|
Author
|
Topic: Why guns?
|
ShootIT
|
posted 03-16-2000 05:56 AM
I read these posts and wonder what the fascination is with guns? Just what justifies the use of guns in low budget movies? I personally don't go around shooting guns at people and I certainly don't endorse it. I understand that guns perhaps seem as an easy tool to make a boring piece interesting. When you take away the guns and violence is there still a good story? I think it's a wacked up culture when peoples favorite scenes in movies involve some ones face getting shot off.
I'm just suggesting that we all think about the content of the works that we do.
In school one professor every term would look at the beginning film students works and would count the percentages of death in the students works... and it always came out to about 90%.. The other 10% had potential. below is a URL to a new project I'm working on.
http://www.balzac2000.com/new/htmlpages/gg.html ------------------
my AOL instant messanger handle is "FILMMANDRU"
|
Shuttereye
|
posted 03-16-2000 07:31 AM
It just depends on the kind of film that you want to make.Sometimes you feel like making a drama - no one gets physically hurt - just emotionally. Sometimes you might feel like making an action film - then guns and explosions are certainly acceptable in that criteria. There are times when you feel like you would like the audience to feel and think about the story and sometimes you might just want to take them on a roller coaster ride of action. |
Prism
|
posted 03-16-2000 12:32 PM
I agree to a certain extent with ShootIt.
I think a lot of amateurs just want to throw a lot of gunfighting in their movies because they are therefore emulating what we commonly see in popular movies. It's easier and more exciting than making a creative script with real characters.Isaiah |
Mr. Hutt
|
posted 03-16-2000 12:54 PM
-Slight irony- A guy named "Shoot it" is complaining about the overuse of guns.
? ? ?But really, I agree with him on this point. My friends are always wanting to make movies where one guy shoots another guy into bloody pulp. My question is: why? It's disgusting. But I guess they're so jaded to violence that in their eyes it becomes "cool" to watch a person get his brains blown out. [This message has been edited by Mr. Hutt (edited 03-16-2000).] |
MarcArts
|
posted 03-16-2000 01:51 PM
I agree with you, ShootIt. I think it is better to make a movie that catches the audience with itīs story and the adventure the peoble have to go through, than with gun fights or explosions. I donīt understand why there are so many topics on how to make explosions and guns. |
lyvewyer
|
posted 03-16-2000 03:03 PM
so far, i havent made any actual films, just tests to figure out camera tricks and effects tricks. the reason that we use guns in our tests is cause shootout scenes usually involve the most intricate cinematography. also, they are a good thing to practice effects on. ------------------
I was normal once..... I didn't like it.
sweet merciful crap! my car! - homer simpson
check my site http://members.xoom.com/lyvewyer/index.html |
Elurew
|
posted 03-16-2000 04:07 PM
of course everyone here agrees. However, one thing that should be noticed is that this is a special effects board. I'm sure their are just as many people out there (well maybe) attempting to create a good original story. However, when working with storyline, there isn't really much you're gonna see on boards anyway, other than the responce that "you have to decide". and with the guns? well, as for sfx goes, i'd much rather see the constant inquiries about how to do muzzle flashes or show blood shots then the "how do you make a lightsaber" question. |
TwoGuns
|
posted 03-16-2000 04:30 PM
You gotta remember that alot of people here aren't making movies in hopes that they're going to be doing it for the rest of their lives. Some people just want to mess around with a camcorder and have something FUN to watch.We're all bloodthirsty in a matter of speaking, and people want to see violence. Writing a good script takes time, and alot of thought. Just making a movie where two guys are chasing each other around beating the crap outta each other is entertaining, and theoretically easy to do, therefore the majority of people will make a movie like that. |
Shmookeyman
|
posted 03-16-2000 04:57 PM
Hey I definately agree. I would have to say that our culture Is generaly pretty twisted. Maximizing violance and sexuality to every extent. I mean think about it, when was the last movie that you have seen where something like that has not happened. But in some cases violance does make a point, Take Saving Private Ryan. I would not even classify that movie as an action. there is enough historical value to make my 8th grade history class look like...well, lets just say its more historical thn any non-documentary Ive ever seen.
