|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: The new movie "Paint Drying"
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-20-2015 10:09 PM
This is a brilliant Kickstarter campaign that everyone should consider being a part of.
Make the Censors Watch 'Paint Drying'
quote:
Help me send my new film to the British Board of Film Classification.
About this project
The British Board of Film Classification (previously known as the British Board of Film Censors) was established in 1912 to ensure films remained free of 'indecorous dancing', 'references to controversial politics' and 'men and women in bed together', amongst other perceived indiscretions.
Today, it continues to censor and in some cases ban films, while UK law ensures that, in effect, a film cannot be released in British cinemas without a BBFC certificate.
Each certificate costs around £1000 for a feature film of average length. For many independent filmmakers, such a large upfront can prove prohibitively expensive.
Luckily, there’s a flipside to all of this: while filmmakers are required to pay the BBFC to certify their work, the BBFC are also required to sit through whatever we pay them to watch.
That’s why I’m Kickstarting a BBFC certificate for my new film Paint Drying — a single, unbroken shot of white paint drying on a brick wall. All the money raised by this campaign (minus Kickstarter's fees) will be put towards the cost of the certificate, so the final length of the film will be determined by how much money is raised here.
For instance, if we raise £108.59, the film will be one minute long. If we raise £526.90, it'll be an hour long. And so on.
Risks and challenges
I've shot fourteen continuous hours of footage, on crisp 4K digital video. This should provide enough material for the film, as long as this campaign doesn't raise more than £6057.
If the campaign surpasses that figure, I'll reshoot the film with a longer runtime — which would also allow Paint Drying to overtake Jacques Rivette's Out 1 (with a runtime of 775 minutes) as the longest film ever rated by the BBFC.
HERE is the website showing the current running time of the movie.
Mashable article
How can you not be a part of this movie magic? ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 11-20-2015 10:19 PM
OK, there is serious chutzpah there. But I suspect that the filmmaker is selling himself short, and that Paint Drying could become a celebrated masterpiece of experimental cinema, written about by leading film theorists in universities the world over.
A couple of weeks ago I showed a 16mm movie for LA Film Forum which consisted of a static shot of a farmer's field, lasting for half an hour or so. OK, admittedly it was a bit more interesting than paint drying: the grass blew in the wind, people walked in and out of the frame stacking hay on a bale and that sort of stuff. It was actually quite hypnotic after a while.
But you get my point: the idea is hardly a new one. And if John Cage managed to become internationally famous by having concert audiences sitting in front of musicians doing nothing, then I have high hopes for the paint drying movie, above and beyond raising a two-fingered salute to the BBFC.
By the way, on leaving college in 1995, I applied for and was interviewed for a job as a film examiner with the BBFC. They emphasized that they couldn't really care what I thought about the controversies over A Clockwork Orange and Reservoir Dogs (because such controversies occupy a tiny part of their working day), but cared a lot about my knowledge of child development and my ability to make the right call as to what would be OK for a 10-year old to see but not a 5-year old. Needless to say, I didn't get the job.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-20-2015 10:25 PM
Really the trick here is going to be the sound mix, not the visual. That being said I do wish he would shoot it in lovely 2.76:1 even if he does shoot it on video (wouldn't you hate to be the projectionist running 2k changeovers?)
But again the trick here is the SOUND MIX. A mix of dead silence of the occasional wind blowing in the background just won't cut it. There must be something repetitive and HIGHLY ANNOYING, so that after 14 hours of that there is just no way they can get it out of their heads for a month.
Just imagine the sound of a couple of guys walking up and talking about some jibberish for a few seconds, then they say "hey man, crank up some tunes" while the one song that the movie licenses (Justin Bieber's Baby) starts.
Then when the song is over "hey man, play that again" and it starts up again.
Then repeat that last paragraph however many times it takes for the 14 hours or however long it ends up being. ![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Of course the lovely part of my idea is that the movie could really only be 3 PHYSICAL reels long. You have:
Reel 1
Reel 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,etc
Reel 3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19,21,etc
That being said, does anyone know if there is a way to mandate no intermissions? And how long are the censors permitted to leave for restroom breaks? How about a strict no cell phone or electronic device rule? Hopefully they are required to view the film at reference volume too, as the filmmakers intended.
Hopefully Joe Redifer will make a similar movie for the MPAA, except of course instead of being really long and boring, it must be sexually offensive beyond their wildest dreams since that's about all that phases them.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Cox
Film God
Posts: 2234
From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada
Registered: Apr 2011
|
posted 11-20-2015 11:07 PM
Saskatchewan used to have its own Film Classification Board. In 1994, the board banned Exit to Eden due to a scene where a woman spanks a man with a hairbrush. This is Sexual Violence, and is Not Allowed.
Banning this movie immediately became front page news across the province, and the result was more interest in it than you can possibly imagine, and far more interest than it deserves (since it really is a ghawd-awful complete waste of perfectly good film and two hours of your life).
I know of one fellow who was actually arranging bus tours from Saskatchewan towns to theatres in Alberta for people to go and see it there!
A week later, the Film Classification Board changed its mind and slapped a Restricted 18+ rating on it so theatres here could play it. And was it ever HUGE! I sold tickets to people who I've never seen before or since. I remember one tiny little old lady who came tottering in the door on her cane, slowly shuffled up to me and said, "Is this the movie that they banned?" I said, "Yes, it is." She replied, "Oh good!" and put her money on the counter. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Saskatchewan is probably the only place on the planet where Exit to Eden made a killing! If they had just slapped a Restricted rating on it at the beginning and left it at that, it would have played for one week in the biggest cities and quietly disappeared when nobody cared. Instead, everybody had to see it and I do mean EVERYBODY. People were coming out from under rocks to watch that thing.
Not too long after that the Saskatchewan Film Classification Board outsourced the job of classifying movies to the BC Film Classification Board. While the Saskatchewan Film Classification Board still exists in theory and on paper (I get a license from them every year to operate my theatre), the actual job of classifying the movies is done in British Columbia.
I'm not entirely certain this is a cause-and-effect situation but it seems awfully coincidental that the film classification function was farmed out that way shortly after the big scandal surrounding the banning of Exit to Eden.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Hajducki
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 500
From: Edinburgh, UK
Registered: May 2003
|
posted 11-22-2015 05:28 PM
quote: Brad Miller
But again the trick here is the SOUND MIX. A mix of dead silence of the occasional wind blowing in the background just won't cut it. There must be something repetitive and HIGHLY ANNOYING, so that after 14 hours of that there is just no way they can get it out of their heads for a month.
Just imagine the sound of a couple of guys walking up and talking about some jibberish for a few seconds, then they say "hey man, crank up some tunes" while the one song that the movie licenses (Justin Bieber's Baby) starts.
I think forcing somebody to listen to Bieber for 14 hours would fall foul of human rights legislation. As Leo suggested some expletives would be necessary to make sure that the examiner watched it.
It would be advantagous for them to get a rating other than a 'U', then they can submit an appeal in which:
quote:
On receipt of a written request for reconsideration, the BBFC will ensure that the work, or the relevant parts of the work, are viewed again, including by senior staff.
For maximum effect the whole film would have to contain swearing, forcing the senior staff to watch the whole thing!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic