-3

Question about filming AS3

Posted by Smigala 6 years, 5 months ago to Movies
91 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Dear Gulch,

First post, introduction coming later.

I'm a little confused about the recent filming of AS3.

They said filming started on 2/20, and finished less than a week later.

I thought it takes a month or two to film a full length movie.

Is there more filming to come?

Thank you in advance for any info regarding this question.

Sincerely,
Steve Migala


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
    hi steve. Your info is wrong. I can tell you the schedule-but I think it's important for you to go hunting around in the posts and have it unfold for you. Welcome to the Gulch. Looking forward to your posts
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ richrobinson 6 years, 5 months ago
    Hi Steve. Welcome to the Gulch. Click on categories up top and go into the producers lounge. Some good stuff in there. I saw a link where they were live streaming from the set a month ago.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -5
    Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
    "They said filming started on 2/20, and finished less than a week later. I thought it takes a month or two to film a full length movie."

    That's only true if the producers are committed to making an excellent movie that they hope will succeed aesthetically and financially. I don't believe that's the case here — AS1 and AS2 are evidence in support of my conclusion.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Lucky 6 years, 5 months ago
      Hello Morgan Tolbert, for AS 3, you are concerned that there is inadequate time spent filming to produce a quality product.
      Taking this as a genuine concern, I refer you to the many films of wheel changing on formula 1 race cars, some on youtube are very amateurish. The results however are mind boggling, there is one of a car coming into the pit, stopped, the team slide in and in less than a minute the car is off, most impressive. If I come across it again I will link. You may need to play it a few times to realize what is going on.
      It is not the hours filming, it is the concept, the plan, the message.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
      morgan,
      Your info is incorrect. I am offended by your statements. I thoroughly enjoyed the movies.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • -5
        Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
        >>>morgan, Your info is incorrect.

        How could it be incorrect? I got it from overmanwarrior — a fountainhead of truth and objectivity.

        See:

        http://overmanwarrior.wordpress.com/2014...

        ". . . you will be delighted to know that Atlas Shrugged Part III finally wrapped on Valentines’ Day 2014"
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
          yes, it did NOT wrap on 2/20.
          your cynicism is not appreciated
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • -4
            Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
            In other words, it wrapped on 2/14 — 6 days before 2/20.

            So even less time was spent on production than Smigala originally assumed. Excellent.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • 10
              Posted by $ richrobinson 6 years, 5 months ago
              I also enjoyed the first two films. I am looking forward to Who is John Galt. I am not sure why so many people like to point out the fact that the first two movies have not make money yet. Films of this kind can take time for people to find them. The book is still popular today after 57 years. Anything that helps promote objectivism is a positive in my opinion.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • -5
                Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                >>>>Anything that helps promote objectivism is a positive in my opinion.

                How does a bad movie that fails at the box office and garners poor reviews from critics help to promote Objectivism?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ richrobinson 6 years, 5 months ago
                  I would never expect movie critics to like these films. Most are left wing loons. If I remember correctly Sylvester Stalone and other actors have regularly had their movies panned by critics but embraced by the public. The Atlas Shrygged movies deal with topics most people are trying to ignore. The time will come when they can't ignore what is going on any longer. As to the quality of the films that is subjective. If you don't like them that is fine but I disagree. I enjoyed 1and 2 and look forward to Who is John Galt.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • -3
                    Posted by AbdulRahmanKarimi 6 years, 5 months ago
                    >>>>I would never expect movie critics to like these films.

                    That wasn't the point. The point was that you now seem intentionally to SEEK bad reviews as if they were a sign of honor. Even Alyssa Rosenbaum herself shed TEARS when the "left wing loons" employed as professional critics of literature in the 1950s trashed Atlas Shrugged. She obviously craved favorable reviews — as, indeed, any professional novelist would.

                    It was some consolation to her, of course, that the novel did very well commercially; but she STILL wanted good reviews from professional critics, if for no other reason than craft.

                    >>>Most are left wing loons.

                    So what. See, you're making a dumb amateurish mistake. You're assuming that a professional critic would trash a well-made film just on account of its political or philosophical content and implications, irrespective of how well-crafted the film was, and how well told its story was. You're wrong. Any professional critic who knows anything about filmmaking and its history would praise a film like Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will" or "Olympiad" for its brilliant technique, even if they want nothing to do with its pro-Hitler, pro-Nazi-regime themes.

