Home Cool News Coaxial Reviews Zone Chat Contact Us Sign in

Talkbacks

wow
by jonboy83
Jul 1st, 2007
08:28:24 PM
sounds just as boring as the show itself
This post needs Cliff's Notes
by Mahaloth
Jul 1st, 2007
08:32:27 PM
:)
Good idea, terrible execution
by Neutron
Jul 1st, 2007
08:33:31 PM
I remember the first or second episode had a lot of behind the scenes stuff of the teams putting their films together, with the typical clash of egos etc. They dropped that instantly for the American Idol format, and then several contestants disappeared without mention. I haven't seen it in a few weeks and doubt I will bother - I still think they'll screw the 'winner' out of their prize somehow, the last thing they want to do is flush another million bucks down this toilet.
Filmmakers? ha.
by KyleKrane
Jul 1st, 2007
08:42:44 PM
what kind of douche bag would have signed up for this show in the first place? you're not a filmmaker. you're a wannabe celebrity. I hear they are casting I love new york 2. go sign up for that. no one ever made a carer or art off of a contest.
On The Lot.
by Alex Trevelyan
Jul 1st, 2007
08:44:51 PM
I stopped watching after the first episode. Crap.
What now?
by SkidMarkedUndies
Jul 1st, 2007
08:58:05 PM
Huh?
Thought it was crap
by Pr_Frink
Jul 1st, 2007
09:06:51 PM
I figured Canada had a bunch of people enter, but 30%? Wow. I like the concept of network show trying to help out filmmakers, but as soon as I heard the format I knew it would go to shit. Too bad.
Mixing reality TV and art is NEVER a good idea
by IndustryKiller!
Jul 1st, 2007
09:08:11 PM
And shame on Mr. Spielberg for cheapening his art for such callous television.
Marco: Awesome work!
by snowpuff
Jul 1st, 2007
09:14:32 PM
I'd be willing to bet that Spielberg himself would be delighted by the ingenuity and independence you showed in creating your own contest and bucking the system.
OK...
by jimmy_009
Jul 1st, 2007
09:20:17 PM
... so everyone agrees that On the Lot pretty much blows. That's a lot of charges against the show though. This guy Marco knows 20th Century Fox's IP address how? How exactly does he know what producers of the show are doing? Passing off the shorts of applicants that aren't on the show is a serious charge. If it's true, why haven't we heard about it until now? Something of this doesn't seem to ring true. Maybe this guy Marco just needs some controversy to drum up publicity for this screenwriting thing perhaps?
Brett Ratner: "Your film is style over substance."
by Kasch
Jul 1st, 2007
09:34:40 PM
Still the funniest quote ever on television. Best of luck to anything that fucks with this elitist Hollywood fakery.
The minute you have any Reality TV show were people get
by Yeti
Jul 1st, 2007
09:34:50 PM
the boot for whatever reason, the producers behind said Reality TV show are going to be more interested in getting various "personalities" to clash with one another rather than "real" people interested in a career or a chance to work in the field. Frankly it's utter bullshit, but since Reality TV as we know it has been around now for about 7 or 8 years anyone who signed up for this dreck knew exactlly what they were getting themselves into.
That show represents so much of why Hollywood
by veritasses
Jul 1st, 2007
09:44:34 PM
sucks. From how the show was put together, to all the people (producers, execs, personalities, contestants etc) involved, to the content that made it on air. Though so much bull crap involved, it makes you realize just how much "magic" there is in getting a great pic to the theatres.
Con
by Larry of Arabia
Jul 1st, 2007
10:34:37 PM