I would have to say I could go either way...in the right circumstances.
|
ShootIT
|
posted 03-16-2000 05:08 PM
Thanks for all your responses, everyone had some good things to ad to this post. Elurew I do understand this is the SFX forum and I must point out that guns/ explosions aren't the only special effects that one could create in a movie.
My purpose for the original post was to get people to think about the kind of things they are making. The nice thing about this medium is that we can do whatever we want to. |
Ale
|
posted 03-16-2000 07:57 PM
Why can't we just all switch to documentory film making and help the world?Ale |
videoman1
|
posted 03-16-2000 09:24 PM
This is a subject I was wondering about too.Saving Private Ryan is very villant but it is for a purpose. I wouldn't be too surprised if that movie prevented a war because it shows everyone what war really is. It is definitly not a entertaining movie. It makes you think.
I believe that that is what a villant movie (or any serious movie) should do. Even Shindlers List was an excellent movie even though it was the most grim movie I can think of.
I do want to mention though that such movies as Wrongfully Accused are just pure fun and no one gets really hurt no matter how many shots are fired, so that's alright. |
Shmookeyman
|
posted 03-17-2000 12:10 AM
I am currently in the beginning stages of a movie that will be WWII. now I obviosly dont expect that a buncha guys with nothing better-to-do-that-feel-like-going-out-to-the-desert-to-make-a-movie (hehe)will be on even small terms with those movies and I must admit that before i read this post , my sole intent was to make a BANG BANG shootemup. but, now that i have given it some thought, I feel like making a truly thought provoking move (please, sustain laughter). I know it wont be, and since im just doin it 4 fun (who would pay money to see one of MY movies)I cant expect much compliance from my buddies(No I won't be paying them). therefore (ooh big word)I believe That a movie whos INTENT is not to make your classic hollywood action movie, but still turns out that way( and a pitiful one at that) should not be frowned apon(there I covered my butt :-) )P.S. someone please respond to my post regarding cheap guns
|
crazy lou
|
posted 03-17-2000 01:11 AM
why not, they're so simple a child can use them. i think the bang bang mentality needs to be toned down. Guns, like a character are sometimes needed for the movie to "work", but guns, for guns sake are stupid. We need to get over the fact that they're a part of our lives, they are, but like anything else we shouldn't become their slaves. in today's world they play less of a role in our lives, unless you live in a crime ridden or other dangerous place, like the gaza strip, we shouldn't be carrying them. Personally i think that the filmmakers should take it into their hands to tone down the gun violence, because i think society today can be summed up like this: which came first, the movie gun violence, or the real world gun violence? everyone will have a different answer, but who really knows
it would be a lot cooler if everyone fought with roadkill or cowpies!
"gimme your shoes man, or i'll bust a cowpie in your ass!"
sorry
later
Tom
|
ShootIT
|
posted 03-17-2000 01:16 AM
Right on Crazy Lou.. I agree 100% (dodgin' cow pies from the other members in here.. )
|
videoman1
|
posted 03-17-2000 09:13 AM
This is a really neat post.