                    AS1 and AS2 were trashed specifically because they barely rose above film-student levels of basic story construction. THAT was also the reason the public rejected them.

                    Those are not reasons to be proud of those movies.

                    And even Alyssa Rosenbaum was able to praise a novelist like Tolstoy for his brilliant writing technique, even though she disliked intensely the "slice of life" subject matter he chose to treat.

                    That you cannot (or will not) separate form and content in art means you are happy to remain an ignoramus. Only in Objectivism is such intellectual laziness praised as "integrity to one's values."
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by Robbie53024 6 years, 5 months ago
                  Other movies with "Poor" reviews -
                  Alien
                  Schindler's List
                  Airplane
                  Mad Max
                  Die Hard
                  Goodfellas
                  Rocky
                  Spartacus
                  Gladiator
                  The Matrix
                  The Big Lebowski
                  Gone with the Wind
                  Jaws
                  2001: A Space Odyssey

                  http://www.moviesoundscentral.com/sounds...
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                    Movies typically get bad reviews if they stray from the social agenda message of the day. I remember how much flack gladiator received, one man who stood against an empire. After the audiences loved the movie it ended up winning best picture. Hollywood had to jump on that one. If these same producers for Atlas made a movie about poor people in New York with a progressive message, same film quality, same actors, same soundtrack, it would be nominated for an Oscar.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                    • Posted by Robbie53024 6 years, 5 months ago
                      And just imagine if Citizen Kane were produced today. It would be a flop.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                      • -4
                        Posted by MertonDabney 6 years, 5 months ago
                        >>>It would be a flop.

                        It WAS a flop when it came out in 1941, you nincompoop. But it was recognized by critics and film aficionados as being both pathbreaking and a work of genius — which it was.

                        Can't you even do a little research before posting a dumbshit opinion on things you know nothing about?
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
                    I fell asleep during Mad Max and 2001 A Space Odyssey. and I've tried to watch that one a couple of times. something about Hal puts me right out
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                    • Posted by Robbie53024 6 years, 5 months ago
                      I hope you read the book. It is much better.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
                        nope, never did
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                        • Posted by Robbie53024 6 years, 5 months ago
                          You really should. And the 3 that follow. They really are classics of 20th century science fiction literature.

                          Also, check out Asimov's Foundation trilogy (and I'm sure you've seen if not read iRobot).

                          And I would be remiss to not mention Robert Anson Heinlein. Despite being a Navy guy, he wrote some of the most engaging and insightful prose of the 20th century, sci fi as it was. His teen dramas were just engaging, and his adult literature really called for introspection. Of course, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" is a libertarian classic, but Stranger is one that should cause anyone, and particularly Christians, to seek deep introspection.

                          Even as an atheist, I would think that these would be at least entertaining. And as an author, provide some benchmarks on storytelling.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • -2
                    Posted by AbdulRahmanKarimi 6 years, 5 months ago
                    But those movies also garner many great reviews — as we well as becoming commercially successful with the public — and quite a few becomes "iconic" to the filmmaker's personal style (such as Kubrick's "2001" or Spielberg's "Jaws").

                    The point of all this not that you can't find this or that bad review of hit movies. The point is that AS1 and AS2 earned nothing BUT bad reviews from critics, AND it underperformed at the box office. Taken together, those are not signs of an "irrational culture"; they are signs of bad filmmaking. And the blame should be placed squarely on the producers.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by khalling 6 years, 5 months ago
              excuse me. and your expertise in the movie industry is....?
              I agree it was an aggressive and exhaustive schedule. what was your contribution or facts to back up your criticism?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • -7
                Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                >>>excuse me. and your expertise in the movie industry is....?

                More extensive than yours.

                >>>I agree it was an aggressive and exhaustive schedule.

                A 20-day shoot is hardly aggressive and exhaustive. Given a 120-page screenplay (appoximately1 page per minute of screentime), most experienced directors will not want to shoot more than 2 pages per day, since every scene typically requires a master shoot, and coverage from different angles and at different image sizes (close-up, medium, pairs of over-the-shoulder shots during pure dialogue scenes, etc.), and there are usually multiple takes for each camera setup. So that's a 60-day (2 month) shoot.

                Then it's about 3-6 months of editing.

