ok if you want more shaky cams and non existent death scenes or at least ones that are so blurry and quick you cant really tell whats happening then yes Ross for the win. but personally i would like something different.
In terms of the cinematic differences in the way I might shoot the movie, I shot this in a very specific way that’s very different than most franchises are shot, obviously, and that had a lot to do with the urgency of what’s going on and Katniss’ point of view. I have some ideas about how to do ‘Catching Fire’ slightly differently, but I don’t want to share them yet. Not because I’m being evasive, but just because they’re not fully baked. But yes, I think it will look and feel slightly different from the first.”
It might not even be a shaky cam, from reading the above quote from Gary Ross, if he were to do it I don't think he's going for the same way he shot THG, it seems like it might be completely different.
new directors worked really well for hp why not the HG Saga?
...
Did you see GoF?
GOF wasn't bad. Did it have some cheesy moments? Absolutely. Was the script great? No, it wasn't.
But the film overall, is very good. "Fans" should stop hating on it just because it's the new "cool" thing to do.
G.G.
It's not "new" to hate on it.
Well I never started hearing other people bash it till I came to this forum last year. Ive been on a ton of HP forums too. I think it's a HPF only talking point...or dare I say...COS forums as well lol. The two whiniest Potter forums on the internet! Booyah! <:-P
new directors worked really well for hp why not the HG Saga?
...
Did you see GoF?
GOF wasn't bad. Did it have some cheesy moments? Absolutely. Was the script great? No, it wasn't.
But the film overall, is very good. "Fans" should stop hating on it just because it's the new "cool" thing to do.
G.G.
It's not "new" to hate on it.
Really? 'Cause like 3 years ago it was really popular to hate on OOTP. Especially between the OOTP/HBP 2-year gap. It was excruciating.
Then, suddenly, everyone stopped menstruating and hated on HBP quite a bit. Not much, just a little bit.
Afterwards, by the time DH started being promoted, the fandom had its period once again, only this time the blood was fully discharged on GOF. And when I say discharged, I MEAN discharged. Mike's poor adaptation was soaked in menstrual blood.
A few of us tried to clean it up, and things are looking a bit better now. You know, they're still a bit bloody, but they're better.
The fandom had a bit of a "mini-period" last year, when DH2 was released. All the "lack of battle" shit, as you can remember. Luckily not much blood reached DH2, as most people seemed to stop menstruating.
I'm proud to say that the fandom is sort of reaching menopause. There are still some "messy" stages, but almost all the blood is gone
About those rumors earlier on about Daniel Newman being cast as Finnick Odair because he was listed on IMDb, looks like it's not true if this source is correct. Kind of glad it wasn't true.
I just think that you guys need to stop thinking that people hate things just for the sake of hating. Why would I "start" hating something I appreciate? I believe just morons would do that. I just dislike because I didn't appreciate. It's simple like this.
Yeah everyone used to bash ootp then hbp and now all of a sudden everyone bashes gof. Its hilarious, but still the bashing wont change my view on the movies, they stand where they do. And Gof is very good indeed. Maurice, you always nail it man, youre awesome
So, for all the reasons I pointed out in my review, I think a new director is exactly what we need. Catching Fire has a lot of similarities with the Hunger Games, including the preparation to the arena and the games itself. I believe that they will have to be careful to not turn the story repetitive to the audience (because the book already is). And a new director is, somehow, a way of bringing something fresh and correcting major flaws from the first. For Catching Fire, I believe we need a much more dynamic director that could also fix the pace of the book. I do believe that Gary Ross direct well some emotional sequences, but he doesn't have the guts for action sequences. And I consider that the action drives the story of Catching Fire, where everything is huge and bigger, specially the arena.
The reason Gary added scenes in THG was to foreshadow what was to come. He had a PLAN, but if they dont give it to him, we will never see it instead we will get something different which could be good or bad, but I wouldnt gamble it.
Like Richard said, why fix something that isn't broken? Ross directed the actors extremely well in the first, and he can do so again here. The action in the first film was fine, at times great, and there's very little action in Catching Fire. It's just the opening corncucopia (which was my favorite scene in THG) and a scene with the killer monkeys, maybe a few other mildly intense moments. The cinematography and score were all beautifully handled. If a new director signed on board, you would have more of a risk that the new adaptation would be badly handled, whereas Gary has already proven his worth and shown us he's up to the challenge of creating an entertaining and powerful film. I think, given the criticism he's received about the shaky cam, he will go for a more dynamic angle and think through his shots better to achieve a better sense of catharsis and power in the arena. If he improves what could be touched up in THG, and still makes a successful adaptation, we'll be left with a fantastic movie.
I don't think you guys should worry. Lionsgate has a goldmine on their hands. They would never screw with it. They can even become big thankfully to it. If they have to hire a new director, I am sure they will make a good choice. Actually, this is part of Gary Ross fault too, because he is the one who wants more money and will deny to direct if they don't offer what he wants.
Ain't broken for you. Because at least for me, and some other people, there's a lot to be fixed. I say you should not worry. Lionsgate would never ruin their goldmine.
Yeah well maybe Ross can make a better movie for those who view thg as broken. If another director comes it wont be the same. I WANT TO SEE ROSS PLAN LOL.
new directors worked really well for hp why not the HG Saga?
...
Did you see GoF?
GOF wasn't bad. Did it have some cheesy moments? Absolutely. Was the script great? No, it wasn't.
But the film overall, is very good. "Fans" should stop hating on it just because it's the new "cool" thing to do.
G.G.
It's not "new" to hate on it.
Really? 'Cause like 3 years ago it was really popular to hate on OOTP. Especially between the OOTP/HBP 2-year gap. It was excruciating.
Then, suddenly, everyone stopped menstruating and hated on HBP quite a bit. Not much, just a little bit.
Afterwards, by the time DH started being promoted, the fandom had its period once again, only this time the blood was fully discharged on GOF. And when I say discharged, I MEAN discharged. Mike's poor adaptation was soaked in menstrual blood.
A few of us tried to clean it up, and things are looking a bit better now. You know, they're still a bit bloody, but they're better.
The fandom had a bit of a "mini-period" last year, when DH2 was released. All the "lack of battle" shit, as you can remember. Luckily not much blood reached DH2, as most people seemed to stop menstruating.
I'm proud to say that the fandom is sort of reaching menopause. There are still some "messy" stages, but almost all the blood is gone
G.G.
Still isn't "new," but okay.
Like Richard said, why fix something that isn't broken? Ross directed the actors extremely well in the first, and he can do so again here. The action in the first film was fine, at times great, and there's very little action in Catching Fire. It's just the opening corncucopia (which was my favorite scene in THG) and a scene with the killer monkeys, maybe a few other mildly intense moments. The cinematography and score were all beautifully handled. If a new director signed on board, you would have more of a risk that the new adaptation would be badly handled, whereas Gary has already proven his worth and shown us he's up to the challenge of creating an entertaining and powerful film. I think, given the criticism he's received about the shaky cam, he will go for a more dynamic angle and think through his shots better to achieve a better sense of catharsis and power in the arena. If he improves what could be touched up in THG, and still makes a successful adaptation, we'll be left with a fantastic movie.
A lot of people seem to be working on the assumption that directors can't make totally different movies in the same series. Look at OOTP. Then look at HBP. I really need state no more.
Remember how many fans were bitching because they brought Yates back after OOTP? More than half of the fandom were up in arms saying how terrible Yates was and how amateurish he was, then he went and blew more than half the fandom away with the films that followed. Personally, I think half the fandom have it wrong :P and that OOTP is a far superior movie to what he did with HBP, but the point still stands. Directors aren't always necessarily going to stick to the same style. In fact, Ross has indicated that he plans to change the style for Catching Fire. The difference could be as big as OOTP and HBP.
Regarding the shaky-cam...I've said it so often I'm not really sure I feel like it again, but I will anyway. They had to find a way to show the brutality of the games without being graphic enough for an R. The fact that it was dealing with children aslo made it harder, since you can get away with even less when it's violence involving children. Filming it from arty or oblique angles would have sacrificed the punchiness, the grit of the violece. Sure, some people don't like the shaking camera, but it was probably the best way to aesthetically make us feel the violence. They got a way with a lot for a PG-13 movie about the children killing each other in a realistic environment. It was more violent than HP ever was, and I don't see you complaining about that. It also had a tougher time with the censors, as HP largely revolved around people being taken out by coloured lights. And anyway, who's to say another director wouldn't be much tamer with the material? Don't automatically assume another director would make the movie more violent. It will be as violent as Lionsgate and the censors permit it to be, regardless of the director.
Getting a new director would risk the franchise. Why fix what isn't broken? It's not like Ross is going to be repetitive in what he's doing!
A new director would equal NEW concepts. The new director wouldn't expand on Ross's vision, he would only CHANGE what Ross already creating, turning it into a inconsistent series, which is the opposite of what it needs to be.
Personally, if a consistent series means maintaining the mediocrity of the first, I would rather have a good, inconsistent series. Like Harry Potter. But as I'm in the minority here for not liking Ross, it would certainly not be a mistake either to let him continue directing. The film did have its moments and I'm sure he will only get better, so I am confident that the sequels won't be shit at least with the passion he seems to have for the project.
To be honest, the whole director/money thing really sickens me. I know this is Hollywood we're talking about here, but if the story really means something to the director he shouldn't worry about the money. Hell, I would direct films like the Hunger Games and Potter for free if I could. And $3 million is a fuckton more than a lot of other jobs in the country right now. )
If that's true, I take back my comment that he seems to have passion for the project. Good grief, succesful directors are overpaid. Either you're going to end up piss poor or richie bitchy (my stupid words) if you choose to become a director.
Well he only got $3 million for Hunger Games and now he wants even more for Catching Fire. Still, I hope he makes a compromise and is still on board for director. The whole money thing really just gets under my skin. If it's a story you love, the money shouldn't matter.
I say the same thing. Hell, I thought most directors outside of hacks did what they did because of passion for filmmaking. But then again I couldn't care less about money.
If you think about how much money Hunger Games brought in compared to how much he made, he deserves a pay raise... Especially because Catching Fire will probably do even better. I'd think Lionsgate could manage to dish out a bit more to get him back.
I really think he probably will settle either way. He seems to have really strong passion for the series.
Well, he probably is pretendingnot to return if they dont agree to pay him what he wants, and if they refuse, he might stay if he truly cares. Atleast hes trying to get a payraise.
Comments
It might not even be a shaky cam, from reading the above quote from Gary Ross, if he were to do it I don't think he's going for the same way he shot THG, it seems like it might be completely different.
'Cause like 3 years ago it was
really popular to hate on OOTP.
Especially between the OOTP/HBP
2-year gap. It was excruciating.
Then, suddenly, everyone stopped
menstruating and hated on HBP quite
a bit. Not much, just a little bit.
Afterwards, by the time DH started
being promoted, the fandom had
its period once again, only this time
the blood was fully discharged on
GOF. And when I say discharged,
I MEAN discharged. Mike's poor
adaptation was soaked in menstrual blood.
A few of us tried to clean it up, and things
are looking a bit better now. You know,
they're still a bit bloody, but they're better.
The fandom had a bit of a "mini-period"
last year, when DH2 was released.
All the "lack of battle" shit, as you can
remember. Luckily not much blood reached
DH2, as most people seemed to stop
menstruating.
I'm proud to say that the fandom is sort
of reaching menopause. There are still
some "messy" stages, but almost all the blood is gone
G.G.
#IRegretNothing
G.G.
hypable.com/2012/03/28/rumor-control-daniel-newman-not-cast-as-finnick-in-catching-fire/
And no. I've never appreciated Goblet of Fire.
This.
Remember how many fans were bitching because they brought Yates back after OOTP? More than half of the fandom were up in arms saying how terrible Yates was and how amateurish he was, then he went and blew more than half the fandom away with the films that followed. Personally, I think half the fandom have it wrong :P and that OOTP is a far superior movie to what he did with HBP, but the point still stands. Directors aren't always necessarily going to stick to the same style. In fact, Ross has indicated that he plans to change the style for Catching Fire. The difference could be as big as OOTP and HBP.
Regarding the shaky-cam...I've said it so often I'm not really sure I feel like it again, but I will anyway. They had to find a way to show the brutality of the games without being graphic enough for an R. The fact that it was dealing with children aslo made it harder, since you can get away with even less when it's violence involving children. Filming it from arty or oblique angles would have sacrificed the punchiness, the grit of the violece. Sure, some people don't like the shaking camera, but it was probably the best way to aesthetically make us feel the violence. They got a way with a lot for a PG-13 movie about the children killing each other in a realistic environment. It was more violent than HP ever was, and I don't see you complaining about that. It also had a tougher time with the censors, as HP largely revolved around people being taken out by coloured lights. And anyway, who's to say another director wouldn't be much tamer with the material? Don't automatically assume another director would make the movie more violent. It will be as violent as Lionsgate and the censors permit it to be, regardless of the director.
A new director would equal NEW concepts. The new director wouldn't expand on Ross's vision, he would only CHANGE what Ross already creating, turning it into a inconsistent series, which is the opposite of what it needs to be.
I really think he probably will settle either way. He seems to have really strong passion for the series.
New interview with Gary Ross, he seems really passionate about these movies, I really can't see him not doing the rest of the films to be honest.
Also, Grant Gustin has been on of the favourites by fans to play Finnick, seems he's eager to play it too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nok1x7ujUWQI would be beyond disappointed if he was cast. But I trust the casting so far, so I'm not too worried.
Grant Gustin will not be Finnick, I won't have it.
He seems so fake.
G.G.
just no lol
As Johanna!