You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

The future of Filmmaking

Posted: Sun, 15th Jan 2006, 9:57pm

Post 1 of 29

90hitpoints

Force: 40 | Joined: 26th Oct 2005 | Posts: 65

Windows User

Member

Hello again. I was just sitting around thinking and I have to ask you guys, what do you think is next for filmmaking? And by that I mean, First there where black & white films, then their where black & white films with sound, then there was color films, then can digital video, and now we have HD. So what do you think will come next?
Posted: Sun, 15th Jan 2006, 10:05pm

Post 2 of 29

Klut

Force: 2120 | Joined: 16th Apr 2004 | Posts: 1585

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

3D!!!
Posted: Sun, 15th Jan 2006, 10:14pm

Post 3 of 29

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Here's a few prophecies, maybe not quite answering your question but nevermind.

1. Industry-wide use of hard disk high-definition movie cameras

2. Quicker production turnarounds to cinema release (e.g. a film with mild special effects is shot and edited within a month or sooner, and released theatrically)

3. On shoot editing. Cameras will be connected directly to computers on-set and directors will view and edit in their best footage immediately and get rid of the unwanted footage (linked to above).

4. As it gets cheaper to make a film, there will be more competition to get your movie into the cinema. As a result, there could be pressure on cinemas from loads of different sides. Maybe even we will go back to the older eras where movie companies will own the cinemas to ensure their films get shown.
Posted: Sun, 15th Jan 2006, 11:14pm

Post 4 of 29

Vault FX

Force: 2550 | Joined: 30th May 2003 | Posts: 602

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hi, I agree with Mel's propecies, in my opinion I also think 3D, but I do also think although we haven't reached the technology and it doesn't quite answer your question, BUT I think that in the future years are films with be in a hologram format or something like that. I know it sounds stupid but that is my opinion smile

TC
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 12:01am

Post 5 of 29

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

I think if James Cameron's Battle Angel is a success, then 3D could well become a regular facet of film-making. It also has support from the likes of George Lucas and Peter Jackson, so the signs look good.

I think we will see some changes in the way films are distributed: widespread digital projection, leading to same-day releases worldwide, authorised internet downloading and simultaneous dvd/cinema releases.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 12:26am

Post 6 of 29

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

There have been 3D films for a long time. What exactly about Battle Angel is special?

Also, I think the most change will come with distribution. With the internet being the new media epicenter (music, gaming, movies, news, etc), I think you'd have to be pretty foolish to think otherwise.

As for how films are made and screened, I think digital recording to hard drives or some type of memory will definitely be the future, with innovations in screening the films coming not only with holographic stuff but also with interactivity. I think film and video games will kinda merge. Not all films, of course, but certain ones, where you control the action and what happens, and there's different things that happen depending on what you do. That's a long way off though.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 12:58am

Post 7 of 29

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

Aculag wrote:

There have been 3D films for a long time. What exactly about Battle Angel is special?
I think Battle Angel will be in a different league personally - we're not talking Jaws 3D quality. I can't recall a director as high profile and successful as Cameron pushing 3D at this level either. Ghosts Of The Abyss / Aliens Of The Deep were jaw droppingly immersive, so if he can apply that technology to a full length feature narrative, it's something to get excited about.

Check this out:
James Cameron Interview
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 3:53am

Post 8 of 29

cinemafreak

Force: 1312 | Joined: 14th Dec 2004 | Posts: 322

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

4. As it gets cheaper to make a film, there will be more competition to get your movie into the cinema. As a result, there could be pressure on cinemas from loads of different sides. Maybe even we will go back to the older eras where movie companies will own the cinemas to ensure their films get shown.
Last time I checked movies keep getting more and more expensive to make. Is it that you mean that there will be more people with sufficient funds in the future or more people with sufficient resources to produce films?
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 3:57am

