The blessed day is here. ON THE LOT'S finale has arrived, although the celebratory atmosphere is more like a wake than most season finales. Jason gets a dap from Jerry O'Connell on the way into the auditorium, which has to be as good as an anointing, doesn't it? Stay tuned!
Host Adrianna Costa idenifies this as the season finale, but who are her writers trying to fool? This has to be the series finale, right? RIGHT? Anyway, the red carpet and the shade of Adrianna's dress are a perfect match. Nice job!
After a very brief Q&A with the eliminated contestants expressing their gratitude for being on the show, it's time for some bloopers that aren't funny.
Adrianna gives props to the show theme's composers. Their work earned an Emmy nomination. Here's an abject lesson in why award nominations and wins trumpeted in ads don't mean a thing. Now this is the Emmy-nominated ON THE LOT. No disrespect to the composers, but God forbid this becomes the Emmy-winning ON THE LOT. No statuette can make this show golden.
The final three are asked to name their favorite films from the knocked out finalists. Poor Zach gets dragged on stage to talk about the short Adam picked. Zach certainly seemed like a favorite on the show, and it has to be eating him to be in this position. Will cites Hilary's writing in selecting her sperm bank heist comedy. Have mercy. That ought to get him eliminated on the spot.
Ugh, not quite halfway through this... Jason picks Mateen's action film as his favorite. Then we get a package about the actors, except it's really about them kissing up to the directors. The show kept them working through the summer, so who can begrudge them some professional sycophancy?
You have to love the way ON THE LOT has worked to spin every negative development as a positive for this tailspinning series. Adrianna informs us that internet voting wasn't able to take place last week because of a "severe technical issue", but toll-free and text voting increased 60% over their previous record-breaking week. If so, tens of people made their opinions known!
All right, enough with all the funny business...who won? Adam?! Oh wait, it's that infuriating AMERICAN IDOL trick of "so-and-so...you are not the winner". They have to drag this out another seventeen minutes minus commercials, so what else can they do? OK, seriously, the million dollar movie deal at DreamWorks goes to...one of these guys after the break. It doesn't look like Spielberg will be there to congratulate the winner, though. Why would he want to distance himself from this?
Oh wait, maybe something's changed. We're back from the break with the announcer solemnly telling us the winner will be revealed by...the host of the show. Blah, blah, blah. Cut to the chase. Will wins! The puppy doesn't die, America! Oops, I must have imagined he threatened that last week. It's just his dream that would have been killed if he lost.
I find it hysterically funny how Adrianna called Will the winner of ON THE LOT 2007, as though there will be a successor next year. You know, I'm starting to get scared that Fox might bring this back next summer.
Following the final commercial break Will talks on the ride to the DreamWorks lot to meet Steven Spielberg. This show is supposed to be live, but they wouldn't have shot this portion ahead of time, would they? (It would appear so. In the end credits: "portions of the program not affecting the outcome of the competition have been pre-recorded and edited". I don't think they're talking about the recap packages.) And then the moment we've all been waiting for...the show is over. I mean, Spielberg strolls out the front gate to greet Will.
And that, dedicated readers, is that. As dreadful as this show was, I've enjoyed blogging about it each week...most of the time. Perhaps I'll try to do the same thing for one series when the new TV season begins. I'm also kicking around some other ideas to up the content on this blog, something which took a hit the last couple months with my TV show being on hiatus while the station gets set up at a new location.
Showing posts with label On the Lot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label On the Lot. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
On the Lot: two episodes for the price of one
Catching up on ON THE LOT after a week out of town on vacation...
The August 7 show's opening tease gives away who will be eliminated. Which director do we not see prepping a film for tonight's episode? The result: previously presumed favorite Zach, who came close to being knocked out the week before, is sent packing. The other directors try to look sad about him leaving, but you know they're jumping up and down on the inside since Zach was the one they thought would win.
Tonight's films are based on the winning entry in America's logline challenge: a man wakes up and finds himself in a dress but can't remember what happened the night before. Apparently the creativity of those watching the show matches that of those on it.
Will's THE YES MEN is a major departure for him. Dialogue! In the intro package he compares it to the Coen brothers. You can see the influence, although the film only pulled a couple chuckles from me. Since I'm not cheating by looking at tonight's currently airing episode, I'm going to bet this will be good enough to advance him.
Sam admits beforehand that he believes either he or Adam will go home from their efforts this week. His DRESS FOR SUCCESS is a SAW parody/female revenge comedy. Umm. Err. Uh. It's different. If he wanted to stick around, he should have made something funnier. He never finds a tone that makes it work, probably because he works far too hard and long to set it up.
Those musical bumpers are going longer and longer. As the directors dwindle the producers struggle to fill an hour. Oh, here's a package that reveals--surprise!--the remaining contestants want to win. Also, kittens and puppies are cute.
Adam's ARMY GUY has some David Lynch flourishes with it's lack of context for why the soldier in the dress keeps having the women asking to marry him while he chases his Russian nemesis. Does America like surreal? The twist isn't half bad, but like so many of the films on this show, I've lost my patience and interest by the time it arrives. If it is between him and Sam, I'm certain Adam will be back.
Jason's OH, BOY. sort of uses a SAW-like premise, except the man dressed as a ballerina has a bomb strapped to him and is in someone's front yard. Most weeks I haven't liked his films, and this one is no exception. That being said, he has an identifiable viewpoint in his films, something Adam and Sam don't have. Will's chameleon-like ability is what amounts to a distinct style.
Adam's film wins the top approval of all three judges, so I expect to see him advancing when I begin watching tonight's episode in a few minutes. Unless I missed something, there was no pseudo-car commercial film tonight. Did Ford decide their ad dollars could be better spent elsewhere?
Ugh, what a bad show.
All right, it's time for tonight's show. Adrianna Costa is dressed less provocatively than she's been the last couple weeks. Apparently cleavage isn't classy for the two-part season finale. Speaking of clothes, Kentucky boy Jason is wearing an Ale-8-One t-shirt. I'm mildly obsessed with "Kentucky's soft drink", so this is pretty wild to see.
OK, down to business... Sam is the director going home, which comes as a shock to no one. The judges had the harshest criticism for his film last week.
Adrianna explains the challenge for the final week...which is that they should pick their two best films to show and be judged on them?! Can ON THE LOT get any dumber? Look, one more new film isn't likely to change the opinion of anyone who cares enough to vote, but why bother having them select from their body of work? The show's website has all the films, so it's not like the viewing public can't take them into account. If anything, it makes this episode even more irrelevant. Could this be a sign that there was no desire to sink more cash into this money pit?
Maybe I should be thankful. With no new films, I can fly through this episode. For me the only drama left in ON THE LOT is whether Steven Spielberg will show up to congratulate the winner next week. This reality TV show is not his proudest moment.
Jason drew first for tonight's screening order. Blah, blah, blah. Does it matter? Jason picked ETERNAL WATERS and SWEET to represent him. He chose wisely. SWEET was easily his best film and probably one of the best during the show's run. It's heartfelt and relatable, qualities lacking from most of what the directors have churned out. He's playing the aw-shucks-I'm-just-a-simple-guy-from-Kentucky card. Will is probably grinding his teeth into dust since that's his ploy. Never fear, though. I'm sure he'll work the angle about having to give up on his dream and support his family if he doesn't win.
Will selects his bookend films. GLASS EYE, which sounds as though it was made before the show, and THE YES MEN, his last short for ON THE LOT, are plucked from his oeuvre for the masses determining his fate.
Adam goes the same route with his pre-show submission, DOUGH: THE MUSICAL, and his last, ARMY GUY. Adam essentially confirmed what was suspected. We did get films made outside of the show's process.
Of the three finalists, Will is most likely to turn out a feature I might want to see. Jason is most likely to be an auteur with supporters and detractors. Adam could be the anonymous career director. Carrie picks Will as her favorite. Garry sides with Jason. Considering my surprise at him not only surviving the first voting elimination but earning the most votes, I expect Jason will win. What do you think?
The August 7 show's opening tease gives away who will be eliminated. Which director do we not see prepping a film for tonight's episode? The result: previously presumed favorite Zach, who came close to being knocked out the week before, is sent packing. The other directors try to look sad about him leaving, but you know they're jumping up and down on the inside since Zach was the one they thought would win.
Tonight's films are based on the winning entry in America's logline challenge: a man wakes up and finds himself in a dress but can't remember what happened the night before. Apparently the creativity of those watching the show matches that of those on it.
Will's THE YES MEN is a major departure for him. Dialogue! In the intro package he compares it to the Coen brothers. You can see the influence, although the film only pulled a couple chuckles from me. Since I'm not cheating by looking at tonight's currently airing episode, I'm going to bet this will be good enough to advance him.
Sam admits beforehand that he believes either he or Adam will go home from their efforts this week. His DRESS FOR SUCCESS is a SAW parody/female revenge comedy. Umm. Err. Uh. It's different. If he wanted to stick around, he should have made something funnier. He never finds a tone that makes it work, probably because he works far too hard and long to set it up.
Those musical bumpers are going longer and longer. As the directors dwindle the producers struggle to fill an hour. Oh, here's a package that reveals--surprise!--the remaining contestants want to win. Also, kittens and puppies are cute.
Adam's ARMY GUY has some David Lynch flourishes with it's lack of context for why the soldier in the dress keeps having the women asking to marry him while he chases his Russian nemesis. Does America like surreal? The twist isn't half bad, but like so many of the films on this show, I've lost my patience and interest by the time it arrives. If it is between him and Sam, I'm certain Adam will be back.
Jason's OH, BOY. sort of uses a SAW-like premise, except the man dressed as a ballerina has a bomb strapped to him and is in someone's front yard. Most weeks I haven't liked his films, and this one is no exception. That being said, he has an identifiable viewpoint in his films, something Adam and Sam don't have. Will's chameleon-like ability is what amounts to a distinct style.
Adam's film wins the top approval of all three judges, so I expect to see him advancing when I begin watching tonight's episode in a few minutes. Unless I missed something, there was no pseudo-car commercial film tonight. Did Ford decide their ad dollars could be better spent elsewhere?
Ugh, what a bad show.
All right, it's time for tonight's show. Adrianna Costa is dressed less provocatively than she's been the last couple weeks. Apparently cleavage isn't classy for the two-part season finale. Speaking of clothes, Kentucky boy Jason is wearing an Ale-8-One t-shirt. I'm mildly obsessed with "Kentucky's soft drink", so this is pretty wild to see.
OK, down to business... Sam is the director going home, which comes as a shock to no one. The judges had the harshest criticism for his film last week.
Adrianna explains the challenge for the final week...which is that they should pick their two best films to show and be judged on them?! Can ON THE LOT get any dumber? Look, one more new film isn't likely to change the opinion of anyone who cares enough to vote, but why bother having them select from their body of work? The show's website has all the films, so it's not like the viewing public can't take them into account. If anything, it makes this episode even more irrelevant. Could this be a sign that there was no desire to sink more cash into this money pit?
Maybe I should be thankful. With no new films, I can fly through this episode. For me the only drama left in ON THE LOT is whether Steven Spielberg will show up to congratulate the winner next week. This reality TV show is not his proudest moment.
Jason drew first for tonight's screening order. Blah, blah, blah. Does it matter? Jason picked ETERNAL WATERS and SWEET to represent him. He chose wisely. SWEET was easily his best film and probably one of the best during the show's run. It's heartfelt and relatable, qualities lacking from most of what the directors have churned out. He's playing the aw-shucks-I'm-just-a-simple-guy-from-Kentucky card. Will is probably grinding his teeth into dust since that's his ploy. Never fear, though. I'm sure he'll work the angle about having to give up on his dream and support his family if he doesn't win.
Will selects his bookend films. GLASS EYE, which sounds as though it was made before the show, and THE YES MEN, his last short for ON THE LOT, are plucked from his oeuvre for the masses determining his fate.
