Haha, the ninja star to the forehead line made me cringe and laugh at the same time.

I'm wondering if they purposely select people who are not so qualified so that there's something to cause some sort of drama in the show. I think that's what they do for American Idol since that's the impression a few of my friends gave me after they auditioned for the show, and seems like that's what they did for On the Lot. Especially after that one guy who forgot his pitch.

Does anyone really believe that those contestants were the top 50 out of 1200 people world wide? I don't.

I watched it in the same sense that you'd watch a video that some kidnappers left behind of them torturing your son and demanding ransom.

I didn't even watch the whole thing. Like I predicted numerous times, it was a hollow travesty. Before, people on here were criticizing me for bashing it, but after seeing this ****, would you honestly want to be on it? Not only was it incredibly insulting to film and filmmakers, but it must have been incredibly boring to the average viewer. It was pretty boring to me.

Carrie Fischer? What the ****? Brett Ratner? Come on. The show felt thrown together and second rate. You could see them clearly trying to ring every ounce of suspense and shame out of it. Most of the contestants were astoundingly boring, and seemed to be more interested in GOING TO HOLLYWOOD, like that dick hole with the suit and purple sunglasses. What a joke.

I hope everyone on that show dies.

quote:

Originally posted by Nervous Larry:

I hope everyone on that show dies.

me too... especially the guy who took his belt off and started whipping the floor... just kidding... lol. But seriously, he has to be without a doubt the biggest moron on that episode. Who the hell does that stupid **** when they have an opportunity for success in front of 3 hollywood judges (regardless of what you think of the judges or the show)... makes me wonder how the hell the producers come up with the selection criteria for the contestants and why the hell they wouldn't take the contest seriously... especially when this could mean their one shot at entering the film industry.

You're hard on the show.

If you expected more than what has been brought to you, you lack experience in reality show (wich is not a bad thing, not at all).

But I think it would still be interesting to watch the show and see how things evolve.

Anyway, next episode they're gonna show the short movie they've been forced to shot in 24 hours.

Tonight I thought is another audition episode where they show the struggles of these kids (even though most are probably as old or older than me) to make the film in 24 hours and then Monday they show short films which the people vote on.

I will give this show at least one full cycle of voting before I stop watching because I want see what the traditional format of the show is as opposed to these audition episodes that comprise the first two shows in On the Lot.

The belt guy wrote a blog explaining what REALLY happened.

It's on the lot's website.

If you want to see who made what films, I have a partial list on my blog over there...if you hit the Community tab, there is a "Most Popular Blog" list. I'm usually number one or two..."JessicaMarie Writes Even If Nobody Reads."

on the 2nd ep:

I will take this commercial break to say I'm sad inside... I'm sad that special effects make a barely existant movie amazing, that stories don't matter and cliches are a good job. That and that the show doesn't even show all the movies.

Man, this sucks.

I second that. So there were what...38 people there??? They only showed maybe 12! 30 minutes for this is way too short. I very dissapointed. And to think I wasted a perfectly good dvd to tape this crap!

Oh yeah...I am happy tho with that prick, Jeff, got cut...mwahhh

Yep, it's too bad when special FX take over the rest...

But right now we're more in the "boot camp" section of the show I think.

Those who can survive this will be able to do more complicated film and all.

All the shorts that the groups made are available at the On The Lot website and it is kind of sad that special effects get the best response because some of the other films I watched online had a little more going for them in the areas of story and cinematography. I said to my fiance as we watched it that people are always impressed by the razzle dazzle in film, how else do all these FX blockbusters get made.

I also thought it was funny that Brett Ratner didn't know how they did the stop time effect. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't he use that same effect on X3 (I know X2 used but I am not sure about his film). Goes to show how most directors have no idea how special effects work.

I actually am interested in seeing how they fare with a professional crew because that was where all the problems came in PGL version 3 with Jon Gulager.

Here's an article I found online hopfully this BS gets cancelled, yet I'm still watching, I think I'm sick:
---------------------------------
Fox's On the Lot Unspools Weak Ratings

by Marc Berman

MAY 23, 2007 -

In series-premiere news, Fox’s On the Lot disappointed last night with a 6.2 rating/ 9 share from 9-10 p.m., according to Nielsen Media Research data.