                A 20-day shoot is typical for low-budget film-student shoots.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • 10
                  Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                  So the suggestion is that Atlas III isn't any good unless an "experienced" director who shoots 1-2 pages of script a day filmed it. That sounds more like a production quota than a testament to production value.

                  A long time ago I built conveyor belts for Amazon.com in a union shop. I built conveyor's at a rate of more than three times the union quota, which caused a lot of trouble. They told me that a sorting conveyor took a day and a half to build, and I was often building three of them in that time frame.

                  In the field during installation guess who had the most quality control rejects..............it wasn't me. It was the union idiots who milked out their day sipping coffee and reading the newspaper instead of doing the job.

                  A lot of movie sets have a lot of time fluff in them. But I still enjoy them. I like student films, and I like big budget enterprises. One of my favorites was Eyes Wide Shut by Stanley Kubrick who spent a year filming Nichole Kidman's breasts. Sure he had perfection, but I'm not sure it made the film better.

                  These guys on Atlas III at least put forth the effort. It would have been nice if Atlas Shrugged could have received the big budget treatment in Hollywood, but they blew it off out of protest. I'm happy these guys picked up the film and tried it even if they did have to learn along the way. Student film or big budget extravaganza--I'll enjoy the film because of the content and heart behind the message.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • -5
                    Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                    >>>So the suggestion is that Atlas III isn't any good unless an "experienced" director who shoots 1-2 pages of script a day filmed it. That sounds more like a production quota than a testament to production value.

                    That's because you've never shot (or budgeted) a movie. Movie production — "lensing", as it's sometimes called — is all about detail. That's why multiple takes are often required. Some directors were famous (or infamous) for excessive takes: Stanley Kubrick, for example, often made his actors do 90-100 takes or more for a single camera setup.

                    In any case, to blow through a feature-length screenplay in 20-days (assuming it's 120 pages) means they're doing an average of 6 pages per day — two whole scenes, possibly three. That's the sort of shooting schedule used in television production . . . and, in fact, as has been mentioned many times by many people, AS1 and AS2 looked more like a made-for-TV movie than a made-in-Hollywood movie.

                    In fact, to blow through 6 pages of shooting per day, it's probably necessary to use multiple cameras, possibly even a TV-style, 3-camera setup (most Hollywood features are shot with one camera because it's difficult — sometimes impossible — for a cinematographer to adequately light a scene for different camera angles at the same time. Directors-of-Photography prefer to light a scene beautifully for ONE angle at a time (as well as one focal length at a time), especially if the lighting is to play an important story-related role in the picture (setting the emotional mood, establishing time of day, etc.). The way it's done for television (especially soaps) is that the lights are hung from a grid on the ceiling, and most of the lighting quality is "flat" (i.e., lights have some diffusion material over them to scatter the light, disperse any strong sense of directionality, and soften shadows) so that it's fairly easy to shoot a scene from multiple angles simultaneously, since everything is lit.

                    Anyway, I can tell you know nothing about movie production. Shooting a film is all about scheduling (which means: setting quotas for shooting). That has precisely zero to do with unions.

                    Stick to setting fire to bull whips and recording it on your iPhone, OK?
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                      I'll stick to that if you stick to being the water boy on a set pretending that you are an expert in film.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                      • -5
                        Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                        Got news for you, genius.

                        **Even** a water boy on a set knows more about filmmaking than you.

                        But I guess being a randroid cult-member makes you an expert in all things (in your own eyes) without going through the unpleasant hassle of actually having to learn something.

                        Some things never change. The "cult mentality" is one of them.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                          So you are a water boy. That makes sense. Tell Randall, the fine screenwriter that we said hi while you're doing his nails and getting him water.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                          • -5
                            Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                            >>>So you are a water boy.

                            Yep. That makes me infinitely more knowledgeable than you about making movies.

                            (But don't worry, muchacho. There are plenty of other cult members here who will gladly buy your line of bullshit.)

                            >>>Tell Randall, the fine screenwriter that we said hi while you're doing his nails and getting him water.

                            OK.

                            In the meantime, genius, I'm putting aside one bucket of water for you —

                            — in case you accidentally set fire to your crotch while doing that crazy Fire Dance with your whip.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • -6
                    Posted by MorganTolbert 6 years, 5 months ago
                    >>>>These guys on Atlas III at least put forth the effort.

