On the Lot is on now...

[George Ellis]

Started 10 minutes ago EDT...

[Cole McDonald]

gonna be a great series...tough stuff...they started with the one thing most indie filmmakers never have to do...Pitch their film...to Hollywood bigwigs no less.

[Jenna Klingensmith]

Just got done watching it myself.. It must say I was proud to see that were was at least a handful of girls.

The group stuff though, those people just clash.. They didn't show any groups that were actually getting along.. Three people with three different ideas, and no experience working with each other.. just sounds a bit ify.

But the show looks like it's going to be interesting.

So everyones opinions... What do you think this show is going to do for filmmakers? Do you think it will help filmmakers gain more recognition entirely? Or contrary?

On The Lot will become the american idol of the motion picture world....

[Chris C. Collins]

I just got done watching it. I must say it was pretty cool to watch but also kinda frustrating. These filmmakers that were chosen seem to be sort of low-grade and unprofessional, and yet they are representing the world of independent film. The conflict within the teams show that all of them are selfish and want only to get their own vision across. 3 locations, 3 directors; a director of all people should understand what a director's job is and where he stands and how it is his job to tell you what to do and lastly that his decision overshadows yours.

Obviously, if these teams don't come to a quick realization than ultimately they will fall hard.

Mostly, though, I want to see these guys' films! Not the ones they have to shoot, but the ones that got them on the show. I want one director to root for, and hopefully its one that appreciates the film medium like I do.

I quote Stanley:
"Most creative directors do not find the balance between being famous and creating art."

As long as you tell a story you enjoy telling, and create art for others and not yourself, all the rest comes later.

I'm looking forward to this show, good night DVinfo!

-Chris

[George Ellis]

Cole, but Indies do need to pitch it. You have to pitch and sell it to distribution. And if you get moving forward, you then have to pitch your next project if your last was successful if you want better distribution. I watched carefully as I have a project coming up to pitch to distributors.

[Cole McDonald]

I didn't get the impression (on the show - haven't looked at them on the website yet) that any of these folks were the types of filmmakers who do projects large enough to distribute...more smaller festival/competition types of filmmakers. I'm probably wrong and making inaccurate assumptions.

I've seen a shift in the last couple of years from talking heads shorts to larger production value shorts (more and better locations + more acting, less talking)...at least in the things I'm watching. I think the lower end indies ( I make a distinction between guerilla, indies and independants based mostly on budget/resource/permission acquisition - you're allowed to disagree with me, I often go too far ;) ) tend to self distribute, so haven't generally had to convince anyone other than themselves the merits of their pieces. I've tried to get more locations into my pieces (although they're still painfully talking heads pieces - I'm working on it), so I've done quite a bit of pitching. I've worked with actors who are not in my immediate group of acquaintances. I have to pitch to them too.

I know lots of indie filmmakers though who haven't moved past making movies with their immediate friends. The quality improves as they get more practice (as it would have to) but they never move out of their comfort circle and their livingrooms/garages to get more variety in their locations and talent pools.

I've also experienced the conflict caused by putting 2 "one man show" directors together on one set to make a project. It doesn't generally get worked through the first shoot. Like everything else, it's learning from mistakes and being an adult about admitting them and taking criticism.

Again, I know nothing of these directorial hopefuls, but my own experience in the indie film community has shown these commonalities in the mindset of the directors who are working toward moving up the ladder. I did my "Guerilla" filmmaker (videomakers for those of you who are sensitive to that sort of thing) work in high school and then later on my first couple of shorts. I decided to make the move to "Indie" filmmaker, so started getting permission to shoot places and getting actors that I hadn't met before the production, writing scripts and Pitching projects to all of these assets. Pitching the project was nerve wracking on my first one too. I've slowly figured it out and am much more comfortable in saying concise summaries that make sense instead of babbling about every little thing that pops into my head about the project ( like I am now :) ).