I agree with what people are saying about the quality of the show. The sudden format change was a huge red light. I feel sorry for the judges who must be contractually bound.
So...
by MC-909
Jul 1st, 2007
10:38:05 PM
Is the show still on the air?
IF you said something bad to Ratner to his face...
by Larry of Arabia
Jul 1st, 2007
10:39:18 PM
You are a bit of an idiot. You are all new filmmakers and despite the fuckeduppendess of whats going on you should be networking with the guys you come into contact with. Say what you want about Bay and Ratner they could squash you like bugs right now. Defend your skills but show respect to them.
veritasses
by half vader
Jul 1st, 2007
10:46:16 PM
You realise by saying that you're putting Princess Carrie Fisher down? Probably a conflict of interest for anyone who posts on this site. ;)
This is awesome.
by Winterchili
Jul 1st, 2007
11:08:27 PM
That show is an abortion on the surface, I'm not surprised to hear it was bullshit behind the scenes too.
Yes!
by Hercules
Jul 1st, 2007
11:22:34 PM
Don't tell Herc!
hey man, only aicn.com knows the truth...oh, and
by RetroActive
Jul 1st, 2007
11:28:43 PM
KarmaCritic.com! Don't forget...keep us alive at KarmaCritic.com...we're so much better than this crappy show. No one understands us...except KarmaCritic.com! Damn you, Spielberg...for being my meal ticket and then choosing somebody else! That's why I started this really cool site after some anti-OnTheLot coporate partners approached me about the original idea they gave me for KarmaCritic.com. Only AICN talbackers understand my fabricated angst through my fake blog! Did I mention KarmaCritic.com, yet? Or the fact that Spielberg realized his mistake before signing the online spinoff deal with KarmaCritic.com's corporate partners?!! No? Anyway...I love you guys! Give us as many hits as we can suck you into at KarmaCritic.com!
Is there anything backing this up?
by jimmy_009
Jul 1st, 2007
11:29:19 PM
Some of those claims were pretty far out there...
director of ''georgia rule" telling me my film sucks?
by angrykirby.tk
Jul 1st, 2007
11:39:03 PM
if speilberg and his big wig friends arn't going to be judges then who cares. I wouldn't listne to a word that wes craven or any of the other shitty film makers judges told me about my film. oh and the film makers all sucked. bad judges, bad contestants, bad show. bring back project greenlight. the third season finally started to get it right.
I feel ya but NEWSFLASH - IT'S THEIR BLOODY SHOW
by aceattorney
Jul 1st, 2007
11:50:00 PM
Stop whining. And stop making references to Orwell - last I heard, Spielberg isn't the federal government.
This statement isn't true
by Hockle
Jul 1st, 2007
11:58:07 PM
They had already picked their 100 or so semifinalists by January, thats right, they already knew who was going to round 2, before round 1 was even over. I know this from talking to semifinalists who submitted their round 2 film sometime in January. Hold on to that thought, I will recall it in a little while. I worked on a film that was postmarked the last possible date - first part of Februrary - we made it to round two and had to make a second submission film. Plus, at the interview with producers in Chicago, one of the final 50 interviewed immediately after the director of our project. And yes, on the show itself they've been using the filmmakers second round films for voting. But, "How they get away with lies like this without someone suing them is beyond me?" Seriously? It's a network TV show, they can do whatever they want. But don't get me wrong, the show is garbage.
I've Got A Great Idea
by topaz4206
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:05:18 AM
on how to get your movie made!

