The Chair -- Starz

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Chair -- Starz

    Just binge watched the first 5 episodes and I have to say I'm really digging it. I learned so much. The whole scene about Shane suggesting that he might deserve to share writing credit with Dan Schoffer was very interesting.

    Anyone else catch it?
    FA4

    Forgot to mention a cool moment: When Anna had her story structure laid out on a wall, it was cool to see her main beats were Save The Cat. Watch closely 'cuz it goes fast, but you can definitely see it...
    Last edited by finalact4; 09-13-2014, 03:37 PM.
    "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

  • #2
    Re: The Chair -- Starz

    Ditto on the binge watch. I think it's very educational and entertaining, and that it helps to put the role of the screenplay into perspective as just one thing among a zillion other things that go into the creation of a movie.

    I found myself talking to the TV a lot, the way sports fans might when watching a game with calls they disagree with or disapprove of, but for the most part it's quite engaging.

    I found some of the moments a bit unbelievable, especially the Shane/writing credit beat. I mean, it's got great drama and all, but I find it a wee bit hard to believe it's entirely authentic.

    Still, I'd call it must-see TV for any screenwriter who hasn't spent weeks on a set. I thought the attempt to crack Chris Moore's computer by guessing passwords was pretty darn funny.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Chair -- Starz

      I've only watched the first two episodes but it seems to me this is classic reality TV more than it is about film making. I hope it gets better.

      They've started by establishing the characters of the two competing directors:

      He's a west coast youtube star and over-confident to the point he's chosen himself for the lead role and is already insisting he should get a writing credit because he rewrote every line of the script. As if directing a feature wasn't enough glory for him.

      She's an east coast, NY indie film "artiste," with the requisite neurotic, Woody Allen-esque NY self doubt, who resents the TV cameras intrusion on her "process" yet she's under-confident to the point she's told her video diary, more than once, she's going to do a lot of crying in episodes to come.

      I'm fully aware the TV show is likely edited -- to the point of stereotype -- to ensure they're depicted prickly enough for "conflict." Yet you can't blame editing for a couple of the doozies pouring from their lips.

      When actor/producer Zak Quinto tells the guy to tone down his gross-out comedy the male contestant disses the film, American Pie, as "so 10 years ago." Way to badmouth a classic, buddy.

      And when the female contestant believes she's safely out of the TV cameras range, tucked behind the glass window of a bistro sipping her cappuccino (yet too scattered to realize her mic pack is on), she disses Chris Moore as a fellow who doesn't know what he's doing who is "in over his head." Yeah, okay.

      Yes -- I know it's healthy for creative types to take a whiz on the clay feet of the Buddha. It's a standard step on the journey to matured talent. However, it's really hard to cut these two a break -- at least for me -- because I'm highly distracted by the knit cap phenomenon which both contestants have in common.

      Literally and figuratively, knit caps everywhere. The actual caps themselves, worn by the directors and their teams, indoors, outdoors, and to bed, I presume.

      Buoyed by the adulation of his tens of millions you tube fans, he wants to wear several proverbial knit caps: actor, director, writer.

      Without her husband/partner in film making, she clings to the comfort of her writer cap angsting over the script she's rewritten over and over and over again.

      The second amazing thing to me was the similar way they treated the writer of the original script who is tasked with doing rewrites for two directors: douchey.
      Last edited by sc111; 09-14-2014, 07:24 AM.
      Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Chair -- Starz

        Originally posted by sc111 View Post
        I've only watched the first two episodes but it seems to me this is classic reality TV more than it is about film making. I hope it gets better.
        That was my first impression so I never gave it a shot. The two "directors" seemed whiney in the trailers and like they were two names that had been randomly picked from a hat.
        One must be fearless and tenacious when pursuing their dreams. If you don't, regret will be your reward.

        The Fiction Story Room

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Chair -- Starz

          Originally posted by sc111 View Post
          I've only watched the first two episodes but it seems to me this is classic reality TV more than it is about film making. I hope it gets better.

          They've started by establishing the characters of the two competing directors:

          He's a west coast youtube star and over-confident to the point he's chosen himself for the lead role and is already insisting he should get a writing credit because he rewrote every line of the script. As if directing a feature wasn't enough glory for him.

          She's an east coast, NY indie film "artiste," with the requisite neurotic, Woody Allen-esque NY self doubt, who resents the TV cameras intrusion on her "process" yet she's under-confident to the point she's told her video diary, more than once, she's going to do a lot of crying in episodes to come.

          I'm fully aware the TV show is likely edited -- to the point of stereotype -- to ensure they're depicted prickly enough for "conflict." Yet you can't blame editing for a couple of the doozies pouring from their lips.