Adam goes the same route with his pre-show submission, DOUGH: THE MUSICAL, and his last, ARMY GUY. Adam essentially confirmed what was suspected. We did get films made outside of the show's process.
Of the three finalists, Will is most likely to turn out a feature I might want to see. Jason is most likely to be an auteur with supporters and detractors. Adam could be the anonymous career director. Carrie picks Will as her favorite. Garry sides with Jason. Considering my surprise at him not only surviving the first voting elimination but earning the most votes, I expect Jason will win. What do you think?
Thursday, August 02, 2007
On the Lot: road week
It's road week on ON THE LOT. Out of the gate we learn that Andrew will hit it, Zach almost gets sideswiped by the viewing public's votes, and Jason cruises to the pole position, which earns a ride-along with Jerry O'Connell.
If you can make judgments by what little we know of the results, Jason should be the odds-on favorite to win. (His GETTA RHOOM mystifyingly landed in the top three in the show's early days.) Then again, there's no way of knowing who the public likes because typically all we've learned is who is voted off. For as much dead time structured in the show, you'd think that they would announce who got the most votes and give that director's film an encore.
I expected Zach's short to play well, but since everyone else is utilizing special effects, maybe he's lost his early edge. Computers have democratized FX work to a certain extent--anybody can do it with a little knowledge--meaning that Zach's output doesn't stand out like it did when their submission films were airing.
But enough theorizing...
Adam's DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE features a car radio that makes people dance against their will. So he got the embedded ad assignment this week. He's done this musical/dance thing before, and it feels like been there-done that. It ends on an off note, mainly because I don't think he knew where to end it. Ambitious? I suppose. Interesting? Eh.
Wow, they're really showcasing host Adrianna Costa's breasts tonight. (Sorry searchers, I still can't direct you to any dirty videos you're looking for. Apparently I have the right combination of words to fool the search engines and bring you here.)
Sam's BACKSEAT DRIVING TEST gets points for having a novel concept, which is about the best thing that can be said for these films every week. That was true for his last film, his wedding invitation stamps comedy, although the execution wasn't that hot. Here a backseat driver mother gets her comeuppance. It's not bad. Lin Shaye, part of the show's repertory cast, plays the nagging mother, so he paired the role and actor well. That begs the question of how the directors choose their actors. Is it a fantasy sports-like draft? The behind-the-scenes aspect of this show has to be more interesting than the films.
Zach's BONUS FEATURE TWO is a sequel to the film that almost got him eliminated, and it's a weird effort. The guy has talent, but I'm not sure his strength is screenwriting. His young lovers end up among pirates, a bad sword fight ensues, he gets all meta in his humor with a joke about the soundtrack, and he ends on a CASABLANCA quote. The judges, including Penny Marshall filling in for brother Garry, seem to like it better than his previous film. I don't get it.
Jason keeps the motivation hidden in THE MOVE until the very end. I actually sort of liked it even if it doesn't make the most sense. If we're giving credit for originality and somewhat relatable material--hey, I'm grasping at straws--then I'll pass him. I can't say that Jerry O'Connell gave him any advantage unless people remember the film because of his presence.
Will's ROAD RAGE 101 about a car that gets revenge on its abusive driver has some nice touches. I particularly liked the angry car's stereo display turning red. The car doesn't "fight back" as much as I expected or was needed, but it's hard to dislike the film or the mugging-for-the-camera director. Or maybe I'm a sucker for anything with Satie's Gymnopédie No. 1.
The winning entry in America's logline challenge is about a man who wakes up in a dress but can't remember what happened the night before. The remaining directors will have to use this as the basis for their next films. Oh boy.
Hey, wait a minute! What's this about the finale being on a new day--August 21? I thought we only had to suffer through two more of these? Maybe they're skipping a week. Knowing this show's haphazard production, someone didn't do their math properly.
The ON THE LOT site now hosts full episodes, which means that it's possible for me to keep up with the show while I'm on the road next week. Don't count on it happening, especially since installing a plug-in is required.
If you can make judgments by what little we know of the results, Jason should be the odds-on favorite to win. (His GETTA RHOOM mystifyingly landed in the top three in the show's early days.) Then again, there's no way of knowing who the public likes because typically all we've learned is who is voted off. For as much dead time structured in the show, you'd think that they would announce who got the most votes and give that director's film an encore.
I expected Zach's short to play well, but since everyone else is utilizing special effects, maybe he's lost his early edge. Computers have democratized FX work to a certain extent--anybody can do it with a little knowledge--meaning that Zach's output doesn't stand out like it did when their submission films were airing.
But enough theorizing...
Adam's DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE features a car radio that makes people dance against their will. So he got the embedded ad assignment this week. He's done this musical/dance thing before, and it feels like been there-done that. It ends on an off note, mainly because I don't think he knew where to end it. Ambitious? I suppose. Interesting? Eh.
Wow, they're really showcasing host Adrianna Costa's breasts tonight. (Sorry searchers, I still can't direct you to any dirty videos you're looking for. Apparently I have the right combination of words to fool the search engines and bring you here.)
Sam's BACKSEAT DRIVING TEST gets points for having a novel concept, which is about the best thing that can be said for these films every week. That was true for his last film, his wedding invitation stamps comedy, although the execution wasn't that hot. Here a backseat driver mother gets her comeuppance. It's not bad. Lin Shaye, part of the show's repertory cast, plays the nagging mother, so he paired the role and actor well. That begs the question of how the directors choose their actors. Is it a fantasy sports-like draft? The behind-the-scenes aspect of this show has to be more interesting than the films.
Zach's BONUS FEATURE TWO is a sequel to the film that almost got him eliminated, and it's a weird effort. The guy has talent, but I'm not sure his strength is screenwriting. His young lovers end up among pirates, a bad sword fight ensues, he gets all meta in his humor with a joke about the soundtrack, and he ends on a CASABLANCA quote. The judges, including Penny Marshall filling in for brother Garry, seem to like it better than his previous film. I don't get it.
Jason keeps the motivation hidden in THE MOVE until the very end. I actually sort of liked it even if it doesn't make the most sense. If we're giving credit for originality and somewhat relatable material--hey, I'm grasping at straws--then I'll pass him. I can't say that Jerry O'Connell gave him any advantage unless people remember the film because of his presence.
Will's ROAD RAGE 101 about a car that gets revenge on its abusive driver has some nice touches. I particularly liked the angry car's stereo display turning red. The car doesn't "fight back" as much as I expected or was needed, but it's hard to dislike the film or the mugging-for-the-camera director. Or maybe I'm a sucker for anything with Satie's Gymnopédie No. 1.
The winning entry in America's logline challenge is about a man who wakes up in a dress but can't remember what happened the night before. The remaining directors will have to use this as the basis for their next films. Oh boy.
Hey, wait a minute! What's this about the finale being on a new day--August 21? I thought we only had to suffer through two more of these? Maybe they're skipping a week. Knowing this show's haphazard production, someone didn't do their math properly.
The ON THE LOT site now hosts full episodes, which means that it's possible for me to keep up with the show while I'm on the road next week. Don't count on it happening, especially since installing a plug-in is required.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
On the Lot: better late than never
OK, so I'm seriously lagging on my weekly ON THE LOT recap. Just now I'm sitting down to watch last Tuesday's episode. Waiting seven days should tell you that the thrill is gone, not that it ever really was there. Last week delivered several press screenings, and I simply didn't feel like watching it. There you have it.
Anyway, Kenny and Mateen were eliminated. Then there was some description about the rest of the competition and when it will end, but I zoned out while typing this and don't really feel it's necessary to go back and check. Adrianna Costa just mentioned that there are three weeks left before the show is put down. Mark it on your calendars.
Really, though, you have to give props to ON THE LOT for completing its run. CBS unceremoniously pulled the plug on Mark Burnett's PIRATE MASTER and is replaying the remaining episodes on the internet. And here's how much I was invested in that show: I won't be checking out what's left. Neither Burnett production was destination TV; they were background TV, white noise to accompany other activities while deposited on the couch.
On to comedy with a hint of romance night!
Zach's THE BONUS FEATURE references other movies, including the work of Lucas, Spielberg, and Zemeckis. Nice bit of sycophancy in paying homage to the show's executive producer and pals. There is one cut where I thought he crossed the line--in other words, edited to a shot that didn't match with the direction the characters were looking--but it turned out to be a confusing edit rather than a "wrong" one. Zach has appeared to be a Spielberg-in-training from day one, and this cements that impression. Good job bud in keeping the product placement less blatant.
Adam gets outdone in the sucking up, inserting just a DreamWorks homage in GIRL TROUBLE. He references the studio's AMERICAN BEAUTY in addition to going old school with THE GRADUATE. It's so nice to see originality at work. < /sarcasm>
Will finds his way around dialogue again with UNPLUGGED, a romance between two desk lamps. I've mentioned before that he seems like someone who would be home at Pixar, and this has a LUXO JR. vibe all over it. Still, it's cute and clever. How can I argue with that?
Andrew's KEEP OFF GRASS is as bad as the wrecked lawn in it. It's supposed to be about a protective lawn caretaker discovering that two superheroes have destroyed his yard and garden. The problem is that most of it is the superheroes bickering while he obliviously tends to a flower. The judges seem impressed, though.
Sam's AMERICAN HOE has a title that someone else ought to recycle, but that's about all that should see the light of day again. The story is about a guy who gets the wrong stamps for the wedding invitations. (He gets a farming series rather than the love stamps.) There's one good joke in it, but the rest of it is pretty dire. The couple is unpleasant and unfunny. FYI to those on the coasts: while "nipple" may be interchangeable with "teat", I don't think I've ever heard the n word in relation to milking a cow.
Jason's OLD HOME BOYZ leads to a breakdance-off at a fifty year reunion, but there's more build-up than payoff. The most notable element may be Lin Shaye cast as an object of desire, which runs counter to the comedically grotesque women she's most recognizably played in the Farrelly brothers' films.
Ooh, the winner will get to feature Jerry O'Connell in his film for tonight's episode. Just think what an advantage it will be to have the star of TOMCATS and KANGAROO JACK!
For all one of you awaiting these recaps, I'll get to tonight's show faster. Only three left!
Anyway, Kenny and Mateen were eliminated. Then there was some description about the rest of the competition and when it will end, but I zoned out while typing this and don't really feel it's necessary to go back and check. Adrianna Costa just mentioned that there are three weeks left before the show is put down. Mark it on your calendars.
Really, though, you have to give props to ON THE LOT for completing its run. CBS unceremoniously pulled the plug on Mark Burnett's PIRATE MASTER and is replaying the remaining episodes on the internet. And here's how much I was invested in that show: I won't be checking out what's left. Neither Burnett production was destination TV; they were background TV, white noise to accompany other activities while deposited on the couch.
On to comedy with a hint of romance night!
Zach's THE BONUS FEATURE references other movies, including the work of Lucas, Spielberg, and Zemeckis. Nice bit of sycophancy in paying homage to the show's executive producer and pals. There is one cut where I thought he crossed the line--in other words, edited to a shot that didn't match with the direction the characters were looking--but it turned out to be a confusing edit rather than a "wrong" one. Zach has appeared to be a Spielberg-in-training from day one, and this cements that impression. Good job bud in keeping the product placement less blatant.
Adam gets outdone in the sucking up, inserting just a DreamWorks homage in GIRL TROUBLE. He references the studio's AMERICAN BEAUTY in addition to going old school with THE GRADUATE. It's so nice to see originality at work. < /sarcasm>
Will finds his way around dialogue again with UNPLUGGED, a romance between two desk lamps. I've mentioned before that he seems like someone who would be home at Pixar, and this has a LUXO JR. vibe all over it. Still, it's cute and clever. How can I argue with that?