1) Write a script that's worth a shit, and submit it through proper channels.

or 2) Pull out your credit card, shoot the bitch yourself, and take it to a festival.
topaz4206
by SelfSentered
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:17:32 AM
you're an idiot. submit it through the proper channels? you obviously have no idea how this town works. there are no proper channels. you get your fucking scripts to whoever you can however you can. it's not like there are specially marked script drop-off points where you just deposit your most recent draft and wait for the phone call. there are thousands of GOOD screenplays sitting around out here un-produced. THERE ARE NO PROPER CHANNELS YOU FUCKTARD. don't talk about shit you don't know about.
they should have done it youtube style
by paulmkelly
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:21:56 AM
This show is painful to watch. I'm not sure this is the best way to showcase actual short films. They should have gone the fun and cheap route and done YouTube style stuff. That way they could pick people who are tv-friendly and they just guide them into making a semi-watchable 2 minute "movie".
SelfSentered
by topaz4206
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:33:33 AM
A) Actually I worked at a production company for several years, we got about a hundred scripts a day. Plenty of people with talent scored themselves literary agents to submit their scripts.

B) If your words are so hot, why not take suggestion #2 and make it? The world eagerly awaits your art.
Ratner
by SwiftCrusader
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:36:29 AM
Did anyone else see Ratner's cameo spot on Entourage a couple weeks ago? I think he was trying a little too hard to look like he was not gay to the point that only a person would that was a closeted gay would have that many women walking around in bikinis so people wouldn't think he was gay. (and not that there is anything wrong with being gay, especially since Singer's X-Men's didn't suck). What I am trying to say is that Ratner is a hack. Did anyone else realize Entourage kind of sucks a lot now? I just wanna smack Eric, Turtle, Vincent, and Ari in the face for being pretentious fucks...It is sad that Drama is carrying that show as the only original character.
topaz4206
by SelfSentered
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:46:08 AM
already have, man. movie in the can, playing festivals, everying you suggested in your eternal wisdom. i'm repped and everying, don't worry about, me. this is not coming from bitter-ville. sorry i was so pissy, but i'm highly offended by the idea that what's stopping people from making their films is not going through the 'proper channels'. i've been out here a long time and you know damn well that there is no such thing as a 'proper channel.' if you get in through an agent, cool. if you can get the script to harvey kietel's physical therapist, that's how you get it to harvey keitel. if you can get it to pt anderson's coke dealer, that's how you get it to him. there are no proper channels. there is no 'right way' of doing it. your idea that all anyone has to do is 'write a good script and submit it through the proper channels' is laughable. as far as making it on my own, way ahead of you, done and done. again, sorry for being a dick, but i am highly offended that you seem to think that it's so fucking easy when it is so very much not.
topaz4206
by SelfSentered
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:49:09 AM
and i'm sorry about the typos and some bad syntax but i'm fucking tired
SwiftCrusader, Entourage
by DanDelion
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:00:41 AM
Yeah, it has kind of sucked lately. I've been really dissapointed. It's still watchable, but I'd never just turn it on and be able to watch an episode now. The great thing about the first 2 seasons was how consistently funny and yet constantly rewarding each episode was. Many in the third and what we've seen of the 4th have been almost chores.
Wes Craven has a beer and cheats on Herc with a Tree
by Jochapma
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:14:37 AM
At least there's a climax to that story
SelfSentered
by topaz4206
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:17:23 AM
No worries. Actually the whole point of my original post was to address the attitude of the guy that sent the letter about KarmaCritic. He made it seem as if Evil Spielberg had "stolen" his big chance at Hollywood fame, and THAT was hilarious to me.
The show did blow,
by JacksParasites
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:58:27 AM
But I'm all in with this karmacritic contest. Sounds awesome. I'm getting to work on something tomorrow.
The sly FOX strikes again
by Talkbacker with no name
Jul 2nd, 2007
02:35:13 AM
Is there nothing they won't do to ruin films and filmaking?

Good luck karma. Hope it's a success and then maybe FOX will rethink it's bullshit and start producing great films and film makers again.

Now where is PROJECT GREENLIGHT 4? That show is how you do it!

