Robert Rodriguez - Film is Dead Part 1

[HunterMann]

Very sad that Robt. Rodriguez says that "film is dead", that the only reason to shoot real film is for purely "nostalgic" reasons. Perhaps he means to say "the art of film is dead". Digital videomaking is NOT filmmaking, the video shooters are NOT filmmakers, they are videomakers, period.

[troglodyto]

what camera does he mean, "the 900"? anyone know?

[mgmanmike]

@troglodyto Sony HDW-F900 to be exact. An early professional HD video camera.

[mgmanmike]

@troglodyto I think he now uses the Panavision Genesis, or, he did for some films.

[zigifrojd]

Cinema died several times during the decades, and what is coming from films in the world especially america is so devastating and disapointing, big, big luck film is great art because of the decades of the 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 in 20th century, but todays standards are so low its unbelivable.

[mgmanmike]

@zigifrojd I totally agree! And Hollywood keeps putting out remakes and endless sequels too.

[stephenGunit]

how many times has he talked about how fast and efficient and cheap he is able to make movies...that piece of poop spy kids cost 50million to make.

[mgmanmike]

@stephenGunit He did make a few low-budget films and I heard that his films are actually made with a fraction of the price it would cost other directors, with the same results.

[elstroshitnonstop]

film will always be better and will never die. the idea of the death of film is so stupid. rodriguez films look awful, he will never be a cinematographer

[RoberTastic]

@elstroshitnonstop

yeah seriously.. he's such a clown

[bordertown]

As I much I love digital and what it's done for cinema, I will always prefer film. It just has that beautiful organic look and feel to it that digital cannot quite capture.

[midiman16]

Title of the video is "Film Is Dead". Now what do you mean by that? Film as a medium is being phased out or that film looks dead compared to digital? It might be true that eventually digital will take over, but as far as image liveliness, film is far superior. As long as digital looks the way it does, it will never replace film.

[elproedros]

@midiman16 check out "The Great Camera Shootout 2011" by zacuto. You will notice that in many cases digital is far better than film

[canadastreetmedia]

YOUNG WHITES GET DIRECT HIRED FIRST UNDER CANADIAN TAX CREDITS! USA FILM WORK IN CANADA ?

The Work Available to the Canadian film unionized members on USA Runaway Productions is now distributed By DIRECT HIRING & Not thru the unions dispatch.

ALLEGED DISCRIMINATORY CONDITIONS!

Under The CANADA Tax Credits The Young Whites Get DIRECT Hired First:

You May Want To Red Flag These Projects coming out of Canada after 2009.

Potentials of GOVERMENT SUBSIDIZED DISCRIMINATION & RASICM may Apply

[SupremeCommander85]

If Robert Rodriguez made a G.I. Joe reboot, it would be awesome!

[sibryce]

While the pros on HD might have been exaggerated when this was made, today the picture quality is pretty much dead-on to 35mm (except maybe on an IMAX screen, and even that probably won't be an issue for much longer).

[NacFilmTheory]

WHAT? Robert Rodriguez has been kidnapped????!!!

[holicat098]

Robert is right!

[Frontigenics]

I clearly said these we're just "my opinions". My real point was just that films are subjective. You're an idiot because you're trying to create facts out of opinions. Plus, your making conclusion out of information I have not given (this is what stupid people do), not all things that are old are bad. Dr. Stranglove was also way ahead of it's time and, IN MY OPINION, much better than movies like Citizen Cane.

[Frontigenics]

@ChetR Spy Kids was the first family film to break the 100 million mark. Not an easy achievement. There is more to film-making that just churning our contrived, pretentious, garbage like "Blackswan" or "Milk".

[xquickstrykex]

@Frontigenics FUCK SPY KIDS!

[Frontigenics]

@ChetR That's just your opinion. I like movies that are different. While, I wasn't crazy about the Desperado series, SinCity and Planet Terror are amazing and WAY ahead of their time... and some of my favorites. Also, in my option, some of the "great films" like Citizen Cane, are completely terrible.

[ConnorGunn]

@ChetR Sin City, El Mariachi, Desperado, Planet Terror. I refuse to ever say that Rodriguez is a bad film maker

[ronineditor]

When I was in film school, I HATED the reality of filmmaking... the price of it, counting feet, running out during a take, changing bags, not trusting your light meter, crap in the gate, etc. You move sooooo slow with film and it's crazy expensive - very limiting. I enjoyed making VHS movies when I was a kid a lot more. I switch over to editing, which I love. But now, with HD, I regained my love of directing because I can just shoot and not stand around all day.

