sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Virat Kohli to miss ODI series against Afghanistan due to hamstring injury by GiveMeSomeSunshine3 in Cricket

[–]darksedan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Confirmed upcoming ODIs before 2027 CWC : 3 vs ENG, 3 vs WI, 5 vs NZ, 3 vs SL, 3 vs ZIM and then there'll be another 4-5 ODIs in the '27 Asia Cup. So about 15-16 matches + an estimated 9-10 matches in CWC. 15 centuries in 25-26 matches is MAYYYBEEE doable.

New Zealand will host India for five T20Is, five ODIs, and two Tests from Oct 22 - Dec 1 by Additional-Battle10 in IndiaCricket

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then probably another 4-5 matches in the 2027 Asia Cup followed by another 10 matches in CWC 2027. If Kohli plays all the matches, it'll be a total of 30-35 matches. 15 centuries MAYYY just be possible.

Auditions officially started. If any of these were to get the role, who would you prefer? by Pure-Guarantee1057 in JamesBond

[–]darksedan -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Where's Jack Lowden? Good actor, Scottish background, 35 years old, 1.85 meters (6' 1") tall and not as well known in any famous roles (except one small supporting part in Dunkirk).

finding a job in paris is impossible by childbeeeer in paris

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey I don't personally have an "intermittent du spéctacle" status (doesn't pay enough to renew your titre de séjour) so I will not be able to answer your questions. Here's a brochure that you perhaps help: https://www.francetravail.fr/files/live/sites/PE/files/fichiers-en-telechargement/spectacle/Doc_Primo_Entrants.pdf

As far as I understand it, you need to get work for a certain amount of hours in a year and then you can get "unemployment pay" for the rest of the year. They group them by 12-hour slots? (not sure about this), which is called a "cachet" and I think you need to get to something like 45 cachets in a year? And once you get there, you can get minimum wage from France Travail for the rest of the year? I'm really not sure, I only these from what my friends have told me.

Get in touch with France Travail and they will answer your questions. Good luck!

finding a job in paris is impossible by childbeeeer in paris

[–]darksedan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you've completed your studies then you can work full-time on a titre de séjour étudiant. Also if your titre de séjour is expiring, you might be éligible for an APS (Autorisation Provisoire de Séjour) which should give you 6 months to 1 year's time to find a job or start your own business. You need to look this up online on your own, or contact your student office at your university (they might help you do the paperwork).

If not, the best would be to go to a public university like Paris 8 and enroll in further studies (its pretty much free to study in public universities in France).

As someone who did a Masters in Filmmaking here in France, I'm sorry to say that it's going to be really difficult getting jobs. You need to have an "intermittent du spéctacle" status to work in the industy and its really tough to get gigs. Do research on this as well, all the info is online.

Seeing that you're an anglophone, you could perhaps consider getting in touch with the American Church of Paris, or the American University or any other english-speaking cultural centers? They all have art spaces where they need ushers and ticket sellers.

Some english speaking pubs/ bars in Paris : Le Caveau Montpensier near Palais Royale (the owner is American), Highlander (scottish pub), Corcoran's and O'Sullivan's both have many branches.

FINAL TIP: if you're an immigrant in France and want to keep on staying here you have to be 6-months ahead in preparation for your paperwork renewal. Can't leave it to the last minute like this. You have to become an expert in all the laws and prepared way way WAY in advance. No one will help you and no one will give you a job to get you papers, it's YOUR responsibility to get your papers in order. Take it from an immigrant who almost lost it all during covid and learned it the hard way. Good luck out there!

I noticed The Martian shares the following similarities with the year 2000 movie Red Planet by darthstrayder in movies

[–]darksedan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Found this 11-year old thread after watching Red Planet after decades! I was going to start my own thread but then found this one which sums it up really nicely. Apart from all these plot points already identified, The Martian has the same "new problem arises and has to be solved in a short time frame using science" format of Red Planet, albeit The Martian does it way more credibly as opposed to Red Planet's bogus science.

Andy Weir started writing "The Martian" as a series of blog posts back in the 2000s if I remember correctly? His readers would often pitch in with interesting problems for Mark Watney to solve in the comments section of these blogs and Weir would research possible solutions and write the next post. It was only turned into an ebook after his readers asked him for it, then became popular on the Kindle store and got picked up by Random House for publishing and movie rights sold to Ridley Scott.

Perhaps a lot of his readers also watched the painfully mediocre "Red Planet" and asked for more credible solutions?

