understand that are the most likely winners. The show seems pretty good so far although it runs very quickly. I'm going to have to catch it next week.

Much like American Idol, having the contestants work together right away makes great television.  It creates a lot of friction as strangers but heads.  It also eliminates a lot of people very quickly.


Phil

you gotta be able to pitch in Hollywood...so it makes sense

Holy shit!

'Anniversary' actually made the finals and I only just found out. Top 50 out of 12000. I'm awestruck.

Shame I can't watch the show cos I'm in Germany. Need to hunt for it online.

Vote Randy Slavin! He's the guy from NY with long hair and a 'tache.

Awesome!!!  

I don't remember right now who that was, but I'll keep an eye out next time for sure. How Cool!!

I'm not a TV person, but this was pretty good. Moved a little quick perhaps, but that probably had to do with there being so many people in the first episode.

Btw, I thought they said 58 000? I could be wrong though.

Of course I'll watch it tonight, because a friend of mine sent a movie to them and I hope his stuff be allright!

Drama! Excitement! Conflict!

Very interesting show, I have to say. Some really annoying, obnoxious and loudmouthed people among the contestants. They are surely the ones who's gonna make it. After all they're looking for the next Brett Ratner, right?

I was quite disenchanted with a lot of the people who were there. Because a lot of them seemed like they weren't there because they loved movies, but just wanted to entertain people, like one guy said, and "movies seemed like the best way to do that".

Although the pitch-challenge was tough. I tried pitching a movie to myself in the mirror afterwards. I passed.

the show bled over half of its American Idol lead in audience.... to register a 5.7ish...

hopefully it wont lose any more of the show could be canned.

I think it's evident that to succeed in the film industry, you need to have good social skills and be proficient with oral communication.  It was pathetic to see some of these hopefuls step in front of the judges only to completely choke.

And Carrie Fisher is still Princess Leia to me!

Quoted from greg I think it's evident that to succeed in the film industry, you need to have good social skills and be proficient with oral communication.  It was pathetic to see some of these hopefuls step in front of the judges only to completely choke. And Carrie Fisher is still Princess Leia to me!

Well maybe that's the reason so much crap comes out of Hollywood each year? Those who get stuff made are mediocre film-makers on all accounts, but they can sell sand in Sahara. they can sell themselves.

While there might be true visionaries out there who without any social skills at all.

Come to think of it, some of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century were excentrics, oddballs, social recluses, Asphergers, and neurotics.

Perhaps Hollywood just simply isn't the place to nurture genius?

True, you don't need to be vocal to be an icon, but to be a successful filmmaker, it's imperative that you know how to talk.  That Rahim guy, for example, comes on stage and gives these disclaimers and stuff, basically saying "sorry, I suck under pressure, I couldn't do this, it was hard, I have no self confidence, blah blah blah."  I think Ratner said it best, you gotta have confidence in your work and you gotta back it up.

Of course, if someone comes off like that wacko who was whipping his belt all over the place, then that's just as bad  

Quoted from greg True, you don't need to be vocal to be an icon, but to be a successful filmmaker, it's imperative that you know how to talk.  That Rahim guy, for example, comes on stage and gives these disclaimers and stuff, basically saying "sorry, I suck under pressure, I couldn't do this, it was hard, I have no self confidence, blah blah blah."  I think Ratner said it best, you gotta have confidence in your work and you gotta back it up. Of course, if someone comes off like that wacko who was whipping his belt all over the place, then that's just as bad

haha yeah my jaw dropped when he started taking off his belt! And then afterwards when he said "You know I did what I wanted to do, I unleashed the thunder..." I was rolling on the floor. "Unleashed the thunder"?? Who does this guy think he is? David Copperfield?

I think you're right when it comes to directors. they need to be able to lead and to communicate. But the problem is the same standards apply for screenwriters, whose profession historically has been riddled with insecure social lost causes who write exactly because they can't talk, because they aren't vocal. Because they can only put their ideas into writing and not speech.

And it'd be really cool if there was a place where these guys' talent was nurtured like the loudmouth's talent is in Hollywood.

By the way whatever happened to that cute little red-head who was cut on the first day. I don't think she ever got on camera. She was one of them who got cut from Randy Slavin's group. I wonder what her name was and film she did? And what her phone number is...

Quoted from Death Monkey But the problem is the same standards apply for screenwriters, whose profession historically has been riddled with insecure social lost causes who write exactly because they can't talk, because they aren't vocal. Because they can only put their ideas into writing and not speech.

You're absolutely right.  A large percentage of writers seem to be a much different bunch than directors. And it's a shame too, because some of the most quiet folk can be amazing visionaries and, as you said, they just don't have the balls to get out there and show their stuff.