[rapist41]

film is better and this is the reason oh, wait for it: IMAX

[TheJabberwock]

except rodriguez knows how to make the Man happy

[TheJabberwock]

robert rodriguez reminds me of melvin van peebles

[PtAltmVansanTarr]

Costs of digital may be not fully apparent, the energy costs of saving these digi films is sky high, film simply needs a large cool cave. We might be losing huge chunks of film history as we speak, especially commercials,shorts, student films, etc

[Morahman7vnNo2]

If it'- on magnetic tape, then that still counts as a type of film.

[Isle0fRed]

As much as i love working in the filmmaking process, I will always prefer film to digital, solely because the quaility is supior, even with 16mm (and sometimes 8). Also, the hard work process means that the effort put into the works is supior, especailly if shooting film can be tiring and fustrating. The only problem with digital is that the effort is rarely there, more films shot on digitial are very weak compared to those on film, also digital has democronised filmmaking, and everyone knows...

[Isle0fRed]

@Isle0fRed demorcracy will never work. That said, I do shoot digital, but the only reason to shoot digital is due to cost reasons

[3guys1girlandfetus]

the future is digital film

[Isle0fRed]

film or hd, just tools I agree. The only downside is that theres more shit films done on digital

[MrJmoss86]

@cfx5000 Robert Rodriguez shot his first movie on film, just because he is telling the truth, digital makes every aspect of the film making process easier faster and more efficiecient, just because he isn't living in the past and he is up on new technology does not make him a modern scrub director, he is a beast at what he does, do u even know anything about rodriguez? idiot!

[cfx5000]

Fim is dead because of because modern scrub directors like rodriguez.

[TheWorksful]

It's just tape! I LOVE shooting on miniDV and I love that!

[KieranIsBoss]

gaming is coming up to fast on film, but there will always be that generation that will watch film.

[martinezmarcio1]

@KieranIsBoss do like games on films? becuse i don't like it

[gullytiger]

@SpyderSniper79 if Rodriguez didn't go digital we would't have Sin City

[gullytiger]

film or HD are just tools, like effects or costumes...if you don't tell a good story or care about the characters you're just wasting peoples time to watch it...just an opinion

[bombtom512]

F U George Lucas, stop converting people to digital

[MSproductions23]

@bombtom512 Lucas is God.

[Tolin93]

@elfil76 2 years ago and it is indeed true what he says. Red One, Sony X1, ARRIFLEX D-21 and more just one the way. So many movies are being shot on digital, and looking good -> And more will follow.

[zebracardeath]

i think that digital is easy enough to use that awful films like G-fore are going to come out ad nauseum in the future. AND because of that, film will retain its esteem, the same way hand drawn animation has.

[elfil76]

two years ago and he's right...red one and the sony x1 did it.

[krutmin]

Everyone knocking film, do you know that slumdog millionare was shot digitally? It one best picture at the oscars and more importantly BEST CINEMETOGRAPHY. Film is dying, it will always have its place, but digital is becoming the standard. Also Avatar was digital too, highest grossing movie of all time. The critics and audiences alike have embraced digital, nuff said.

[modpodsquad]

Film won't die, it looks the best. Digital can't produce that coveted film look.

[EastIslandFilms]

@modpodsquad Digital will take the majority of motion picture work in the near future for all of the reasons that Rodriguez says in this talk. Not only are more films being shot digitally but the biggest and best film are now being shot digitally.

Have you tried shooting on both to see which is better for you?

[Dabeat19]

@modpodsquad i agree film is better digital works on some movies but not all movies same thing goes for music videos

[flickerchocho]

Robert Rodriguez is the best Film Director Ever!!!!!!

[MrPerdition]

Budget & then the filmmaker's choice decide this issue. Film isn't going anywhere soon because the vast majority of people in a position to get $20-40 million dollars from a studio prefer shooting film. Rodriguez still can't convert his good friend Tarantino to shoot digital. Digital is established, Film is THE STANDARD.

[UnpunishedMovie]

Film is to the movie world what oils are to the art world. Digital is the future and present of movies. I find the film company ads that trash digital in trade magazines kind of sad, but they see which way the wind's blowing.

[grindhouse74]

Film looks better, end of story.....

[Ticklishlittlefellow]

For reall dude. Digital is taking over. It's better, the end.

