Why does Super-8 have to equal Super-S**t?

[calgodot]

I think it was Theodore Sturgeon (but it may have been Heinlein) who said, "Ninety percent of science fiction is c-r-a-p. But then, ninety percent of everything is c-r-a-p."

I've shot a lot of DV, and as anyone in the LA Super8 Collective (SLA8) can attest, I am an evangelist for the medium. While I can endlessly argue its technical merits and flaws, one thing I cannot defend is the relentless drudgery and all-around awfulness of probably 99.9% of everything shot on DV.

It's almost a truism among dedicated DV-philes that the 'ease of use' reputation which the medium deceptively carries does not encourage people to practice care and caution when they shoot a DV movie. I could probably count on one (middle) finger the number of DV shooters who do storyboards. They just point and click their cameras, and then call it a movie. (Likewise the other booming digital cinema, Flash movies, of which I don't think I've seen one that was worth the download. And I have megabit broadband.)

Perhaps this is what afflicts Super8, its continued rep (in most quarters) as a "home movie medium" or, at best, an amatuer or neophyte way to learn film, allowing you to move on to the more 'advanced' formats of 16 & 35. Like most DVers, most S8 shooters seem to think a 50-foot roll of their friend's frantic nosepicking is a movie.

But overall I think it may be a symptom of a larger disease. The New Agers are fond of saying, "As above, so below." While I don't like the idea of putting Hollywood 'above' me, perhaps the reason that the majority of S8 stuff is c-r-a-p stems from *all* movies being mostly c-r-a-p.

The Hollywood equivalent to this is the notion that anything with movie star in it is a movie. I expect to soon see home videos of movie stars farting and belching presented as "nouveau cinema." Steven Soderbergh will direct it; it will be called FULL FRONTAL 2: JUST FARTING AROUND WITH MY REALLY NICE DV CAMERA AND A BUNCH OF FREE EQUIPMENT DONATED BY APPLE SO THEY CAN SUE MY MOVIE TO SELL IMACS.

Or a 3-hour epic about the pending Affleck/J-lo nuptials, which threaten to swamp Puerto Rico like a hurricane. Or yet another boring STAR WARS prequel. Or a sequel to SPIDER-MAN. Or SCOOBY DOO, which is at least named appropriately for a movie that is a pile of cinematic dog poo.

Crappy movies, all around. Poisoned by the aesthetic acid rain of mass media, how could young filmmakers be expected to know good cinema?

I'm certain that someone on this board will take me to task for calling SPIDER-MAN c-r-a-p, but it is c-r-a-p. I've left better crafted work in a toilet bowl, and I've certainly spent more time on the porcelain seat than Raimi did with that script. Don't even get me started about the so-called marvelous effects. The only similarly equally-hyped and equally dismal effects are those in TITANIC.

Chas, you deserve a round of applause simply for standing up and pointing at crappy movies, and shouting CRAPPY MOVIE! Most people aren't willing to do that. Until we're all willing to point at bad art and call it what it is, and why it is what it is, then there's no way anyone will ever learn.

FULL DISCLOSURE: My first movie was 41-minute narrative work, shot on DV. We spent about 2/3 months in pre-production, 10 days shooting, and almost a year in post. The long post time is due to the fact that it was scripted, planned and shot as a 90-minute feature, but over half of what I wrote was c-r-a-p. The final movie is so bad I can't watch it, though most of my friends say I am over-reacting. Maybe I am, but the movie doesn't measure up to my own standards. And what else do I have but my own values?

PS. In preparing the above, I discovered that this board software is actually censoring the word c-r-a-p. While I certainly understand the obliteration of true profanity, the word c-r-a-p is not profane. This feature should be adjusted. A forum for art that practises such a draconian level of censorship is absurd.

[tanenbaumm]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In preparing the above, I discovered that this board software is actually censoring the word c-r-a-p.</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have great sympathy for you on this point. I once had to work around the word cockney (as in rhyming slang) because the board's software kept filtering it out! (different board)

As for the rest...please don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel! [img]wink.gif[/img]

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 03, 2002 02:16 PM: Message edited by: tanenbaumm ]</font>

[cameraguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Paul L.:
I'd prefer that they pick up a video camera instead, because it makes the super8 medium look like a joke with its endless parade of story-less clay animation, goofing around, no editing, no tripod dreck</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whoa, let them shoot on Super 8 cause that keeps demand up which will keep film available.