Andrew's KEEP OFF GRASS is as bad as the wrecked lawn in it. It's supposed to be about a protective lawn caretaker discovering that two superheroes have destroyed his yard and garden. The problem is that most of it is the superheroes bickering while he obliviously tends to a flower. The judges seem impressed, though.
Sam's AMERICAN HOE has a title that someone else ought to recycle, but that's about all that should see the light of day again. The story is about a guy who gets the wrong stamps for the wedding invitations. (He gets a farming series rather than the love stamps.) There's one good joke in it, but the rest of it is pretty dire. The couple is unpleasant and unfunny. FYI to those on the coasts: while "nipple" may be interchangeable with "teat", I don't think I've ever heard the n word in relation to milking a cow.
Jason's OLD HOME BOYZ leads to a breakdance-off at a fifty year reunion, but there's more build-up than payoff. The most notable element may be Lin Shaye cast as an object of desire, which runs counter to the comedically grotesque women she's most recognizably played in the Farrelly brothers' films.
Ooh, the winner will get to feature Jerry O'Connell in his film for tonight's episode. Just think what an advantage it will be to have the star of TOMCATS and KANGAROO JACK!
For all one of you awaiting these recaps, I'll get to tonight's show faster. Only three left!
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
On the Lot: Lights, camera, action
It's time for another edition of WHO WANTS TO BE A HACK MOVIE DIRECTOR?, err, ON THE LOT. Sorry, no liveblogging this week as I was busy seeing I NOW PRONOUNCE YOU CHUCK AND LARRY. Dennis Dugan's sensibility isn't all that different from these contestants, so it's not like I had to defer my consumption of soulless cinema at that time on Tuesday night. To be perfectly honest, I wasn't sure if I'd have much to say about the show this week. You can only say that the films stink but have some polish so many ways.
Business first: we bid adieu to Shalini and Hilary. And there go the last of the ladies...
Is it me or do the accommodations for the filmmakers look like budget housing, especially in comparison to the fancy digs Mark Burnett put his ROCK STAR strivers in?
Tonight's theme is action. Before taking a look at these I have the feeling that we'll get more technically proficient but artistically empty shorts. The judges will gripe about storytelling, but here's the thing: with the amount of time they're given, how much story can you really deliver?
Sure enough, Sam's KEY WITNESS is more like a scene from a movie than self-contained piece. It's as slick and nutritious as olestra-laden snack foods whose consumption may result in, umm, unexpected passage.
Jason's SWEET, an action-comedy about a husband who rushes at the last minute to get anniversary flowers for his wife, does what perhaps no other short has done on the show's entire run. It succeeds as a standalone piece and might actually be something people would watch. I've been pretty critical of his past work, but tonight he strikes the right tone, develops the situation and character (as much as can be done in the alloted time), and draws laughs. Jason made a smart choice in telling a story that he and plenty others can identify with. His other shorts have been well received on the ON THE LOT message boards. Now I think he might have a shot at winning this silly competition.
I haven't been paying attention to who's sponsoring the show--God bless DVRs and the time-shifting viewing they permit--but Andrew's ZERO2SIXTY confirms that Ford is one of the major companies involved with it. Previous episodes had shorts that functioned like car commercials and featured prominent shots of the product, but this film is a Ford ad through and through. I wonder if someone gets assigned the pseudo-advertisement short each week. It didn't do Andrew any favors. You don't feel the speed in the car chase.
Kenny really wanted to do a stunt in his skateboard movie THE LOSERS, but the supervisor wouldn't let him. Like what he does or not, Kenny knows who he is. (The same goes for Jason.) His adrenalized, off the wall style earns him points for creativity. He didn't do a very good job of communicating where his skating racers are in relation to one another and the finish line, but again, I'm beginning to see what got him to this point. Garry Marshall, who must work all week on one-liners for his evaluations, quoted Camus in response to Kenny's short. That's the sort of weirdness that makes ON THE LOT tolerable.
Mateen's CATCH takes forever to set up a foot chase and then ends on a reversal that we've seen a few hundred times. Yawn.
A montage of the stunts and some behind-the-scenes work help pad out a show that's already mostly padding. Carrie picks Andrew's as her favorite while Garry and guest judge Antoine Fuqua pick Jason's. Next week the six remaining directors will present comedies with a hint of romance. (You mean romantic comedies?) I'm betting that Sam and Mateen are out, but tune in next week to find out.
Business first: we bid adieu to Shalini and Hilary. And there go the last of the ladies...
Is it me or do the accommodations for the filmmakers look like budget housing, especially in comparison to the fancy digs Mark Burnett put his ROCK STAR strivers in?
Tonight's theme is action. Before taking a look at these I have the feeling that we'll get more technically proficient but artistically empty shorts. The judges will gripe about storytelling, but here's the thing: with the amount of time they're given, how much story can you really deliver?
Sure enough, Sam's KEY WITNESS is more like a scene from a movie than self-contained piece. It's as slick and nutritious as olestra-laden snack foods whose consumption may result in, umm, unexpected passage.
Jason's SWEET, an action-comedy about a husband who rushes at the last minute to get anniversary flowers for his wife, does what perhaps no other short has done on the show's entire run. It succeeds as a standalone piece and might actually be something people would watch. I've been pretty critical of his past work, but tonight he strikes the right tone, develops the situation and character (as much as can be done in the alloted time), and draws laughs. Jason made a smart choice in telling a story that he and plenty others can identify with. His other shorts have been well received on the ON THE LOT message boards. Now I think he might have a shot at winning this silly competition.
I haven't been paying attention to who's sponsoring the show--God bless DVRs and the time-shifting viewing they permit--but Andrew's ZERO2SIXTY confirms that Ford is one of the major companies involved with it. Previous episodes had shorts that functioned like car commercials and featured prominent shots of the product, but this film is a Ford ad through and through. I wonder if someone gets assigned the pseudo-advertisement short each week. It didn't do Andrew any favors. You don't feel the speed in the car chase.
Kenny really wanted to do a stunt in his skateboard movie THE LOSERS, but the supervisor wouldn't let him. Like what he does or not, Kenny knows who he is. (The same goes for Jason.) His adrenalized, off the wall style earns him points for creativity. He didn't do a very good job of communicating where his skating racers are in relation to one another and the finish line, but again, I'm beginning to see what got him to this point. Garry Marshall, who must work all week on one-liners for his evaluations, quoted Camus in response to Kenny's short. That's the sort of weirdness that makes ON THE LOT tolerable.
Mateen's CATCH takes forever to set up a foot chase and then ends on a reversal that we've seen a few hundred times. Yawn.
A montage of the stunts and some behind-the-scenes work help pad out a show that's already mostly padding. Carrie picks Andrew's as her favorite while Garry and guest judge Antoine Fuqua pick Jason's. Next week the six remaining directors will present comedies with a hint of romance. (You mean romantic comedies?) I'm betting that Sam and Mateen are out, but tune in next week to find out.
Monday, July 09, 2007
On the Lot: more liveblogging folly
OK, so you're probably not watching Fox's director search ON THE LOT. If you are, you probably forgot that it's on tonight because of the All-Star game. (That's what digital video recorders are for.) Anyway, I'm home, the show is on, so following last week's attempt, let's do some liveblogging.
8:00 p.m. In the show's opening tease we see a Universal Studios tour group going by while the guide says that they can see "a lot of filming" for the TV series. And I thought it was too bad that the only film shooting when I went on a Paramount Studios tour was LUCKY NUMBERS.
8:03 p.m. Mateen basically calls Adrianna The Angel of Death. Heh heh.
8:04 p.m. Shira-Lee gets the heave-ho. Not a surprise considering she essentially said that she didn't know the genre she had to work in last week.
8:05 p.m. Adrianna informs the directors that their theme for this week is "when two worlds collide" and *gasp* two directors will be eliminated. This must be Fox's way of getting in an MLB tie-in. Now that the stakes are higher, it's for real, kind of like how the All-Star game stupidly determines home field advantage for the World Series.
8:06 p.m. This week's guest judge is who? Luke Greenfield, director of THE ANIMAL and THE GIRL NEXT DOOR, accepts the call. If this show had any traction, they'd be pulling better guests than this.
8:07 p.m. Zach's TIME UPON A ONCE sounds like it's going to be all about his special effects background. He's directing his actors to do everything backwards. Lin Shaye is back for more, and isn't that Reginald VelJohnson (you know, the FAMILY MATTERS dad)? (I think he was the head doctor in Will's comedy piece two weeks ago, but we didn't get a long enough look at him.) The conceit is that the new neighbors do everything backwards, and the effect he pulls off is convincing. The judges and voters are going to eat this up.
8:17 p.m. Hilary gives us THE LEGEND OF DONKEY-TAIL WILLIE. With her track record of lowbrow humor, that title portends all sorts of bad things but it's cute. She shot this like an old-timey western and employs a gauzy filter because nothing says fairy tale than having glaucoma. It's her best effort on the show, although I think part of it is the better production values. She's gone with the no glasses look this week. That's not important; I just don't have anything else to say.
8:27 p.m. Next week is action movies. Anything that spares us dialogue is a good thing. Speaking of which, here's Will. Hus SPAGHETTI has a present day couple finding themselves in a spaghetti western and has some spoken words. When two worlds collide! Or because Univeral Studios has an old west backlot set. Will's definitely seen a Sergio Leone movie, but keep this guy doing his silent movie thing. It's fine but zzzzzzz..... Like some other ON THE LOT shorts, it could have been a commercial with a tweak here or there.
8:37 p.m. Shalini's FIRST SIGHT definitely looks like it is shot on a studio backlot. The large building in the background looks two-dimensional. Her inspirational movie about a special pair of sunglasses that allows Tatyana Ali to see the true spirit inside people is heavyhanded but generally well exectued. Carrie Fisher rips it by saying that in Hollywood "if you want a message, leave it at the beep." Greenfield is similarly harsh. Leave it to that ol' softie Garry Marshall to stand up for it and defend the charge of lack of subtlety by saying, "Subtle is what they play in Connecticut when nobody goes."
8:47 p.m. An hour for five short films is way too much time.
8:48 p.m. Adam's WORLDLY POSSESSIONS has a military package accidentally delivered to a wealthy suburban couple. He's employed a lot of visual effects, most of them practical by the look of things. It's funny how Shalini just got hammered for a message movie, yet Adam just did the same thing. The difference, of course, is degree. It's a little too on the nose as well, but this features the best storytelling of all the shorts tonight.
8:56 p.m. A shocking elimination on HELL'S KITCHEN tonight. When isn't there? Last week, I guess.
8:57 p.m. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Adam couldn't look more uncomfortable on camera.
8:58 p.m. Favorite films? Carrie votes for Adam, Luke for Zack, and Garry picks Hilary. Adrianna says she'll see us next Tuesday. Sounds like a threat.
Now that we're a little deeper into the show we can see that the directors have professional competency, but I'd like to draw your attention to what Donna had to say about this in last week's comments:
8:00 p.m. In the show's opening tease we see a Universal Studios tour group going by while the guide says that they can see "a lot of filming" for the TV series. And I thought it was too bad that the only film shooting when I went on a Paramount Studios tour was LUCKY NUMBERS.
8:03 p.m. Mateen basically calls Adrianna The Angel of Death. Heh heh.
8:04 p.m. Shira-Lee gets the heave-ho. Not a surprise considering she essentially said that she didn't know the genre she had to work in last week.
8:05 p.m. Adrianna informs the directors that their theme for this week is "when two worlds collide" and *gasp* two directors will be eliminated. This must be Fox's way of getting in an MLB tie-in. Now that the stakes are higher, it's for real, kind of like how the All-Star game stupidly determines home field advantage for the World Series.
8:06 p.m. This week's guest judge is who? Luke Greenfield, director of THE ANIMAL and THE GIRL NEXT DOOR, accepts the call. If this show had any traction, they'd be pulling better guests than this.
8:07 p.m. Zach's TIME UPON A ONCE sounds like it's going to be all about his special effects background. He's directing his actors to do everything backwards. Lin Shaye is back for more, and isn't that Reginald VelJohnson (you know, the FAMILY MATTERS dad)? (I think he was the head doctor in Will's comedy piece two weeks ago, but we didn't get a long enough look at him.) The conceit is that the new neighbors do everything backwards, and the effect he pulls off is convincing. The judges and voters are going to eat this up.
8:17 p.m. Hilary gives us THE LEGEND OF DONKEY-TAIL WILLIE. With her track record of lowbrow humor, that title portends all sorts of bad things but it's cute. She shot this like an old-timey western and employs a gauzy filter because nothing says fairy tale than having glaucoma. It's her best effort on the show, although I think part of it is the better production values. She's gone with the no glasses look this week. That's not important; I just don't have anything else to say.
8:27 p.m. Next week is action movies. Anything that spares us dialogue is a good thing. Speaking of which, here's Will. Hus SPAGHETTI has a present day couple finding themselves in a spaghetti western and has some spoken words. When two worlds collide! Or because Univeral Studios has an old west backlot set. Will's definitely seen a Sergio Leone movie, but keep this guy doing his silent movie thing. It's fine but zzzzzzz..... Like some other ON THE LOT shorts, it could have been a commercial with a tweak here or there.
8:37 p.m. Shalini's FIRST SIGHT definitely looks like it is shot on a studio backlot. The large building in the background looks two-dimensional. Her inspirational movie about a special pair of sunglasses that allows Tatyana Ali to see the true spirit inside people is heavyhanded but generally well exectued. Carrie Fisher rips it by saying that in Hollywood "if you want a message, leave it at the beep." Greenfield is similarly harsh. Leave it to that ol' softie Garry Marshall to stand up for it and defend the charge of lack of subtlety by saying, "Subtle is what they play in Connecticut when nobody goes."
8:47 p.m. An hour for five short films is way too much time.
8:48 p.m. Adam's WORLDLY POSSESSIONS has a military package accidentally delivered to a wealthy suburban couple. He's employed a lot of visual effects, most of them practical by the look of things. It's funny how Shalini just got hammered for a message movie, yet Adam just did the same thing. The difference, of course, is degree. It's a little too on the nose as well, but this features the best storytelling of all the shorts tonight.
8:56 p.m. A shocking elimination on HELL'S KITCHEN tonight. When isn't there? Last week, I guess.
8:57 p.m. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Adam couldn't look more uncomfortable on camera.
8:58 p.m. Favorite films? Carrie votes for Adam, Luke for Zack, and Garry picks Hilary. Adrianna says she'll see us next Tuesday. Sounds like a threat.
Now that we're a little deeper into the show we can see that the directors have professional competency, but I'd like to draw your attention to what Donna had to say about this in last week's comments:
I think that's why the show has become more boring, if that were possible, as the shorts have improved technically. We're getting more emphasis on visual effects, but assuming that all of these filmmakers have talented professionals assisting them--and who knows how much help they are getting--what does that tell us about their abilities? Rather than go for bigger and "better", I'd really like to see what the directors could do with just a conversation scene. It'd be a truer gauge of their directorial visions."...the polish you speak of bothers me more week by week. It's like somebody taught these people a bag of tricks -- filters, angles, cuts, music beats -- and they pour it all over whatever the assignment is, every week. Kenny may be incompetent, but I'll take his rough-edged ignorance over the other directors' chrome sheen. At least it feels like his vision, not a Frankenstein monster stitched together out of the ultra-commercial surfaces that represent these contestants' highest aspirations."
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Liveblogging On the Lot
All right, let's give this liveblogging thing a shot. Tonight's episode of ON THE LOT is on the air. Here goes nothing...
8:00 p.m. What, no Adrianna Costa intro? Voiceover announcer: "It's horror film night on the lot." Dude, that's every week.
8:03 p.m. And David gets eliminated, but pervy uncle Garry Marshall reassures him that he got to meet girls.
8:04 p.m. Adrianna informs us who will be directing horror films. What a surprise, it's the contestants who didn't direct last week!
8:06 p.m. Eli Roth is the guest judge. Terrific. You know how much I loved HOSTEL.
8:07 p.m. Kenny's THE MALIBU MYTH kicks off horror night. Looks like Tatyana Ali, who was in David's film last week, is back again. The guy relies heavily on transitional effects, but I have a feeling his aggressive direction will go over well with whoever's watching this show. The film has something to do with missing teens turned into bloodthirsty monsters. Essentially it's a pre-credits sequence to JEEPERS CREEPERS but jokier. The woman in the car talks about what a blog says, but it doesn't appear she has a computer. Continuity is for suckers, though, right? Considering that I don't think the directors have sufficient time to make something scary, I'll give Kenny credit for putting together a short with more polish than most of what we've seen in ON THE LOT'S run. Roth namechecks three horror films to prove how cool he is. Somebody punch him, please.
8:16 p.m. The success of Sam's ANKLEBITERS is going to rely on a puppet. Umm, OK. Actually, it is convincing enough, but is there anything to this other than it being a clip from a feature film? Roth throws out a comparison to DEAD ALIVE, but I have to agree with him that the prologue essentially makes what follows irrelevant. We already know that a new creature "will change everything". Then again, the time limitations pretty much guarantee we won't be surprised.
8:24 p.m. We're two for two with prologues for these shorts. Will Andrew's MIDNIGHT SNACK make it three for three? Nope. Hey, Lin Shaye is back too. Wisely he's not bothered with much dialogue, and he does OK building atmosphere. Still, this isn't going to scare anyone. Sure enough, a joke is the exclamation point on the short. Roth compares it unfavorably to a "got milk?" commercial. Sadly, I can't disagree with what the guy's saying.
8:31 p.m. I expected horror night to be a catastrophe, but I'll grudgingly grant that these films have been better than what we've seen in previous weeks. There's nothing in them that would make people pull them up on any of the numerous online content providers, but they have a sheen of professionalism that helps explain why these people were chosen.
8:34 p.m. They have people make one-sheets for these shorts? Why? I guess it's a nice souvenir for the contestants.
8:35 p.m. Jason's ETERNAL WATERS is up. Boy does that guy like that dream-like, fractured editing style. A boy is drowning in a pool. Now he's underwater in a coffin. Watch out! There's an Asian man with a knife in the house! I guess this is supposed to be redemptive or something, but I'm not seeing it. Roth isn't buying the actress cast as the mother. "You dressed her up like a teenager. She's this blonde with, you know, the big breasts, and she's in a tight t-shirt. It's hard to take her seriously as a mother." Surely he's just taken Garry's lines.
8:38 p.m. Garry Marshall has two words for Jason: "Sen-sational." Oh Garry.
8:43 p.m. Shira-Lee claims to have known almost nothing about horror films before this. For real? Her OPEN HOUSE has an expecting couple wandering into a home for sale. There's no real estate agent...but there is a ghost or something warning the woman to get out. Yawn.
8:46 p.m. Good point, Carrie. Ghosts during the day aren't scary. Roth likes the tag, which is the man suggesting that a name has come to him. It's the name of the ghost woman's dead son. OOOOOOOOOO! C'mon, that was lame. Garry nails it: no conflict.
8:49 p.m. I'll say this for liveblogging the show. It's made ON THE LOT pass much faster.
8:50 p.m. Fox is advertising DON'T FORGET THE LYRICS. Isn't this the same thing as NBC's THE SINGING BEE?
8:51 p.m. The challenge for next week's show, airing on Monday due to Major League Baseball's All-Star Game, is based on the well-worn trailer phrase "when two worlds collide". Yeah, that ought to stretch their creative muscles.
8:52 p.m. Mateen's PROFILE strives for everyday horror. A white police officer pulls over a black driver. Flash forward to the cops giving him a beating in the station bathroom. Of all the directors, he fulfills the task at hand, which is to make the viewers uncomfortable. (One part draws an audible gasp from the studio audience.) Granted, with material this charged, it isn't hard to shake people up, but I'll give him credit for making something that actually could horrify those watching. None of the other films did that. He does make a really odd choice in closing it with an aerial shot of the area that then becomes a view of the planet. Roth: "And then it's the point of view of the moon or something." Ha.
The judges are especially critical, maybe because it gets under their skin? Hitchcock's childhood fear of the police informed much of what happened in his films, and it's that fear of authority with a racial angle that makes the film somewhat effective. (The perspective shifts are correctly identified as a problem.)
I've agreed with Roth, a director I find awfully smug and whose last two films I think are reprehensible, so it's nice that he gives me a rich comment to dine on here. Says the guy whose HOSTEL PART II has a naked woman hanging by her feet getting gutted by another naked woman who showers in her blood, "With subject matter that's this volatile, it's easy to put a shocking image up, but it's tough to relate that horror to the audience." Did I mention that Roth plays scenes like that for laughs?
8:59 p.m. The judges are split on their favorites. Carrie goes for Andrew, Roth for Kenny, and Garry for Jason.
9:25 p.m. Speaking of horrors, my longest entry of the whole liveblogging experience gets chomped in an attempt to publish while the wireless connection is interrupted.
I expected tonight's show to have the directors flailing, but they acquitted themselves better than they have at any other time during the show. OK, so only Mateen's film had a glimmer of frightening images/scenarios, but I was prepared for much worse. I think Shira-Lee's a goner out of this group, but if Mateen succeeds only at making people feel bad, he could be susceptible.
Perhaps the pressure of writing during the show made it feel like the time went quickly, but stepping out of the comfort zone for these filmmakers did produce a smidgen of the creative spark missing in their other films and more entertaining TV. All but Shira-Lee relied on what we've seen from them before, but it didn't seem as tired. (Did anyone catch the mention in the opening tease that they use professional writers? Interesting...) Was it me, or was this show tighter? The judges could still be tougher. As usual, the guest judge made the most valuable feedback.
And so goes this experiment in liveblogging. Thoughts?
When the links for the films are available, I'll update the entry for those who want easy access to them.
8:00 p.m. What, no Adrianna Costa intro? Voiceover announcer: "It's horror film night on the lot." Dude, that's every week.
8:03 p.m. And David gets eliminated, but pervy uncle Garry Marshall reassures him that he got to meet girls.
8:04 p.m. Adrianna informs us who will be directing horror films. What a surprise, it's the contestants who didn't direct last week!
8:06 p.m. Eli Roth is the guest judge. Terrific. You know how much I loved HOSTEL.
8:07 p.m. Kenny's THE MALIBU MYTH kicks off horror night. Looks like Tatyana Ali, who was in David's film last week, is back again. The guy relies heavily on transitional effects, but I have a feeling his aggressive direction will go over well with whoever's watching this show. The film has something to do with missing teens turned into bloodthirsty monsters. Essentially it's a pre-credits sequence to JEEPERS CREEPERS but jokier. The woman in the car talks about what a blog says, but it doesn't appear she has a computer. Continuity is for suckers, though, right? Considering that I don't think the directors have sufficient time to make something scary, I'll give Kenny credit for putting together a short with more polish than most of what we've seen in ON THE LOT'S run. Roth namechecks three horror films to prove how cool he is. Somebody punch him, please.
8:16 p.m. The success of Sam's ANKLEBITERS is going to rely on a puppet. Umm, OK. Actually, it is convincing enough, but is there anything to this other than it being a clip from a feature film? Roth throws out a comparison to DEAD ALIVE, but I have to agree with him that the prologue essentially makes what follows irrelevant. We already know that a new creature "will change everything". Then again, the time limitations pretty much guarantee we won't be surprised.
8:24 p.m. We're two for two with prologues for these shorts. Will Andrew's MIDNIGHT SNACK make it three for three? Nope. Hey, Lin Shaye is back too. Wisely he's not bothered with much dialogue, and he does OK building atmosphere. Still, this isn't going to scare anyone. Sure enough, a joke is the exclamation point on the short. Roth compares it unfavorably to a "got milk?" commercial. Sadly, I can't disagree with what the guy's saying.