I am suffering from the same problems as mookeyman. I want to make a real movie, but it is hard to do it right. I'm aways afraid it will end up dumb, or worst yet- like a soap-opera. Also I don't have many friends around at the moment to do a good movie with. I guess I should make the plung next chance I get. Anyone have some tips on making a serious and thought provoking movie that they will share with everyone? |
Spoonboy
|
posted 03-17-2000 03:12 PM
The truth is, action is easier to write, and easier to act. Most people on this board can't afford or don't know people that can act. It's much easier to have your buddies kick punch, and shoot at each other and make it look decent than it is to get Jimbo from down the street to cry his eyes out because he is a manic-depressive and his cat just got a urinary tract infection because he can't handle the fact that his parents are divorcing and his dad is gay and..... Get my point? ------------------
One day flatware will rule us all
|
sgt.barnes
|
posted 03-17-2000 03:22 PM
saving private ryan was entertaining! what are you crazy? it was not only unbelievably well done in the aspect in which you are talking but kept me on the edgo of my seat the whole time. I could watch the bridge scene a million times in one day! But if you want a thought provoking movie thats gonna stop a war, look at the thin red line, not as good as private ryan, but a hell of a lot scarier and deeper!------------------
everyman dies, not everyman really lives |
sgt.barnes
|
posted 03-17-2000 03:26 PM
im in the post production of a WWII era flick that i am hoping to be very deep and i hoping to use the guns in the way they were used i also am going to have good blood effects in the picture with alot of ironies that come up all over the place. You want WWII guns for a 14 year old movie? go to www.glendale.com, im considering those for my movie.------------------
everyman dies, not everyman really lives |
videoman1
|
posted 03-17-2000 09:43 PM
What I mean is that you don't get with your buddies and say, "Hey guys, lets go down grab a few cokes and watch that Ryan movie then go to Six Flags. I watched it once and then a few months later got it on video and shoot! the things kills me every time I see it. That's the kind of movie I want to make- one that you can't watch too many times. |
hkmovieman
|
posted 03-18-2000 12:14 AM
Assuming the majority of members on this board are male, i'd say the guns thing has something to do with an innate male fascination with weapons. I'm not a psychologist, so dont ask me to explain it. But dont weapons and such interest you for no particular reason? it seems that way with me.. maybe im just crazy.. 
|
SeerSavant
|
posted 03-18-2000 01:50 PM
Anything (guns included) used in a film that doesn't forward the overall story is just eye candy. Yes guns are overused in film, but my beef is mainly with how inaccurate they are used. Shoot outs between cops and badguys where thousands of rounds are used (Yeah, right.) Cmon, your average shoot out lasts only a few seconds and maybe ten shots are fired at best.
Also, what's this crap about aiming a gun tilted sideways? This is pure BS and you know he'd never hit what he was aiming (If he even aims.) at. Some films gunplay is necessary, (John Woo, the Matrix, etc.) and we know its all made to style, not reality. What trend I really hate is the sudden need for quick jerky shots ala MTV videos that never show you what is going on. I mean, shaking the camera and quick zoom in/zoom out shots can give you a sense of chaotic action if used properly, but other times makes you think the director is a ten year old with an inner ear infection.
Example; The Rock. Sean Connery is hauling butt in a vehicle, we see several chases, but then there's that shot of him from in front, the camera jumps around and zooms in and out a few times. Why??????? All it did was make the viewer aware that the director has a severe case of stupid-cameratrick-gimmick-itus.
A good way would be a solid mount to the hood showing how the driver and occupants are bounced around, not the camera.
Sheeez. ------------------
Hence, loathed Melancholy,
Of Cerberus, and blackest Midnight born,
In Stygian cave forlorn,
'Mongst horrid shapes, and shrieks, and sights unholy.
-- L'Allegro, John Milton |
videoman1
|
posted 03-19-2000 01:18 AM
Good point! I think the gangsters hold there guns sideways because if they didn't then they would hit the good guys to often. That would be bad! |
SirGahrjyn
|
posted 03-19-2000 01:29 AM
Film making is taking a story and putting it into pictures. So if it's a factual story then you can't decide weather there are guns in it or not. If the story is fiction and it's not your script then you have to go by what the writer wrote. If the story is fiction and it is your script then the story will be based on what you wrote to entertain others or what you wanted to write about. To sum this all up we are all very different people and write in different manners and styles. If we all made movies about kitty cats this would be a very boring world. |
sgt.barnes
|
posted 03-19-2000 05:00 PM
