FORUMS: list search recent posts

whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 8:06:21 pm

remember sam mestman creating all that stir with his hundred million dollar film? And then all that confusion about what film he was talking about? the one where he was only cutting EPKS and below the line marketing, and then the other one that larry jordan referred to - the other film that larry deduced a whole new hundred million dollar budget from even though sam mestman didn't know that budget?

whatever happened to that film? it was, like, three to four months back now, and larry said all would be revealed in a matter of weeks,

refresher here in Larry's first reply:
http://www.larryjordan.biz/seeking-perfection/

Aindreas:
Great questions and you are NOT an idiot. There are two films involved here.
The film I mentioned in my talk is different from the Bulgaria film. I have spoken to the editor, who is not Sam, who prefers to remain anonymous because the studio – one of the “Big 6″ Hollywood studios – has not authorized him to discuss the film. I don’t know it’s actual budget, but, given the stars involved, 100 million dollars seems in the ballpark.
FCP X is being used for all editorial on this film, and was selected after six months of testing and strong initial objections from the studio.
Larry


and then he goes on to say:

Aindreas:
Correct. Sam worked on the Bulgaria project. He is also working on the new movie, but in workflow support, not as the editor. Both Sam and the editor are under non-disclosure for this new project ***for a few more weeks yet.***
And, the reason no one is talking about this new movie, yet, is they don’t have permission from the studio to do so.
Soon, but not yet.
larry


ok so that was a few months ago now, mestman has coincidentally gone on to launch an FCPX repair shop, and FCPX motivational tour date announcement, FCPX gum and t-shirt accessories, and guided tours of the suites he was in when he realised, like Michael Cioni, that FCPX was effectively not just the future of editing, but also possibly the future of civilization itself. It appears sam mestman also probably wants your money.

anyhoo - was just wondering about that hundred million dollar film from one of the big six studios cut entirely on FCPX where larry has spoken directly to the editor and sam mestman was intimately involved in the workflow. and we were going to hear allllll the details in a few weeks, quite a number of months ago. I literally cannot wait to hear more about this exciting development. I am giddy with anticipation.

BTW - this is how I imagine it if all the FCPX training circus carny crowd turn up in the same square, Larry Jordan was only trying to buy a suit:







http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 8:38:19 pm

Large films are 1 year+ in the making. Any related news like that won't be available until it's very close to release and in the hands of the studio PR folks.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 8:47:42 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Dec 30, 2013 at 8:59:02 pm

so larry was incorrect in his assessment that the editor and sam mestman were under nondisclosure agreements relating to the use of FCPX that would expire in a matter of weeks?

also - since when is the matter of a nominated editing system likely to be subject to the use of NDA for the films editor and one involved in workflow prep?

Also - if a major 100 million dollar picture from one of the big six was being currently edited as we speak solely in FCPX, presumably in LA I guess - isn't it surprising that no mention or word of it has appeared outside of a Larry Jordan sales pitch in amsterdam, and a sam mestman launch my FCPX career post in fcp.co - a site designed entirely to profit from the rapid expansion of the FCPX base? Is it realistic to suppose that people wouldn't know in the LA film community? there are people that come on here regularly that work and live in LA editing circles [edit: er sorry, like you for instance Oliver] - isn't it weird that this is a phantom to the extent that it is, months and months into editing? when did editing begin?

so as to say: I mean, really?

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:06:38 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "so larry was incorrect in his assessment that the editor and sam mestman were under nondisclosure agreements relating to the use of FCPX that would expire in a matter of weeks?"

That's irrelevant. I interview editors for stories all the time. No one talks, until the studio PR folks have blessed the interview. As an editor in the food chain of film production, it is not your place to get involved with outside press until everything is put to bed and folks are happy. This is true as well of DPs, sound editors, re-recording mixers, VFX folks, etc.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Is it realistic to suppose that people wouldn't know in the LA film community?"

Yes. Have you ever noticed that very few if any notable editors or DPs have an online footprint - as in posting to forums or running their own blogs? Geoff Boyle and Roger Deakins are notable exceptions, but otherwise, you don't see Murch, Wall, Cassidy, Tichenor or any of the others participate openly in places like CCow.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:27:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] " very few if any notable editors or DPs have an online footprint "

sure - of course, said el pleb in the cheap seats - but given the magnitude of the proposition - with a largely LA derided edit system nominated to handle a hundred million dollars worth of prime hollywood output, i find it extraordinary that the only two people who can blithely talk about it are Larry Jordan and Sam Mestman. Sam Mestman can talk about the catering and figure out the budget from there, then walk back the budget because he says he has no idea what the budget was, as he did, and Larry Jordan can say that the cast list convinced him it was a 100 million dollar film. And that he will be speaking about it again in a matter of weeks. And then we never hear about it again to this point.

they both seem to be quite in the know, and presumably dangerously close to the edge of the FCPX 100 million dollar super movie NDA.