Johnny Drama's verbal bitchslap of Ratner was awesome!
by FilmCritic3000
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:26:55 AM
It felt so good to hear that hack's lack of talent laid bare for all to see.
Say what? A bunch of rejected egomaniacs aren't happy?
by InfinityWave
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:51:35 AM
I think it's great that Karmacritic is being put together, and I'll be very interested to see what comes of it. But I don't see why the show and its filmmakers deserve so much crap. These guys have to survive weekly public scrutiny, they work to tight deadlines with huge stakes and naturally it's part popularity contest. Good on 'em. Hell, the fact they've been messed around and made to use their quickie qualifying films in front of live judging, makes them bigger winners in my book. There's no scientific way for contestants to have been whittled down in the first place, clearly the rejected contestants aren't going to be happy. As a viewer though, I -don't care- if part of the reason the ones that made it are there is that they're good on TV, and openly passionate and expressive about what they do. That's the nature of the beast, and whoever wins will most likely deserve their Dreamworks office.
Just do another Greenlight
by Jinxo
Jul 2nd, 2007
05:00:59 AM
Okay, two of the three films they made sorta blew. But the show was good. And at the end they actually produced a film that was worth a damn.
Some responses to the talkbackers
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
07:08:35 AM
Hey people, I'm Marco. First off... my thanks to Harry. When I wrote that email, I wasnt sure it would get read, I figured Harry would be busy at the very least.. but I'm very pleasantly surprised this morning. Harry, thank you, so much man... -------------------------- now, I want to reply to some talkbackers: jimmy_009: when you edit wikipedia without your account, you leave your IP address there. Anybody can look up an ip address, here, you do it, go to http://www.dnsstuff.com/ and look up 216.205.224.64 (thats what was left in the wikipedia entry). See what comes up. As for OTL using round 2 flicks up until last week... well, didnt it seem strange to you that some contestants talked about pulling in favors from school and such to get their film made? Or that some films had -snow- in them? I dont have a direct line to the producers, but some ex-semifinalists talk to me. Worse of all was Jess Brillhart's "The Orchard" film.. she clearly labelled it "experimental" when she made it way back when, but it was shown during the "horror" week for Wes Craven and got, ehem, hacked up. ----------------------------- to RetroActive: I wont lie to you and say I'm not hoping to get some filmmakers to sign up for our contest. But that doesnt make what I said "fake". You can look it up yourself, the links posted here lead to more detailed accounts with more links in them, and you can double check them all. Okay, moving on.. ------------------------------ SelfSentered is right by the way. There are "proper channels", and then there are "good channels". His examples were good. To Topaz, and others: I dont think Spielberg had anything to do with this show. He lent his name to his friend Burnett, and I think he visited the set a couple times, but beyond that that's it. The "Orwellian" (and believe me, thats a good term) applies to the people handling thelot.com and thats Prospero. What do you call it when people are deactivated for saying something The Power That Be doesnt like? Or worse, when they edit your posts to make them sound like you said something you didnt say (YES, they DO that)? You call it Orwellian. But its not Spielberg's fault, I dont think he even knows all of this BS, he's busy making Indy4, as he should be. --------------------- InfinityWave, as for the contestants, I wish them all the best. The ones who got some screen time, will be okay even if the show gets canceled tomorrow. They'll get work, they'll get calls, they'll be fine. The ones who got axed without screentime (contestants 24 to 18) got the rawest hollywood deal ever. Remember, this wasnt like American Idol where you just had to wait in line for a day in some stadium. To make it here, you had to have made three rounds of shorts, out of your own money, on your own time. I know people who spent 4 thousand dollars on round 2 alone. I've heard of others mortaging their house. And what does FOX do? Stick a camera in your face when you're crying over some stupid pitch about a lab mouse, then give you the boot. Later on, when producers close the money spigot, use the work you did with your own money to keep the show afloat on the cheap. Nicely played FOX. Hence the "Karma".
I don't know what to tell you...
by FilmNerdJamie
Jul 2nd, 2007
07:39:31 AM
...if you REALLY thought ON THE LOT was going to be this amazing "search for talent!" It's a reality TV show, folks! They were always gonna cast on "personality" and "TV characteristics" than someone who was insanely talented but had zero "camera-charm." That's exactly why I didn't summit any of my short-films to em.
FilmNerdJamie
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
07:45:12 AM
I gotta say, that looking back at how things turned out, I can definitely see you're right. I mean.. a reality TV Show? from FOX? But the thing is... when I saw Spielberg's face there... that really went a long way towards convincing me this could be different. Its human nature: when you pit hope against logic, logic often loses out :( We knew it could turn out to be shit, but we -hoped- it wouldnt... lesson learned.
Spielberg...
by FilmNerdJamie
Jul 2nd, 2007
07:56:56 AM
He even admitted to have VERY little input into ON THE LOT on SUNDAY MORNING SHOOT-OUT. He said he'd basically pop his head in once in a full moon and show up for the "big finale" where the winner is announced. So even the great name of Steven Spielberg (who I'm a huge fan of and look up to as a fellow film-student) meant diddily dick to ON THE LOT. It was 100% Mark Burnett's opertaion and I can't stand that motherfucker (mostly b/c he acts like his shows are "classier" than other reality TV shows!) Whatever...
Worth Watching
by Fount of Useless Info
Jul 2nd, 2007
08:41:06 AM
Look, the show has been worth watching if only for the chance to see the Princess tell someone who made a horrid film that it was her "least favorite thing after adolescence and being left by a man for a man." That made up for all my boredom right there.
chimed out?
by Schih Thayde
Jul 2nd, 2007
08:52:38 AM
fat, illiterate fairy.
YEAH!
by EZEQUIEL
Jul 2nd, 2007
10:22:15 AM
