Re:Crapify
by jawngee on Monday December 22, 2008 @02:55PM
(#406806)
I posted this on your blog, but I'll post it here since you want to take this pointless discussion to a new level:
You're post is so incorrect, I don't even know where to start.
Apparently they crowd-sourced an entire movie. Everything
from the script to the casting was voted on, presumably by
the same lunkheads who turned Digg into an extension of
Apple marketing interspersed with unfunny comics and left-wing
commentary. It’s a process scientifically designed to produce a
film that’s mediocre for its budget range, which apparently was
somewhere in between what a student film normally costs and
my monthly car insurance payment.
First of all, the process you've outlined in your post is not the process used on Massify. Massify users voted for the story, not the screenplay. The winner did not direct the movie, he served as a producer and got a small role in the movie. What he did get to do, however, is sit in on the production and participate, work with the screenwriters to flesh out the story, etc.
Furthermore the budget for the film was way beyond the cost of a student film and your monthly insurance car payment combined.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s neat the way the process worked, but I
guess I’m unable to see the value in coming up with a novel way
to produce more cinematic detritus. Hollywood regurgitates this
crap 10 times a year, except (judging from the trailer) with more
polish. They don’t need crowd sourcing to add to the dung heap.
It's painfully obvious you've had little to do with film, like ever. Do you really believe most films are the work of a single individual? Movies have been crowd sourcing since before the internet tubes. The only thing Massify changes is who gets let into that particular crowd.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s neat the way the process worked, but
How can you call the process neat when you haven't the faintest clue how it works?
I guess I’m unable to see the value in coming up with a novel
way to produce more cinematic detritus. Hollywood regurgitates
I'm not exactly sure our process is that novel. All we've really done is put a web interface on the same mechanic and opened up who can participate, nothing more and nothing less.
In fact, the one thing the movie industry has going for it is
that it’s still much more meritocratic than most of the rest of
America. A good script is a good script, no matter who wrote it,
Again, you write with authority but it's obvious you aren't a student of film history.
I'd argue your points more, but discourse on the web is futile, specifically when there is a risk that the OP will be shown to be clueless and pedantic.
You're post is so incorrect, I don't even know where to start.
Apparently they crowd-sourced an entire movie. Everything from the script to the casting was voted on, presumably by the same lunkheads who turned Digg into an extension of Apple marketing interspersed with unfunny comics and left-wing commentary. It’s a process scientifically designed to produce a film that’s mediocre for its budget range, which apparently was somewhere in between what a student film normally costs and my monthly car insurance payment.
First of all, the process you've outlined in your post is not the process used on Massify. Massify users voted for the story, not the screenplay. The winner did not direct the movie, he served as a producer and got a small role in the movie. What he did get to do, however, is sit in on the production and participate, work with the screenwriters to flesh out the story, etc.
Furthermore the budget for the film was way beyond the cost of a student film and your monthly insurance car payment combined.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s neat the way the process worked, but I guess I’m unable to see the value in coming up with a novel way to produce more cinematic detritus. Hollywood regurgitates this crap 10 times a year, except (judging from the trailer) with more polish. They don’t need crowd sourcing to add to the dung heap.
It's painfully obvious you've had little to do with film, like ever. Do you really believe most films are the work of a single individual? Movies have been crowd sourcing since before the internet tubes. The only thing Massify changes is who gets let into that particular crowd.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s neat the way the process worked, but
How can you call the process neat when you haven't the faintest clue how it works?
I guess I’m unable to see the value in coming up with a novel way to produce more cinematic detritus. Hollywood regurgitates
I'm not exactly sure our process is that novel. All we've really done is put a web interface on the same mechanic and opened up who can participate, nothing more and nothing less.
In fact, the one thing the movie industry has going for it is that it’s still much more meritocratic than most of the rest of America. A good script is a good script, no matter who wrote it,
Again, you write with authority but it's obvious you aren't a student of film history.
I'd argue your points more, but discourse on the web is futile, specifically when there is a risk that the OP will be shown to be clueless and pedantic.