I'll just leave this with a statement that I like living by: The only thing stopping you from doing something...is you.

they seem like they are looking for the next great filmmaker...and that would require someone who's a "jack of all trades"

Martin,
I thought I recognized that guy! I remember seeing your film a few months ago and remember the director. I saw him on Fox's website. They have a five-minute intro to the show. Go there and you will see him. I don't get it down here until the 29th. Good job with that, Martin! The director for my short, Manipulating Life, made the second round(top 100) but was eliminated due to his second round, film. Was interviewed in LA and everything. Pretty impressive out of 11,000 films/directors selected. Now I know who to root for! Go Martin's film/director/screenplay!

Joseph

Quoted from SwapJack they seem like they are looking for the next great filmmaker...and that would require someone who's a "jack of all trades"

That's pretty much how it's done with the small budget indie films.  No one has one job and the director, pretty much, has to be ready to do them all.


Phil

I just thought about something. How about a Simply Scripts Pitch challenge?

It would work similarly to on the show, only, you know, in writing. But we'd get 24 hours and then we'd have to pitch a movie from an assigned Logline.

Could be good for creativity, like the OWC.

Of course if you get a really good idea, you might not wanna post it with all the plagiarism around these days...hmmm.

Quoted from Death Monkey I just thought about something. How about a Simply Scripts Pitch challenge?

I would do that. I like to think I work pretty well under pressure.

There is a website, voteforthteworst.com, that encouraged people to vote for the worst singer in American Idol.  This is why Sanjaya lasted so long.  Anyway, they are now targetting On The Lot.

I bring this up because I like this show and would hate to see these assholes ruin someone's chance at winning by purposely voting for the worst filmmaker.  I'm not going to say who to vote for; that's up to you.  You can visit onthelot.com and see the shorts that are in the competition.  Some are good.  Some are bad.  If we vote, we might be able to counteract these assholes and their counterproductive nonsense.



Phil

Quoted from Martin Holy shit! 'Anniversary' actually made the finals and I only just found out. Top 50 out of 12000. I'm awestruck. Shame I can't watch the show cos I'm in Germany. Need to hunt for it online. Vote Randy Slavin! He's the guy from NY with long hair and a 'tache.

Sorry about your guy being eliminated. Looks like he got eliminated in Round Two. I think the judges referred to his group’s 24-Hour Film as “style over substance.”  

I'm pretty embarrassed for a lot of these guys. They aren't very good. Some are talented and good pitching and things like that, but the production values for a lot of these films (mainly the cinematography) is extremely lame.

-Rubix

I enjoyed most of the shorts.  One was extremely bad.  Most others were problematic.  And many were very good.  Two or three three stuck out over the rest.

I enjoy this show.


Phil

I'm still happy to see that the emphasize is on the story.

Some of these super shorts were well made and and so on, like the "special effects" guy's stuff, however I felt that about half of these shorts were not really stories. Some felt like a joke and others like a commercial and then there was the "trailer". Yeah sure, some of it was impressive considering the short time they all had, but few of the films were actually stories with a beginning a middle and an end.

Who did I vote for?
I can't believe it, but I voted for the "fart" one, Replication something. Second for me was the "Lucky Penny".

I voted for the first one.  The 'dance' one.  The story was complete and original.  Production was good.

The penny one was an old joke filmed.  If the guy dated the piece to make it look like an old movie, I think he would've done much better.


Phil

The Dance one was my third pick and the airport security, seduction thing after that.  

i voted for the Saftey Lab because it looked like the hardest to direct and he pulled it off very nicely.

i also liked Soft, Fart Replication, the erotic Airport fantasy,  Lucky Penny, and the Dance one.

Come on, no1 liked the drunken aliens? That was comedy!!

If the alien one had a stronger ending, I'd agree with you, JD.

What does everyone think the worst short was?  The taxi short was my least favorite.


Phil

Yeah, I didn't like the Cab one either. He should have got his cab story from Helio's Cab's Tales.....

I also did not like the light bulb changing one. That girl looked like she wanted her film school money back.

I liked the idea of the lightbulb one.  It just fell short in it's execution.

I also think that the guy who did 'Getta Rhoom' will be packing his bags tonight.  That film was pretty offensive... and I'm hard to offend.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe If the alien one had a stronger ending, I'd agree with you, JD. What does everyone think the worst short was?  The taxi short was my least favorite. Phil

Yea, did need ending high point.

I also really like replication. " It was me" was great to end it on!

yea taxi guy/kenny is gone....

I hope getta room guy sticks around, i think his story didnt come out how he thought

Honestly, I got bored during the second hour and elected to watch Kevin Arnold parallel park in "The Wonder Years" instead.  

My beef is that this show is the exact same format as all of Fox's other crappy reality shows(minus Hell's Kitchen) and, I don't know, I just got bored with it all last night.  

