Toochis is right. (Good catch!, Iwo Jima budget $15-19 million in 2006!) Though in fairness, Eastwood shot "Iwo Jima" and "Flags of Our Fathers" at the same time, covering the same subject with different points of view. And the production cost for "Flags," according to Boxofficemojo.com or imdb.com -- was anywhere from $55-90 million. The irony is -- more proof of Eastwood's artistry -- is I consider "Iwo Jima" a better film than "Flags" and stands alone without my awareness of "Flags" (though I think "Iwo" would've cost more without "Flags's" budget propping everything up). It's unfortunate neither film was a box office hit. -kuz.
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:23:22 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [MOPO] Can a major director shoot an "epic" on a low budget?To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU I think Clint Eastwood managed to do it with Letters from Iwo Jima.Toochis ----- Original Message ----From: David Kusumoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:02:34 PMSubject: Re: [MOPO] Can a major director shoot an "epic" on a low budget? I believe John's post was designed to challenge whether our most successful film directors today -- are capable of "going back to making films on the cheap" as most at one time did. But I your reply was on the mark -- esp. your comparisons to "Duel" (a TV-movie released theatrically overseas) and "Memento," an indie film throughout. Spielberg demonstrated he could in fact "go back" in 1993 -- after a string of classic blockbusters (and some duds in between). And I believe he was "indulged" by Universal because he always intended to deliver the $65 million "Jurassic Park" -- which was briefly the #1 box office hit of all time -- the same year as his $22 million "Schindler's." In interviews, Spielberg later acknowledged his track record enabled him to make a Holocaust picture few would finance, and that he himself intended "Schindler's" to be a "non-fiction novel," an "artifact" -- told in a style akin to Truman Capote's, "In Cold Blood" and author Thomas Kenneally's own source material, "Schindler's Ark." Good points, though, Patrick. Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:42:57 -0700From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Can a major director shoot an "epic" on a low budget?To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], clearly you did not read my response to John's original post. Here is what I posted in reply: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John: And I'd like to see Federer, Nadal, the Williams Sisters, etc. play a tournament with wooden rackets. The problem is that there is no incentive for highly successful filmmakers to go 'guerilla' on us to prove your point. They could most likely do it. Spielberg made DUEL for $450,000 in 1971 which was likely about $200,000 in 1960 dollars and Christopher Nolan made MEMENTO for $5,000,000 40 years after PSYCHO which was likely close to $1,000,000 in 1960 dollars. Point being, we expand to our budgets personally and professionally. These guys are filmmakers no less than Hitchcock was. All nostalgia aside, John, I think your question is still interesting but I'd like to extend it to the group in this fashion where a certain Director did exactly what you propose: In the 1940's, a director sought to prove to the studios that he could produce a film within the system on budget and on time. He not only came in on time but was under budget: What was the film's title? And who was the Director? Those who know me have a built-in advantage. Patrick ps: I'm completely serious about wanting to see a 'wooden racket' tennis tournament! On Jul 22, 2008, at 2:35 PM, David Kusumoto wrote: ** Spielberg did this 15 years ago. He began shooting what was thought to be an "unbankable" Holocaust picture in March 1993 -- that made it to theaters by December. It took him 10 weeks, cost $22 million, a pittance by Spielbergian standards, 33-years after "Psycho." He ended up with a three hour, "mostly" black-and-white picture with no zooms, steadicams, cranes or "Spielberg camera tricks," near zero post-production time. "E.T" was the only other Spielberg release considered made on the "cheap" for $10 million, but that was in 1982. The budget for "The Dark Knight" is said to be $180 million plus. I doubt Spielberg himself could shoot a modest "epic" in many locations for under $30 million today, unless it was a documentary w/less expensive foreign production crews. ** What would be intriguing, though, which gets to your point -- is whether Spielberg could do a "Sundance-type" film in the U.S. -- with no stars or sets, armed only with a talky script. Oscar-winning director Peter Jackson shoots his action films "down under" because of cost. Imagine how much they'd cost if shot in the U.S.? This is why I'm extremely curious with what Jackson will do with his next film, "The Lovely Bones" (now in post production), which is based on the 2002 mega-bestselling book by Alice Sebold -- a modest "talky" story about a small American town -- narrated throughout by a 14-year old girl who's murdered on page one. -kuz.> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:45:38 +1000> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: I saw THE DARK KNIGHT tonight. . .> To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU> > I just returned from seeing The Dark Knight this afternoon and although it > was reasonably entertaining I have to wonder if a really successful movie > can be made today without throwing truckloads of money into the project and > relying almost totally on whiz bang special effects and mass destruction of > cars, buildings etc etc.> > I also thought that it was a little remiss of the director that in a number > of scenes it was very hard to hear what Gary Oldman was saying. I actually > have no idea what he said in the fairly key final scenes, bearing in mind > that his were the last words of the movie, and the people I saw the movie > with made the same comment.> > In 1960 Hitchcock made a movie with his TV crew for a budget of under a > million dollars and shot the film in a matter of weeks. If it hadnt been for > the shower scene, he would have completed the project even quicker. I would > like to see one of the major directors like Spielberg, or Christopher Nolan, > make a film with a low budget and see what they could come up with.> > Regards> John> > Sign up for my regular newsletter on movie memorabilia:> http://www.moviemem.com/pages/page.php?mod=account&go=register> > Visit my Website: www.moviemem.com> > All About Australian posters: > http://search.reviews.ebay.com/members/johnwr_W0QQuqtZg> > My eBay Store and Lisitngs: http://myworld.ebay.com/johnwr/> > Exhibitions: http://www.moviemem.com/pages/page.php?page=15> > JOHN REID VINTAGE MOVIE MEMORABILIA> PO Box 92> Palm Beach> Qld 4221> Australia Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
