EPIC-FU for 2/28/2008 - special: what filmmakers really think of the web

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Aelius on February 28, 2008 at 9:07am

An interesting topic. I think that perhaps the question was a little too broad for them or perhaps they didn't understand the question itself. A few of them seemed to just be commenting on the internet in general, or perhaps the reviews of movies given on the web. That one guy seemed fairly bitter, I can only assume some annonymous poster gave his work a bit of a flaming.

I can say that the internet is great for getting your work out there and getting information to the masses. I think it has a drawback in the sense that it does draw away from 'arts&culture' in general though. I think its a great medium for someone to get their work out there, as numerous people said I wouldn't want it to replace the actual thing. I would prefer to see the actual painting, and while its neat to see it online, the in person experience is much better.

And the same goes for film, I think its great that people can get started on the internet, get feedback and tips on how to improve their work. I just hope that those people never stop trying to make it to the big screen, or whatever medium the art would be in.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mark Schoneveld on February 28, 2008 at 12:00pm

Got some good quotes in there, guys, but yeah, I agree with Aelius - maybe the question was too broad. But it's interesting, even with a broad question, to see where those steeped in filmmaking go with the topic. Love it or hate it, baby, we're here.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by EnricCirne on February 28, 2008 at 3:14pm

I love the ending! Look forward to clear(ity).

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kevin on February 28, 2008 at 5:13pm

Keep it simple and you will get more out of them. I agree with Aelius Aswell. Maybe the question was too broad.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pete on February 28, 2008 at 5:44pm

It looks like they're still figuring it out. Most of those answers seemed to demonstrate filmmakers/actors are still cautious when they speak on film and "the internet", as they have to navigate the politics of film studios that just don't "get it" yet. The best answers were the dude who never met the guy who did his soundtrack, and Glen Hansard tellin us the internet's the inside of a bathroom cubicle. (Glen was hilarious.)

And what's up with Funetics? Sounds like a 70s self help book.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Derek on February 29, 2008 at 8:02am

That thumbnail of this weeks show really sent me for a loop. I thought two things:

- Zadi did a Michael Jackson
- EpicFU did a Scriggity (popular host left / quit)

Glad that neither are true. Good job getting press creds!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Joshua on February 29, 2008 at 3:31pm

Awesome work guys! You got some great interviews

The "toilet guy" is Glen Hansard from the movie "Once" which just won an Oscar for best song! One of the main reasons he won was probably from people passing it along on the "INTERNET".

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Eric Susch on March 3, 2008 at 10:07am

"You can't see paintings on the internet."

Not sure what to say about that. I guess you can't slice a tomato with a karate chop either.

It's interesting how some totally get it and some don't. I guess we all move into the future at different rates.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Aelius on March 3, 2008 at 12:43pm

I'm not really sure I get you? Indeed, you can "see" a painting on the internet, but it in no way compares to seeing the actual painting itself. Of course you could see a picture of the Sistine Chapel on the internet, do you think that in any way compares to actually standing in it?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Eric Susch on March 3, 2008 at 4:56pm

My point is that there is no point to saying such a thing. It's a straw man argument. Of course you can see a painting on the internet. AND it's not the same as seeing the original. They're both valid experiences. Just because they're different doesn't mean that the internet is somehow inferior. The internet is good at spreading the painting to billions of people. The original painting can't do that. ...And THAT doesn't make the original inferior. They're just different.

And you can't slice a tomato with a karate chop...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Aelius on March 4, 2008 at 8:12am

LOL, I tried that tomato thing... and you are correct, it didn't work.

And okay, I get your point. And while I do agree that you can in fact 'see' a painting on the internet, I think that he was refering to the fact that it wouldn't be as good as seeing the real thing.

I do think its great to have all that on the internet, and get it spread around. I just worry that soon no one will actually leave their computer desk and merely 'live life' from a chair. I realize thats taking hte point a little far and its not like looking at a picture o nthe internet is going to ruin your life. I'm just worried where its going in teh distant future is all.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by wandalassiter on December 8, 2008 at 1:27pm

I think it has a drawback in the sense that it does draw away from 'arts&culture' in general though. I think its a great medium for someone to get their work out there, as numerous people said I wouldn't want it to replace the actual thing.We don't want to discourage anyone, but there are some essential truths about the internet business that you should be aware of before you waste your time by pursuing something you cannot achieve or by going in the wrong direction.You can see from www.mediahalo.com

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2