How do you get this type of blue sunlight cinematography?

[Brian Drysdale]

How much nudity will depend on the market and the rating you want to get It also depends on how it's being used, the culture involved and the world of the story.

You don't need large amounts of either violence and nudity in a thriller, from memory the Dutch thriller from 1988 "The Vanishing" has very little of either, Not to be confused with the American remake.

[Paul R Johnson]

I'm no prude by any means, but the productions I have been involved with over the years that feature nudity and sexual content to do feature on my CV at all. More recently, I'm spotting that more and more younger people also find it something they wish to distance from - even though they're well aware of it.

Back in the 70s and 80s we had movies with all kinds of nudity - from horror to comedy, and actresses of that period did it routinely as part of career progression. Now it is much less common. Google an actress from the 70s and there will be boobs, try it on an actress from 2000 onwards and far, far less. It's no longer a career progression route, so they don't do it. I'm not sure people even like it in a general release movie.

[Brian Drysdale]

Having an X certificate limits your market and since it's so easy to access hard core porn for free on the internet, there is no real reason for mainstream films to feature nudity as a selling point.

You still get small amounts, even in TV dramas, but there's less of doing so for the sake of it.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well nudity was not mentioned in the critique, but just more violence and gore, and showing more of the sexual violence was mentioned. But they didn't say whether or not to show nudity during it.

However, when it comes to more violence and gore, how descriptive should I be in the script, and how graphically should one shoot it...

For example, I wrote in the script that one character kills another with a baseball bat... I just wrote it so that he kills him with the bat and that's it, no more description in terms of gore. But should I write it so that the brains spill out all over the floor and everything and get that detailed? Or does that come off as a little gratuitous or over explaining?

Another thing is, I was told the script had too much plot compared to what audiences of this sort of thing expects. But I was told on here, before that the plot wasn't moving fast enough, so I am confused now for a thriller, if more or less plot is a good thing?

As for an X or NC-17 rating, I think with online streaming, nobody really cares anymore, since people watch NC-17 content all the time... Game of Thrones for example... So does that rating matter anymore in today's online streaming market, where anything seems to go almost?

[Brian Drysdale]

You do what is dramatically appropriate for the character and the story.

It's often the build up and context of the violence that matters In the script. You describe what you'll see. You can read the scripts of "The Untouchables", "Casino" and various other films to see how they describe them. Don't expect other people to do your work for you.

Strangely, you can get less complaints about violence than nudity.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. When you say you can get less complaints about violence and nudity, compared to what?

I've seen The Untouchables and Casino but it seems that I am being told to go beyond those even.

[Josh Bass]

Theyre talking about the very American trope of people freaking out over an exposed nipple but you can show heads getting bashed all day long with nary a raised eyebrow

I think I need to clarify again ryan’s colleagues are complaining that his script is not enough in the aforementioned exploitation genre, a la “I spit on your grave”, and that is what they are trying to push him toward with his own movie. This is what’s confusing him. You guys are trying to tell him how to make a more typically “good” movie (proper plot arc, character development etc) while his friends are trying to tell him how to make specific genre film that often has none of that.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Greg Smith

It depends on why you're wanting to make this movie in the first place. Is it a personal project, a story that's been bubbling up from inside you for years that you just have to tell? Then don't compromise. Do you genuinely want to make money from distributing it? Then listen to those who have experience (and hopefully success) selling their work. Are you mainly hoping to use it as a resume piece to get the attention of producers and future work in the industry? Something that is unique, striking, a little offbeat and meticulously crafted is in order. And it doesn't have to be a full length feature.

Probably, your ambitions include all of these elements, but when just starting out, it may be helpful to choose one end goal to concentrate on and let that be the guiding principle for all the decisions you make. So far it isn't clear, to me at least, what objective you have in mind.

Personally, I think making a profit is likely to be very, very difficult, especially for an inexperienced director and crew. If that's your goal, then go for it whole-heartedly, but for myself I would make it the least of my priorities.

This was a good post. I was fully expecting Ryan response would be all of the above. One of the things he is plagued by is lacking focus and acting with a specific goal in mind. He is constantly bouncing from around every conceivable aspect of film making and doing it all poorly. I've asked him before what is the intended purpose or budget of this film and never can get a straight answer from him. No doubt it's because he doesn't even know himself.

There are many things that go into making a successful film and Ryan wants to know the rules so he can follow them but it doesn't work that way. One thing I know for sure this movie will not make money. He would first need to become a competent film maker then after that you could talk about what scripts, approaches, contacts would yield the greatest chance of financial success. Very few people are able to make a go at this business...

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

I've seen The Untouchables and Casino but it seems that I am being told to go beyond those even.

yes, but have you read the scripts?