OTL good for the contestants? Maybe one or two. Did it make a joke out of the other ones who never even have been there. YES. Was the show casted as a reality show and not a "real" directors contest? Well...at least that was their intention because they failed even in the casting. All contestants are boring boring boring and don't even make good reality T.V. Put that together with bad short films, makes it even worse. Add that together with a poorly organized show. Worse. But whatever, someone will get something out of it and that's cool. The website even went downhill--and now the place for filmmakers is KarmaCritic.
re: half vader
by veritasses
Jul 2nd, 2007
10:55:18 AM
You might have a point ;)
The lot sounds awfully familiar
by emeraldboy
Jul 2nd, 2007
11:06:58 AM
Miramax tried this and it was called Project greenlight. It didnt last because When Harvey and bob were turfed out of disney, the show died. Maaatt Dammooon and affleck off were involved in it. Shows like this dont work. The films usuall curl up and die.
When you lose something, like a competition
by emeraldboy
Jul 2nd, 2007
11:51:02 AM
Some take it as a minor setback, rub thier wounds and comeback better. So dont and they are the ones that end up hear. giving out endlessly about how hollywood screwed their childhood or that sort of rubbish. Some are better at things then other. this website seems to attract a lot of frank grimes.
NOT REALLY
by EZEQUIEL
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:01:59 PM
I hear what you're saying emerald. The stuff gets to me too...but it's the same thing that happens on every website. But at least, there is no censorship on KC and it provides a brand new forum for film kidz to show their work, communicate, network and vent if they want. It's just a cool place!
They ARE still shooting new movies
by Dannychico
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:16:43 PM
I know because I'm an actor and get the breakdowns for them.
Dannychico
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
12:44:45 PM
You're correct, they only started shooting new movies with last week. All the previous ones were submissions before the people were "on the lot". ----------------------- Emeraldboy, you would right right in in KC. I say this, because we've made it our mantra to be doers not talkers. Its even in the promo. I believe in what you're saying, let me put it this way: when OTL started pulling all this crap on us, one option was to just bow down.. shrug.. "whatchagonnadoo" and just go away. Another option was to make our own thing and see if its really true that we can handle a community better without a Big Brother watching. We took the second route man. Its not so much about standing up "To the Man", but for ourselves.
Karmacritic is just "On the Lot" for Losers
by hjrogers
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:12:15 PM
Marco Leon / FableForge: "[On the Lot threads] were deleted, accounts were deactivated, blogs censored... all for -speaking- anything negative about the show." EZEQUIEL: "But at least, there is no censorship on KC and it provides a brand new forum for film kidz to show their work, communicate, network and vent if they want." Oh, really? http://www.karmacritic.com/nod e/669 Marco Leon / FableForge: "I shall be a moderator, and effective immediately, I will erase every single blog post or comment that I, in my sole and imperfect judgment, consider to be a personal attack. Prepare for a wave of deletion that would make Eccefama [an "On the Lot" board moderator] hug her knees and shiver in a dark corner." Karmacritic. What a joke. Karmacritic is like a place that hands out bats to beat the dead "On the Lot" horse and then people beat each other with them afterwards. "On the Lot" sucks. Yeah, we know. Get over it, Karmacritic people, so you don't as well.
The Last time I checked--"on the lot" was losing!
by EZEQUIEL
Jul 2nd, 2007
01:57:23 PM
Losing Ratings. Losing financing. Losing members. Losing air time. So...let's see. If KarmaCritic is a forum for losers, why don't you join and show us all how much more better you are? I'm not attacking you or anything. But it would be cool for you to join the site and call all the members losers and see what happens. Maybe you should see some of the films that are on there before you judge.
KarmaCritic.com
by ewokstew
Jul 2nd, 2007
02:05:32 PM
is a poorly designed web site. Those guys need to go back in and streamline that sucker.
And I should care because...?
by Tal111
Jul 2nd, 2007
02:12:58 PM
Yeah, let me get right on over to Karmacritic right now...zoom!
KARMACRITIC
by EZEQUIEL
Jul 2nd, 2007
02:22:16 PM
Tal111. Are you scared? ;) Why you making fun? Why don't you check it out. If you have a film or script, sign up. Submit. Have fun. It's a cool forum.
Karmacritic
by jimmy_009
Jul 2nd, 2007
03:41:42 PM
First off if I did have a good film or script, that's the last place I'd put it. The whole thing looks amateurish and sure to cause plagerism night terrors. I have the strange feeling this site will fizzle out once all these 'filmmakers' and 'screenwriters' realize they can't and won't get anything out of submitted their work there.
"not as complex as AICN"
by chrth
Jul 2nd, 2007
03:47:22 PM
How could anything on the Web be less complex than AICN?
Jimmy_009
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:03:58 PM
So first you questioned where I got FOX's IP address and how I knew that the films being shown recently were really the contestants 2nd and 3rd round submissions. I responded to that, maybe to your satisfaction. Now you say the site "looks amateurish" and you have a "strange feeling" that it will fizzle? Alright man. I cant respond to that. I can tell you how to look up an IP address, but I cant tell you how to "feel". Good luck to you, and yeah, I'll make the site look better if I can. --------------- and chrth? KC is pretty packed man. It has a couple extra doodads, such private messaging, buddy lists, rating system for everything from blogs, films, scripts, movie reviews, a chatroom, .. yeah. Lots of gizmos :) What I care for is people though. With good people, it almost doesnt matter how the site looks or works, thats my mantra. Good people.
wait my argument is right too
by jonboy83
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:24:32 PM
because i wrote a script and got it made into a movie. and its going around festivals. my opinion is valid now. shut the fuck up and take your shit movie elsewhere. im going to see fantastic four 2 for the 20th time!
Drathan
by antonphd
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:40:36 PM
Glad you guys started something on your own. Good show!