one of the most entertaining, realistic, and well filmed movies i have ever seen was three kings. lots of violence, they show a bullet go into a guy and what happens on his insides. This was a great movie, it was extremely well filmed and had a very distinct color of filming but was very good. It was a deeply impacting movie, with the soldiers in the beginning thinking that war was easy, in the end realizing the harsh brutalties of it. no brutalities were held back. It was a new age war film but was very effective in it's antiwar theme.------------------
everyman dies, not everyman really lives |
dstepson
|
posted 03-19-2000 06:31 PM
I think we should use more knives and explosions to kill people in films. There is nothing I like better than seeing brains splatter everywhere do to an explosion. Deep blade wounds are good to especially if there is a severed head or arm to go with it. Ther more blood the better. The best movies are full of blood, bad language, and nudity. Who needs a good story. Seriously its entertainment if that is something you dont like dont watch it. |
ShootIT
|
posted 03-19-2000 11:45 PM
I understand that people see death as entertainment.. But I'm saying we need to be aware of our actions as video/filmmakers. Feel free to stick asinine death sequences in you movies... do what you like. |
Brien
|
posted 03-20-2000 12:14 AM
I am shooting a short about a guy betraying his boss right now for a class. The boss decides to have this guy whacked. There are guns in the film, as they are a part of the world of the story. There are a couple scenes where I could show all the gunplay with a thumping soundtrack but it would do nothing for the story. The gunplay if off screen. I do not want the action to get in the way of the story. I am not saying there is no place for violence in film. I love action. But it should be right for the story. |
Gamecat
|
posted 03-22-2000 10:23 AM
Yes I agree that there are too many films about shootings.. but if you take a look at a good story, you'll notice that good stories seem to be about someone somewhere's pain and suffering, weather it be mentally or physically... I mean if we made a film about people just sitting around being happy and content we wouldn't get anywhere in the film not to mention bore the hell out of the audience.... |
lyvewyer
|
posted 03-22-2000 03:13 PM
little late here, but i agree with hkmovieman, for some reason i have some fasination with guns, not killing people, just a shootout will grab my attention.------------------
I was normal once..... I didn't like it.
sweet merciful crap! my car! - homer simpson
check my site http://members.xoom.com/lyvewyer/index.html |
Phil the Giant Robot
|
posted 03-22-2000 03:49 PM
actually, if i made a movie, i would keep out most gunplay ect. I think its stupid that everyone thinks these huge weapons and crap are the coolest thing since sliced bread, and it seems all the new movies are based around special effects and weaponry. Frankly, i think Swords should be used more, they're more dignified, cooler, not as commen, and a load of other stuff. i think some gunplay is good sometimes, but its entirely overdone. its just bang bang bang, everywhere you look. sure, if the weapons add to the storyline fine, but its just that, nothing seems to have a really good story anymore. what someone needs to do is make a thought provoking, confusing, cool movie. for example, i though 12 Monkeys was really good because of the story, and viiolence was used in just the right way, not really overdone, but adds to the main foundation. well, enough of my babbling, i need a sandwich.Phil ------------------
Its not the end of the world 
[This message has been edited by Phil the Giant Robot (edited 03-22-2000).] |
Ace13
|
posted 03-22-2000 07:12 PM
What really bothers me in movies a lot more than guns(violence) is the foul language. When I'm writing I really don't see a need for it in my scripts. Yea, grant it, it may be less realistic of real life not to have the language in some scenes, but you can get around the language. Some movies though like American History X, Good Will Hunting, I can understand the language. Yet I will still choose not to put the language in my movies. |
Phil the Giant Robot
|
posted 03-22-2000 07:33 PM
Yeah, i gotta go with ace on that one. there really is no need for swearing. frankly, i think its stupid sitting in a theater watching people cuss for two hours, it's unnessicary and stupid. i mean, in a movie, if its really vital or it just sounds right, go for it, but it seems all people really want to do is shock and provoke people, and they're going about it all wrong. Lousey stuff...Phil "You wanna piece of me?" The Giant Robot ------------------
Its not the end of the world :)
|
crazy lou
|
posted 03-22-2000 10:37 PM
the reason "gangsters" shoot with the gun tilted is because they're stupid. Weak hand shooting uses this technique, think about it, if you have a pistol with an ejector to the right, but you shoot it left handed you're going to get hot shells in your face, if you turn it, they eject towards the ground. i think it might help reduce the recoil too.
of course, in the movies, its mostly for looks i'd bet.
later
Tom
ps, sometimes crude language is necessary, but for the most part no. |