Post 9 of 29

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I think 3d films are gimmicky, and cheesy, etc. It wouldn't be a movie to me, and if that became a standard, cinema would suck. I wouldn't be able to stand it, my favorite form of entertainment (video) would be gone imho.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 4:05am

Post 10 of 29

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I personally think we'll be seeing more film-to-cartoon style films, such as A Scanner Darkly.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 4:15am

Post 11 of 29

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

Serpent wrote:

I think 3d films are gimmicky, and cheesy, etc. It wouldn't be a movie to me, and if that became a standard, cinema would suck.
Done badly, I agree. The 3D movies from the early 80's are full of shots of people poking random things at the camera, simply to show off the effect. As you said, pointless and gimmicky.

The technique used on Ghosts Of The Abyss was more subtle, placing you in the environment realistically, without drawing attention to itself.

The more I think about it, the more it seems like a natural progression - we've essentially had three-dimensional sound since the late 70's, so why not a three-dimensional picture?
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 4:17am

Post 12 of 29

SlothPaladin

Force: 2900 | Joined: 30th Nov 2004 | Posts: 637

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The future of cinema is Starwars 7, 8, and 9... in 3D! and Starwars 10, 11, and 12... in holographic projection!

Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 4:20am

Post 13 of 29

The Artur

Force: 563 | Joined: 21st Aug 2004 | Posts: 517

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

The future of filmmaking holds feature films of the future boys, made by me, causing all people to hate me and film for the rest of eternity. Muahahaha.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 6:21am

Post 14 of 29

Klut

Force: 2120 | Joined: 16th Apr 2004 | Posts: 1585

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Aculag wrote:

There have been 3D films for a long time. What exactly about Battle Angel is special?
I'm thinking of 3D tv's, and cameras that can shoot 3d... razz

Would have been sweet, but might not happend in a few years.

But what Mellifluous sounds very likely ^^
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 9:46am

Post 15 of 29

rogolo

Force: 5436 | Joined: 29th May 2005 | Posts: 1513

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 4 User MacOS User

Gold Member

In the future, movies will make themselves, and we'll all be out of "work"!!! wink
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 11:22am

Post 16 of 29

Klut

Force: 2120 | Joined: 16th Apr 2004 | Posts: 1585

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

rogolo wrote:

In the future, movies will make themselves, and we'll all be out of "work"!!! wink
Heh, we will be able to record our dreams on tape!
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 3:08pm

Post 17 of 29

Magic_man12

Force: 853 | Joined: 20th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1350

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I am the future of filmmaking

what do you want to know about it?

razz lol

-MAGIC
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 4:06pm

Post 18 of 29

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Films don't become more expensive. A few Hollywood Blockbusters with budgets between 100 and 200 millions do, but don't jump to the cunclusion they'd stand for "films", as they're really the exception.

Firstly I think, budgets like these will break, because they don't make any sense and corrupt the market. (No one is worth 30 millions for one movie, while 100 others work a damn hard job to earn their 10'000 a year.)

So with films getting cheaper, I do think this will lead to a huge competition wich will most likely not cause reactions that are good for independent filmmakers. I agree that cinemas might be completely bought to ensure they show what the rich and powerful want to be shown. Lowbudget-Filmmaking is still a niche, has always been, and probably will always be.

As long as we still have "money" as our main drive in society, that is.
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 6:38pm

Post 19 of 29

Job

Force: 150 | Joined: 26th Jun 2005 | Posts: 108

MacOS User

Member

..there will be a device that records my oscar winning dream in 3D razz
Posted: Mon, 16th Jan 2006, 6:42pm

Post 20 of 29

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

Words about budget
Remember though, Sollthar that while films will be getting cheaper, the value of money will continue to go down (if trends continue as they have o'er the years) so a 30 million dollar picture now, could cost 60 million in 50 years.