As for On The Lot. Now I understand the obvious contempt the contestants have for the judges.

The show is utter shit. It gets worse every week. You can see that the host can barely stand being on the show. Carrie seems like she's pissed constantly during the show. What's it like to be her or Gary and have to go thru that shit. I'd be beyond pissed. Maybe that's why she's such a fucking bitch on the show. She's just fucking mean.

Good luck to your contest.

Thanks antonphd!
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
04:54:19 PM
And you know what is ironic, or somehow.. bittersweet? That at one point in time, say, around Dec 06 or Jan this year, we were all pro-OTL. I mean.. it seems so weird today, but its true. Back in February even, I would step in to defend the moderators when they got bashed by random people. How have things changed, eh? How did FOX go from having over 10 thousand filmmakers and wannabes from all over the world... eating from their palm day in and day out... energized and happy and completely PRO-OTL.. how did it go from that, to this? Its a change from night to day. Nowadays, there's so few people over there posting positive stuff about OTL, that when they do, they are immediately suspected of being plants. Maybe some of them are real. But the mood is so bad that now everyone doubts it.
You mean Reality TV isn't real?
by The Ref
Jul 2nd, 2007
05:17:49 PM
Oh noes!
Well hey, we learned a lesson...
by Hyphin
Jul 2nd, 2007
05:20:53 PM
The truth is, karmacritic dude, that NONE of us ACTUALLY, if we thought about it, seriously considered On The Lot to be a legit, serious attempt at finding filmmakers. As someone up there said, it was seeing Speilberg's face in the trailer for the show on their site that got all of us.

Bear with me for a moment here..

Think about the Apprentice, which I think is where Mark Burnett's head was when he thought of On The Lot. It was a good show. Sure, some people might not have liked it, but if you were into the business world and you were interested in witnessing large event planning (even thought it might have been heavily aided by the production crew) it was for you. Now, hear me out, dont attack me just yet...

I think that a competition, like The Apprentice, COULD, I repeat, COULD, be a fun, FAIR way to find filmmaking talent, if that goal was always central to the shows producers. I actually think that, hey, what if they did On The Lot EXACTLY like the apprentice. Two teams, or more, presented with a genre or something. Then, just like project leaders were chosen, they would choose project directors. Then, the teams work to create something. Think about it, we would get actual attempts a some real creativity, not RETARDED shorts, literally a minute long sometimes, about vomiting aliens and blind dates gone wrong. I don't know, it seems really fun to me. Anyways, what do you guys think? Any suggestions for a better format? Other than, stop the show, and use the 'proper channels'.

Good points Hyphin
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
05:30:59 PM
And it was me, actually, who said that Spielberg's face sealed the deal. I find myself defending him all the time, even inside KC, telling others that chances are Spielberg doesnt even know of the BS going on at OTL, that he's busy with Indy4, which is best for humanity, actually, than trying to fix the sorry state of affairs over at OTL. I have to say, 90% of the time, 90% of us -knew- deep down that this would come down to BS. But the other 10% hoped that maybe "this is it" "who knows, I might get..... discovered!!".. heh :) man, its too easy to make fun of those thoughts now, in retrospect. But like you said, we learned a lesson. You know what is really sad though? If FOX announces a season 2, knowing everything we know now.... more than half would try again, thinking "it'll be different this time!". See... hope always wins vs logic. And finally, yes, a 2-teams format like the apprentice would have been way better. My guess is.. after the premiere dissapointment, they panicked and scrambled, and made too many damn changes to the format, and just seemed all over the place. I hope some -other- entity make a TV show about a film contest. Just not FOX.. I wouldnt trust those guys a second time around... logic wins out against hope at least the second time around.
Drathan
by jimmy_009
Jul 2nd, 2007
05:53:55 PM
Didn't mean to sound like I was ripping the idea, or am being paid by Fox to pan it or something. No one else was asking any of the hows and whats about all the stuff you reported. I figured those were all reasonable things to inquiry about, since you seem to know a lot of what goes on behind the scenes on that show. As for karmacritic, I hope it works out for you. I genuinely do. I'm just saying I would be wary about posting my work there in hopes of it leading to bigger things. If people go in just to have fun, I'm sure they'll be rewarded appropriately.
eli roth is the guest judge on tomorrows episode
by brucecampbell
Jul 2nd, 2007
06:02:40 PM
should be amazing
You have every right to question Jimmy_009
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
06:13:40 PM
I've no problem with that, I would question things too, actually, thats how I got in trouble with OTL, by asking them why they were dropping people left and right from the site. Instead of replying they just dropped me, that was my answer. Anyway, no, I never thought you were being paid by FOX, you sound too smart for that :) And well, like someone else was saying above in this talkback, there arent really many "proper channels" to get your stuff read by the people who matter in santa monica (oops, I meant hollywood). I mean, you could send an unsolicted submission, and it would return unopened. Or you could pay a script agent, and he'd shop it around town if he likes it (did I mention you pay him?). But from all I've heard, its usually the informal relationships that work. You have a third cousin who is a classmate of the daughter of bruce willis: thats how you get your script to bruce willis. Its a sad state of affairs, but it is what it is. Its why they never say "john doe graduated to hollywood" or "got promoted to hollywood" or "applied and got accepted in hollywood". Its always "break in". Thats just how the system works man. And this contest... well, other contests promise you money, say 5 thousand bucks, and its good. This contest promises a real-deal serious hollywood producer (Tova Laiter, look her up in IMDB) will read your shit. And so will the guy who reps De Souza, T.J.Scott, Robert Orr, and plenty other writers. Look them up too. Thats a pretty big prize in hollywood terms, a guarantee that they will read your stuff without you having to bribe the neighbor of their hairdresser or something. Sure, nothing is for certain in life, but in hollywood, you dont get a lot more sure shots than this, not at this entry level.
I wouldn't lend Karmacritic that much credibility...
by pizzatheface
Jul 2nd, 2007
08:00:30 PM
...if Ezekiel weren't involved. I watched his stuff early on during the OTL submission process, and that guy really has a great eye for film. Just for that reason, I'll give it a look.
Why not the Nicholls, Disney, AFF, etc.?
by hjrogers
Jul 2nd, 2007
08:07:05 PM
Drathan: "And this contest... well, other contests promise you money, say 5 thousand bucks, and its good. This contest promises a real-deal serious hollywood producer (Tova Laiter, look her up in IMDB) will read your shit. And so will the guy who reps De Souza, T.J.Scott, Robert Orr, and plenty other writers. Look them up too. Thats a pretty big prize in hollywood terms, a guarantee that they will read your stuff without you having to bribe the neighbor of their hairdresser or something."

