Sorry if it looks as if I am the only guy posting stuff (talk about a banal Summer movie season) - but I came across this: The Dogma (or Dogme) 95. It's this Scandinavian collective of filmmakers that puts emphasis on purity, and to focus on the actual story and on the actors' performances. The audience may also be more engaged as they do not have overproduction to alienate them from the narrative, themes and mood. The film must conform to these rules, referred to as the 'Vow of Chastity':
1. Filming must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found).
2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unless it occurs where the scene is being filmed).
3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted. (The film must not take place where the camera is standing; filming must take place where the action takes place.)
4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).
5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.
6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.)
7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. (That is to say that the film takes place here and now.)
8. Genre movies are not acceptable.
9. The final picture must be transferred to the Academy 35mm film, with an aspect ratio of 4:3, that is, not widescreen. (Originally, the requirement was that the film had to be filmed on Academy 35mm film, but the rule was relaxed to allow low-budget productions.)
10. The director must not be credited.
I can't believe this method of filmmaking has been around for 10 years, and I hadn't heard about it. Then I thought, "Of course I haven't." It's virtually impossible to make a film within all 10 guidelines - and available for the public to see? Listen, I'm all for minimalism (hey, could the orginial 'Clerks' fall into this category?), but not only does this Dogma 95 sound impossible to film, it also seems boring and ridiculously self-indulgent - kinda like an Andy Warhol movie? Ever seen one of those? Christ. Bring a sandwich.
You have no idea how this affected me. Because now, all the time - well not all the time, but I'm constantly trying to figure out how and why ANYONE would see/enjoy a film under the Dogma 95 rule. I mean c'mon.
Do you realize that on this page alone I have counted 9 threads started by you, and they are all written at novel length. All the while, though, you tell these other people in another thread to get a life and go do something else that's productive? Kinda the pot calling the kettle black, wouldn't you say?
A: I don't have to defend myself to the likes of a newbie
B: The threads started by other people are BS questions like 'What's this movie?', or simple statements like 'So and so is a con man!' etc.
C: Once upon a time there were regulars here, I simply try to keep my name visible on the page so that something is familiar to those that don't visit here very often.
Here Here for MD... the man has good ideas to keep the forum going I say let him post all he wants... plus spending 10 minutes to write a post and spending months to film a movie that A) is most likely crap and B) no one will see are apples and oranges are they not?
I don't know that this is true or not, but I suspect you are one of the fuckwits that keeps contributing to the Myke Macino thread. I completely agree with M.D's thoughts on that thread. None of the regular contributors here give a rat's ass about Myke Macino or his Ferrari's or whether or not he is a fat fuck, or if he has a girlfriend.
A thread was created for people who want to whine about what a terrible con man Myke Macino is. I don't care about this, M.D. doesn't care about this . . . pretty much everyone that was on the scene here before any of this Myke Macino nonsense cares about any of it. No one here asked the place to be flooded with a bunch of crap posts about some second rate con man who managed to take in a few hopelessly naive aspiring gay actors. I don't know how it is that the man drives a Ferrari, and frankly don't give a fuck.
Marc Daniel is a regular contributor to this board. He writes interesting points and observations, and I enjoy reading his posts. It doesn't matter that they are long. He makes this place worthwhile to come to because he has something worthwhile to say.
People who type posts that consist of one-liners disparaging Myke Macino contribute nothing to this board at all. I'd rather read a thousand intelligently writen words by M.D. than anything more about Myke.
New Guy, if you have something worthwhile to say about movies, then by all means say it. I recommend that you get a log in and throw your hat in the ring. If your schtick here consists of trying to portray M.D. as a hypocrite, then it won't work. In writing what he did on the Myke Macino thread he was merely confirming what most regulars here already agree with.
Hey New Guy, why don't ya cut the smarmy attitude and contribute rather than condemn? Otherwise, you ARE in fact the douchebag, that I and evidently everyone else has pegged you as here.
The last I heard of that idiot..
he was suing people left, right and centre
just because people are talking about him.
Yeah! ..And he hired some cheap ass solicitor to do the dirty work for him!
Crazy bastard!
Yeah! I saw it! I thought it was a load of bollocks!
Where on earth did this guy get all those stupid film titles from?
I don't think anyone has seen them.
I think Myke is just totally delusional 100%.
[IMG][/IMG]
Mind you, I saw this just before he removed all those pictures.
Yeah! It's his promo poster for some stupid TV series which will never get made.
CRIME IN THE CITY
More like GRIME IN THE CITY!
Date of Birth
16 April 1972, Islington, London, England, UK
Birth Name
Myke Andrew Macino
Nickname
Fat Boss
Little Myke
Big Mack
Iron Myke
The Iron Shiek
Italian Fat Ninja
The Devil on Set
Height
6' (1.83 m)
Bollocks! The size of a midget!
Where Are They Now
(January 2008) Los Angeles
Yeah! Pinner, Middlesex
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had to laugh because his guy has come up with the most ridiculous resume I've ever seen.
[/IMG]