8:31 p.m. I expected horror night to be a catastrophe, but I'll grudgingly grant that these films have been better than what we've seen in previous weeks. There's nothing in them that would make people pull them up on any of the numerous online content providers, but they have a sheen of professionalism that helps explain why these people were chosen.
8:34 p.m. They have people make one-sheets for these shorts? Why? I guess it's a nice souvenir for the contestants.
8:35 p.m. Jason's ETERNAL WATERS is up. Boy does that guy like that dream-like, fractured editing style. A boy is drowning in a pool. Now he's underwater in a coffin. Watch out! There's an Asian man with a knife in the house! I guess this is supposed to be redemptive or something, but I'm not seeing it. Roth isn't buying the actress cast as the mother. "You dressed her up like a teenager. She's this blonde with, you know, the big breasts, and she's in a tight t-shirt. It's hard to take her seriously as a mother." Surely he's just taken Garry's lines.
8:38 p.m. Garry Marshall has two words for Jason: "Sen-sational." Oh Garry.
8:43 p.m. Shira-Lee claims to have known almost nothing about horror films before this. For real? Her OPEN HOUSE has an expecting couple wandering into a home for sale. There's no real estate agent...but there is a ghost or something warning the woman to get out. Yawn.
8:46 p.m. Good point, Carrie. Ghosts during the day aren't scary. Roth likes the tag, which is the man suggesting that a name has come to him. It's the name of the ghost woman's dead son. OOOOOOOOOO! C'mon, that was lame. Garry nails it: no conflict.
8:49 p.m. I'll say this for liveblogging the show. It's made ON THE LOT pass much faster.
8:50 p.m. Fox is advertising DON'T FORGET THE LYRICS. Isn't this the same thing as NBC's THE SINGING BEE?
8:51 p.m. The challenge for next week's show, airing on Monday due to Major League Baseball's All-Star Game, is based on the well-worn trailer phrase "when two worlds collide". Yeah, that ought to stretch their creative muscles.
8:52 p.m. Mateen's PROFILE strives for everyday horror. A white police officer pulls over a black driver. Flash forward to the cops giving him a beating in the station bathroom. Of all the directors, he fulfills the task at hand, which is to make the viewers uncomfortable. (One part draws an audible gasp from the studio audience.) Granted, with material this charged, it isn't hard to shake people up, but I'll give him credit for making something that actually could horrify those watching. None of the other films did that. He does make a really odd choice in closing it with an aerial shot of the area that then becomes a view of the planet. Roth: "And then it's the point of view of the moon or something." Ha.
The judges are especially critical, maybe because it gets under their skin? Hitchcock's childhood fear of the police informed much of what happened in his films, and it's that fear of authority with a racial angle that makes the film somewhat effective. (The perspective shifts are correctly identified as a problem.)
I've agreed with Roth, a director I find awfully smug and whose last two films I think are reprehensible, so it's nice that he gives me a rich comment to dine on here. Says the guy whose HOSTEL PART II has a naked woman hanging by her feet getting gutted by another naked woman who showers in her blood, "With subject matter that's this volatile, it's easy to put a shocking image up, but it's tough to relate that horror to the audience." Did I mention that Roth plays scenes like that for laughs?
8:59 p.m. The judges are split on their favorites. Carrie goes for Andrew, Roth for Kenny, and Garry for Jason.
9:25 p.m. Speaking of horrors, my longest entry of the whole liveblogging experience gets chomped in an attempt to publish while the wireless connection is interrupted.
I expected tonight's show to have the directors flailing, but they acquitted themselves better than they have at any other time during the show. OK, so only Mateen's film had a glimmer of frightening images/scenarios, but I was prepared for much worse. I think Shira-Lee's a goner out of this group, but if Mateen succeeds only at making people feel bad, he could be susceptible.
Perhaps the pressure of writing during the show made it feel like the time went quickly, but stepping out of the comfort zone for these filmmakers did produce a smidgen of the creative spark missing in their other films and more entertaining TV. All but Shira-Lee relied on what we've seen from them before, but it didn't seem as tired. (Did anyone catch the mention in the opening tease that they use professional writers? Interesting...) Was it me, or was this show tighter? The judges could still be tougher. As usual, the guest judge made the most valuable feedback.
And so goes this experiment in liveblogging. Thoughts?
When the links for the films are available, I'll update the entry for those who want easy access to them.
Site news
As a recent notebook computer purchaser, how about I try my hand at some liveblogging tonight? There's a new, sure to be awful episode of ON THE LOT at 8 p.m. Eastern. Come back for more then.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
On the Lot: Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
ON THE LOT was more "fun" when it was a train wreck. Now that it's just merely bad than spectactularly bad, it's lost the gawker appeal. Wretched is as wretched does.
A new week means more changes, but first, what's the point of the show being live? I don't recall them making an issue of it in prior weeks, but the live nature of Tuesday's show was stressed. If ever there was a show that could use some fine-tuning in the editing room, this is it.
Once again, the results were delivered differently. Rather than make Jessica suffer for a week awaiting the result that might as well have been given right after she showed her horror short from a tree's perspective, Adrianna Costa and Garry Marshall stopped by the directors' living quarters to dismiss her. I missed if they claimed to have done this the day after the show, not that it matters.
When it comes to contestant interaction in their free time, producer Mark Burnett must have felt he learned his lesson on ROCK STAR: INXS. (The non-performance episodes got shuffled from CBS to VH-1, which indicates the ratings were dreadful.) Such content is practically non-existent on ON THE LOT, although we get maybe a minute of it each week to show the directors' reactions to the judges' comments. Big whoop.
Adrianna reminded us that the six comedies we would be seeing were made in five days. Because nothing guarantees original and quality ideas than rushing a creative project. Documentarian Shalini kicked things off with DR. IN-LAW. A son-in-law accompanies his non-English speaking Chinese father-in-law to the doctor's office. Naturally, the whole time the guy is berated for not being good enough for the old man's daughter. The son-in-law exacts revenge by telling the doctor that his relative needs a rectal exam. The intro package played up how comedy is not in Shalini's comfort zone, but compared to the night's other shorts, hers was not bad. She made good use of perspective and paced it well. Standard operating procedure for ON THE LOT is to employ an easy, vulgar joke when in doubt, and Shalini did not disappoint.
Next was Adam, who never looks comfortable in front of the camera. DISCOVERING THE WHEELS used that old standby of cavemen encountering unfamiliar technology. In this case it was a car. And not just any car but a Ford Mustang. Seriously, this was nothing more than an in-show commercial--and not a particularly good one--for one of the sponsor's vehicles. I shouldn't be surprised that ON THE LOT is attuned to finding the best 30-second advertisement director than a feature filmmaker. Burnett's THE APPRENTICE was oriented for those with marketing savvy more than business skills. All the better to flog the goods in the product placement-laden challenges. Adam's short ultimately didn't make narrative sense, but it probably has enough polish--he tried special effects!--to keep him around another week.
Adam took a page from Will's book and made a short without any dialogue. Will continued to stick with what has worked for him: minimal words for a putative silent film. His NERVE ENDINGS was a darker, grosser comedy about a surgeon who accidentally nicks a guy's brain with his scalpel and then leaves his assistant alone with patient. With the brain exposed, the assistant has fun pressing different parts of the organ to operate the man like a puppet. I didn't think it was funny at all, although there was a good final joke when the head doctor does the same thing to give his second-in-command a remote slap. I don't think that Will reused classical music from one of his other shorts, but I swear that someone in the competition used the exact same selection.
Hilary's deeply unfunny UNDER THE GUN yukked it up over a mother and daughter robbing a sperm bank. They want to make a withdrawal. Ha! Or maybe not. Lin Shaye, best known for her bit parts in the Farrelly brothers' films, played the mom. Hilary's first short showed that she's not exactly fit for humor of discomfort, but I think this one was worse than the short about the woman having to pee on the bus.
David's sex comedy short HOW TO HAVE A GIRL was pretty awful too. The conceit is that the man reads that to have a boy, he should be on top. The woman reads that she should be on top if she's to have a girl. Thus a wrestling match/fight ensues from the bed to the floor. Aside from not being funny, it was disconcertingly violent. That was THE FRESH PRINCE OF BEL-AIR'S Tatyana Ali in this, right? The short's title doesn't exactly describe it. Come to think of it, neither did Shalini's.
The last director was the all-but-coronated Zach. He keeps talking about wanting to branch out and not be pegged as the special effects guy. Shaking things up for DIE HARDLY WORKING, he became the sound effects guy. The clever title and solid execution of office drones pretending to battle among the cubicles was more than enough to get the judges slobbering over his talent. I'm not saying he's without ability, but there's a big step from pulling off effects and small concepts on the cheap and making a feature film.
Moviemaking and watching are supposed to be fun activities, but ON THE LOT sucks all of the excitement out of it. The title of the show would lead us to believe that we might see the directors working behind the scenes. There's precious little of that. What we did get from the sets tended to be the non-working contestants criticizing the opponents' choices. Burnett, who typically does a good job of building his "characters", has failed miserably in establishing who these people are. The judges often have nothing worthwhile to say and instead opt for sub-American Idol wit or effusive praise.
The game's structure seems to require generating a new short in five days. Bor-ing, at least if they're not going to show us the struggle. Plus, they've hamstrung those directors who aren't writers. That likely accounts for the one-note ideas in these shorts. There's also an implied preference for directors who can do any genre, as if versatility is the most prized attribute. Look at the directors they've had judging the contestants. Most of them, like this week's guest Mark Waters, make the same kinds of films over and over. They don't jump from horror to comedy to costume drama.
Not that anyone with ON THE LOT is listening to me, but to jazz it up, how about having every director make a short from the same script? That would be more revealing of their talents. OK, so that could make repetitive TV. Since they're doing for-hire work anyway, why not provide a pool of scripts for them to select from? Maybe there would be a slight uptick in the base quality, and it would remove their writing skills, or lack thereof, from the equation.
Or ON THE LOT could go THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS route. I'm of a mind that these directors have too much freedom. They'd never get Lars von Trier to do a guest spot on the show, but wouldn't it be great to have him lay down strict rules regarding what the directors can and can't do? Even if he weren't cracking the whip, some limitations might force them to make more creative choices. As it stands, the group as a whole is making the easiest, laziest, and crudest decisions.
Next week brings horror shorts from the other six directors. The horror... As bad as the comedies were, the horror genre sounds like a uniquely terrible idea for two minute shorts.
A new week means more changes, but first, what's the point of the show being live? I don't recall them making an issue of it in prior weeks, but the live nature of Tuesday's show was stressed. If ever there was a show that could use some fine-tuning in the editing room, this is it.
Once again, the results were delivered differently. Rather than make Jessica suffer for a week awaiting the result that might as well have been given right after she showed her horror short from a tree's perspective, Adrianna Costa and Garry Marshall stopped by the directors' living quarters to dismiss her. I missed if they claimed to have done this the day after the show, not that it matters.
When it comes to contestant interaction in their free time, producer Mark Burnett must have felt he learned his lesson on ROCK STAR: INXS. (The non-performance episodes got shuffled from CBS to VH-1, which indicates the ratings were dreadful.) Such content is practically non-existent on ON THE LOT, although we get maybe a minute of it each week to show the directors' reactions to the judges' comments. Big whoop.
Adrianna reminded us that the six comedies we would be seeing were made in five days. Because nothing guarantees original and quality ideas than rushing a creative project. Documentarian Shalini kicked things off with DR. IN-LAW. A son-in-law accompanies his non-English speaking Chinese father-in-law to the doctor's office. Naturally, the whole time the guy is berated for not being good enough for the old man's daughter. The son-in-law exacts revenge by telling the doctor that his relative needs a rectal exam. The intro package played up how comedy is not in Shalini's comfort zone, but compared to the night's other shorts, hers was not bad. She made good use of perspective and paced it well. Standard operating procedure for ON THE LOT is to employ an easy, vulgar joke when in doubt, and Shalini did not disappoint.
