gdp's Comments

Big Hollywood : Trailer Talk: 'Dorothy and the Witches of Oz' Sends Us Over the Rainbow Again

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 01:52:03 +0000

Thanks Guys!

Big Hollywood : Trailer Talk: 'Dorothy and the Witches of Oz' Sends Us Over the Rainbow Again

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:56:47 +0000

I don't know Ron...I may have hit it this time. Here's the first review... http://www.monstersandcritics.com/movies/reviews/...

Big Hollywood : Government Still Throwing Millions at Artists Unable to Survive in Free Market

Wed, 3 Aug 2011 21:11:43 +0000

Thank you! I try. I've just been very (thankfully) busy making movies!

Big Hollywood : Government Still Throwing Millions at Artists Unable to Survive in Free Market

Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:26:38 +0000

What gets confused here is the fact that the costs associated to produce "art" are costs associated with making it professional. When it is professional, it should be forced to compete in the free market and not rely on government to fund it. Anybody who wants to spend their free time and disposable cash on cheap supplies can produce any type of "art" imaginable. I can make a "film" with my blackberry and free editing software I download online. What they're really talking about here is paying for the higher end supplies (real movie cameras, recording studios for music, etc.) that takes it out of the "art" realm and into the market. And to really piss you off, the reality of most of this funding is that it goes to support the artist. They live off of this money. Their "job" is to produce art without any financial responsibility or real world consequence. It's welfare, and instead of society getting a few extra kids and potential maximum security prisoners down the line, we get a crappy painting or a bunch of mp3s of music that freaks out your cat. As somebody who has sold his soul to make a living doing what he loves creatively, I can't begin to tell you how angry this makes me. I would have preferred to make sensitive personal films and live comfortably, then fight with network executives about the color and size of a mutant shark. But hey, I was raised not to be a sponge.

Ladd Ehlinger Jr., Hyphenate : Atlas Shrugged

Sun, 17 Apr 2011 23:55:11 +0000

I could not agree more with both your review of the film or your assessment that libertarian/conservatives should be investing in film rather than donating money to smarmy PACs and loser candidates. I'm a blogger for Big Hollywood and an Independent Filmmaker who actually makes money with my films... a lot of money. Yet, I've pitched a lot of the usual suspects in the political world about investing in films that have a political bent and it's all crickets. This more than anything could be a game changer for the long term.

Big Hollywood : The New Production Code: MGM Scrubs China From 'Red Dawn' Remake

Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:32:53 +0000

And let me point out something that I have yet to see noted. Chinese people and Korean people do not look alike. I guess to the enlightened, non-racists of Hollywood this isn't really a problem because, to their intellectual eyes all Asians look alike. In their attempt to not offend, I think they have done something even more offensive and ignorant. I wouldn't be shocked if this movie disappears all together.

Big Hollywood : 'Battle: Los Angeles' Review: Wildly Entertaining & Subversive -- The Anti-'Avatar'

Tue, 15 Mar 2011 03:33:46 +0000

I'm not saying that Box Office is indicative of quality. Quite the contrary. My point is that we are constantly told that Hollywood is all about business. That they make left wing garbage because it plays well overseas and it has a wider audience. The Box Office is proof that they are agenda driven and not financially driven. Pro-American films like this one have a much better track record that left wing, anti-American films.

Big Hollywood : 'Battle: Los Angeles' Review: Wildly Entertaining & Subversive -- The Anti-'Avatar'

Tue, 15 Mar 2011 01:39:17 +0000

I want to echo John's sentiments. I saw this opening night in Connecticut, a few miles outside of New York. Even there, in the bluest of blue states, the audience cheered several time throughout the film. It is one of the most unabashedly pro-American, pro-military films I've seen. The reviews from critics are hilarious. What's more hilarious is the fact that the audiences and the critics completely disagree. And, dear friends, the box office doesn't lie. Once again, movies made for people who don't live in LA and NY make more money than the praised drivel that Hollywood usually turns out.

Big Hollywood : Kathy Griffin Responds to Palin: I'm Still Coming After Your 16 Year-Old Daughter

Tue, 8 Mar 2011 02:17:25 +0000

Kathy Griffin is worse than Charlie Sheen.

Big Hollywood : Unlike Obama, Charlie Sheen Really is 'Winning the Future'

Tue, 8 Mar 2011 01:19:04 +0000

Where do you see that Lorre is a McCain supporter? All I could find is that he called Levi Johnston and American hero and trashed Sarah Palin. Someone should take away his kids.

Big Hollywood : Michael Kinsley: States Need to Stop Offering Hollywood Corporate Welfare

Wed, 2 Mar 2011 17:51:03 +0000

I've said it once, I'll say it again. To say that tax credits "cost" states anything implies that all the money made in the state belongs to the state and that they are generous in allowing the people or the businesses to keep any of it. State tax credits are essentially tax cuts that are passed on to private citizens and businesses. States aren't taxing citizens, then giving the money to Johnny Depp. That's just not how it works.

Big Hollywood : Why Hollywood Can't Find Americans to Portray American Superheroes (Not That There's Anything Wrong

Sat, 5 Feb 2011 04:43:22 +0000

Agreed. But the Pope didn't hire the guy who makes Velvet Elvis paintings to do his ceiling. Just saying.