[chas_ucla]

Getting back to the subject, I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has curated a short films screening, S-8 only or otherwise. Is it really that hard to find quality films? I've been to so many "short film fests" within the last two years and so few have been less than 80% **** .

It brings to mind these questions:

1.) Is it really so hard to find good films?

2.) Are the curators putting in their friends movies, regardless of quality?

3.)Do the filmmakers simply not realize the turds they have on their hands?

[Greg Crawford]

I've not seen many super 8 shorts, a couple of super 8 features.

As side from the "craft" and "competency issue, " can you go into a little detail as what you believe a craft film is? I.E. what not to do!!!

My biggest problem is young film makers casting there out of work (read no bills and no care in the world young friends ) cast in parts for older more mature people. Who are to busy making a living to work for free in a "Home MOVIE" Like a weathered - private eye played by someone 22.

I Personally take in a major Hollywood movie, every weekend, and I'm sure in 20 years we not e have very many CLASSICS from this decade. OK, maybe a couple.

[Nigel]

I agree with the stance that S8 seems to attract some people that want to make movies as though they are 8 years old.

I have seen some S8 that is absolutly wonderful. Visually stunning stuff. At the same screening there will be some images that look like they came from a monkey's arse.

I try to make my S8 look as good as possible. However, there are some people who think that S8's "look" is equal to shlt.

Good Luck

[rollemfilm]

perhaps it is good to mention here that one of highest grossing independent films ever "Endless Summer" was produced with this goofy motif. i personaly think Enless Summer ranks up there as one of the worst films ever. but, i did enjoy it. go figure.

[chas_ucla]

Bossjock,
I'm not sure I know what you mean by "craft film" unless you meant to write "krap film" ;]

But anyway, a list of what not to do would be endless; here is a list of what TO DO for the simpleton (no offense):

1. use a tripod unless going for a certain handheld look
2. plan your f***king film in advance
3. write a script instead of improvising the whole thing because you have some "funny" friends.
4. EDIT the film even if you think that the unedited film has a certain "poetry about it" that should not be touched.
5. Most importantly, if you aren't willing to work your *** off on it, don't film! Give your film stock, tripod and camera to someone who has a good idea but not enough equipment to make a really good film.

Nigel, I have no doubt your stuff is superb; what do you mainly shoot? Commercials? Anything we've seen recently?

[Greg Crawford]

Nigel,

Thanks for your res ponce. I agree.

Judging by the passion level of alot of the people on this board, I'm sure they are way younger than me. .Fact is, most people are younger than me, and taste in film very by dimographic to some extent

The only commercials I have done recently have been for employer and occasionally for friends business. I hope to do more.

I work in radio as an air personality , and have done more commercial photography, products and people on location and in the studio.

Some film school and have worked on ultra low budget features and student shorts doing just about everything. DP, 1st, 2nd ACGaffer, Grip AND PA .. ETC.

OH YES... I was an extra in "OH Brother. " I'm on camera for about 12 seconds during the political rally scene. I'm the farmer who mugs into the camera,as Clooney runs past!!!

[technicolour]

In my humble opinion I think super 8 must be attracting to a degree the wrong sort of people, just like the re-assurgence in hi fi valve amps and other things which have suddenly mysteriously come back into fashion and are now attracting outrageous amounts of money for. You get jumped up yuppies who want everything thats "trendy" who really dont know jack about photography/filmming and dont respect the technical side of it as well as making the film work for itself. Im still very much an amatuer but ive spent a great deal of time reading up and asking questions about the format so I can make a good job of my films, rather then just reel of a roll of film with no particulary purpose. My interest in the format has also attracted the attention of freinds who were equally intrigued as I was.

just take pride in the fact your films are better then theirs i guess [img]graemlins/film.gif[/img]