comment #1

tholl-yung says ...

Ah there's that Sunday story I read on-line Friday. That's a lot of doh and it goes further in Mexico, that was but one point of the story. How do the guilds operate in these offshore endeavors? Are there a whole buncha new SAG members? A good story, I'll read a few more times, but the dog has to go out; Sheigh could relate to that.

comment #2

jeffmcm says ...

Is it so difficult to spell the word 'dough'?

comment #3

tholl-yung says ...

And no star salaries. Wonder what Gibson's upfront fee was? All that money, shot in Mexico -- it better be a visually thrilling, uber pumped up "Run, Lola, Run," but I still haven't heard anyone say they enjoyed it.

comment #4

tholl-yung says ...

Arguably, comparably much, much more expensive than the 90 mil spent in London, on Children of Men, with stars, London being one of the most expensive cities in the world; so expensive that the next Bond movie may not shoot there because of it.

Both productions tested digital cameras and came to different conclusions.

comment #5

Monument says ...

And what were those conclusions?

comment #6

tholl-yung says ...

To shoot CoM on film, 3 perf. To shoot APOC with the Genesis and, according to Sheigh's article, about 2% on film for extreme slow motion. After you have a ball at APOC, tell me how the low light and night stuff looks. I think I have the CoM article at home, which I'll link if I can.

comment #7

tholl-yung says ...

You know, just want you to know, I can dig violence, I just don't want to be abused by watching it. I'm interested, I just don't trust Gibson and Safinia's ability. I don't even trust it's historical accuracy or sincerity in the subject, it just seems so exploitative, which is exactly how I felt about POTC. Watch, Gibson's next movie will be an about face, he'll suddenly be cured of the forces that drove him.

comment #8

Monument says ...

I think that most of these comments about the violence in Gibson's films are valid, and in many cases I agree. What I find strange is that Gibson is singled out as being especially violent, while other equally bloody directors are given a pass. This criticism seems to be less about the films and more about the man, which seems counterintuitive since few of us have ever met him but most have seem his films. It all seems very dishonest to me.

comment #9

tholl-yung says ...

It's not about measuring quantities of violence. I think we should name the genre of Braveheart, POTC and APOC and decide what other films fall into that genre.