Wishing that I’m the next Zaha Hadid, Tadao Ando, Le Corbusier or Rem Koolhaas. Yet, I’m in the Offshore Industry (of Commercial Deep Diving and Saturation Diving, ROV and AUV) without a magical name to praise, perhaps Jacques-Yves Cousteau — the ocean explorer or Kirby Morgan — the deep diving helmet founder. Now doing something in the steps of Vincent LaForet, David Fincher and Rob Sheridan — cinematic experience. Twitter, @daftsavant.
- Norman Abdul Halim of KRU Studios.
Sir, I strongly disagree.
The above quote is taken from an article entitled ‘More Local Movies Going 3D’ which appeared in the Malay Mail. The article talks about how a number of local filmmakers are coming up with 3D productions. Reading the article left me with a feeling of “aw, man, is it necessary?” and it would have remained as simply that if it wasn’t for that quote above.
Because that quote above pretty much encapsulates the mindset of the mainstream film industry producers. And it’s that mindset that’s holding our industry back from making really good mainstream movies.
When the RED cameras first came out a whole bunch of studios jumped on it, boasting about how they were shooting on a RED as if this wonderful piece of technology would turn their movies into Incredible Films Worthy Of Hollywood Itself. But (and I don’t know if they realized this or not after they actually shot their movies) having a bad cameraman behind a good camera does not a good movie make.
And more importantly, if the story ain’t up to scratch to begin with, it doesn’t matter how brilliant the camera is, or the CGI or whatever else for that matter. Because at the end of the day Story Is King.
Now attention has moved away from CGI and badass digital cameras and the studios have turned to 3D as their weapon of choice, their saviour, their Excalibur that shall reap them many a profit and the lamentation of your women.
And I understand how the studios think - in numbers. Statistically, movies in 3D have done well for Hollywood. Ergo, it shall do well for us here. Somehow, their logic dictates that any movie shot in 3D will be as successful as Avatar.
But they forget one thing - Avatar is brought to you by the man that brought you Terminator, Aliens, Terminator 2, True Lies and Titanic. Yes, each of these movies relied heavily on technology and special effects, but it was all justified. James Cameron needed the tech to tell the stories in his brain and he knows how to use the tech well.
Studio execs here would argue otherwise. I still remember when I was sat down with a pretty big time producer in our lovely little industry who basically told me that if my script was good or original they wouldn’t pick it up because statistically good, original scripts do not make a profit in this country.
My counter-argument is simple: a good story shouldn’t be a deciding factor. It should be a given. And by good story, I don’t mean an incredibly original and revolutionary tale that changes the face of fiction. No, I mean a good story with a beginning, a middle and an end. A proper pace and actual characters and a plot that moves and makes sense. All this should be a given, it should be the first thing to look at, the very first thing to get right before a single cent is spent on making the damn flick in the first place.
Story Is King, regardless. If James Cameron found himself in a position where he could only muster a few grand to make a movie I’m quite certain he would still make a good movie. If any Hollywood filmmaker was put in the same position I’m sure they’d still make a good movie. Hell, even if it came out a bad movie, it would still be watchable.
Of course, my opinions count for jack shit in this crazy town for I am but a tiny fish. So sit back, relax, and count the days to the release of the upcoming batch of local 3D flicks.