Next was Adam, who never looks comfortable in front of the camera. DISCOVERING THE WHEELS used that old standby of cavemen encountering unfamiliar technology. In this case it was a car. And not just any car but a Ford Mustang. Seriously, this was nothing more than an in-show commercial--and not a particularly good one--for one of the sponsor's vehicles. I shouldn't be surprised that ON THE LOT is attuned to finding the best 30-second advertisement director than a feature filmmaker. Burnett's THE APPRENTICE was oriented for those with marketing savvy more than business skills. All the better to flog the goods in the product placement-laden challenges. Adam's short ultimately didn't make narrative sense, but it probably has enough polish--he tried special effects!--to keep him around another week.
Adam took a page from Will's book and made a short without any dialogue. Will continued to stick with what has worked for him: minimal words for a putative silent film. His NERVE ENDINGS was a darker, grosser comedy about a surgeon who accidentally nicks a guy's brain with his scalpel and then leaves his assistant alone with patient. With the brain exposed, the assistant has fun pressing different parts of the organ to operate the man like a puppet. I didn't think it was funny at all, although there was a good final joke when the head doctor does the same thing to give his second-in-command a remote slap. I don't think that Will reused classical music from one of his other shorts, but I swear that someone in the competition used the exact same selection.
Hilary's deeply unfunny UNDER THE GUN yukked it up over a mother and daughter robbing a sperm bank. They want to make a withdrawal. Ha! Or maybe not. Lin Shaye, best known for her bit parts in the Farrelly brothers' films, played the mom. Hilary's first short showed that she's not exactly fit for humor of discomfort, but I think this one was worse than the short about the woman having to pee on the bus.
David's sex comedy short HOW TO HAVE A GIRL was pretty awful too. The conceit is that the man reads that to have a boy, he should be on top. The woman reads that she should be on top if she's to have a girl. Thus a wrestling match/fight ensues from the bed to the floor. Aside from not being funny, it was disconcertingly violent. That was THE FRESH PRINCE OF BEL-AIR'S Tatyana Ali in this, right? The short's title doesn't exactly describe it. Come to think of it, neither did Shalini's.
The last director was the all-but-coronated Zach. He keeps talking about wanting to branch out and not be pegged as the special effects guy. Shaking things up for DIE HARDLY WORKING, he became the sound effects guy. The clever title and solid execution of office drones pretending to battle among the cubicles was more than enough to get the judges slobbering over his talent. I'm not saying he's without ability, but there's a big step from pulling off effects and small concepts on the cheap and making a feature film.
Moviemaking and watching are supposed to be fun activities, but ON THE LOT sucks all of the excitement out of it. The title of the show would lead us to believe that we might see the directors working behind the scenes. There's precious little of that. What we did get from the sets tended to be the non-working contestants criticizing the opponents' choices. Burnett, who typically does a good job of building his "characters", has failed miserably in establishing who these people are. The judges often have nothing worthwhile to say and instead opt for sub-American Idol wit or effusive praise.
The game's structure seems to require generating a new short in five days. Bor-ing, at least if they're not going to show us the struggle. Plus, they've hamstrung those directors who aren't writers. That likely accounts for the one-note ideas in these shorts. There's also an implied preference for directors who can do any genre, as if versatility is the most prized attribute. Look at the directors they've had judging the contestants. Most of them, like this week's guest Mark Waters, make the same kinds of films over and over. They don't jump from horror to comedy to costume drama.
Not that anyone with ON THE LOT is listening to me, but to jazz it up, how about having every director make a short from the same script? That would be more revealing of their talents. OK, so that could make repetitive TV. Since they're doing for-hire work anyway, why not provide a pool of scripts for them to select from? Maybe there would be a slight uptick in the base quality, and it would remove their writing skills, or lack thereof, from the equation.
Or ON THE LOT could go THE FIVE OBSTRUCTIONS route. I'm of a mind that these directors have too much freedom. They'd never get Lars von Trier to do a guest spot on the show, but wouldn't it be great to have him lay down strict rules regarding what the directors can and can't do? Even if he weren't cracking the whip, some limitations might force them to make more creative choices. As it stands, the group as a whole is making the easiest, laziest, and crudest decisions.
Next week brings horror shorts from the other six directors. The horror... As bad as the comedies were, the horror genre sounds like a uniquely terrible idea for two minute shorts.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
On the Lot: nowhere to go but up
Could it be that the producers of ON THE LOT are taking heed of the criticisms being lobbed at the show? No, they didn't replace host Adrianna Costa or suddenly find brilliant filmmakers. They've gotta dance with the ones that brung them to this point. Fortunately someone behind the scenes had the good sense to dispense with the protracted "drama" of declaring some directors safe and withholding the dismissal until the end of the program. There was no "_____, you are safe" and "the person going home is...going to find out after the break" nonsense. The show starts, Marty is told to pack his bags--good riddance--and on we go to the final five directors and their "new" films.
ON THE LOT still has loads of problems, but compared to the awful other episodes, the June 19 edition deserves accolades for an evaluation of "poor" or, if one's feeling generous, "mediocre". The show's pacing continues to sag, but it was tightened up some. There was less beating around the bush of which director might debut his or her film next. (Really, though, why should there be any? It's not like the order matters.) This week's entries were marginally better, although don't hold your breath waiting to see the feature credit "un film de ON THE LOT champion".
First up was family man Will Bigham, whose GLASS EYE was in the same silent film vein as his first short. I pegged him as one of the favorites, and I stick by that prediction. Unlike some of his competition, he knows where to put the camera and should get a lot of mileage out of his modest personality. His story of a man who gets a new way of seeing things when his glass eye falls out takes awhile to get going, but it's sort of cute and a cut above most of what we've seen from the other directors. Will is adept at delivering live action Pixar-lite shorts. I didn't find this to be all that funny. The story doesn't exactly add up either. At least I can see why he was cast...but careful with the aw-shucks demeanor, buddy. It's going to wear thin.
In his intro package Jason Epperson, the sideways ball cap-wearing Kentuckian, testified to his faith and a desire to not make films glorifying sex and violence. Naturally, BLOOD BORN was about a drug addict and frequent blood donor who likely gets killed in a drive-by shooting. He rightfully took some heat from the judges for saying one thing and doing the other, but I'll give him some benefit of the doubt since he was trying to use the elements to tell a redemptive story. (The guy's blood heals the sick.) That's the only pass I'll give him, though. The "edgy" style--color processing of the shots and aggressive, handheld camerawork--was distracting, and the confused narrative earned laughs from the studio audience when the shooter drives up at the end. What I would give for the directors to do something in locked down master shots and tell stories they know from their lives...
Zach Liposvky's SUNSHINE GIRL found him wowing the judges again with his technical skills. Zach introduced his film as being about a little girl who is afraid of the dark, which you don't quite get from the finished product. He has an eye for composing shots and pulls off some neat special effects. The girl's herky-jerky moves when she's plucked the sun from the sky lead me to believe that whatever equipment he's using has its limitations. Visually Zach has manipulated the images so they're excessively glossy. With so many tools at their disposal via computer editing, new filmmakers tend to use them all regardless of if it's merited. Shortcoming aside, like Will, he's one I projected as a favorite out of the gate. That won't be changing.
Mateen Kemet led into his short LOST by talking about how his work is more mature. By mature he must have meant boring because the restaurant conversation between a formerly dating man and woman was boilerplate romantic drama through and through. The way it was cut doesn't work, and the lack of tripod use was just annoying. It was slow moving and, in the grand scheme, didn't follow narrative logic. This way lies thousands of indie relationship movies that no one ever sees but festival programmers. I'd say he's the most likely to go except...
Jessica Brillhart's THE ORCHARD, a horror short from a tree's perspective, was strictly dullsville. As with Zach's film, if the director hadn't told us what it was about in the introduction, there's a good chance we'd be confused by what we're seeing. Jessica captured better images than Mateen, and I'll go out on a limb and guess that she might make more interesting failures than him. She's flopped spectacularly whereas Mateen's missteps are pedestrian.
As they've done in previous weeks, the judges mostly pulled their punches or prefaced their criticisms with "I liked your film". To no one's surprise, Jessica took the most lumps. The guest judges have usually been more forthcoming with their appraisals, but Wes Craven held back. Whether he knows anything about filmmaking or not, ON THE LOT needs Gordon Ramsay of HELL'S KITCHEN to stop by and read the riot act to these directors. There's nothing wrong with trying to be encouraging. Maybe the producers hope that the judges' muted positivity will convince the audience that these films aren't that bad. But come on. Even the best of these shorts hardly seem like top notch thesis films, and none of them would earn viral video status on YouTube.
I finally figured out what's so bothersome about host Adrianna Costa. Speaking loudly and opening her mouth as widely as possible, it's as though she thinks we have impaired hearing.
The producers and director continue to block the cameras in ways that don't work. Why have the host looking straight ahead and then take a shot from her side? Even worse, Adrianna and the director on the spot stand side by side, yet she is supposed to look forward while the contestants must face their left. Every time both are on camera together, the directors are looking another direction. Please, enough of the close-ups of the directors and their frozen grins as Adrianna rattles off the phone number for voting. Those shots are really unnerving.
Next week should bring another format change. Six directors are supposed to present comedy shorts, with the following week promising horror shorts from the other six. Oh boy!
ON THE LOT still has loads of problems, but compared to the awful other episodes, the June 19 edition deserves accolades for an evaluation of "poor" or, if one's feeling generous, "mediocre". The show's pacing continues to sag, but it was tightened up some. There was less beating around the bush of which director might debut his or her film next. (Really, though, why should there be any? It's not like the order matters.) This week's entries were marginally better, although don't hold your breath waiting to see the feature credit "un film de ON THE LOT champion".
First up was family man Will Bigham, whose GLASS EYE was in the same silent film vein as his first short. I pegged him as one of the favorites, and I stick by that prediction. Unlike some of his competition, he knows where to put the camera and should get a lot of mileage out of his modest personality. His story of a man who gets a new way of seeing things when his glass eye falls out takes awhile to get going, but it's sort of cute and a cut above most of what we've seen from the other directors. Will is adept at delivering live action Pixar-lite shorts. I didn't find this to be all that funny. The story doesn't exactly add up either. At least I can see why he was cast...but careful with the aw-shucks demeanor, buddy. It's going to wear thin.
In his intro package Jason Epperson, the sideways ball cap-wearing Kentuckian, testified to his faith and a desire to not make films glorifying sex and violence. Naturally, BLOOD BORN was about a drug addict and frequent blood donor who likely gets killed in a drive-by shooting. He rightfully took some heat from the judges for saying one thing and doing the other, but I'll give him some benefit of the doubt since he was trying to use the elements to tell a redemptive story. (The guy's blood heals the sick.) That's the only pass I'll give him, though. The "edgy" style--color processing of the shots and aggressive, handheld camerawork--was distracting, and the confused narrative earned laughs from the studio audience when the shooter drives up at the end. What I would give for the directors to do something in locked down master shots and tell stories they know from their lives...
Zach Liposvky's SUNSHINE GIRL found him wowing the judges again with his technical skills. Zach introduced his film as being about a little girl who is afraid of the dark, which you don't quite get from the finished product. He has an eye for composing shots and pulls off some neat special effects. The girl's herky-jerky moves when she's plucked the sun from the sky lead me to believe that whatever equipment he's using has its limitations. Visually Zach has manipulated the images so they're excessively glossy. With so many tools at their disposal via computer editing, new filmmakers tend to use them all regardless of if it's merited. Shortcoming aside, like Will, he's one I projected as a favorite out of the gate. That won't be changing.