While no one expected the reality/competition to hold the American Idol audience, retention of just 38 percent and a loss of a whopping 39 percent at 9:30 p.m. (7.7/11 to 4.7/ 7) is a terrible start.
------------------------------

Honestly I think no one gives a shizz about struggling filmmakers but us, struggling filmmakers, but we hate ourselves so its sort of doomed to fail.

i think its ahead of its time. its a good idea, but not enough people will follow it.

I don't hate myself, i would just rather see a bunch of short films for an hour than a bunch of people whining.

Not to mention if we were going to just screw over the actual movie watching, the ycould at least be more like american Idol and have at least one night of just watching the movies; then talking about how they did it late and elimination on the next night.

Also with cutting down on what people really want to see, is made worse because theres no actual connection to the filmmakers we don't get to know them...so their struggle means nothing to us.

That said none of these judge seem to be worth their salt...one of them is an actress. Their judgements are off base, they are easily swayed by special FX, they think generic "speilbergian" pitches are awesome, and they don't give 2 craps about story. But like I said, these people are not worth their salt... the ones that are directors, have you seen what they've directed? Gag.

Just give me a hour of shorts,k thanks.

carrie fisher has written 3 screenplays

Carrie Fisher is a joke and must wear dentures or something because she sounds like an idiot when she talks.

I tried avoiding the second episode of this show, but my mom was watching it while I was in the room, so I did catch a few (or whatever few seconds they showed) of the shorts.

I can't believe people gasped when the time stop thing happened. Everyone in the audience was worried or hypnotized, and it made me sort of sick. Even if I don't know exactly how they did it, I can take a pretty good guess (and I'm sure Brett Rater knows, he was probably just humoring them- I HOPE).

Now, for a short film, fine. they had 24 hours to make something, so it's not going to be an intricate story, and the fact that it went in a completely different direction than you expected at least deserves some merit. But the few snippets they showed of some other films looked pretty interesting (when they were talking about the "great" films), and they probably didn't have ANY visual effects.

Like I figured, I'm sure this will become a popularity contest full of parlor tricks and visual effects that have no real connection to the stories. There's a big difference between an effect that stops a bunch of hangers and the great visual effects in Michel Gondry's work, and part of it is that Michel Gondry isn't trying to impress anyone. Oh yeah, and he has heart and meaning.

I was kind of mad when I heard about this show. I mean, competition is bad as it is. I really don't want other people seeing this show and suddenly want to become filmmakers, but now I don't think I have much to worry about.
Plus, they only get a million dollars??? That sounds like a lot and agreed it isn't how much money you spend on a movie, but coming from a major motion picture company, most movies are gonna run over 10 million. They are gonna have to stretch that money because that's only gonna cover the crew.

quote:

Originally posted by JacobD:
I was kind of mad when I heard about this show. I mean, competition is bad as it is. I really don't want other people seeing this show and suddenly want to become filmmakers, but now I don't think I have much to worry about.
Plus, they only get a million dollars??? That sounds like a lot and agreed it isn't how much money you spend on a movie, but coming from a major motion picture company, most movies are gonna run over 10 million. They are gonna have to stretch that money because that's only gonna cover the crew.

most independent films are done for under a million. i think its a great opportunity. if they win a million they will find a way to stretch that money, if not then they may just blew chances of ever making it as a producer / director in the real world.

30 minutes into the 3rd episode:

The judges are way too nice. The first two films were quite nice in my opinion, but the third - "Spaced-Out" was really weak and got "rave reviews." The 4th one (can't remember the name, something about a wacky cab company...) was horrid. A couple decent shots here and there, but other than that, it was just all around crappy to me. And there the judges were, dancing around the issue with comments like "Well, I guess I just didn't get it." or "Well, I liked the colors..."

I would really like to see some working film school professors get in there and rip all these contestants to shreds.

And the host annoys the crap out of me for some reason.