A New Year Shout-Out
Okay, okay, STOP THE PRESSES! Mickey Lee so generously pointed out Lucas' "announcement" in the Associated Press that they are actually going to make Indiana Jones IV and begin filming this year. IT WASN'T TRUE! In a recent article at Spielberg Films, both Lucasfilm and Amblin said that the Associated Press article was "inaccurate." An Amblin representative said, "While acknowledging that a lot of people want to get the movie to 'happen,' the article appeared to make plans sound more definite than they were at this time as it had omitted such words as 'hopefully' from Lucas' comments." Amblin HOPES to release something "official" about the project within a week. Sorry, Mickey, as I've proven in my Indy IV post, false hope for this film keeps turning up like a bad penny.
UPDATE:
STOP THE PRESSES AGAIN! When Mickey Lee's right, HE'S RIGHT. New articles have confirmed that they are going through with it. So why do I still have a sinking feeling in my gut about it? Perhaps it's the title on the Internet Movie Database: "Indiana Jones and the Ravages of Time." God help me... Then again, it would be a cinematic sin to not have faith in Steven Spielberg...
BACK TO SCENE:
Second, I promised I would do this eons ago and forgot. The boys at Scribosphere will keep you on top of all the latest posts on screenwriting. A very helpful resource, which I’ve added to my sidebar.
Our good friend, Carl Salminen, wrote a brilliant post on his blog called You are Selling Yourself. “If I have learned anything from this process to pass on to my fellow writers it is that if your writing craft is as absolutely as good as it can be, then your script may not sell itself, but it might sell you! Every word you write counts! Each word is vital! It's been said before but take it to heart. Every time you send out a script, you are selling yourself, not just that particular story.”
Is that not almost word-for-word EXACTLY what I’ve been saying since the day I joined TriggerStreet? Amen, brother! Preach it!
Unk continues to be brillaint with recent posts like Paint your characters on the page.
If you haven't checked out Matt Spira's blog, you should. He's been very thoughtful lately, particularly his comments the last couple of months about the Asian Film Market.
Our friend, wcdixon, has two great posts on agents here and here. In the second post, he writes: “One: agents don't get you work, you get you work. Agents can hear about projects before you do...they can hustle and get your name out there...they can even get you meetings - but ultimately it's you and your work that gets the offers. And you'll be a bored bitter client if you think otherwise. You have to be working in conjuction with your agent in terms of networking and socializing and shmoozing, not waiting for them to bring you the job. Sure some agents will be better hustlers or better negotiators or better connected than others, and they can prep you and hype you and help you - but it still will be up to you to take the meetings and land the jump.”
I also really enjoyed Emily’s great post called Why did The Island suck so very much? It was quite funny: “Is it the fact that our heroes keep experiencing the best luck in the world, like landing in a batch of netting while they fall a zillion feet inside a giant neon letter off the side of a building and end up with like, one scratch over an eye? No. I've seen that before and completely bought it in various Terminator films. Is it the fact that our heroes, who boast the education of a 15 year old, keep outsmarting our borderline retarded professional hunters? We're getting warmer…”
It’s also worth your time to take a peek at Andy Horbal’s Film Criticism Blog-a-Thon. Many of the points they make apply to us, as well, as reviewers of stories on TriggerStreet. I loved what Peet Gelderblom wrote, “It’s one thing to challenge the opinion of others, it’s another to proclaim absolutes in the name of Good Taste. A true provocateur doesn’t hamper by discouraging thought, but stimulates others to think differently. Why is it that some critics judge like punishing Old Testament Gods when their function is not to damn or win souls, but to sharpen minds? A critic’s pen should serve as a whetstone, not a sledgehammer.”
To that I say, “Amen.”
Coming soon… my review of Stanley Kubrick’s Napoleon.
Happy New Year, everyone.
-MM
12 comments:
Thanks for a 2006 filled with inspiration, MM! Keep it coming.
My blog post you linked would not exist without the support and encouragement and input I have had throughout 2006. I was pretty much just repeating all the things everyone else has already said, including you.
That's the best thing about giving advice. You know people are listening when they turn around and give it to other people.
Carl - I've got a 4-part series on Kubrick's Napoleon coming up, the whole reason I started a blog, and this may be the best review I've ever put together.
Mim - Yes, but in Carl's case, this is what he was told by PRODUCERS. Ideas aren't enough, the script has to be great! I loved Carl's post, I really did.
I also had to REVISE this post because the news about Indy IV was NOT TRUE! I should've known better than to believe it. History has proven that false hope for Indy IV keeps turning up like a bad penny.
-MM
Cheers MM!
Right back at ya!
Oooh! I feel so giddy. Thanks!
I love the fact that you give us writing exercises. Keep 'em coming.
HAPPY NEW YEAR YEAR, MM!
Unk
Okay, MM, read this one...
Now what were you saying about bad pennies?
It says they've asked Sean Connery to be involved. Isn't it strange that the two guys who played Indy and Indy's dad are still alive, but River Phoenix, who played young Indy, is dead?
OMG. On IMDB it says the working title is Indiana Jones and the Ravages of Time. That's harsh.
Okay, Mickey Lee, when you're right, YOU'RE RIGHT. I did one more update to this post.
Mim - If that title is, indeed, true, let me just say - I fucking hate it. There. I said.
I have to get ready for my posts on Kubrick's Napoleon. It's going to be big! It'll be the best review / overview on the web.
-MM
That title's been bouncing around for quite awhile, but I always thought it was meant to be a joke on Harrison Ford's age, and not as the literal title for the film.
One thing you gotta remember about IMDB, its information is user-based.
Post a Comment