And two of the filmmakers ticked me off.  The first film with the dancing guy was fun, but the filmmaker came off as a jackass to me.  When they were giving his bio he said "Derrr derrrr I got accepted to Harvard hehe hahaha and on the first day I decided that I wanted to make derr derr derr films instead derrrr derrrrr snort."

As a student who is currently going through the transfer process to a university and experiencing all of the crap of real colleges, that ticked me off.  Call it bias, but I hope he loses because I think he's a loser.

And then the Marty Martin kid who made a TRAILER instead of the short, and then comes out on stage with an exaggerated bow to the mandatory not-so-great applause.  That also bugged me.  These things remind me of the OWE, and alot of the time we see people(myself included) stretch the theme, i.e. comedy instead of drama for example.  But this guy is going for THE million dollar deal, THE life changing event, THE ultimate prize, and he's coming out all lackluster and basically telling the judges "hey, I can't think of anything nor can I do the directing tasks because I lack imagination and I shouldn't be in this competition anyway, so, instead,  I'm going to apply for an editing position."  The trailer wasn't even that good, either.

So yeah.  I felt disappointed, but I'll probably keep watching because, well, the concept is still interesting.

End rant.

I can't believe that guy Kenny what's his face got to stick around last time. And Carrie Fisher commended his 'cinematography'?? My high-school graduating film had better cinematography than what he did. What a joke.

He did the Whack Alley Cab this time around and look at it. The editing is awful, there's no dynamic or flow. He obviously doesn't know how to direct the actors neither. This guys is a walking ad FOR film school.

I loved the Dance Man film. It was hillarious even if it didn't have a real punch-line. Marty Martin's trailer had high production value and had pretty witty dialogue and execution, but at the end of the day it was a trailer. And a very generic and unimaginative one at that.

Spaced out was funny but again, didn't have a good enough punch-line.

I hate to say it but I think those who's shown most artistic vision has been a couple of the ladies. A lot of the guys have got the craftmanship down but not an original thought in their heads. But that's a rather sweeping statement considering they are mostly guys.

Zach Lipovsky - the FX wiz kid does show some promise, but he needs to prove he can do a film without relying on effects.

My favorites are:

Adam Stein
Carolina something von something de San Martin
Andrew Hunt

And I really like Jessie Brillhart but she needs to do better than the lightbulb movie next time.

By the way, I agree that the show is pretty much cut and paste from every other FOX reality TV show even down to the cheesy presenter voice. But it's about movies, so I don't care how they wrap it, I'm still gonna watch it.

Unless they start eating buffalo testicles and forge clandestine alliances to win a date with that pouty chick from For Love or Money...

Quoted from dogglebe I liked the idea of the lightbulb one.  It just fell short in it's execution. I also think that the guy who did 'Getta Rhoom' will be packing his bags tonight.  That film was pretty offensive... and I'm hard to offend. Phil

Just out of curiosity, what was offensive about it?

I re-watched it twice after reading your comments, but I just don't see it?

The main character in Getta Rhoom was supposed to be a nerd, trying to fit in.  Unfortunately for the director made the guy look like he was mentally retarded.  This made the short seem like an attack on retarded people.


Phil

Oh.

Did you ever see American Splendor though?

The character of Toby Radloff came off as 'retarded' to some viewers, but that's how he is in real life. Fact is, there are real people like that out there, even if he is a stereotype.

Suffice to say, I wasn't offended. But then again I don't get offended, so I guess I don't really count.

Yeah, but when you're in competition, you don't want to upset those who rate and judge you.

Also, the director said he wasn't going for retarded but nerdy.  This means he wasn't successful in what he set out to do.

Also, that guy irritated me with his silly-assed urban appearance.  He's from Kentucky!!  And, as George Carlin put it, no guy over the age of fourteen should wear his hat backward.


Phil

I was disappointed to see a Southern boy make a blunder like that. I knew what he was trying to do, but I also saw that it didn't come off right. I hope people will forgive him and let him stay on for a bit.

Sorry Pia, but I think your good ol' boy is going home tonight.


Phil

At least all the contestants can put "you're a very talented filmmaker.- "Carrie Fisher" on their resumes.

As opposed to "you're a very talented singer."  Paula Abdul?

Phil

I only watch Survivor and this, so I have no idea what Paula Abdul does.
I thought she was married to Arsenio Hall.

i think the nerd film was made with good intentions but i think it was executed wrong. i felt bad for the guy. i dont think he set out to make a an attack on mentally challenged people.
for the record,  i have a cousin who has a mental disability...

that Taxi film was by far the worst... that was just annoying

I don't think he was trying to be offensive. Saying that is like saying Norbit is offensive to fat people.