My problem is that you write that as if the Nicholls, the Disney, the Chesterfield (when and if it resumes), etc. don't exist.

For example, I looked at your screenwriting contest and the entry fee is $15. The Nicholls is $30. You would have difficulty convincing me that your contest provides half the value of one of AMPAS's Nicholls Fellowships.

In another example, Disney gave 14 people fellowships last year that are $50,000 each. The entry fee for that competition is ZERO dollars. It's not exactly a profitable operation.

At my last check, there were over 240 various screenwriting competitions of which fewer than ten mean much. Yours is just one more.

As far as "On the Lot" being "Orwellian," a TV show that can't scrape together a 2 rating isn't a good candidate for "Big Brother" status.

Despite you writing:

"[On the Lot threads] were deleted, accounts were deactivated, blogs censored... all for -speaking- anything negative about the show. The deletions of contestants were getting ridiculous. When the moderator quoted to me from the contract, where it says 'FOX reserves the right to delete (anything) for any reason at any time,' that did it. I started a new website"

you write this:

"I shall be a moderator, and effective immediately, I will erase every single blog post or comment that I, in my sole and imperfect judgment, consider to be a personal attack. Prepare for a wave of deletion that would make Eccefama [the "On the Lot" board moderator that quoted the FOX policy to you] hug her knees and shiver in a dark corner."

at http://www.karmacritic.com/nod e/669 .

So while I agree that "On the Lot" is just a pimple on the ass of nothing, Karmacritic seems straight out of Macbeth:

"[F]ull of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."

Because "karmacritic.com [becoming] thelot.com's public enemy number 1" doesn't mean very much - even if was true. Since you're operating a screenwriting contest, you should know that the quality of the protagonist is partially defined by the antagonist. A 1.8 rating show isn't much of an antagonist. You don't score any moral victories either when you admittedly behave the way that you claim that they do.

I would advise writers to save that $15, scrape together another $15, and send their scripts to the Nicholls next year. Can't afford it? Submit to Disney for FREE.

They could also support a nice little film festival that I think (but don't claim that) Harry supports - the Austin Film Festival (AFF). I saw Harry there at a screening of the director's cut of "Payback" last year.

The AFF costs $40 which is more than the Nicholls, but having attended its awards luncheon, I know that the winner receives their trophy in a room that is filled with nothing but producers, sutdio and prodco reps, agents, and film and TV writers.

I'm not shilling for the AFF, though. I think it's submission deadline has already passed for this year.
HJRogers, nice to see a familiar face
by Drathan
Jul 2nd, 2007
09:01:36 PM
Hey there, we meet again :)

Let me tell you the basic difference between OTL moderation and KarmaCritic moderation.

OTL moderation is this: http://www.karmacritic.com/nod e/933

KarmaCritic moderation is this: http://www.karmacritic.com/nod e/919

For those who are short on time, the first link has a screenshot of some OTLer asking in the boards if anyone recognizes Jeff King, VP of FOX branded media, since he remembers seeing his face pretending to be a contestant inside OTL, and now has heard about him HERE in AICN. In This Article! But wait... why a screenshot? Because the post was deleted within 10 minutes. The screenshot is all that's left. Thats OTL moderation. Deleting ideas that speak bad about the company, about the project, about the way you conduct your business. Do you remember the thread "The worst host ever" that talks about Adrianna Costa? Where did that thread go? Where do alll threads that criticize OTL go? Now only "Adrianna Costa Rules" survives, but maybe the moderators arent reading the comments in it, thats all I will say.