Mateen Kemet led into his short LOST by talking about how his work is more mature. By mature he must have meant boring because the restaurant conversation between a formerly dating man and woman was boilerplate romantic drama through and through. The way it was cut doesn't work, and the lack of tripod use was just annoying. It was slow moving and, in the grand scheme, didn't follow narrative logic. This way lies thousands of indie relationship movies that no one ever sees but festival programmers. I'd say he's the most likely to go except...
Jessica Brillhart's THE ORCHARD, a horror short from a tree's perspective, was strictly dullsville. As with Zach's film, if the director hadn't told us what it was about in the introduction, there's a good chance we'd be confused by what we're seeing. Jessica captured better images than Mateen, and I'll go out on a limb and guess that she might make more interesting failures than him. She's flopped spectacularly whereas Mateen's missteps are pedestrian.
As they've done in previous weeks, the judges mostly pulled their punches or prefaced their criticisms with "I liked your film". To no one's surprise, Jessica took the most lumps. The guest judges have usually been more forthcoming with their appraisals, but Wes Craven held back. Whether he knows anything about filmmaking or not, ON THE LOT needs Gordon Ramsay of HELL'S KITCHEN to stop by and read the riot act to these directors. There's nothing wrong with trying to be encouraging. Maybe the producers hope that the judges' muted positivity will convince the audience that these films aren't that bad. But come on. Even the best of these shorts hardly seem like top notch thesis films, and none of them would earn viral video status on YouTube.
I finally figured out what's so bothersome about host Adrianna Costa. Speaking loudly and opening her mouth as widely as possible, it's as though she thinks we have impaired hearing.
The producers and director continue to block the cameras in ways that don't work. Why have the host looking straight ahead and then take a shot from her side? Even worse, Adrianna and the director on the spot stand side by side, yet she is supposed to look forward while the contestants must face their left. Every time both are on camera together, the directors are looking another direction. Please, enough of the close-ups of the directors and their frozen grins as Adrianna rattles off the phone number for voting. Those shots are really unnerving.
Next week should bring another format change. Six directors are supposed to present comedy shorts, with the following week promising horror shorts from the other six. Oh boy!
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
On the Lot: How Low Can You Go?
The sinking ship that is ON THE LOT continues its slow descent to the bottom, but there is some good news. No format change this week!
America has been holding its collective breath for the past week wondering which of last week's five directors will get voted off, and the producers made sure that we'd get a little bluer in the face by keeping the mystery until the end of the show. The "loser" was Trever, whose montage of nightmare blind dates was as unoriginal as possible. I use the scare quotes because at this point the winners are those who don't have to stick around each week and witness the show's death throes firsthand.
While we waited for the results to be announced in the most drawn-out fashion, there were "new" movies to watch. Remember how NBC tried to sell its reruns as "it's new to you" for old episodes you might have missed? Rumors spread last week that these so-called new films were the contestants' submission entries. If true, the films are new in the sense that the general public hasn't seen them. The suspicions were essentially confirmed with the first filmmaker intro.
Toque-wearing Andrew Hunt talked about the challenge of making his film while planning his wedding. He's been one busy guy in the last week if he made a short, planned the wedding, and got married in the last seven days. Of course he didn't. Unless I missed it--and it's possible as my attention drifted a lot during the show--they've dropped the conceit of saying the films were made in five days. Hunt's POLISHED is a decent but unremarkable comedy in the silent film style about a janitor who exacts his revenge on messy office workers. Guest judge David Frankel (THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA) hit the nail on the head when he said that it would have been more effective as a 30-second commercial.
The analysis could have been repeated for the night's other entries. Time and again the shorts took ideas that merited half a minute at best and sextupled the length. These films crawled along with no sense of rhythm, especially LOVE AT FIRST SHOT. Does this sound familiar? A nerdy, clueless guy drones on about science fiction to his lunch companion and enlists the help of Cupid to make the date go smoother. The acting leaves a lot to be desired, and the clunky editing does it no favors.
The only film with a remote notion of comedy pacing was BEELINE. Shira-Lee Shalit specializes in crass sex humor, this time having a son (played by her own boy) grilling his divorced mother if she's had sex since she split with his dad. Har har. She runs around the city telling her recent lovers not to talk to her again lest the kid find out. The film kept its pace well, but there was weird sequencing in how the second guy she talks to is the doorman at her building. Wouldn't she have confronted him first before leaving the building, coming back, and racing somewhere else? I guess this short, dubbed SLUT MOM by the judges, is what Garry Marshall was looking for when he said that we need more women filmmakers sharing their perspectives.
The resident bad boy directors were next. Marty Martin, who couldn't be fuller of himself, presented another short that functioned as a fake trailer just like his first film, THE BIG BAD HEIST. DANCE WITH THE DEVIL was all flash from the Tony Scott school of filmmaking. Dialogue is subtitled in various fonts, sizes, and location, something Scott experimented with a lot in MAN ON FIRE. Or maybe he's lifting from CRANK. Whatever the case, the guy already has a bloated sense of his talent. From what we've seen, he's nothing more than an empty style mimic.
Proving that ON THE LOT wasn't saving the best for last, Kenny Luby's EDGE ON THE END showed that he knows how to use all the effects on Avid or Final Cut Pro. His short about boozing to deal with a loved one's death was more coherent than WACK ALLEY CAB, but he's a poor man's Marty Martin. With computer editing's bag of tricks available on a wide scale, all he's done is slather on some fancy effects to gussy up an amateur music video.
We've now seen ten of the final fifteen's presumed submission films. This was the best the producers could find? I realize that not everyone trying to break into the industry would consider a reality TV show to be the ideal avenue, but color me seriously underwhelmed with what we've seen. These films may demonstrate a degree of professional competency, but they're also trite and bloated. I found myself looking away to do other things during the shorts, and they're only three minutes maximum.
If some of the directors were cast on the program based on personality and backstory, ON THE LOT hasn't done anything with it. Since it's mostly a studio show (for now), there's very little behind-the-scenes content that would show directors melting down on set or clashing with one another.
Although host Adrianna Costa was as terrible as ever, her performance was more polished than the flub-heavy previous shows. Overall, though, ON THE LOT has found a way to become even less interesting. The films are bad copies of clichéd scenarios, and the banter among the judges, directors, and host lacks snap. The show can't be salvaged--I'll be surprised if it completes its full run--but for those of us gaping at its awfulness, it would be nice for ON THE LOT to go down fighting by chucking its current set-up for something more dynamic.
America has been holding its collective breath for the past week wondering which of last week's five directors will get voted off, and the producers made sure that we'd get a little bluer in the face by keeping the mystery until the end of the show. The "loser" was Trever, whose montage of nightmare blind dates was as unoriginal as possible. I use the scare quotes because at this point the winners are those who don't have to stick around each week and witness the show's death throes firsthand.
While we waited for the results to be announced in the most drawn-out fashion, there were "new" movies to watch. Remember how NBC tried to sell its reruns as "it's new to you" for old episodes you might have missed? Rumors spread last week that these so-called new films were the contestants' submission entries. If true, the films are new in the sense that the general public hasn't seen them. The suspicions were essentially confirmed with the first filmmaker intro.
Toque-wearing Andrew Hunt talked about the challenge of making his film while planning his wedding. He's been one busy guy in the last week if he made a short, planned the wedding, and got married in the last seven days. Of course he didn't. Unless I missed it--and it's possible as my attention drifted a lot during the show--they've dropped the conceit of saying the films were made in five days. Hunt's POLISHED is a decent but unremarkable comedy in the silent film style about a janitor who exacts his revenge on messy office workers. Guest judge David Frankel (THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA) hit the nail on the head when he said that it would have been more effective as a 30-second commercial.
The analysis could have been repeated for the night's other entries. Time and again the shorts took ideas that merited half a minute at best and sextupled the length. These films crawled along with no sense of rhythm, especially LOVE AT FIRST SHOT. Does this sound familiar? A nerdy, clueless guy drones on about science fiction to his lunch companion and enlists the help of Cupid to make the date go smoother. The acting leaves a lot to be desired, and the clunky editing does it no favors.
The only film with a remote notion of comedy pacing was BEELINE. Shira-Lee Shalit specializes in crass sex humor, this time having a son (played by her own boy) grilling his divorced mother if she's had sex since she split with his dad. Har har. She runs around the city telling her recent lovers not to talk to her again lest the kid find out. The film kept its pace well, but there was weird sequencing in how the second guy she talks to is the doorman at her building. Wouldn't she have confronted him first before leaving the building, coming back, and racing somewhere else? I guess this short, dubbed SLUT MOM by the judges, is what Garry Marshall was looking for when he said that we need more women filmmakers sharing their perspectives.
The resident bad boy directors were next. Marty Martin, who couldn't be fuller of himself, presented another short that functioned as a fake trailer just like his first film, THE BIG BAD HEIST. DANCE WITH THE DEVIL was all flash from the Tony Scott school of filmmaking. Dialogue is subtitled in various fonts, sizes, and location, something Scott experimented with a lot in MAN ON FIRE. Or maybe he's lifting from CRANK. Whatever the case, the guy already has a bloated sense of his talent. From what we've seen, he's nothing more than an empty style mimic.
Proving that ON THE LOT wasn't saving the best for last, Kenny Luby's EDGE ON THE END showed that he knows how to use all the effects on Avid or Final Cut Pro. His short about boozing to deal with a loved one's death was more coherent than WACK ALLEY CAB, but he's a poor man's Marty Martin. With computer editing's bag of tricks available on a wide scale, all he's done is slather on some fancy effects to gussy up an amateur music video.
We've now seen ten of the final fifteen's presumed submission films. This was the best the producers could find? I realize that not everyone trying to break into the industry would consider a reality TV show to be the ideal avenue, but color me seriously underwhelmed with what we've seen. These films may demonstrate a degree of professional competency, but they're also trite and bloated. I found myself looking away to do other things during the shorts, and they're only three minutes maximum.
If some of the directors were cast on the program based on personality and backstory, ON THE LOT hasn't done anything with it. Since it's mostly a studio show (for now), there's very little behind-the-scenes content that would show directors melting down on set or clashing with one another.
Although host Adrianna Costa was as terrible as ever, her performance was more polished than the flub-heavy previous shows. Overall, though, ON THE LOT has found a way to become even less interesting. The films are bad copies of clichéd scenarios, and the banter among the judges, directors, and host lacks snap. The show can't be salvaged--I'll be surprised if it completes its full run--but for those of us gaping at its awfulness, it would be nice for ON THE LOT to go down fighting by chucking its current set-up for something more dynamic.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
The downward spiral of On the Lot
Could ON THE LOT be a bigger disaster?
I could have sworn that my DVR was set to record a two-hour episode Monday night, and then magically *poof* it was no longer in the list. Odd. Yet unexplained disappearances are par for the course for this program. From the first week to the second week the show changed hosts, lost a challenge, and six finalists mysteriously vanished. (There were 24 contestants after the audition episodes, but only 18 directors were present for last week's comedy short challenge.) At this rate ON THE LOT won't even air next week, which might be what all involved with it would prefer.
This week's big shake-up was a format change. Rather than each of the remaining fifteen directors making a short to present, only five unspooled films for the audience and judges. Three minutes to work with didn't mean we got anything more original than the derivative pieces shown last week.
BROKEN PIPE DREAMS had some moderately clever direction but points off for replicating the famous shot from THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION. TERI redid that bit from countless romantic comedies in which there's a montage of someone meeting all sorts of "wacky" blind dates. Perhaps the big twist on it is to make it a fantasy sequence? This is what the best undiscovered talent comes up with? At least THE FIRST TIME I MET THE FINKELSTEINS had a couple decent lines in its moldy premise of a woman meeting her boyfriend's boorish parents. The handheld DV style, a la InDigEnt films, didn't work at all, though.