I like the show...it's going to challenge the filmmakers to move into the fiscal responsibility of the "Independant" filmmaker, then that will teach them also the massively collaborative mindset of the "Studio" filmmaker.

These last two also rely on others to distribute your film, so treating it as a business becomes part of the preproduction planning, with distribution and audience saturation as a goal to maximize profit. As we all know, Filmmakers deal with much larger budgets that HAVE to show not only fast ROI, but sizeable profits or they won't be able to continue being filmmakers without self-funding their next projects.

[Cole McDonald]

And break a lead on your distro dealings George!

<diatribe off>

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Jenna Klingensmith

On The Lot will become the american idol of the motion picture world....

The two shows have a lot in common. The selection process itself for instance... the contestants are chosen not just for their skills and talent, but also because certain personalities make for good television. Just like American Idol, the producers of On The Lot will intentionally bypass some of the most promising auditions -- those which are never seen by the viewing audience -- in favor of others whose who are guaranteed to mix it up onscreen with others like oil and water.

It's all about what makes "good television" by their standards... think Survivor, The Apprentice, American Idol... yes there's plenty of talent on Idol but "good television" always takes precedence; that's why there was a Sanjaya on Idol this season.

[Dylan Couper]

I watched John Travolta's masterpiece Battlefield Earth instead.

[Steve Royer]

This show will do nothing but good things for indie filmmakers. Anything that encourages wanna-bes to stop talking and start doing is a great thing.

I loved the show, my frustration was not submitting.

I wanted to post to respond to the comments about how none of the successful groups were shown... they have to

#1) make good tv as has been stated already, but also...

#2) they need to show aspiring filmmakers what not to do first, because chances are the highest majority of watchers would make the wrong moves before the right ones.

[Chris Hurd]

I love the show too, but the reality of the situation with "On The Lot" is that it's not about good things for indie filmmakers, but rather it's about casting a reality show on TV. Casting for entertainment value.

No way would I want to be on *any* reality show on TV. I'd rather get behind a camera than in front of it... and if I'm in front of it, the last thing I want to act like, is myself. I'd much rather prefer to do a Brando impersonation.

"It was you, Charlie... I coulda had class..."

Or Alex, from Clockwork:

"Me glazzies! Aagghh!!"

[James Emory]

I think Carrie Fisher (Princess Leia) was hilarious with her matter of fact responses. She once said in an interview that everytime she looks in a mirror she has to give George Lucas a buck because he owns the rights to her likeness. There's one thing about this show and typical pitch sessions though. I think the stress level was obviously much more because this was done with several cameras pointed at the contestants not to mention a jib swinging around the whole time. You can see all kinds of content like the introduction bios of the judges, etc. on their website. Even though the show is about being chosen as director, I don't think it will be as popular as American Idol because it doesn't appeal to the masses like acting and singing stars do but more with the crew side of the industry. How many people have pictures of directors on their wall? It's definitely about time for us though!

www.thelot.com

[George Ellis]

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

I watched John Travolta's masterpiece Battlefield Earth instead.

You are just pouting because they weren't smart enough to include you ;)

[Mike Horrigan]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

It's all about what makes "good television" by their standards... think Survivor, The Apprentice, American Idol... yes there's plenty of talent on Idol but "good television" always takes precedence; that's why there was a Sanjaya on Idol this season.

I agree, but as long as there is some talent on the show... I'll be happy.

We'll find out soon enough. I just hope we get to see more of what they film at some point. Then we'll see if any of these people have some real talent. Too early to tell at this point.

Entertaining show though, and that's what it's all about.

Mike

[Jeremiah McLamb]

I like the show...was a little bit frustrating to sit and watch..instead of direct and participate! However, it was really cool to see a friend of mine on there!!! I knew she made it...but it was even more exciting to see her on the show!

It does seem like they picked certain people to be on the show just to create "drama"...and they probably already know who is going to win just because of the selections they have already made. but still...it will be fun to watch!

....boy am i jealous...