[emdiuenmaxi]

Watching Avatar, Superman Returns or even Attack of the Clones I don't appreciate that much difference with film latitude (the major issue between film and digital). Digital cinema it's just starting. It's improving every year. It'll clearly be the standard in the future.

[philmore24p]

analog film is for people that's slow and old :)

HD ALL THE WAY BABY!!!!!!!!

[bregowine]

The latitude of the film still surpasses the one given by any real HD camera, a RED, a Cinealta, you name it... and everyone knows it, even Mr. Rodriguez. Obviously, the video will eventually develop to a point where it will equal or even leave behind the film, but it hasn't happened. We are talking in terms of quality of the image here, but if it resumes to cost, it's pretty clear that the video saves you a lot of money and is easier and faster to work with.

[leviathin5]

lol, wow this is my first time seeing this guy speak and I'm surprised at how mellow he is. Seems like a cool guy. How ironic is it tho while he's talking about the quality of the image and diffusion and stuff that this youtube video quality is so shitty lol..

[xmedical420Marijuana]

SO MUCH LOVE

[BitzCinema]

its time for a new generation of writers, directors, ACTORS, procducers. I really hate admitting this, but digital is it. film IS dead and its the product of the 20th century. Its time to move on.

[mainline6]

Film maybe dead for some people who don't care as much about makeing the best images possible. For me...I will continue too shoot film because it is still the best format on the planet for movies!

Shooting HD isn't going to make the user young, hip or cool! Despite what the HD salesmen say.

[TheDM75]

Tottaly agree. Film for me.

[William82oct]

I don't know how true this is but I heard that most Film Festivals prefer for your film to be Digital.

[BitzCinema]

I don't know about that, i'm gonna have to look it up, but it sounds accurate. digital is easier, cheaper, faster...but like most people, myself included, knows there's nothing like film. it's beautiful, but it's a new era now. No one knows what you can do with digital yet, i know there's beauty in it, i just have to find it.

[xTazerx]

@BitzCinema yea and about time-mostly anyone can shoot now! But guess what? Anyone can do it but only few actually have talent to make a kick ass film!

[emdiuenmaxi]

@xTazerx You just exactly hit the point. Now films can be done by people who has talent, not only by the people who has friends in film industry and/or the money to spend on 35mm footage.

[ARUBAPRO]

@xTazerx how can i get in touch with Robert? I am a writer and i would like to show him the stories I have written...!! thanks

[rammsteinemiliano]

@ARUBAPRO with imdb pro u can get in touch with his agent, but it costs

[mgmanmike]

@ARUBAPRO Like rammsteinemiliano said, join IMDB pro. It does cost, but it's well worth the money! And, once you join you can contact anyone's reps.

[leomannpictures]

Please stop arguing about film vs whatever...get out there and make your movie with whatever you got. I just needed to say that. peace.

[theryaner]

digital is far more economical than film, but film does look better. Public Enemies looked like crap.

[TVwriter23]

It is and it isn't at the same time. Digital is cheaper, but the way new tech makes the old obsolete faster and faster these days I think in the long run it will cost more. Plus you can always use film cameras no matter the age. Once a video cam dies it just dies. Becareful too Hollywood forgets to mention that though film can be expensive that's not what's making movies cost so much. It's mostly the talent.

[TrevorDeanM]

Film has such a cool look to it. It's like your looking at your own imagination.

[mainline6]

Both Sodrburgh and Fincher have used video on projects that benefit from the ugly realism that HD can provide, in the same way that soap operas do. Other than a few obvious exceptions film is still is the best format to shoot a movie on!

[Smithereen1]

In the terms of David Fincher, Fight Club is the perfect example of that. Not just in the actors but the locations also has a bleak sense of urban decay.

[mainline6]

That's true, but ironicaly Fight club was shot on Film, which goes to show how versatile film is. It's a shame a great director like Fincher who made his name with film has resorted to shooting on video.

[EMHBABE]

Digital is the future, get over it. The only way they can make the picture quality better using film is to use a bigger stock, which means they'll need a bigger camera. Digital technologies will allow for better picture quality while keeping the cameras relatively portable. All they have to do is invest in the technology. George Lucas knows it, now Robert knows it, soon everyone else will. Goodbye film.

[mainline6]

Your right digital is the future but not because it is better than film as it's certainly not! Film is still superior in lattitude, colour reproduction, believe it or not resolution as well,and the most obvious of all it looks a hundred times better than Digital. Which is why productions spend big sums trying to make it look more like Film.