DOUGH: THE MUSICAL looked good in comparison, if only because it gave the impression that it took some creativity to develop the idea in the five days the filmmakers were supposedly given. (More on that later.) LAUGHING OUT LOUD: A COMIC JOURNEY, a documentary short about a gay Indian comedian, showed some visual style but featured banal content. Obviously this made it guest judge Michael Bay's favorite of the bunch.
ON THE LOT message boards contain rumors that this week's films were what the contestants submitted to be cast on the show or made during earlier, non-televised eliminations. I wouldn't be surprised if this is recycled content of some kind because the directors made unusual statements when describing their work. They talked about making the films at home and scrounging for equipment. Surely the producers don't send them back to their hometowns and make them acquire the equipment they need, right?
Then again, this is a terribly produced show. Host Adrianna Costa butchers her lines, which might be understandable if it were live. (It isn't, as far as I know.) Umm, anybody heard of multiple takes if she's screwing up the copy on the teleprompter? The contestants don't know where to stand or what camera to look at, and Costa doesn't always seem certain either. It feels like they're making it up as they go along.
Truly bad TV is almost always funnier than sketches or movies that try to be intentionally bad for laughs. ON THE LOT has reached that lowly level of wretchedness. God bless Garry Marshall. The guy's movies stink, but his rah-rah boosterism is hysterical. If only GEORGIA RULE had been as funny as this gem from Tuesday's show: "Ring a ding ding, you lost the bling. You had a fish. You had a dog." (It loses some effect without his Catskills comedian delivery.)
Believe it or not, Michael Bay had the most cogent, if vague, advice for the aspiring filmmakers. (In all fairness to the critical whipping boy, I've liked some of his films.)
It's beyond idiotic that there will be a week's wait for the results, but like I said, who knows if Fox will continue to send this over the airwaves? At least we're spared a repeat of last week's rack torture known as the hour-long results show.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
On the Lot results
Why, America, why?
In retrospect, it shouldn't come as any surprise that the makers of the three worst shorts survived last night's ON THE LOT elimination. There's plenty of garbage that does well at the box office, so it follows that those tastes would translate to the offerings on a reality TV show. It may not be a coincidence that the filmmakers in question also received a substantial amount of air time in prior shows. Familiarity may have been enough to get them through, although if the message boards and voters putting it in the top three are any indication, people genuinely liked the loathsome GETTA RHOOM. Seriously, people, rent THE RINGER instead. It's a lot funnier and not offensive.
Taking several pages from the AMERICAN IDOL results show book, ON THE LOT drew out the proceedings to a painful length. Other than finding out who was getting the boot and showing a couple minutes of the contestants mingling after the show at their Hollywood bungalow, there was nothing new in the hour-long program. Even thirty minutes is more time than is needed for the results. This is what digital video recorders are made for. Why bother watching sixty minutes of filler when you can fast forward to the thirty seconds of essential material? Still, that might be more effort than necessary. A quick check on the web will yield the results.
While I'm bagging on the show, how about losing host Adrianna Costa? The animated Disney heroine come to life struggled mightily doing her duties on the results show, not to mention that there's something highly unappealing about her. She would make kindergarteners feel like they were being condescended to, let alone the adults watching the show. A quick check of her IMDB page provides the expected. Among several entertainment reporter/anchor jobs, she has worked for E! News and Access Hollywood. That's where she got the tacky, phony delivery.
In retrospect, it shouldn't come as any surprise that the makers of the three worst shorts survived last night's ON THE LOT elimination. There's plenty of garbage that does well at the box office, so it follows that those tastes would translate to the offerings on a reality TV show. It may not be a coincidence that the filmmakers in question also received a substantial amount of air time in prior shows. Familiarity may have been enough to get them through, although if the message boards and voters putting it in the top three are any indication, people genuinely liked the loathsome GETTA RHOOM. Seriously, people, rent THE RINGER instead. It's a lot funnier and not offensive.
Taking several pages from the AMERICAN IDOL results show book, ON THE LOT drew out the proceedings to a painful length. Other than finding out who was getting the boot and showing a couple minutes of the contestants mingling after the show at their Hollywood bungalow, there was nothing new in the hour-long program. Even thirty minutes is more time than is needed for the results. This is what digital video recorders are made for. Why bother watching sixty minutes of filler when you can fast forward to the thirty seconds of essential material? Still, that might be more effort than necessary. A quick check on the web will yield the results.
While I'm bagging on the show, how about losing host Adrianna Costa? The animated Disney heroine come to life struggled mightily doing her duties on the results show, not to mention that there's something highly unappealing about her. She would make kindergarteners feel like they were being condescended to, let alone the adults watching the show. A quick check of her IMDB page provides the expected. Among several entertainment reporter/anchor jobs, she has worked for E! News and Access Hollywood. That's where she got the tacky, phony delivery.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
On the Lot
As a movie fan who indulges a taste for some reality TV (primarily THE AMAZING RACE, SURVIVOR, and AMERICAN IDOL), it was imperative that I check out ON THE LOT. The Steven Spielberg and Mark Burnett produced Fox show is searching for an undiscovered director to receive a million dollar development deal at DreamWorks.
ON THE LOT started culling the field by giving the contestants one of five loglines and having them pitch their ideas to actress/screenwriter Carrie Fisher and directors Garry Marshall and Brett Ratner. In other words, it was as though the now defunct Query Letters I Love blog had been brought to life in televised form. This was a decent enough way to test these aspiring filmmakers' ability to sell their visions. Those who survived this initial cut were grouped in threes and sent out to shoot one scene each for a short film. Again, the directors were pared down to the final 18. (Another task, in which each was supposed to direct a scene on a pre-arranged set in an hour, seems to have disappeared from the competition as nothing with it was involved with last night's program.)
On Monday's episode, each filmmaker presented a one-minute comedy short that they were given a week to prepare. In the comments to his insightful piece about the show, Noel Murray summed up the resulting films as equivalent to the Coca-Cola refreshing filmmakers' shorts that are part of the "pre-show entertainment" at multiplexes. Even the better entries were highly derivative. Many relied on toilet humor: flatulence blame diverting across time and borders, a woman on a bus has to pee, intoxicated aliens projectile vomiting. (No disrespect meant to the woman who made the bus short, but when it comes to thwarted urinary relief, nothing can top the scene in BUFFALO '66.)
Most were OK on some level. The exceptions were WACK ALLEY CAB, which made no sense visually or narratively, and GETTA RHOOM, which was supposedly centered on a nerd making an ill-timed exclamation. When Garry Marshall, the director of the horribly offensive THE OTHER SISTER, takes you to task for making fun of the, how to say it, mentally challenged, you've got a problem. THE BIG BAD HEIST missed the point of the exercise, opting instead to be a mock trailer.
In an improvement over another Burnett production, ON THE LOT appears to be giving the contestants tasks that apply to what they are seeking to do for a living. On THE APPRENTICE, in which Type A business professionals sought employment with Donald Trump, the contestants were evaluated more for marketing savvy than for the nuts and bolts business skills the job presumably entailed. If ON THE LOT asks the filmmakers to make shorts each week, it's about as fair of a test as possible...for a competition like this.
But is it really about finding the best unknown director? Of course not. Writer-directors have an advantage since they are forced to generate their own content, not just shoot scripts. Genre versatility, a treasured trait of some directors but not an implicit measurement of greatness, will be an advantage. More than anything, though, the ability to go safely and competently down the middle will be the trump card. ON THE LOT isn't about artistic expression but predigesting the conventions of mainstream films and aping them. In other words, they're looking for Ratners and Marshalls.
Maybe some of these filmmakers will surprise us, but my best guess is that we won't see anything too out there. Like AMERICAN IDOL'S opinionated three, the judges talk about taking risks, but that's the fastest ticket to get the voting public to look elsewhere to cast their ballots. The surest way to advance is to make something flashy and familiar. That's why the prohibitive frontrunner should be Zach Lipovsky. The special effects wiz is likely to produce the most dazzling films. Toque-wearing Minnesotan Andrew Hunt, the puking aliens guy, also looks to be a strong contender because he seems more experienced and aware of what it takes. Family man Will Bigham might be in it for the long haul, especially if the producers play up how this might be his last chance to pursue his filmmaking dream.
It will be interesting to see how many contestants stick around because of secondary factors (looks, playing the villain role, heart-tugging back stories). To be sure, talents beyond what can be put on screen have kept other careers afloat, so who's to say it won't be accurately reflected in ON THE LOT'S results?
ON THE LOT started culling the field by giving the contestants one of five loglines and having them pitch their ideas to actress/screenwriter Carrie Fisher and directors Garry Marshall and Brett Ratner. In other words, it was as though the now defunct Query Letters I Love blog had been brought to life in televised form. This was a decent enough way to test these aspiring filmmakers' ability to sell their visions. Those who survived this initial cut were grouped in threes and sent out to shoot one scene each for a short film. Again, the directors were pared down to the final 18. (Another task, in which each was supposed to direct a scene on a pre-arranged set in an hour, seems to have disappeared from the competition as nothing with it was involved with last night's program.)
On Monday's episode, each filmmaker presented a one-minute comedy short that they were given a week to prepare. In the comments to his insightful piece about the show, Noel Murray summed up the resulting films as equivalent to the Coca-Cola refreshing filmmakers' shorts that are part of the "pre-show entertainment" at multiplexes. Even the better entries were highly derivative. Many relied on toilet humor: flatulence blame diverting across time and borders, a woman on a bus has to pee, intoxicated aliens projectile vomiting. (No disrespect meant to the woman who made the bus short, but when it comes to thwarted urinary relief, nothing can top the scene in BUFFALO '66.)
Most were OK on some level. The exceptions were WACK ALLEY CAB, which made no sense visually or narratively, and GETTA RHOOM, which was supposedly centered on a nerd making an ill-timed exclamation. When Garry Marshall, the director of the horribly offensive THE OTHER SISTER, takes you to task for making fun of the, how to say it, mentally challenged, you've got a problem. THE BIG BAD HEIST missed the point of the exercise, opting instead to be a mock trailer.
In an improvement over another Burnett production, ON THE LOT appears to be giving the contestants tasks that apply to what they are seeking to do for a living. On THE APPRENTICE, in which Type A business professionals sought employment with Donald Trump, the contestants were evaluated more for marketing savvy than for the nuts and bolts business skills the job presumably entailed. If ON THE LOT asks the filmmakers to make shorts each week, it's about as fair of a test as possible...for a competition like this.
But is it really about finding the best unknown director? Of course not. Writer-directors have an advantage since they are forced to generate their own content, not just shoot scripts. Genre versatility, a treasured trait of some directors but not an implicit measurement of greatness, will be an advantage. More than anything, though, the ability to go safely and competently down the middle will be the trump card. ON THE LOT isn't about artistic expression but predigesting the conventions of mainstream films and aping them. In other words, they're looking for Ratners and Marshalls.
Maybe some of these filmmakers will surprise us, but my best guess is that we won't see anything too out there. Like AMERICAN IDOL'S opinionated three, the judges talk about taking risks, but that's the fastest ticket to get the voting public to look elsewhere to cast their ballots. The surest way to advance is to make something flashy and familiar. That's why the prohibitive frontrunner should be Zach Lipovsky. The special effects wiz is likely to produce the most dazzling films. Toque-wearing Minnesotan Andrew Hunt, the puking aliens guy, also looks to be a strong contender because he seems more experienced and aware of what it takes. Family man Will Bigham might be in it for the long haul, especially if the producers play up how this might be his last chance to pursue his filmmaking dream.
It will be interesting to see how many contestants stick around because of secondary factors (looks, playing the villain role, heart-tugging back stories). To be sure, talents beyond what can be put on screen have kept other careers afloat, so who's to say it won't be accurately reflected in ON THE LOT'S results?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)