          When actor/producer Zak Quinto tells the guy to tone down his gross-out comedy the male contestant disses the film, American Pie, as "so 10 years ago." Way to badmouth a classic, buddy.

          And when the female contestant believes she's safely out of the TV cameras range, tucked behind the glass window of a bistro sipping her cappuccino (yet too scattered to realize her mic pack is on), she disses Chris Moore as a fellow who doesn't know what he's doing who is "in over his head." Yeah, okay.

          Yes -- I know it's healthy for creative types to take a whiz on the clay feet of the Buddha. It's a standard step on the journey to matured talent. However, it's really hard to cut these two a break -- at least for me -- because I'm highly distracted by the knit cap phenomenon which both contestants have in common.

          Literally and figuratively, knit caps everywhere. The actual caps themselves, worn by the directors and their teams, indoors, outdoors, and to bed, I presume.

          Buoyed by the adulation of his tens of millions you tube fans, he wants to wear several proverbial knit caps: actor, director, writer.

          Without her husband/partner in film making, she clings to the comfort of her writer cap angsting over the script she's rewritten over and over and over again.

          The second amazing thing to me was the similar way they treated the writer of the original script who is tasked with doing rewrites for two directors: douchey.
          SC111, That's all set up. Yeah, I think this is scripted to a point-- aren't they all to some degree? But I think there's some really good information that someone who's never been on set or seen directors in action can learn a lot from.

          I mean, it really made me think differently about what I write and it's good to have an understanding of how things work.

          It gets better. Hope you keep watching, it'd be great to open up the discussion. I didn't want to offer up too many spoilers, but the core idea of taking the same initial script and spin it two different ways, it kinda cool-- even if you don't like one take over the other. I'm pretty sure I'll like Anna's version more-- I'm not into crass, college puke humor where the girls are all depicted as stereotypical 'dumb blonde bombshells."

          Shane is really funny, though, and very easily identifiable. I think when he says, "I've never been to a party," that it's a very telling moment that even he may not realize.

          And he has a following of 10,000,00 YouTube subscribers-- he could easily win on that alone-- But I'm hopeful he'll do something with broader appeal, as they've suggested.

          I kinda like the producers, too-- gives some good insight to what must be the business end of it.

          FA4
          "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Chair -- Starz

            I've been watching. Pretty hooked on it, it's a great experiment.

            Based on their movie trailers, I could never sit through Shane's film. Ever. There's a difference between toilet humor used sparingly and cleverly like in Bridesmaids -- and the kind of crap he's doing. Anna looks like she's produced a far superior film. But it's a little unfair that it will be based on fan voting since he has such a large YouTube audience.

            I really want to root for Anna as she seems to have more depth and artistic intuition, but she's far too reliant on her little pod and really seems to have very little confidence so it's hard to then put confidence in her. Meanwhile Shane is very... for lack of a better word, man-bitchy. His attitude is a major turn off. He has little moments of redemption when he self-deprecates or relates well to his actors, but then when he insults aspiring actors and throws fits and storms off pouting, or blatantly bad mouths his producer (the far more successful than Shane could ever dream to be, Zachary Quinto) -- it just makes me shake my head. You can use "first timer" as an excuse for mistakes, but your personality is your personality. I think that Anna, IF she start relying on her own instincts and lets herself be known as THE director instead of just "one of three", could go on to be successful. But I think Shane would very quickly earn a reputation as being profusely disrespectful and difficult to work with and struggle to ever be hired for anything, let alone handed real budgets to make more of his juvenile gross out stuff. He has an audience though, I'll give him that.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Chair -- Starz

              I, too, am bothered by Anna's lack of confidence and autonomy. I imagine even some of that is scripted, but you can see in her face that she's used to working as a unit. I get that part of the reliance, but to me it makes her look like a Miss Nell waiting to be rescued.

              I find Shane unappealing, but I don't know his work well enough to know whether the person he's depicted as is real or scripted; he may just be defensive because of his awkwardness earlier in his life.

              These personality traits/caricatures in Anna and Shane add drama to the series, but I would have liked to seen stronger main characters that wouldn't make me roll my eyes so much. Besides, the concept is so interesting, and there's natural conflict at every twist and turn in making a film, so there's plenty of real drama to be mined. I'd like to see some of that drama, and hope that it's in the upcoming episodes.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Chair -- Starz

                I watched the third episode last night -- because it was on after Outlander. If it wasn't in that slot I'd likely forget about the show.

                Like jcpdoc said above, Shane and Anna are becoming caricatures for me. I don't know if editing is creating this impression, or if each of them is clearly stuck in their stereotype.