-Rubix

I don't think he was trying to be offensive.  I don't think he was trying to portray the character as a mentally challenged person.  But that's what happened.


Phil

well not only did america not find it offensive they put him in the top 3...

wow.

I watched this for the first time tonight. It was fun to watch something that pertains to something I’m interested in.

The guy with the Safety Lab film, I was wondering if the judges could kiss his ass anymore. I mean, it was okay but I didn’t think it was that good - not good enough for the judges to just keep shamelessly kissing his ass. And Carrie Fisher asked him to marry her daughter? Ugh. How tacky.

The hostess should be fired. She’s just awful. She must have slept with somebody pretty powerful to get that job. She didn’t get it based on her talent, I’m sorry.

Since it was my first time, I only got to watch the encore films, the Safety Lab movie, the supposedly offensive movie, and I’ve already forgotten the other one. I just couldn’t believe how non offensive the supposedly offensive movie was. People need to toughen up if that’s what they found offensive. I mean, come on. It was stupid and it really had no business being in the top three. I suspect it was only there because the judges made such a fuss and the viewing public wanted to set them straight.

The other one wasn’t good enough for me to remember.

Overall, I love the idea of the show. I can’t help but feel a little embarrassed however that these are the best they could find. They're fine directors but they need writers badly.

Breanne

Looking back at my post, it’s possible I was too rough on them. I’m sure they all worked really hard and did their best. It was also a one minute comedy which I know must have seriously challenged them. I know they had professional crews at their disposal. It appeared they had an actor pool to draw from as well. Does anyone know if they had to write their own stuff or if they had any writers at their disposal as well?

It almost doesn’t seem fair not to give them some writers to work with.

Breanne

Alright, I'm a bit confused now. How many episodes have aired so far and when's it on? I don't get Fox so I have to rely on somebody putting up the episodes on the internet.

4th episode. there were two piliminary episodes... last nights viewing of all the final 18 directors' films and today's elimination.

Last night's episode was the fourth.

The directors had to write this week's script, as well as last week's.  I missed the second episode and don't know if they showed their first assignments.


Phil

So the episode where Obnoxious Jeff and Obnoxious Marty butted heads in the all-night editing session and Jeff subsequently was sent home was the second episode, right?

Umm, yeah.  I missed that one but, but yeah....


Phil

I don't see why everyone got so pissy over the Getta Rhoom movie.  Yeah, the nerd came off as a mental, so let's all condemn the filmmaker to hell.  And then that Phil Hawkins wanker goes up to the filmmaker(I think his name is Jason) and tries to feed his own ego by bitching about how he was offended.  I mean shut up, dude.  He's trying to blow up his bubble because his film sucked so he was trying to make himself feel better.  I'm glad he's gone.

And these "judges" are absolutely pointless.  Not to mention that I'm sick and tired of the whole "we'll find out who goes home...AFTER THE BREAK!! WEEEE!"  Wow.

Right now I think there's only a handful of people that are contenders for this show in the sense that they're talented, have good social skills, and aren't jerks.  

Quoted from greg I don't see why everyone got so pissy over the Getta Rhoom movie.  Yeah, the nerd came off as a mental, so let's all condemn the filmmaker to hell...

I realize the guy explains that he never intended for the character to be challenged. But I have written handicapped characters and experienced something similar. Producers felt that it was offensive to handicapped people because the villain was in a wheelchair.

I told the director the only thing I’m guilty of is treating handicapped characters the same as I would any other characters.

It’s like handicapped people aren’t allowed to be portrayed in any way negative - but it only seems to apply to comedies. No one complained that Mr. Potter from It’s A Wonderful Life was insulting to handicapped people.

Suppose there was a series about handicapped people in which the majority of characters were handicapped. Would it be expected to have no villains? In my opinion, it’s the people who are so offended by this type of material who are the prejudiced ones. They think handicapped people can only fill nice or inspirational roles. Ask any handicapped actor and they’ll tell you they just wish there were any roles at all for them.


Breanne

Quoted from Breanne Mattson I realize the guy explains that he never intended for the character to be challenged. But I have written handicapped characters and experienced something similar. Producers felt that it was offensive to handicapped people because the villain was in a wheelchair. I told the director the only thing I’m guilty of is treating handicapped characters the same as I would any other characters. It’s like handicapped people aren’t allowed to be portrayed in any way negative - but it only seems to apply to comedies. No one complained that Mr. Potter from It’s A Wonderful Life was insulting to handicapped people. Suppose there was a series about handicapped people in which the majority of characters were handicapped. Would it be expected to have no villains? In my opinion, it’s the people who are so offended by this type of material who are the prejudiced ones. They think handicapped people can only fill nice or inspirational roles. Ask any handicapped actor and they’ll tell you they just wish there were any roles at all for them. Breanne

Exactly! You really hit the nail on the head.