Big Hollywood : Why Hollywood Can't Find Americans to Portray American Superheroes (Not That There's Anything Wrong

Sat, 5 Feb 2011 01:26:15 +0000

And that, I think is the root of it all. The notion that quality, art or inherent talent is a separate attribute from "salability". I think that is the root cause for dwindling sales in the entertainment industry. People want "good", not sellable. The mistake that the suits have made is that the creatives work for them, and not the other way around. I can't tell you how many times I've seen great stuff ruined by development people, producers etc. in the name of making something "sellable" when the initial gut of the creative would have probably made way more money.

Big Hollywood : Why Hollywood Can't Find Americans to Portray American Superheroes (Not That There's Anything Wrong

Sat, 5 Feb 2011 00:57:40 +0000

Indeed. I think your side stepped defense actually echos my points. The notion that a SAG actor is inherently more experienced is a misnomer. What acting experience does being an extra bring vs. stage or being a lead in a low budget film? So, that's part of the problem, that simply being SAG indicates some sort of quality or experience when the process and priorities for SAG membership emphasize neither. And yes, going to the same suppliers is the problem. How many feature lead actors in studio productions don't come from the same three or four agencies? Expand it to television and you might have twenty agencies on the list. Still a tiny sampling. And having been around long enough, I'm sure you know that being repped by a big agency often has less to do with what you can do in front of a camera than who you know. There simply isn't a premium put on talented actors from either the SAG or agency perspective. I know that there are a lot of good actors who make it through, but nine times out of ten, they are not leading types. Finding 25-35 year old charismatic leading types can be difficult if you're looking for someone who can really act.

Big Hollywood : Why Hollywood Can't Find Americans to Portray American Superheroes (Not That There's Anything Wrong

Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:44:02 +0000

And how do you suppose one gets the opportunity to be part of a SAG signatory show without already being in SAG? SAG is the first gateway. You can't get in to read for major productions, including network shows unless you are SAG. And unless you are friends with a major agent or a client with a major agent, you're not going to even get near an agency with pull if you aren't SAG. Even on MOWs that I've done, they've been reluctant to see non-union talent. That $1500 fine can be a deal breaker for a producer when your total cast budget excluding names is 30-50k (which it is on your standard Syfy or Lifetime movie). Point being that it is an unnecessary hurdle and one that in no way benefits talented actors who don't have a lot of contacts or disposable income to toil away trying to get into a union first. Their first objective should be honing their craft and booking paying jobs.

Big Hollywood : The Curious Case of Free-Thinking Film Critic Armond White

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:55:51 +0000

Um, Dude. I said the exact opposite.

Big Hollywood : The Curious Case of Free-Thinking Film Critic Armond White

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:09:20 +0000

I think there is a big difference between the legitimate use of "intertextuality" (yes, I have a degree in Film Criticism) and saying a film is good or bad because of the marketing or the opinions of other critics. That's what I mean by being in a vacuum. As for the racism shtick, I think it's just that, a shtick. While I would not call him "conservative" by any means, I do think he rejects the liberal view of race and racism. He's the kinda guy who probably doesn't like white people, ESPECIALLY liberal ones who are so arrogant that they feel the need to speak for him or all black people. The "soft racism" of lowered expectations I believe is the term. So, in a world where white liberals constantly accuse anyone who has an ideological difference with a black president "racist", wouldn't the same hold true for a film critic? If a white political observer who questions stimulus, "investment" or sitting on your hands while the Middle East burns down is a racist, shouldn't a film critic who questions a negative review of "Toy Story" be equally maligned? I think the charge is deft political and cultural commentary.

Big Hollywood : The Curious Case of Free-Thinking Film Critic Armond White

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:39:23 +0000

I could tell that there was a better movie in there, but the powers that be monkeyed around too much with it. But I agree, it had some moments and wasn't anywhere near as bad as the critics made it out to be. I think it was a forgone conclusion in the media that the film would suck and it needed to be beyond amazing for them not to pan it. And that's the point. Critics should pay no attention to the fact that the release date was pushed three times, that there were reshoots, or that the cast trash talked it or refused to do press. Just watch the damn movie. And yes, Megan Fox sucked. I think her 15 minutes are up. She will be in made for TV movies and Syfy originals in the next two years.

Big Hollywood : The Curious Case of Free-Thinking Film Critic Armond White

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 14:59:04 +0000

Considering it is used properly more times than it is not, I think your criticism should be on the existence of typos rather than fundamentally criticizing my understanding of the English language.

Big Hollywood : 2010 in Music and Movies: Not the Worst Year Ever

Wed, 29 Dec 2010 04:12:58 +0000

Not so much. I've talked at length about how truly "artistic" works must have a clear point of view and a sense of romanticism. Everything I listed, at its core, has a thematic structure that is transcendental to the human condition. I too abhor "reality" based entertainment, nihilist works that are merely an excuse to showcase depravity. There is a difference. You may see some of this stuff listed on the Huff Po or Rolling Stone, but more importantly there is a lot of stuff they would list that I would not. The BH brand is about showcasing the fact, and working to change the reality, that Hollywood on all levels is controlled by a deeply ingrained leftist bent. Libertarianism is a brand of conservatism, as such, it too is a target of the Left. I don't think it is fully in our parameters to only focus on family or Christian entertainment. But, hey, we do that too. Even yours truly. As I said, I have a great respect for religious people and religious doctrine. If you want to know the truth, the only people who truly irritate me are the ironically "holier than thou" atheists. Now those people really have a problem.