KarmaCritic moderation is about personal attacks. The post you're so fond of quoting, is the result of a war between two people that was making the site simply -unfit- for creativity. My response was to implement a no personal attacks policy. I dont think I need to explain the difference between forbidding pointless personal attacks between members and forbidding rational criticism of the overall enterprise, do I? If so, then see the second link I posted. A very clever member of our community made a very clever satire of another, and I'm letting it stay, because parody is a protected form of speech, and doesnt enter the "personal attack" policy. Both links are things that happened today.

I would encourage anyone who wishes to enter the Nicholls to do so. I never advertise this contest to be better than the Nicholls, and with all due respect, its stupid to compare contest based on the price point alone. All I've advertised is that the finalists' scripts will be read by Producers Tova Laiter and Jon Brown. Thats what it is, no more and no less. If that is worth 15 dollars to you, you're free to enter, if not, dont. I would also encourage anyone to enter the AFF. This is not a zero-sum game where some party must necessarily lose in order for the other one to win. As long as serious writers have enough money to pay for about 2 happy meals each, they can afford to double their chances in every contest that catches their eye.

KarmaCritic's contest is different from many others in that we dont start with a finished product and leave it all up to the judges. This is a development contest, when the product you start with in Round 1, gets refined and developed through the community's feedback and ends up a tested material by the time it reaches the judges. Its an experience more than a race, its an opportunity to interact with people who have your same goals and similar skills and see what good comes out of it. In short, its everything OTL could have been, but chose not to and made up for by shortening Adrianna Costa's hemlines.

Finally, we are more than OTL's nemesis. OTL is fading away from our collective memories with every passing day, and its being replaced with new material, such as Angry Jack, which I would recommend to anyone: http://www.karmacritic.com/ang ryjack Thats the direction we're going. Everyone is invited, Hjrogers, even you. We could have simply shrugged and walked away from OTL disappointed, but we chose to do something instead. We're walking man, not just talking.

I respect anyone who takes things into their own hands.
by Fabulous Freak
Jul 2nd, 2007
09:26:42 PM
to naysay these guys is fucking pathetic. I swear to god people always bitch on these boards about recycled directors and material. Here these people are, DOING SOMETHING NEW, trying to drum up support, and you are nit picking. I shouldn't be, but I am surprised and disappointed.
Fabulous Freak
by Tal111
Jul 2nd, 2007
10:51:04 PM
Do you need a hug?
On The Lot shorts are L-A-M-E --- O
by Quake II
Jul 3rd, 2007
01:17:20 AM
I watched 3 episodes of that sugar-coated American Idol rip-off crap and it's terrible. Every short looks the same as far as lighting and cinematography go. There's no crazy Harmony Korine or Kubrick style shit. It's all very "safe" so the public doesn't get confused or scared. If Carrie Fisher likes your short, you're good! See, she's the Simon Cowell on the show. Isn't that clever? In two minutes you could shoot some amazing shit if given the chance. But no, it's film-by-the-numbers garbage. And Gary Marshall is a judge? He's as commercial and "safe" as it gets.
Tal111
by Fabulous Freak
Jul 3rd, 2007
12:09:12 PM
*sniff* Thanks buddy...
respect to jimmy 009
by half vader
Jul 3rd, 2007
08:55:25 PM
for backpeddling and admitting he knows as much about filmmaking as he does about graphic design and typography. ;) That's called a backhanded compliment mate.
Producers
by Cobbio
Jul 4th, 2007
09:34:30 AM
Ratner was part of this? No wonder the whole thing fell apart. Fox execs were trying to create whiny drama queen personalities to sell to the public, which I understand often sells, but they blew it. Poor conception, gestapo rules, and a blatantly unfair decision making process later, Ratner and the Fox execs are the REAL whiny drama queens.

Maybe that could be a new reality show?

"This week on Drama Queen Producers, the hottest, spiciest reality show ever, see the producers of American Idol, On The Lot, and The Bachelor face off and bitchslap each other blue in the Radisson Hotel showers. See them complain about their assistants like full-drag Compton street queens, watch them tell jokes no one thinks are funny, and be a part of the incompetence as it happens! Don't miss the excitement! Watch Drama Queen Producers this week and get hooked!"

Yeah. So sad it'll never happen.

Cobbio
by hjrogers
Jul 5th, 2007
10:28:01 PM
A less costly version of "Drama Queen Producers" is beginning in a couple of weeks.

It's called "America's Next Producer."

http://www.tvguide.com/channel /anp/contest.html
Re: hjrogers
by Cobbio
Jul 6th, 2007
08:26:13 AM
Thanks for the infornmation. All I can say about it is: hooo boy!
Click for previous story Talk Back More on this story Click for next story

User login

Quick Talkback

Please login to post talkback.