                    In art — as in life — you don't get an "A" for putting forth an effort. You get an "A" for results. AS1 and AS2 were rejected by the public (including many Objectivists) and panned by critics. AS3 probably won't be different. Why should it be?

                    >>>>It would have been nice if Atlas Shrugged could have received the big budget treatment in Hollywood, but they blew it off out of protest.

                    You're fabricating a mythology about the history of this project to make you feel better about its failure. The producers could have made a single, high-impact movie with a screenplay by Randall Wallace (an excellent screenwriter). Perhaps the final product didn't please "philosophical adviser" David Kelley in terms of strict compliance with mandates for Objectivist purity. Who knows. Instead, they shelved Wallace's work in favor of a "let's throw in everything, including the kitchen sink" made-for-TV-approach, and even that was amateurish.

                    The producers realized that they could always sell DVDs and merchandise (t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.) to cultists who made it clear online that they would buy anything, as long as it had something to do with Ayn Rand or the story of Atlas Shrugged. In fact, the bigger the failure at the box office and in critical write-ups, the more Objectivist cultists can cry "cultural conspiracy!" "mysticism!" etc., and the more they would urge one another to buy a 2nd or 3rd DVD, another t-shirt, and one more coffee mug.

                    I would be very interested in learning how much of the final budget — including monye from the Kickstarter campaign — was in fact spent on AS3. Given a mere 20-day shooting schedule, I suspect not much.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by Lucky 6 years, 5 months ago
                      As a 'cultist' who also made a small contribution to the Kickstarter I recall that it was for marketing so I expect none of that went into the production.
                      Should I be wrong, I do not care. I will buy the DVD and probably enjoy it and get value as I did from 1 and 2.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                        I will too. I can recall many stories of people who have discovered the book because of the movies. That makes these movies wonderful advocates for thought. Anybody who is against them are the same people who are against anything that provokes thought against their committed philosophies. Even when they know they are wrong.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                        • -4
                          Posted by EdvardHovanesian 6 years, 5 months ago
                          >>>>>I can recall many stories of people who have discovered the book because of the movies.

                          But wouldn't even MORE people have discovered the book had MORE people seen the movie? And wouldn't MORE people have chosen to see the movie had the FEW people who did see it given it positive word-of-mouth reviews to their friends, colleagues, and neighbors? The answer is YES. Most people who saw the movie trashed it. That's why it died at the box office.

                          Word-of-mouth killed it.

                          >>>>>That makes these movies wonderful advocates for thought.

                          No it doesn't. It makes them fantastically over-budgeted advertising failures. You don't spend 30-40 million on two movies just to get 11 people to buy the book. Only a bullwhip bullshit artist could approve of something so inefficient and so dumb.

                          >>>>>Anybody who is against them are the same people who are against anything that provokes thought against their committed philosophies.

                          You're a redneck hick, and an intellectual blank cartridge. Your grammar also sucks ("anybody who is…" is singular, not plural. Try this: "Anybody who IS against them IS the same kind of person who would be against anything that provokes thought . . ." etc.

                          Your head is mush, overdouche. You can neither think straight, nor write straight. I'm unsure at this point which one is cause and which one effect. Ultimately, however, it doesn't matter.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                            Where are you tough guy? I see you're online. I've been sitting here for 20 minutes waiting for you to respond. Are you going through your lengthy professional history trying to figure out how to explain to me that you are a person of intellect and sophistication when you have never really done anything of any value. Let's see," how to make a waiter at The Outback Steakhouse sound like a worldly job."
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by overmanwarrior 6 years, 5 months ago
                            And you are an inflated fool wanna be who sits on a fence picking on what other people do because your personal life is so worthless dickweed. And if you want to get into insults contact me offline away from this forum and we can have at it melon head. If I piss off idiots like you, I've done my job.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                      • -3
                        Posted by MertonDabney 6 years, 5 months ago
                        >>>I recall that it was for marketing

                        Reread the FAQs from the original site. It said that even though the film was already (supposedly) "fully funded", the additional money would be used across several categories, including PRODUCTION (not just marketing); and it said that contributions above a certain amount would be rewarded with the contributors' names carved into the side of Galt's cabin in the gulch.

                        You mean, you donated your own money and you didn't even read what the terms were at the site?

                        Smart.

                        You're schmucky, Lucky.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo