Batman Dead End

[Marco33]

I just finished viewing the 8 min piece.

That was more interesting that the last 2 Batman movies.

The dialoge was good NOT great. Although Sandy did more with less.

The camera work was great. You can see how he would have gone for more but, $30,000 only goes so far.

That Joker looked better than Nicholson but, you can't realy compair the two actors. The actor did a great job with the dialoge. It was nice to see a guy with muscles in a plain Batman suit. I think that helped to break it away from the movies we are used to. Amazing what you can do WITHOUT CGI.

Any thoughts?

[tgpo]

Where would we view this at?

[Solarjetman]

Where can I find it.

I just read PVP online and he did a comic talking about it. I am interested in viewing it.

The comic is here BTW
http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20030804

[Marco33]

Me too, PVP is my home page.


Read all about it here.

http://digiverse.net/vectormatrix/archives/00000106.htm


First heard it on Stern.

I'm trying to get it to a disk to watch it on the big screen but, there seems to be an audio sampling rate problem.

[tgpo]

Just finished watching it. I was expecting more for $30,000. Much more. I thought it was kinda boring personally. I kept waiting for some excitment, but it just never happened for me. I think a better script would have helped. And for $30,000 more than 8min could have been produced.

[Marco33]

Just finished watching it. I was expecting more for $30,000. Much more. I thought it was kinda boring personally. I kept waiting for some excitment, but it just never happened for me. I think a better script would have helped. And for $30,000 more than 8min could have been produced.

Where do you think the 30,000 went?

[stiltman]

Just finished watching it. I was expecting more for $30,000. Much more. I thought it was kinda boring personally. I kept waiting for some excitment, but it just never happened for me. I think a better script would have helped. And for $30,000 more than 8min could have been produced.

IMO,It was also pretty darn stupid...
I have to say the Preditor costume was good though....must of been where they spent the 30K

[tgpo]

Where do you think the 30,000 went?

If they used Film then a lot went to camera rental, film stock, film developing, film processing. Plus costume rentals. All of that adds up fast.

[Marco33]

Where do you think the 30,000 went?

If they used Film then a lot went to camera rental, film stock, film developing, film processing. Plus costume rentals. All of that adds up fast.

So from this statment above

And for $30,000 more than 8min could have been produced.

You felt they went over budget... ok.

[tgpo]

The movie Clerks was made for $27,000. It was shot on 35mm Film I do believe. At it was over 80min long. They also had to include song rights in their budget.

[Solarjetman]

Ah, but Waterworld cost millions and wasn't worthy of the film is was shot on.

I think tgpo needs to move to hollywood, get a $20 million budget. Use $1000 to make a kung-fu movie. And split the rest with us here at DVDrhelp

[tgpo]

Ah, but Waterworld cost millions and wasn't worthy of the film is was shot on.

Exactly!! To have a good film you need a good story. With no story, no matter what your budget, you have a crappy film, which I feel is what happened with the Batman Dead End movie. One plus, the Joker looked wicked!!!

If I get a bunch of money for a movie, I'll donate some this way, don't worry.

[Marco33]

I think we are supposed to judge the movie on the film work. IE: Shots, relevent scenes, angles, proper movement of the story. He seems to be shooting to be a director so I don't think it's fair to judge by the story dialoge.

Try watching it without the sound.

[mysticgohan17]

only thing i dont understand is why the predators and aliens didnt talk. its hard to move the plot when the bad guy cant speak.

[Solarjetman]

I think we are supposed to judge the movie on the film work.

Well, I think everything but the plot is great. The only complaints I have in those departments are I did not really like the batman shirt. The rest of the costume was fantasic, but the shirt made me think of a little boy dressing up in his big brothers ratty T-shirt to play pretend superhero.

The joker was perfect. Exactly what I picture him to be.

**Spoiler ahead, you are warned***

Also, I did not like how they introduced the aliens. When the alien took the joker by suprise, it seemed a little too jerky. But, wire work is tough to do.

Another thing was there is no apparent reason the aliens or the predators were there (though admittedly this is a plot hole, it is distracting) I would have maybe indrocduced and alien artifact that they were trying to retrieve, or something.

** End spoliers **

Overall I rate the film...
Special effects: 4 of 5
Fight scenes: 5 of 5
Storyline: 1 of 5
Acting: 3 of 5
Overall: 4 of 5

[tgpo]

I think we are supposed to judge the movie on the film work. IE: Shots, relevent scenes, angles, proper movement of the story. He seems to be shooting to be a director so I don't think it's fair to judge by the story dialoge.

Try watching it without the sound.

If we go only be directing then it was okay, but think of it like this. WHen a movie bombs, people don't say I hated the movie, but the directing was good. They say the whole movie sucked. The shots were good, there were a few that I would change, some sweet angles too. Proper movement of the story??? There was a story?? I still think that the plot is what is bringing the picture down. If a beter script had been made by the same people I bet it would have rocked!

[flaninacupboard]

you sure clerks was shot on 35??
looks like 16 to me, but maybe that's my dusty old laser disc.....

[tgpo]

You're right.

Technical Specifications for
Clerks. (1994)

Camera
Arriflex 16 SR2

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
16 mm

Printed film format
35 mm (blow-up)

Aspect ratio
1.85 : 1

[poopyhead]

Use $1000 to make a kung-fu movie. And split the
rest with us here at DVDrhelp

kung pow: enter the fist

you don't even need an original kung fu movie nowadays

[tgpo]

Use $1000 to make a kung-fu movie. And split the
rest with us here at DVDrhelp

kung pow: enter the fist

you don't even need an original kung fu movie nowadays

But boy did that movie suck!

[poopyhead]

The shots were good, there were a few that I would change, some sweet angles too. Proper movement of the story???

yea......

i'm thinking the scene where batman's batarang and predator's claws are stuck together...

that could easily be a 360 degree rotation with batman and predator in slow mo.....

all the cameras around the two characters might be a little bit expensive thou :P

[pacmania_2001]

They made The Blair Witch Project on $35,000 and it made a fortune.

[poopyhead]

They made The Blair Witch Project on $35,000 and it made a fortune.

only 35K???

i thought they had a $1 million budget

[pacmania_2001]

http://us.imdb.com/Business?0185937

Nope, it was $35,000. The second one had a budget of $15,000,000

[Marco33]

[quote="tgpo"]
There was a story??quote]

Maybe I'm not being clear.

The sound as well as the pictures can move a story or film along. If he (Sandy) jumped right in to show Batman on a roof then jump right to the last scene where he was facing all the Preditor's then that is poor movement of the story, plot and or action.

After watching the film with the sound off, I found myself being able to follow the (I know you hate the word story so I'll use) film progression.

[tgpo]

After watching the film with the sound off, I found myself being able to follow the (I know you hate the word story so I'll use) film progression.

Okay, I follow ya' now.

[flaninacupboard]

You're right.

Was the info on clerks gleaned from anyhwere in paticular? has the IMDB started putting techinical info in or something?

[spiderman2k1]

I like it thought it was a good short action film for batman. If your a cartoon batman fan then I would say you will like this one. Some how batman get's out of this one do not know how but he does.

[tgpo]

You're right.

Was the info on clerks gleaned from anyhwere in paticular? has the IMDB started putting techinical info in or something?

Yeah man. Check it out http://us.imdb.com/Technical?0109445