[Mr19after6]

He is a good director, but film will never die!

[TVwriter23]

I hope not. I mean digital is cool, but film has a look I don't think digital can come close to.

[44eelz]

@Mr19after6 yeah, technically hes right about all the comparisons, but Film just feels so organic

[Jammsbro1]

@Mr19after6 It won't die in the same sense that Vinyl didn't die after CD but it will die off and become a rare art form. Digital is the only way forward.

[Joyvel]

film is not gonna be dead! come on, even one frame of a 35mm film has more information than a 4K frame, is superior in quality, so i'm not agree with that way of think. but he is a good director and he is always trying to say that you can do a film with less money than you think, and of course the video is one of the steps to do a low budget film.

[TVwriter23]

I have a film production teacher who works in film as well as teaches at UT and has a production class outside of school. Pretty cool dude. He started in film and has worked in digital, but prefers film. The only reason he does digital is because there some projects that it's just economical sense. He did tell us that the main reason film is so high is because of the actors not because of film and sets. I believe this especially seeing how much many stars get paid.

[mainline6]

Rodriguez is talking shit! Anyone who knows anything about filmaking knows that film is the best way to shoot a movie! especially a fantasy movie! HD still looks like video! You'll spend more money trying to make HD look like film than you did on buying and developing the filmstock! Don't believe the bullshit! Film will allways look better!! They're just trying to sell a new and inferior format!

[GodotArrived]

Anyone who knows anything about cinema knows that the works of Soderbergh and Fincher invalidates you argument.

[OutlineStudio]

Well said!

[RakaiThwei]

Robert Rodriguez is doing a new Predator film... and I've read it, it's the script which he wrote from 1994... And I can say that it's shit. The new film is gonna suck...

Robert has not done his research on the Predator character, and is wanking over the fact that he's doing a Predator movie.

He shouldn't have touched the Predator franchise... all I can say is, I hope Litvak and Antal dump his ideas which he wrote in 94..

[LooneyM3]

you are aware that the creators of predator read the script and loved it, and they wish they would have done his movie before doing Alien vs Predator.. im actually hyped about the Predator movie.. looking forward to it, but wont go into production for a long time.

[RakaiThwei]

I am aware of it, but the script is pretty damn horrible. I have taken the time to read it and as a Predator fan, I am quite astonished as to how many contradictions there are in the script regaurding the Predator character.

Rodriguez has NOT done his homework on the Predator character. He has NOT researched the culture or anything. He still thinks his ideas are cool when at best they seem mediocre.

And the Thomas Brothers created Predator, Fox just holds the copywrites to it.

[RakaiThwei]

Rodriguez completely ignores what has been established in Predator 2, that Predators are more than just mindless killing machines and that they have a warrior's code of honor. He's even said he's ignoring Predator 2 in a MTV Interview.

There was nothing wrong with Predator 2.

I don't understand why Rodriguez wants to turn the creatures into mindless slasher villians when in Predator 2 they became so much more than that.

You want the script, I can link you it via PM?

[JCVDFan1]

robert is just the producer for that movie...

[MrPerdition]

I hated what Kevin Smith said in his 2nd Evening With DVD. Told a kid to use credit cards. Complete BS Putting yourself in debt has little if anything to do with whether or not you work in the film industry. Great work ethic & attitude along with a couple of connections will get people in. Putting yourselves into debt of film school or your first feature just isn't smart anymore. Not sure if it ever was. You can get a great setup (Cam/PC/edit&Sound Apps) for 3 to 4 grand. Wrangle a crew & get2it

[CTM1978]

Trying to "get in" doesn't do shit for anyone. Like you said, get a basic set up (cam/PC/edit&sound apps) and just make your fucking movie. Smith wasted, what, 27K shooting Clerks on film when he could have done the entire thing on video for about $50 bucks and would have looked just as good even in 1994. Look at Crank 2, those guys shot on Prosumer cameras available at any electronics store.

[TVwriter23]

Video in 1994 looked okay not great. Plus the whole editing system back then are you serious.