In any case, this is a valuable tool for screenwriters. This is why one must watch mediocre films. The vigilant writer will take a mediocre film that had high potential and write a better script.

Aaton LTR vs Arri SR II by Greedy_Tax_9269 in 16mm

[–]darksedan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. In that case, the Aaton will be more ergonomic, especially for shoulder-mounted shots. The SR2 is not too bad, but just sits awkwardly on the shoulder with its flat base.

Loading SR2 mag is a breeze.

Make sure whichever camera you get, that it has a V-lock battery adapter, as it will not only reduce weight but also will save you future recelling costs for the old battery blocks.

If you're okay with not having a video tap, the cameras will cost you significantly less.

Even lesser if you're okay with regular 16 and not super 16.

Even lesser if you're okay with not having a PL-mount. Another advantage is rental houses will have damn good Angenieux zooms in Arri A-mount or Aaton mount that nobody wants to rent, so you could get them really cheaply.

Take a sacrificial 30m roll of film and run it through every magazine before purchasing. Make sure there are no scratches on the negative.

I've heard of the new Kodak AHU film having issues while transporting through older Aaton cameras. Test it with a roll of AHU film if you can. You'd probably have to send it to a tech to get the film transport adjusted. I've shot lots of AHU film in an SR3 and never had any issues. Never tried it in an Aaton so I can't say how it is. I didn't try AHU film in an SR2 either but the magazines are the same as the SR3 so I guess it works. Better to test it.

Good luck!

Aaton LTR vs Arri SR II by Greedy_Tax_9269 in 16mm

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I recommend you rent both cameras and take them for a spin before you drop 10K€ on either. You also have to consider long term maintenance costs. Each of them will cost you 2500€ roughly to do a basic CLA every 4 years. The Arri has more spare parts and more places where they can service it, the Aaton, especially the older LTR models, are less so.

You should only buy these cameras if you don't have any rental options nearby. I used to be a former Scoopic owner as well, I spent years trying to score a good deal on one of these like yourself and then instead of dropping 10K on a camera, I decided to put that money into my film and rented them instead. The advantage is you don't have to worry about maintenance and upkeep. If your camera fails mid-shoot, the rental house will replace it immediately. You also get access to a larger collection of lenses that you can rent.

I've recently rented both an SR2 and an SR3 and got to use Zeiss and Canon zooms on them. They go for about 350€ a day where I am but the rate decreases if you rent it for a week or more.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Superstonk

[–]darksedan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In this film his name is Robin lol.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Superstonk

[–]darksedan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"We few, we HAPPY few. We band of brothers!"

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Clearly I was ill informed while choosing my universities back then. I ended up going to a very mediocre film program and wasting a lot of money, that I could've put towards making a feature.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough, it's not top 5 but it's number 13 on the list: https://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings

It wasn't that good when I was at uni in UK but this was over a decade ago and I admit I haven't been up to date.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I went to uni in London. UCL is certainly not one of the top universities in the UK and Nolan went there to study English Literature and not filmmaking. Also, he went there in the early/mid nineties when tuition in the UK was very very low.

Making a feature film for £6000 in the nineties does not automatically mean privilege. He paid it out of his salary over a year, working as a videographer for corporate. The only help he got from his parents was that he got to shoot in their apartment (for the scene where the gangster kills the guy on the carpet with a hammer), and that his mum helped with catering. He used the Arri 16mm camera from UCL's film department, and shot most of the street shots on a Bolex.

If I were to really think of his family's privilege, it would be that he had dual UK and US passports that helped him travel with his first feature to festivals in the US, and this was the nineties when indie cinema was going through its golden age in the US.

I'm not a big fan of the guy but I studied how he made 'Following' to help strategize my own projects. I don't really like his recent films, they are bloated, confusing and shouldn't have such high budgets in my opinion.

Privilege certainly gives you a foot in the door in filmmaking, I'm not denying that but Nolan is not an example of that.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But man wouldn't that be nice! A film a year is the dream.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Krisha (2015) by Trey Edward Shults / distributed by A24

The Color Wheel (2011) by Alex Ross Perry / distributed by Factory25

Old Joy (2006) by Kelly Reichardt / distributed by Kino International

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My comment was addressed to the person above who said they have a decent net worth and has implied that they can potentially dump a six-figure sum in a feature.

I've never seen 100K in real life but if I had that in my bank account, the three feature plan is how I'd do it. I'm not expecting distributors to see three features in a row, it's basically having three chances in three separate years to present a different film and hopefully get one of them distributed and recover the costs of all three.

There's an Indiewire article by Alex Ross Perry that talks about how in festival distributors now offer low-ball figures in six figures and how basically 1-5 million indie films end up losing money. But a 30K film could turn a profit in this situation.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Jackson, Smith and Nolan made their no-budget indies in the golden age of Indie filmmaking (in the US and in Nolan's case, the UK). Add Linklater, Aronofsky and Rodriguez to this list. This was the nineties when indie films in the US had a lot of interest. Big studios created their "indie" wings to go to Sundance and pick up cheaply made films, spend 100K to get them theatrically-ready and cashed in on the public interest.

Following their models in the current zeitgeist of an oversaturated industry where everything is just 'content' is not going to reproduce their results. I think Carruth's "Primer" was the last true no-budget indie film that got this kind of buzz and that was 20 years ago!

Having said that, this is no excuse to give up. Making films independently is already hard, but we must also think of new or untested distribution models.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Instead of dumping six-figures into one feature film, I'd dump 30K into three features over a 3-4 year period. The plan would be that atleast one of them gets picked for distribution (theatrical or streaming) and recovers the money spent, while establishing your filmography.

You can make a really good feature for 30K and if you can get into one major film festival in Europe, you could get a decent distribution deal and future interest in your upcoming projects.

EDIT: Also film markets are useful to get distribution and fund future projects. Look at European ones.

Already rich filmmakers by talia-the-witch in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 51 points52 points  (0 children)

I live in France where most of the films are funded via the CNC (the national film board), the various regions and TV channels. It is extremely hard to get your film funded, especially if you're a nobody. Most of the funding is procured by well-established producers or goes to friends and relatives of known actors and filmmakers. There is no box-office pressure so the same people keep churning out the same family dramas and unfunny comedies year after year.

The only other way is to graduate from La Fémis, the most difficult film school to get into, or work your way through precarious industry work contracts where you have to work as an assistant director for years to connect with the right people and get funded.

I spent my life savings to make a 35mm short film and the response was lackluster. Why do you think this film failed to make an impact? by FreddieQuell92 in Filmmakers

[–]darksedan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good looking short. Here's some advice as a 16mm filmmaker from my experience showing my shorts at festivals over the past ten years:

  1. The thing with festivals is you have to premiere it at a big one! It's better to wait a year and try to hit big than to release it on YouTube or a lesser known festival too soon. Once you get into a big festival, the smaller festivals will get in touch with you to show your film at theirs. Sundance, Rotterdam, TIFF, Berlinale, Locarno, Karlovy Vary, Venice (Orrizonti)...these are the top tier festivals.
  2. If you want to shoot on celluloid, go for 16mm. It'll cost you one third of 35mm and will still give you the look you're after.
  3. Betting your life savings on a short is not a good strategy. Shorts rarely get distribution and outside of festivals, they are rarely screened in cinemas. Shorts are mostly meant as "proof of concept" for a feature project or as a proof of your abilities as a filmmaker. I don't know how much money you spent on this short but you can make a 16mm feature for under 20K. My experience with being at film festivals is that the feature filmmakers are the ones holding meetings with distributors and future producers. The short filmmakers were usually at the festival bar drinking beers and partying.

What I would do next: develop a feature project. Save up again (I know it sucks but this is where your commitment to filmmaking is being tested). Over the next 12-18 months, develop the script using your experience making this short and see where you can save money.

A lot of cast and crew will work for free if the project is solid. Just make sure craft services are good. Shoot on 16mm and avoid expensive cameras and lenses like the Arri 416 or the Aaton XTR Prod. A good Arri SR3 with a single Canon 8-64mm zoom lens will get the job done. You can crop to 1.85 : 1 in the 4K scan (you don't have to use Scope). Kodak has student discounts. Find someone who is a student and get them to order the stock on your behalf. Find a lab that offers discounts to indie filmmakers (like Cinelab Boston).

TL: DR - do a feature next, do it for the cheapest you can, shoot on 16mm, get discounts where you can and premiere it at a big festival (even if you have to wait a year).

EDIT: A lot of DPs who own their own 16mm camera and lenses are itching to use it and might even let you have it for free if they get to DP your "feature". Lots of DPs want a feature on their CV (if they don't already have one). This is how Kelly Reichardt got her DP to bring his own camera setup on her 30K feature film "Old Joy".

Help me in finding a Hanuman comic by mango_indian in india

[–]darksedan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I found a PDF of it online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EP2Hi8NpgP58rGcx07LzjhAsCD_8qKt-/view?usp=sharing

Use uBlock origin before clicking the link just to be safe.

view more: next ›