But I agree that overall film will get cheaper. As the software and equipment becomes more readily available to the public.
Posted: Tue, 17th Jan 2006, 9:50pm

Post 21 of 29

nanafanboy

Force: 690 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 345

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The way the box office is tanking I predict that soon production companies will go searching for actors and directors who will work for much cheaper and make cheaper films aka us. I think that people like the filmmakers at FXhome are the future. Lets face it... Hollywood is dying. So either hollywood execs go looking for new low budget talent or they continue along the path of the pg-13 horror remake and the 200 million dollar flop and go bankrupt.

Hollywood as a dream died years ago... meet hollywood as a business.

If things keep going in the direction they are going we will never see films like Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, King Kong (1933), or Psycho. We will only see films that attempt to imitate them and cash in on their success. This is precisely the reason filmmakers like the fine folks here should stand up and be counted. I bet if a producer handed any one of the talented folks here 1 million dollars they could make a film just as flashy and twice as good as oh say Van Helsing was.

Those are my thoughts anyway
Posted: Tue, 17th Jan 2006, 10:25pm

Post 22 of 29

Limey

Force: 547 | Joined: 11th Sep 2005 | Posts: 752

Gold Member

I've always thought that smell would be cool to have in a movie. It would be kind of hard to do though. Maybe like a smeling camera or somthing.
Posted: Tue, 17th Jan 2006, 10:25pm

Post 23 of 29

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Van Helsing ruled though. wink
Posted: Tue, 17th Jan 2006, 10:35pm

Post 24 of 29

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sollthar wrote:

Van Helsing ruled though. wink
/me wakes Sollthar up
Posted: Tue, 17th Jan 2006, 10:37pm

Post 25 of 29

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Oh, thanks for that. It was great though, I bough the collectors edition. I'm a die hard Sommers Fan. smile
Posted: Wed, 18th Jan 2006, 12:47am

Post 26 of 29

EyerisProductions

Force: 20 | Joined: 21st Oct 2005 | Posts: 54

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I do agree Hollywood is dying... Cinema's future lies in the New Comers.... As it always had. Hollywood died before, many students from USC, graduates or not revived it in the late 70's.

Again it is dying... New comers well breath life into it.... For another 20 years or so.

The feature of Hollywood is unclear.... But it will never go away.
Posted: Wed, 18th Jan 2006, 1:21am

Post 27 of 29

90hitpoints

Force: 40 | Joined: 26th Oct 2005 | Posts: 65

Windows User

Member

Limey12345 wrote:

I've always thought that smell would be cool to have in a movie. It would be kind of hard to do though. Maybe like a smeling camera or somthing.
Haha thats what I was thinking to. I also agree with nanafanboy. I think indi filmmakers are going to be the ruling the cinama.

First of all, because technology is making it very easy to make a low cost movie, and it will also bring in new filmmakers.

And secend, because any "A-list" movie director can take ,oh lets say, $50 million and make a crapy, over blown movie. But if you give $3 million to a person thats used to making movies for like $10,000 then he will make a great movie that could probebly make lots of money.
Posted: Mon, 23rd Jan 2006, 9:06pm

Post 28 of 29

CurtinParloe

Force: 841 | Joined: 16th Oct 2001 | Posts: 916

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

3D will be the next thing.

By that I mean 3D without the glasses, which is currently available technology, but will require a 40foot specially built plasma screen. If you go to Whitby Abbey, they have a 3D LCD screen showing a wireframe model.

The problem is television. In the 50s, Hollywood really suffered because of its advent, which is when they pushed widescreen (and the first 3D), concentrating on spectacle, which you just couldn't get at home. With 3D, it won't work, because technology advances so rapidly that everyone will have 3D TVs soon after.

After that, who knows???
Posted: Wed, 25th Jan 2006, 4:15pm

Post 29 of 29

Andreas

Force: 4943 | Joined: 9th Apr 2002 | Posts: 2657

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Speaking of the first 3D.. This read will sure catch you minds smile

http://www.21stcentury3d.com/press/pr-060117-3dvx3.html