[alistahr]

it was the third evening, and he didnt say that was the only way, the kid asked him for advice and you give advice according to your experiences, that was kevin's experience so he told him that. nowadays you dont have spend 25 grand, you can probably spend about 5 and get a better looking picture than clerks, i agree with you on that, its a lot different now

[MrPerdition]

Actually, it was the 2nd evening with, 1st half done in Canada asked by a guy in his early 20's with black glasses. I remember the question very vividly, it pissed me off so much. & still listening through evening with 1 & 2 he puts it out there that if the movie wasn't what it was it would have ruined his credit & therefore early adult life. But he still stood up there saying lie about you job & get a bunch of credit cards as a recommendation not as "this is how I did it." Pure BS on his part

[alistahr]

i have evening 2 and dont remember that, he said something like that in the 3rd where he said, he lied about being the manager of the store,and yeah he took a big risk, and he managed to make it why does that piss you off, thats pretty fucking kick ass if you ask me, he had nothing going on in life, had a crappy job and still lived with his parents, this is a guy who took that chance and made it a reality, he told that to the guy because he didnt know any other way

[rivercraig]

It's not the worst idea ever, Its how he got clerks made so it's not like he was just mouthing off like that.

Now days you don't really need it as much as gear is more accessible and you can get a half decent result but you need talented friends and a good script and you know what sometimes talent costs money and if you can make a great film then 25k on your Visa is a good investment.

[elvisfan22]

I spent a grand total of $400 making an 1800s prison short. That included gas, crew, clothing, props, tape, everything. I put it in the 3rd oldest film fest in the U.S & out of 4,500 movies I won the "Gold" for best editing. People actually asked me if I filmed it in England & if my clothes were specially made because the period and clothing were so authentic. No & no. They also predicted my budget to be in the 30-$100,000 range. Nope, $400. I did all this using RR style filmaking and it worked.

[HunterMann]

The movie "Clerks" was said to have cost around $22,000 to shoot & edit. That may be true, but what most people saw in cinemas & on VHS/DVD had the sound re-mixed and new music which cost much more than $22,000 for the publishing and/or performance rights. Did we see a $22,000 film?

[elvisfan22]

In theory yes, but in actuality, No it was NOT a $22,000 film. However, I do not see the distinction for what we were talking about? Just because Clerks wasn't doesn't mean that you can't make a great feature length movie for $22,000.

[HunterMann]

Good points. Obviously I am a film geek in the struggle to hang on to the motion picture method I grew up with.

I'm shooting a feature this year, but budget dictates that for me to shoot it with 35mm Panavision would cost around $2 Mil. Instead I'll have to go digital(HD or Red Cams):a 3-cam shoot, 38 days on location with a crew of 12 at a cost of $750K. I could do it cheaper, but my crew deserves pro wages & great meals/hotels. I won't have any volunteers on my crew or in my cast.

[elvisfan22]

Yep the $7,000 movie takes it's toll on the stress. If you have 750K it can make it to where ur confident and secure in your crew and there professionalism instead of having to teach all your "friends" how to do each job on a $7,000 dollar project, lol. Plus ur right, people deserve to get paid.

[TVwriter23]

I think that's where people have to becareful as well. Because many don't realize a film isn't really free or cheap whether it's digital or not it's because people are giving services for free which when estimated by costs you would have spent more than the film is said to have been made for.

[HunterMann]

Video shooting is great if you are lazy and are willing to compromise & let go of the true craft & art of filmmaking. I prefer real film.

[thisolslacker]

have you ever shot on real film?

[HunterMann]

Yes, over 30,000 hours working on-location, shooting 35mm film in Aaton & Panavision cameras, 16mm film in Aaton cameras.

[elvisfan22]

Filmakers like u r just scared because you're no longer of any use & value with ur "Film skills". You're pissed because it's becoming, rapidly, a usless skill that you've spent so much time & money learning. Ever seen the Red Cam? It's the latest digital cam ABOVE HD that's just officially put a plot on the cemetery map for film. Many prefer it OVER 35mm for quality not just convenience. 16 looks like dog shit anyways. I've done movies with film & no matter how hard u kick & scream it's over.

[HunterMann]

I spent time learning film,, yes, and people who shoot video in the film style are much better than videographers. You say I spent time learning film? No. I was paid for every shoot day, no film school, no apprenticeships. Sure, I donate my time to work on low-budget films that I believe in, but I never had to pay money for film knowledge.

[Obsidianhr]

Yes, I think I will go back to painting on stone walls in caves because thats the true craft of art.

[HunterMann]

At least it doesn't take a bunch of over paid Teamster RV & grip truck drivers to make a cave painting.

[nublackmusic]

it's the same conversation in music. tape vs digital. tape sounds way better but it's a matter of convenience in production and post production. digital wins, it's no contest.

[B3D5X]

Totally agree. Vinyl records sound so much better (at least in terms of warmth and richness, perhaps not aural accuracy) than CDs but it's a matter of convenience. I'm glad I'm a digital filmmaking major in this day and age. Though perhaps a few years ago may have been even better.

[mommyimadeapoopy]

digital is the better choice at this point, because it has so much possibility. with it you can create whole new worlds and environments for your characters to live in;it's absolutely limitless. and i really think that within the next 20 years,a school of directors inspired by movies like sin city will embrace it and make some really groundbreaking,creative movies.

[gopoop777]

danny trejo has a very long weenie!!!!!!!!

[shailladotcom]

I love RR!!!!

xoxo

[HunterMann]

Robert,

I love your films, but come on video is video, it is not cinematography. HM, over 30,000 hours on-location, all film.

[Satchel334]

RR is great. But I still prefer 35mm to digital. Someday digital will look better than 35mm. But they still aren't there yet. In this day and age? 35mm still looks better.

[shroomsrgood]

no its not dead...but digital is kicking fucking ass... its cheap, its faster in post production. High definition digital looks just like 35mm. whats not to love?

[Benny1642]

el mariachi sucked hard and film is not dead, he is simply wrong.

[QBangah]

YOU shoot a film with a $7,000.00 budget and make it better than El Mariachi.  We'll see which film sucks harder.

[HunterMann]

That $7,000 was mostly a publicity thing. If you add up the value of donated time, loan of equipment, use of music, etc. it was probably more like a $40,000 production. I once attended a film screening of a Rick Schmidt film. He wrote the book Feature Filmmaking At Used Car Prices. The basic thing was that for about $6,000 a person could shoot a film. After the screening, the first question form the audience was : "How much did this used car cost?" He chuckled and said "..about $30,000."

[elvisfan22]

"Donated time" doesn't count. Just because I spent a grand total of 100,000hrs building a car doesn't mean that I calculate how much it would have cost if I had paid someone and then call it a $500,000 vehicle. Plus using stuff already pre-purchased before the movie was even conceived in thought doesn't count. That's just somone being a human who buys things. I live in a $250,000 fully paid house, but that doesn't count to my budget if I make a movie here in 2011 does it?

[TVwriter23]

Donated time does count. Just because it seems free doesn't mean it is. If you calcuate the time, services etc. it actually is more than what the movie budget really is.

[elvisfan22]

No it's not. Calculated time based on what?? It's all relative. If a grip crew turns down a 250K job to do a film for free, then yes, that's time counted as money because u would otherwise be making money where u are now, not. If 4 guys work at burger king and in there off time make a film instead of playing video games at home, that's a complete profit costing you nothing, but video game fun. Time based on what? If I just would have been wiping my ass anyways then how is that time wasted?

[TVwriter23]

You can calculate the hours worked for free and how much that would cost if they were being paid. What do you think deferred pay is. Also the items you get for free you can calculate how much that would have cost had you paid for it.

[elvisfan22]

Yes, time is valuable. That's NOT the point, you don't get it! Everything in life needs ACTION/sacrfice of time/resources to be completed; taking ur kid to practice; drilling for oil; selling pies; gardening. Now, everything needs SOME kind of energy to get done, BUT It doenst HAVE to be MONEY!! The arguemnt is, no matter what resources you have, it's impossible to make a great film without currency. And that's a lie, you can make a film with time, favors, new technology etc. Wake up man.

[GLOCKMEISTER333]

what do you mean film isnt dead um look around writers are running out of ideas..which would explain why there are sooo many remakes of old movies and lots of sequels..QBangah is right $7000 bucks to make el mariachi dumb fuck plus desperado and once upona time in mexico (the sequels) were fuckin great..put that in your pipe and smoke it..

[VortheDestructor]

I believe this is talking about film over digital video, not film as in movies.

[TVwriter23]

It's not that writers are running out of ideas. It's that studios are in the business of making money as well they are an industry. So they are going to go with safe than with the unknown being that they have to pay back people called investors.

[elayjc]

benny1642, the only that "sucks" is ur mum...!!! ROBERT RODRIGUEZ is a proper filmmaker!!!

[Bonesone4]

Does anyone know how the hell to get in touch with Troublemaker studios? There's no email or mailing address for any of his sites or anywhere!!! Does he even hire outside people for projects?

[GLOCKMEISTER333]

ive called troublemaker studios before jus being curious..why you got a script???

[Bonesone4]

Nah, just curious myself. :)

[doryenc]

get an agent.