Hollywood is shit scared of being 'offensive' which means that they won't take any chances. Also, I've noticed how they do it with race as well. In most cases you can only have a black villain if the hero is black as well, because Hollywood is afraid that if they set up a white guy against a black guy it's gonna look like a race-war. Doesn't work the other way around though.

Funny thing is, like with handicapped people, the people who are offended are almost always people who have no stake in the joke. People who get offended ON BEHALF of the handicapped, the homosexuals, the little people or whatever minority you wanna put in there.

I watched a couple of the episodes... I didn't really enjoy them.

As for writing, according to the end of episode 2, if I remember correctly, they were given 4 scripts to choose from for their 1 minute clips that were shown in episode 3 and 4.  So these goofs are not writing them.  However, I almost wish they were... I really haven't seen a clip I have truly enjoyed yet.  The girl announcer annoys me and the contestants are being made out to be twits.  The director/editor/producers are highlighting the conflicts and not the creative aspect of film making.

And I don't know why they gush over Zack the FX dude. I haven't seen him do anything really complex yet, just layering video clips. That is a bit time consuming, but nothing that makes me kow tow.

I might watch one more episode, but so far I'm not impressed.

Dethan

I hear On the lot is in danger of being cancelled.

House (re-run) is are now sloted for monday at 7

They're trying to find the best night and timeslot for the show.  Weren't the first two episodes on Wednesday and Thursday nights?



Phil

Quoted from JD_OK I hear On the lot is in danger of being cancelled. House (re-run) is are now sloted for monday at 7

I've heard all sorts of rumors like that, too.  Don't know if they're true, but I can believe them based on how the quality of this show is about a fraction of what it could potentially be.

By the way, if it's a deal for DreamWorks, why is it airing on Fox?  Do they have some kind of deal going on or something?

Quoted from dogglebe They're trying to find the best night and timeslot for the show.  Weren't the first two episodes on Wednesday and Thursday nights? Phil

yea, but if they keep switchin up the times, it will loose more of an audience.

this week was monday and tuesday..... so you think u can dance took wednesday and thursday

Dreamworks isnt a tv station, fox made deal with them to take the director, much like american idol and so you think u can dance. the winner gets contacts out with someone else

this is all so much more confusing than it needs to be. If the show gets cancelled, what happens to the million dollar contract? i'll take it!

The contest would still go on...it just wouldn't be televised.  People could probably stay up to date online though.

I remember this happening on another show...I think it was the contender rip-off that De La Hoya was on.

... can I still have the money?

The show will stabilize in its timeslot in the next week or two.  I don't think that the ratings are in yet to tell if it's a hit or not.  If this show is cancelled from television, it'll probably continue on-line.

I think the first season of Last Comic Standing went from Fox to Comedy Central for lack of ratings.  My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss was actually cancelled in mid-season.


Phil

I just saw the fifth episode...

Where does Michael Bay get off? All his comments were "more style, more editing, more visuals!". Does Michael Bay even remember what it was like making movies without Industrial Light & Magic and a 200-million dollar budget?

And his 'unimpressed' air of confidence really made me queasy.

I did like Sam's movie "Broken Pipe Dreams" the best, but Adam's was good as well.

I couldn't stand the fact that the one that got the best reviews was the one with the homosexual. Now, I'm not saying anything against homosexuals and don't want to get into that topic. But that film wasn't as well made as some of the other films, had a very cliche "moral", and while it did have interesting visuals, it seemed very easy to make.

The ONLY reason it did so well was because it was about a gay man and because if it wouldn't have won, I'm sure the judges and producers were scared gays would be upset and call it discrimination.

As for Michael Bay, I think it's good to have directors like him judge. Because there are two other judges who are concentrating on telling the filmmakers how to tell better stories, and Michael is trying to get them to have their own "style" of cinematography and whatever. He concentrated more on the technical aspect of it, which is great for this competition because that's where a lot of them struggle.

-Rubix

I have to say that I am quite confused about the aim of this show. And why on earth only have it on for 45 minutes yesterday?

I think the story is super important, but this show is about filmmaking, but there seems to me to be very little emphasis on that.

I'm also getting tired of the judges. Just because certain subjects don't appeal to them, they just seem to say I didn't care for the film. Shouldn't they as judges focus a little more on the technical aspects of the films and not just whether or not they liked the subject matter.

Rubix,

Are you Chris H. by any chance?

Quoted from Death Monkey Does Michael Bay even remember what it was like making movies without Industrial Light & Magic and a 200-million dollar budget?

No.

So I've been reading the comments in this thread and most of them are leaning towards the negative side. I've been very busy lately so I've missed the last couple episodes, which, I gather, is a good thing. What I've seen hasn't particularly interested me anyway and the show moves so fast, there's not enough time to really see what's going on. Nevertheless, this thread has persuaded me not to try and get back into the show. So yeah, not too disappointed to be out of the loop at this point.

Quoted from Elmer I couldn't stand the fact that the one that got the best reviews was the one with the homosexual. Now, I'm not saying anything against homosexuals and don't want to get into that topic. But that film wasn't as well made as some of the other films, had a very cliche "moral", and while it did have interesting visuals, it seemed very easy to make. The ONLY reason it did so well was because it was about a gay man and because if it wouldn't have won, I'm sure the judges and producers were scared gays would be upset and call it discrimination. As for Michael Bay, I think it's good to have directors like him judge. Because there are two other judges who are concentrating on telling the filmmakers how to tell better stories, and Michael is trying to get them to have their own "style" of cinematography and whatever. He concentrated more on the technical aspect of it, which is great for this competition because that's where a lot of them struggle. -Rubix

But is Michael Bay and Brett Rattner the best people to help young filmmakers develope their OWN personal style? We're talking about two of the most anonymous filmmakers in the business...

Get people like Darren Aronofsky or even David Fincher in there. The latter has mainstream appeal as well as talent.

The ONLY reason why I watch the show is because of the shortfilms and the process that goes into making them, and then to see who goes. That takes up about 10 minutes. Then the remaining half hour is about Adrianna Costa talking about Ford, Verizon and Transformers, and of course doing the 'suspenseful' beats before announcing whose movie gets to be shown tonight. Oh the suspense!

This show is so bad, when you think about what its subject matter is. It could've been great.

I don't understand why the film about the gay guy won so much praise either. I was almost cringing when I was watching it, its jokes didn't deliver and it was pretty pretentious. Maybe people were afraid after the backlash Getta Rhoom got last week? She did a pretty good job of setting it up as a 'controversial' film because of its subject matter. Maybe people felt 'brave' for liking it?

I feel so lost with this show.  What the hell was going on last night?  Are they, like, making it best of 5 for 3 weeks now or something?

I don't think any of the 5 directors from last night have much of a chance at anything to be honest.  The two films I liked were the musical and the toilet one, but I have such beef with the two filmmakers that I just don't care.  Sam has absolutely no personality.  He stood up there with a durr-faced grin the entire time, and Peanut Head Harvard Boy I don't  like by default.

The film about the gay guy sucked.  I don't know why people were off their rooster about that one.  The other two were kind of forgettable, I guess.

How are they going to work the vote-off?  I see two hours of "So You Think You Can Dance" tonight...

Quoted Text I don't think any of the 5 directors from last night have much of a chance at anything to be honest.  The two films I liked were the musical and the toilet one, but I have such beef with the two filmmakers that I just don't care.  Sam has absolutely no personality.  He stood up there with a durr-faced grin the entire time, and Peanut Head Harvard Boy I don't  like by default.

I think that's unfair. I was gonna say it's not a popularity contest, but...well it is.

I don't understand what their personalities have to do with it. I mean, I don't watch the show because of their star-quality, I watch it for their abilities. Let their work speak for them.

Stanley Kubrick was an asshole. Look what he accomplished.

Some people are just more introspective than others. I know if I was on, I wouldn't be one of those guys cracking jokes, flirting with Adrianna or doing that number thing with my fingers when I wanted people to vote for me. Michael Bay would probably hate me too. Which is comforting.

I guess I like to put myself in the position of the CEO of Dreamworks and I look at these people as if I were to handpick the one who I would give the million dollar deal to.  I know best personality isn't the object of this show, but if I want someone putting my company's name all over their films, I want them to be someone with a good personality and a positive aura, so likewise I would pretty much dissect everything these people do.  Hey, it keeps the show interesting.

Kubrick was an ass and it's a shame that that is part of his legacy.  David O. Russell is an asshole, too.  I think the video of him throwing a tantrum has been seen more than his actual films.  Basically, if I were in the position, I don't think I'd hire them because they are notorious dicks.  Ron Howard has a pretty impressive resume and he's known for being a laid back kind of guy, so I'd rather take my chances on him.  