You were asking how you write these scenes, so read the scripts, don't just keep asking other people. Read "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" and other similar screenplays if need be, they're available on line. If you want to be a script writer, that's what you..

BTW Get the scripts, not transcripts..

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. I don't see why it's bad to want to use it to get noticed in the industry but also try to make money off of it as well, if possible. Is it bad to want both?

But also, if I read scripts like The Untouchables and Casino, what I mean is, is that those scripts are in a different genre compared to something like I Spit on your Grave, so is the level of violence the same really?

[John Nantz]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

....You guys are trying to tell him how to make a more typically “good” movie (proper plot arc, character development etc) while his friends are trying to tell him how to make specific genre film that often has none of that.

Yes! Yes!

You guys post faster than I can read!

Why does violence have to be [edit: shown] in a video? The old radio mystery programs never had video and yet they covered lots of violence. In fact, the programs dealt with essentially everything that is shown in a movie or on TV in a video, and the listeners visualized what happened.

War of the Worlds, the movie, oh, wait a minute, the radio program … was broadcast years before, in the 1930s or early '40s? Hollywood eventually made the movie, but the radio program gripped the audience throughout the nation. It took years before the movie would be made that would try to duplicate the audience reaction.

So, why must the blood, guts, and bodily harm be actually shown in a video? Does the viewing public have feelings anymore?

For what it’s worth, during this lockdown I’ve read two books, one published in 1840 (that’s 180 years ago), about a British couple who moved to Canada (and then to New England), and a second one written in the time frame of 1850 to 1860, published in 1980 (where the author moved from New England to the mid west, then finally to California during the gold rush), and the writing style is very interesting. Much more poetic than today, and much more “wordy”, probably not the best word choice, but the authors really wrote a lot more about FEELINGS than the typical author does today. This is difficult to explain but the reader got more into the characters, their thoughts, their reactions, body movements, etc., than the typical prose of today’s writing. The old radio programs, many only 30 minutes long and included commercials, seemed to elicit more feeling than todays TV programs, in-spite of all the color and high resolution available.

We hear about the plight of victims all the time, so have we become insensitive to the pain of others?
Is it necessary to VISIBLY show someone being hurt as part of a story? Descriptions and audio don't work?
Or, animals don’t have feelings because they aren’t human?

[recent news article on the BBC about swine (I think, or calves?) taken to Spain for fattening, then shipped, in cramped conditions where many died in transit, to Lebanon(?) for slaughter. Won’t go into detail how they were slaughtered] Are we numb now?

[Ryan Elder]

Do you think maybe it's a case in marketing where indie filmmakers are able to show more than Hollywood is willing to show, and maybe therefore, movies that push the envelop in violence, and sexual violence are bigger sellers, because they stick out from the crowd in terms of pushing the envelope?

For example in my script, one of the readers, a different one said I should show a rape scene, where it was implied but not shown before. She said that not having it would be like cutting out the shower scene in Psycho, and just skipping ahead.

So maybe from a standpoint like that, a movie is willing to get noticed more, if it's more daring in what it shows, like Psycho, compared to trying to be subtle, when trying to get your movie noticed?

[Pete Cofrancesco]

The first step is doing something well. The second step having the right people notice what you did. You haven't accomplished the first step. The other thing we were talking about is if you have as specific goal then you can direct your energies. So a script to show off your unique and artistic vision would be different than one to show that you're good at doing mindless action junk. The first approach might win you a film festival award and lead to opportunities, while the other you might be hired to do b-movie crap or tv soap opera. No one wants someone who is mediocre at a bunch of things they want someone who is fabulous at one thing. If you goal is to make it at all costs, that might mean dropping your script, compromising your vision and doing what the producer wants. When you pick a goal then the decisions become more clear. It doesn't mean you will succeed just you are putting your energies in the right direction and are more likely to achieve your goal.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. And another thing is, I was told one thing to improve on the most for me is the acting. But I probably have a better chance at finding a better pool of actors who are interested if it I don't take a b movie approach? Unless maybe people would rather do it as a b movie, because maybe a lot of people prefer b mobies, when it comes to dark material, because they feel it's more of a safe movie, that way?

[Brian Drysdale]

Reading scripts, regardless of other genres will show how to write action. Each writer will have a different way of doing this and you can learn from them. You're like someone just wanting to learn how to do an effect, rather than learning how to use the NLE,

You've got to improve everything, not just the acting because without a good script the actors have nothing.

There are A movies that do dark subject matter as well, any movie attempting such material shouldn't be safe. However, they're usually B movies because it's harder to get funding for cark subjects because they're not safe..