Help with Film Studies

[AHarkness2512]

1) Main character going about his daily routine, he then receives a phone call saying comet is approaching. He warns people to take cover and comets strikes, civilians die and it is his duty to save those in trouble as a series of other disasters occurs such as earthquakes and continuing meteor strikes that make conditions harder for him. He saves one girl who he later ends up marring and at the end he is presented with a medal of honour for his service.

2) The main character is part of a special organisation that monitors outer space conditions, he is one day altered that a comet has been spotted only a few light years away and is predicted to reach earth within the next 4 years. The next day he wakes up peers through a high-tech telescope and sees a small comet approaching earth. He rings the organisation and is given orders to warn others immediately. The comet strikes much sooner than expected and it is his duty to save those trapped or injured. He manages to save many people including his wife, risking his own life along the way.

Which of the two above do you prefer for a disaster movie?

Are there any improvement that could be made to the plots?

[Kiba.]

Please don't double post the same or a virtually identical question. Once is enough. You should take the time to read the Forum Rules.
If you repeat this type of question post again, it will be removed.

[Scruff]

Originally Posted by dalebiskit

Bare sets

hi all. I'm new to the forum and looking for help with my independent research/dissertation.

I'm after films that - like dogville and manderlay - make no attempt to allow sets to get in the way of telling the story. so any that might be filmed on soundstages, without sets, on theatre stages... films that focus your attention on the actors and their performances.

any help will be greatly appreciated.

"12 Angry Men" is an excellent study of this.

"Red Candy" is basically in a house.

"Reservoir Dogs" was based on that premise (12 guys in a room).

The classic film school assignment is to write a film around a minimal number of sets (because you don't have any money).

[Lizhawkins]

Please, AHarkness2512. This is getting a bit tedious... You've already asked a variation of this question and it really didn't warrant starting a new thread - which is why I've moved it to the "Help with Film Studies" thread... The only reason I haven't removed it is because you've changed the post to include a third option. (Although I'm not sure kiba will be so lenient!)

[Jonesy]

Originally Posted by AHarkness2512

Which of the two above do you prefer for a disaster movie?

Are there any improvement that could be made to the plots?

Kiba has previously warned you about making yet another post on this same topic. You chose to ignore him, as a result your third post has been removed and you've received an infraction. If you do another post asking the same type of study question, you will be banned.

[wigles123]

Ok, here is the deal. Desperately need some help making this film idea any good, this survey will only take 5 minutes and it will not only greatly help my aim of getting this film somewhere, but it will also help greatly for my media studies A level http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XP2X6ZX

[gdh12]

Hello, I am doing a research project on the three films of Martin Scorsese which are: Taxi Driver, Shutter Island and King of Comedy. I think that these three films often deal with psychological issues, such as the theme of loneliness. Do you agree? Any feedback will be appreciated

[reach4thesky9]

Hi ok I don't wana cause any fuss puss i'd appriciate it greatly if I could get your guys opinion on this matter of practical effects vs. CGI. Its for a college report I have to do but if this is in the wrong place please feel free to move or delete. Thanks Emma.

[robinho67]

Don't want to speak for others but John Carpenter's The Thing holds up much better than something that was fairly good CGI say ten years ago, like the Matrix, but is visually showing its age now.
Would prefer the Thing over the Matrix any day so this might cloud my judgement on it anyway.

[Porkchopexpress]

The use of CGI can be amazing, but there is an over reliance on it and complete lack of quality control from some film makers. George Lucas and Stephen Sommers I'm looking at you.

Compare the jarring, glossy and other worldly appearance of some CGI and compare and contrast with the films of Jeunet and Guilermo Del Toro, they both show what can be achieved with a preference to prosthetics and real world sets.

CGI is great in moderation and is best used to augment rather than replace elements within a film, as for me, pure CGI can be very jarring and rip me out of a film if done badly.

But some films can't help an over reliance on that form dependent on the genre, the Strausse brothers make some gorgeous CGI on a shoestring budget and look at the terrible CGI in the 'Twilight' films, I appreciate the skill of it when it's done well.

Give me Stan Winston any day though, may he rest in gloriuous rubber molded pieces.