BUT, back to the show, right now I like Andrew, Will and Shira-Lee because I think they're the best rounded.  And Shira is a babe, so she gets bonus points

Quoted from greg I guess I like to put myself in the position of the CEO of Dreamworks and I look at these people as if I were to handpick the one who I would give the million dollar deal to.  I know best personality isn't the object of this show, but if I want someone putting my company's name all over their films, I want them to be someone with a good personality and a positive aura, so likewise I would pretty much dissect everything these people do.  Hey, it keeps the show interesting. Kubrick was an ass and it's a shame that that is part of his legacy.  David O. Russell is an asshole, too.  I think the video of him throwing a tantrum has been seen more than his actual films.  Basically, if I were in the position, I don't think I'd hire them because they are notorious dicks.  Ron Howard has a pretty impressive resume and he's known for being a laid back kind of guy, so I'd rather take my chances on him.   BUT, back to the show, right now I like Andrew, Will and Shira-Lee because I think they're the best rounded.  And Shira is a babe, so she gets bonus points

You'd rather hire Ron Howard, because he's a nice guy, and then end up with something mediocre, than hire an asshole (which 90% of all geniuses are) and get a masterpiece? Isn't the movie the most important thing?

Andrew and Will are geniuinely nice guys. Especially Will. But I need to see some range on him. He's very sympathetic, but "sympathetic" and "nice" don't pay the bills.

Quoted from Death Monkey You'd rather hire Ron Howard, because he's a nice guy, and then end up with something mediocre, than hire an asshole (which 90% of all geniuses are) and get a masterpiece? Isn't the movie the most important thing?

Ron Howard's done some mighty fine movies, dude...I don't know where you're getting the mediocre from.  

Let me just clarify here; I wouldn't hire someone just because they're nice, that's insane.  We probably have different opinions here on Howard's work, but I'm a fan of it and if it came down to a Howard-Kubrick decision...I mean they both got decorated resumes, awards, box office smashes, but one of them is known for being a dick.  In a case like that, ya know, I'd probably take the nicer guy.  

Now obviously talent is talent.  If it came down to Jonathan Mostow or Kubrick, well, I'd take Kubrick in a heart beat.  But, ya know, Howard-Kubrick, at least IMO...personality may play a big part.

How can anyone not like Opie?

I think Ron Howard is great, besides he's still alive...

Kubrik might have been a genius, but if you have to work closely with someone, the nice guy will be my pick.

Quoted from greg Ron Howard's done some mighty fine movies, dude...I don't know where you're getting the mediocre from.   Let me just clarify here; I wouldn't hire someone just because they're nice, that's insane.  We probably have different opinions here on Howard's work, but I'm a fan of it and if it came down to a Howard-Kubrick decision...I mean they both got decorated resumes, awards, box office smashes, but one of them is known for being a dick.  In a case like that, ya know, I'd probably take the nicer guy.   Now obviously talent is talent.  If it came down to Jonathan Mostow or Kubrick, well, I'd take Kubrick in a heart beat.  But, ya know, Howard-Kubrick, at least IMO...personality may play a big part.

Oh sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you didn't particularly like Howard. If you think Howard is equally talented then I completely understand why you'd pick the nice guy over the asshole.

Personally he represents the Hollywood hired gun for me. No personal vision whatsoever. And he did Coocoon for which he must die.

Has he done entertaining films? Yes. Were they entertaining because of his direction? IMO, no.

He has made one movie that I actually really liked, which was The Missing. But other than that I imagine he's the kinda guy the studio calls and says"Ron, we need an Oscar winner! We've got Russel Crowe, 60 millon bucks and a plot about a true underdog story. P.S. Make Russel's character disabled in some way to gain audience sympathy"

I guess my point is, if the actual outcome, the movie itself will be just 1% better by hiring the world's biggest jerk, I would do it. And if the world's biggest jerk also happens to be the world's greatest filmmaker, he should win the competition.

I see where you're coming from and I think you're 99% right that, in the end, the personality of the director won't really change the outcome of the film for better or for worse, just getting to that point will be the adventure.  

It's like the saying that goes something like "what's more important: the end result or how you got there."  Some may argue either way.

I've enjoyed having this discussion with you!

Yeah I totally get that. I mean, if my life was miserable during the making of every film, I wouldn't be able to enjoy them much afterwards.

But then again, to the audience it wouldn't matter. Think The Shining. Kubrick's tantrum towards Shelley Duvall. Was it a horrible experience making that film? Yes. Did the film get better for it? Probably.

But it's really easy sitting here speculating when I've never done a film myself.

Anyways, back to On the Lot...

On The Lot isnt fairing in raitings... its averaging a 2.5 share.... (by contrast CSI's get about 9.5 and higher)

if this show is still on in two weeks i'll be surprised.

I think I've seen all the episodes so far....... did I miss something? Is it over? I can't find its schedule anywhere. I don't like having to really search for a show. That just results in me not watching at all.  >

It's on tomorrow at 8 on Fox.  Screw all the original criticisms, I think the way they're airing this is confusing everyone!  Are they going to do another 5 tomorrow?  Does someone get voted off?  Whaaaat?!

We get to see Shira-Lee tomorrow, though.  I'm looking forward to that. I discovered her existence over the weekend and suddenly I'm much more interested in this show

I liked this show the best so far!