                Shane has a tantrum because actors don't want to be associated with a film in which a lead character eats his own poop. He's offended! He wants to know who is revealing the production's secrets! He thinks out-of-work actors should kiss his feet of clay for a chance to be in his feature film. Shane the youtube star has become so predictable it's hard to watch him.

                Anna -- oh, jeeze. With all the aspiring women directors out there chomping at the bit for an opportunity, they choose a woman who confirms every stereotyped doubt about women directors. They can't lead, they can't make decisions, they need a man to rescue them, they cry when the pressure is high. I'm waiting for the PMS scene. Anna needs to run everything by her hubby back home. Anna's brother-in-law had to take over the casting session. Without men to rescue her, Anna is out of luck.

                I'm staring to wonder if these two were chosen to prove youtube stars and women can't cut it in Hollywood.
                Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Chair -- Starz

                  I just want to slap them both.

                  Find it hard to believe that these were the two most promising wanna be directors that they could find...

                  And my heart really goes out to the original writer of the script...one of the things that this drives home... and I thought it was just my own experience... the worst thing in the world is the "writer"/director.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Chair -- Starz

                    I dozed off during last night's episode. So, to catch it again, I waited till Starz reran it later. I was wide awake during the interim yet dozed again trying to watch it a second time. I don't know if it's the drone of the same wool-capped voices whining about the same things, episode after episode, but this show is coma-inducing for me.

                    This morning, I poked around looking for reviews of both finished films. The LA Times announced, Shane Dawson's, Not Cool is a waste of time.

                    A different reviewer for the same paper is kinder to Hollidaysburg yet also says it doesn't really break new ground.
                    Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Chair -- Starz

                      I think, for me, I was really interested in the process, not so much the entertainment value or the characters per se. I thought it was interesting looking at the dynamics of everything other than the two directors.

                      I don't know how 'scripted' it is, but I do know that I'm a very different writer-- I know exactly how I'd want the actors to express the characters. I wouldn't need to check with anyone else-- at least I don't think I would.

                      It seems important to be able to navigate various relationships in order to get what you want in the end. Maybe it's that I'm older than they are, but I'd have been more mindful of the producers stake and that it's not a lottery that you just won, you are 'hired' to make a movie that will generate profits-- not just establish you as a filmmaker.

                      If the first one bombs, well chances are there will be no second one. I think I'd want to tap into all the experience and talent available. Be decisive, but open minded. That probably wouldn't make for good reality tv, though.

                      It feels like (and that might be my interpretation based on editing) there's a lack of professional responsibility to the business end of it. I could be completely off base. I mean, sure they're upset by the constraints that the budget places on them, the restrictions of the locations, and the schedule-- all things beyond their control, but are they looking beyond what they want to the fact that someone's else's money is at risk here? I don't know. It sometimes felt like an 'us vs them' scenario.

                      The other thing that I've wondered, is if both films are unsuccessful, will that hinder potential opportunities for first time writer/directors in the future?

                      I wonder if they will release the back half of the episodes?

                      Keep in mind that my comments are based on a position of ignorance as I have not yet experienced the process.
                      FA4
                      "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Chair -- Starz

                        I was thinking the storyline of the original script chosen for them to work with was also ho-hum. And this lies with Chris Moore & Company because they chose it. The premise is in the well-worn "you can't go home again" territory. There's not much new to explore.

                        That said, both of them had the ability to heavily rewrite the script. And both of them did. So if there are weaknesses it lies with the contestants and their talent level, no one else.

                        As far as budget restricting the contestants -- I think it's a lame excuse. If you have well-developed characters and dialogue and you know how to direct actors, does it really matter how much you had to spend on production?

                        Setting aside current criticism of Kevin Smith, look at Clerks. What kind of budget did he have? Even at today's dollar value, it would be - what? - about a tenth of what these contestants had to make a film? Clerks was good because Smith knew his characters and their world, inside out.

                        When I look at trailers and clips from these two films it seems to me Shane and Anna are sticking with what's been done before. Shane wants to make his generation's over-the-top version of American Pie or Animal House. Anna is doing her version (or her husband's version by proxy) of Garden State.

                        Edited to add: Alas, the outcome of this experiment is looking like the old story. Anna's movie is getting better film critic reviews. Shane's movie, thanks to 10-mil youtube fans is doing better BO (but not earth-shattering BO for sure). Here are their Opening Weekend numbers according to Box Office Mojo:

                        Shane's: Opening weekend...$10,329.
                        Anna's: Opening weekend.......$1,713.
                        Last edited by sc111; 09-29-2014, 06:48 AM.
                        Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X