I'm glad I found this (and I barely found out he has other 10-Minute Film Schools) I saw this in 2008 on the bonus feature of the DVD we rented ( how dated of a term!) and I always thought how cool movies were gonna get with this knowledge...so sad man
@ConnorGunn it can sound a bit arrogant at times, but the thing is, many people in the business really don't think out of the box. it's important to have guys like rodriguez explain this stuff, because it inspires others to use and expand those techniques to save money, which in turn makes a small/medium budget achieve the results of a big/huge budget movie. less cost for a movie means more profit, means more movies get produced without a drop of quality. win/win for filmmakers and audience
@spec10 I found it at the library a block away from my house. It is very cool and as a comic artist; I can relate how using cheap alternatives can help as long as every thing planned thoroughly and with hard work.
@MrAPchannel I don't know for sure, but my guess is that it is to get the reflections of the set, so that when the CG guys go in and digitally add the spoons, they have an idea of what would be reflecting off of them.
I love how he saves money and does everything himself in his other movies but this movie looked like total ass, in all honesty. It just looked sooooo synthetic, and like a bad video game or something. It made the new Star Wars films look realistic and they were way overdone with special effects. I liked his more organic approach when he did most of the shots in camera.
@CanvassBlack You can have a great movie with bad acting and a great director. But you can not have a great movie with a bad director and good actors. Look atSoderberg he is the man when it comes to bad acting. Every actor that leaves his set is better than when they came in 100 times fold. Film is a directors medium and it takes a creative and brilliant mind to make you look at life a new way. Some directors working now suck but those who write classics are incredible. It's harder than it looks
so did The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, but that's obviously a much bigger film. So in that case, let's go back in time, with films like Jurassic Park, Blade Runner, Star Wars, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Terminator, and Titanic. At the end of the day, my point on this being cheap visual effects stands as tall as ever. I am quite fond of Rodriguez, but I didn't like the visuals for these films very much.
@sibryce Kubrick overrated? Have you even done research on him or have you just watched his films and said "DERH well I don't get it he must be overrated." Ok you dont like his style but you should give him some respect. He influenced pretty much every big name director after him. Ask any director and they'll all say he is the best because he pushed the medium of film and changed it with nearly every movie he did. He could flip a genre upside down make it 100 times better. That's why hes king.
Revisiting many years later: no I don't think of him as overrated anymore. Perhaps could have benefitted from not writing, himself, but as a director he was incredible (albeit OCD as hell).
He was a good director BUT, several of his early films were awful, and he wasn't that good as a writer. I had to turn of "Eyes Wide Shut" after about 15 mins because it was such a snooze fest. Many of today's directors are great visualists who can't tell a compelling story.
This saves money...but it SHOWS. It's not like good quality visual effects for cheap...its CHEAP visual effects for cheap. The visuals look TERRIBLE and I never liked that. It's a little TOO unbelievable that it takes you out of the context of the film (which isn't that good in the first place).
you can't say anything bad about this man, a true master!
Robert, you are the man... thanks for always sharing your knowledge, and not hoarding it.
I'm glad I found this (and I barely found out he has other 10-Minute Film Schools)
I saw this in 2008 on the bonus feature of the DVD we rented ( how dated of a term!) and I always thought how cool movies were gonna get with this knowledge...so sad man
this is perfect knowledge for a filmmaker like me who never made a film short nor been to a
an actual film school!!!!!!!!
@ConnorGunn it can sound a bit arrogant at times, but the thing is, many people in the business really don't think out of the box. it's important to have guys like rodriguez explain this stuff, because it inspires others to use and expand those techniques to save money, which in turn makes a small/medium budget achieve the results of a big/huge budget movie. less cost for a movie means more profit, means more movies get produced without a drop of quality. win/win for filmmakers and audience
Mr. Rodriquez is one of the best filmmakers. I ove his film making philosophy.
I could listen to him all day! :D
@spec10 I found it at the library a block away from my house. It is very cool and as a comic artist; I can relate how using cheap alternatives can help as long as every thing planned thoroughly and with hard work.
2:35
Golden Idol of Fertility from Raiders Of The Lost Ark The 1st Indiana Jones Movie
hes the king out there in Independet Film Making.
You owe me half a minute, Rodriguez.
@MrAPchannel I don't know for sure, but my guess is that it is to get the reflections of the set, so that when the CG guys go in and digitally add the spoons, they have an idea of what would be reflecting off of them.
He and Wes Craven are my favorite biggest inspirations
@Gamergigabyte It's his speech patterns, but yeah the tone is all wrong. It might have been a mixing/capturing glitch.
@ConnorGunn ok :) you're right, that book really is awesome
This guy is a genius
You gotta take into account that the film came out in 2001
What is the purpose of the 'ball' at 5:31. I've seen it before on film set.
@matt joyce Dude I know I thought it was him and quentin and robert were doing like a double commentary or something
Rodriguez's sounds so much like Tarantino in the first few seconds
Just out of interest, which software was used for compositing - AE, Smoke, Flame, Nuke etc.?
I love how he saves money and does everything himself in his other movies but this movie looked like total ass, in all honesty. It just looked sooooo synthetic, and like a bad video game or something. It made the new Star Wars films look realistic and they were way overdone with special effects. I liked his more organic approach when he did most of the shots in camera.
@rawkfist208 Thanks, that make sense
The first one is a good kids movie.
Stop motion skeletons are awesome! CGI skeletons suck!
@Gamergigabyte I've GOT The Aviator. It's not that interesting. The Departed and Goodfellas are decent but very drawn out.
its him calm down
@CanvassBlack You can have a great movie with bad acting and a great director. But you can not have a great movie with a bad director and good actors. Look atSoderberg he is the man when it comes to bad acting. Every actor that leaves his set is better than when they came in 100 times fold. Film is a directors medium and it takes a creative and brilliant mind to make you look at life a new way. Some directors working now suck but those who write classics are incredible. It's harder than it looks
Disagree i have seen awful directors get good results becuse they casted right.and then did nothing on set.
As much as a I love rodridguez but how did this geta cinema release.. It blows my mind
bill paxton wtf
so did The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, but that's obviously a much bigger film.
So in that case, let's go back in time, with films like Jurassic Park, Blade Runner, Star Wars, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Terminator, and Titanic. At the end of the day, my point on this being cheap visual effects stands as tall as ever. I am quite fond of Rodriguez, but I didn't like the visuals for these films very much.
@Nextdirector123 Kubrick and Scorcese are seriously overrated.
@sibryce Kubrick overrated? Have you even done research on him or have you just watched his films and said "DERH well I don't get it he must be overrated." Ok you dont like his style but you should give him some respect. He influenced pretty much every big name director after him. Ask any director and they'll all say he is the best because he pushed the medium of film and changed it with nearly every movie he did. He could flip a genre upside down make it 100 times better. That's why hes king.
Revisiting many years later: no I don't think of him as overrated anymore. Perhaps could have benefitted from not writing, himself, but as a director he was incredible (albeit OCD as hell).
He was a good director BUT, several of his early films were awful, and he wasn't that
good as a writer. I had to turn of "Eyes Wide Shut" after about 15 mins because it was
such a snooze fest. Many of today's directors are great visualists who can't tell a compelling story.
...standard effects...but they look pretty cheap in this movie....
This saves money...but it SHOWS. It's not like good quality visual effects for cheap...its CHEAP visual effects for cheap. The visuals look TERRIBLE and I never liked that. It's a little TOO unbelievable that it takes you out of the context of the film (which isn't that good in the first place).
Sounds like tarantino talking
9:24.
I WANT MY MONEY BACK