I'm going to vote for "slut mom", but I'm shallow enough to have a soft spot for Kenny!

I agree, good episode tonight.  I liked Polished alot, and Kenny's film was just so out there that I liked that one too.  I think the film was more of a controlled style over substance deal and it worked for me this week.

Love at First Shot lacked alot of direction and energy, and Mickey Mouse's Waltz with the Devil, while some of the editing work was cool, I can't help but dislike because I hate the director.  This guy just looks like such a snob and an assface and he's up there on stage sparring with Carrie Fisher.  Just shutup, dude.  

However, my lady's film was by far the best(and the best by default), so I happily voted for her.  God, she has that slight, slight accent and whenever it comes out it's like...my goodness.  Shira-Lee can be my director any time

I put emphasis on storytelling in my review of the short-films. If you can't tell a story, then style means nothing.

That said, this is what the chart looks like.

1. Polished

Best of the lot. Funny, well-told, even if it could've been tightened up editing. Great lead role and solid simple premise.

2. Beeline

Very sweet film, but it could've had a bit better delivery and perhaps better editing.

3. Love at First Shot

Pacing was a big problem. It was really well-written though but it fell through.

4. Dance with the Devil

Style over substance, and Marty should just stop arguing with the judges. It's tacky. tTe style was very impressive, but the story made him look like he was acting out a crush on Tony Scott/Guy Ritchie. The difference between Marty and Steven Spielberg is Spielberg has good stories and knows how to tell them with his style. The only thing Marty has perfected is mimicking the style of his idols.

5. Edge on the End

A truly horrible film in my book. Such pretentious wish-wash like that I thought people got over doing in high-school. I couldn't believe the judges. What utter crap. It's like the whole world has gone mad. How many art-house clichés can you fit into one 2,5 minute film? I counted. Eleven.

'Polished' was my favorite.  'Edge on the End' was terrible.  FWIW, I found out that Kenny Luby (director of Edge on the End) is the poster child for http://www.votefortheworst.com.  These assholes were the ones that kept Sanjaya on  American Idol longer than he deserved.


Phil

I thought Polished was the best. I liked Love at First Shot in the beginning, but it was stale at the end. Beeline was good, but not as good as the judges painted it to be. I don't like Marty. If he wants to prove himself, he should make short films, but I guess he feels like he's better than "all that" by making trailers. And I kept asking myself why Kenny is still there.

HA!  HA HA HA HA!!!! Mickey Mouse got the BOOT! HAAAA!  That's a big LOLERZ right there.

My goddess was safe though, so that's all that matters

As for tonight's films, here's what I thought:

Glass Eye: It took me a second to figure out what was going on, but when I did I quickly caught on and found this film to be very enjoyable.  Adding the dog in was a nice touch, though I would have skipped the stomach scene because the licking of the chops was enough to imply.  It would have made that final coverup while the dog was crapping all the more humorous.  Overall, great film.

Blood Born: I thought the general concept was great; execution not so much.  Not only that, but I agree with the judge who thought that the main guy was high the entire time.  Just so-so for me.

Sunshine Girl: Zack is definitely going to go deep.  His blend of visual effects and direction mixes well like strawberries and kiwis.  I would have taken out the drawing, as I didn't see it move the film along, and concentrated more on the girl's fear of the dark.  Overall, great film.

Lost: I gotta say, Mateen knows how to direct people.  I felt the performances were very believable, but the story was longer than the film, so it kept me on the edge.  Overall, good film.

The Orchard: Jessica's got a good vision, but the tree wasn't a character, which I think was this film's major flaw. If you told me that behind the scenes she added in the "horror film from a tree's perspective" at the last second, I'd believe you.  It was just there...it wasn't important or anything.   Look at the Giving Tree.  The tree was the main character and it was a great story...and it was just a tree.  Jessica has talent, but this film just wasn't up to par I think.

I'd say that either Jessica or Jason is going home next week.  Any idea on how they'll format it now?  Is it gonna be 4 movies each week?  Cause that kind of bums me, man.

Is Marty gone? Really? Oh joy! Now we only need to see Kenny go and this show might make sense.

I think Zach is the one to watch. He hasn't made a bad film yet. Sunshine girl was terrific, but yeah, the girl's fear of the dark could've taken up more room and be stressed as a theme. Why not have her be tugged in and her mom turning off the lights?

The Orchard wasn't very good unfortunately. I like Jessie and really feel she has potential, but there was no story. There was no end.

Glass Eye was okay. Good concept that was stretched too much. I didn't warrant three minutes of film.

Blood Born didn't work. I think people should shy away from doing these kinds of 3-minute thriller movies, because they fail for the most part. I never got that Brandon had a troubled past...

I haven't seen Lost yet.