YouTube video leads to Hollywood contract

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

YouTube video leads to Hollywood contract


news.bbc.co.uk

A producer from Uruguay who uploaded a short film to YouTube in November 2009 has been offered a $30m (£18.6m) contract to make a Hollywood film.

The movie will be sponsored by director Sam Raimi, whose credits include the Spiderman and Evil Dead films.

Fede Alvarez's short film "Ataque de Panico!" (Panic Attack!) featured giant robots invading and destroying Montevideo, the capital of Uruguay.

It is 4 mins 48 seconds long and was made on a budget of $300 (£186).
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
$30,000,000 contract from a $300 YouTube video - this guy's got talent!

Check it out (-HQ version recommended/ volume up!):





And that's not all. Fede Alvarez, from Uruguay, was being inundated with emails from Hollywood within 4 days of putting the clip up! To top it all, he's really caught the (ATS) zeitgeist.

We all know technology can serve as a leveller - but an unknown from South America being instantaneously catapulted to the top like this?! Pretty astonishing!

Maybe this can give hope to a lot of underprivileged folks around the world who are increasingly managing to gain access to PCs?



news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
haha are you kidding me? anyone who knows anything about films and making them would know that a 300 $ budget is total hogwash


300$ budget + 200,000 for everything else, can anyone say cloverfield advertising ? gotta love viral ads.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cloak
 


Nice conspiracy angle there, Cloak. Kudos.


Intrepid researchers/investigators: I think you just got a summons...



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
$300 for the actual project perhaps...but that goes little to cover the thousands spent on software and hardware outside of the project to make it possible.

I could claim my A-level media project had a budget of £0. but strictly speaking it isn't true, I'm using a camera which cost over a hundred pounds, a uniform recycled from another project thats £110, a camera tripod, three recycled televisions in it...many many things shifted about and re-used so I didn't have to pay for them.

Then I'm using Sony Vegas Pro 9 which is stupidly expensive, but I didn't buy it specifically for this project so it doesn't go into the budget for it...


Not to take away at all, this guy is VERY talented clearly, the idea of a $300 budget just seems a bit sensationalised to me... just forgetting all the background costs of things.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by pause4thought
Maybe this can give hope to a lot of underprivileged folks around the world who are increasingly managing to gain access to PCs?


Quite likely this is the most ignorant patronising quote I have ever read on this site.

Disgusting.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Shambles
 


With absolute certainty that is the most patronizing comment I've ever read on this site.

I see you enjoy putting people down. I for one hopes this lifts a few people up.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
That movie was very very cool.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Pretty cool film, however I have to agree that was a little more than 300 bucks to make. The camera alone would exceed that. But very cool none the less. Glad things happened for him like they did, will definatley be looking for more of his work.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I stopped watching after the first 30 seconds.

I don't know why they would give this guy any money.

That movie was already made.

It was called War of the Worlds.



[edit on 17-12-2009 by DazE777]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by The Cloak, StevenDye, Lemon.Fresh & djvexd
 


I can only assume the budget refers to how much it cost with all the hardware/software already in place. I agree, though, it is a stretch.




reply to post by DazE777
 


It's just a 'short'. A proof of concept. In effect the equivalent of a filmmaker's CV (though I don't actually know what the guy was setting out to achieve + I don't think we can discount the somewhat intriguing theory put forward by The Cloak).



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Ah nothing like a feel good story from Hollywood. Now what’s the catch?

Francis Ford Copalla found making the God Father Movie (The first one) a daunting challenge in a Hollywood fearful of reprisals from Organized Crime elements. Few people were willing to touch or go anywhere near Mario Puzo’s book despite it’s huge potential as a film.

I wonder what Hollywood is really offering 30,000,000 to an outsider to take on?

Those are pretty shark infested waters out there in Hollywood, and movie moguls and investors aren’t known for their generosity of spirit.

Meanwhile Uruguay itself is a veritable sanctuary for everyone from ex Nazi SS to the money launderers and financers that make the War on Terror go round.

There is a conspiracy here somewhere!

Oh and while I am at it…BAH HUMBUG!



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


Oh aye, I see that. But perhaps for people who arn't really interested at all in film making, it might be useful so see how a film with a budget of zilch, in fact comes closer to a budget of £1000, so a film with a budget of $300 probably exceeds that by the end.

Again, it doesn't take away from the skill of the director at all.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Shambles
 


What in the world was so patronizing about that comment?

On topic: I think that is pretty cool. He made due with some limitations to create some pretty nice effects.
Imagine what this guy will be able to do with a Hollywood Budget?

Should make a very nice movie.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 




(Merry Christmas, Proto!)

Off the scale - what made you think of that? Has anything of that nature been exposed before? (Not just corruption, but a convoluted Hollywood cover up of that ilk.)

Wouldn't you have thought going viral via YouTube would be the opposite to what you'd need if you were hiding something under a rug?



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 




We all know technology can serve as a leveller


I think it will be even more of an equalizer when the idea of offering 30 million to someone to make a movie will seem silly...because what would you spend it on?



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


Do you mean when so much of the economy has gone up the shoot that there is simply nothing in the shops?

By that stage hyperinflation would have kicked in. $30 million should still get you a few DVDs, though...



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Got bored at excatly 2minutes and nineteen seconds in. just before i hit the reply button.

I see absolutly nothing original here, the way it is cut together and the music synch is just crap. while the technical aspect may be good. the film itself is not deserving of such a great reward.

This is just a mordern version of the Day after tomorrow. and if made into a full feature film i expect the plot and tone,would be very similar.

I think that the maker of the film, is very much into the Japanese anime. where almost every cartoon contains a giant robot of some kind, destroying a city..


mr bob rates it 4/10 while technically brilliant for an amatuer. it is just too unoriginal.


[edit on 17-12-2009 by MR BOB]



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by MR BOB
 



mr bob rates it 4/10 while technically brilliant for an amatuer. it is just too unoriginal.


Fair enough. Perhaps there's plenty to criticize to the untrained eye. But if it falls that far short it really does beg the question - why is Hollywood falling over itself to sign the guy up?

Perhaps the CTs from The Cloak & ProtoplasmicTraveller gain more credence the more we take a critical look at what's happening here.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by pause4thought

Fair enough. Perhaps there's plenty to criticize to the untrained eye. But if it falls that far short it really does beg the question - why is Hollywood falling over itself to sign the guy up?

...


Whilst opinion on whether the footage is edited well or not, or is original enough to be entertaining or not is left up to opinion. I think we can universally agree the effects are done very well.

THAT alone could be what hollywood sees, a person who was willing to work VERY hard, and does have a creative flare; and so, given a big budget, a nice full crew and some guidance some truly great things could come from him.


I hated my media film for the first half of my A level, but it got me an A, the narrative was terrible because I could never do what I'd wanted. But my shots, lighting and editing showed there was a flare of talent in there somewhere, I just still had a bit to go. And perhaps that is what hollywood can see, for unless we are film teachers or in the business, we will miss alot of this talent being shown.





top topics
 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join