YBTMV.

shiny new belief threshold acronym there.

Or I'm totally wrong and it hits hollywood reporter in a fortnight as a mega editing story.
did really feel an urge to point out the growing interval of time from the splash story tho.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:36:37 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "did really feel an urge to point out the growing interval of time from the splash story tho"

It happens. The Coens' "Inside Llewyn Davis" was edited in 2012 using FCP7, but not released until 2013 (really 2014 mainstream). That comes right at the time that Adobe is touting their interest in Premiere Pro for the next feature.

Honestly, outside of the walls of these forums and some film schools, no one cares what NLE was used to edit any given film.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:55:55 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Honestly, outside of the walls of these forums and some film schools, no one cares what NLE was used to edit any given film."

lord sure, said someone who has no clue - that stuff is all a mile up in the gods past the clouds said he.
you would be inclined to hold Jordan to the particulars of that amsterdam presentation tho.
until it all breaks.

recap: early september splash, 100 million dollar film clearly stated and re-iterated by Jordan, big six studio, entirely edited in X - more details very soon.

sure think of it even as a year end bit on interesting stories from 2013. full details would make quite an absorbing 2014 read.

Larry must, realistically, be very keen to speak in great detail, building on all the vague, provocative things he said in amsterdam.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:58:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Honestly, outside of the walls of these forums and some film schools, no one cares what NLE was used to edit any given film."

So very true

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:05:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Honestly, outside of the walls of these forums and some film schools, no one cares what NLE was used to edit any given film.

- Oliver
"


Oliver dude, stop it.

You're scaring all of us here who've spent so much time convincing ourselves that what we say and do influences all human thinking in the rest of the world.

Seriously, you DO know, don't you, that Putin's having trouble with the terrorists in Russia primarily because none of the factions can decide whether to cut their pre-Olympics terrorist manifesto EPKs in Premier or X?


(whoops, just realized that I used the "t-word" and the "o-word" in the same email ... oh, well, greetings NSA cubicle workers - hope you're having a pleasant day!)

; )

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


Frank Gothmann
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:34:46 pm

[Bill Davis] "Olympics terrorist manifesto EPKs in Premier or X?
"


Have to say that was a good one, Bill. Almost chocked laughing.

Don't understand why is it relevant who uses what to get a job done. Either it works for you and your workflow or it doesn't. Simple.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:52:49 pm

[Bill Davis] "Putin's having trouble with the terrorists in Russia primarily because none of the factions can decide whether to cut their pre-Olympics terrorist manifesto EPKs in Premier or X?"

you're a bad, bad man Davis. word apparently is they went premiere. some people told them X suited the editing workflow far better but the Chechyan fools went rental. ownership for gods sake.

.. and now we are all going to hell.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:30:28 pm

Alan E. Bell edited CATCHING FIRE. He was VERY mum about it. He's active on Twitter, but barely tweeted anything while working on that film. When it came out, he came out and chatted all over, including here.

But know that not every editor is chatty. Most want to do the job and move on. They don't care to talk about what NLE was used and what their challenges were. They like to cut, and move on. That's why when Murch came out and talked, and wrote books, everyone was like "WOW! Some editor is finally saying stuff!"

[Oliver Peters] "Honestly, outside of the walls of these forums and some film schools, no one cares what NLE was used to edit any given film."

VERY true. Well, other than the PR people of the editing application makers. They love to say "We were used to cut this film! It couldn't have been done without us."

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:39:16 pm

[Shane Ross] "They don't care to talk about what NLE was used and what their challenges were. They like to cut, and move on."

well yes. I personally cut twenty five stories below the ground floor in question. the light bulbs don't work down here. I am just rather keen to hear about this film.

Jordan said weeks. that hasn't panned out. I want to hear about the film. I'm in the bleachers with a soggy programme.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:58:57 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "remember sam mestman creating all that stir with his hundred million dollar film?"


Whatever happened might have been the inspiration, in part, for this.
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1300-why-final-cut-pro-x-works-and...
and his company.
http://www.fcpworks.com

If he believes he can make a living at it somebody must be buying.
I don't doubt when he gets the green light he'll be using it to promote his new business.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 10:28:08 pm

I know - but what is so really interesting about FCPX is the potentially gigantic user base, for training, workflows and motivational speaker tours - if only it can forcibly declare a valid highly visible professional footprint - the visible rope ladder of opportunity that will lead you to giving mestman and jordan cash has to lead into visible paid professionalism say. like say a shiny hundred million dollar film.

I'm not saying it won't or it isn't - but given the massive intellectual effort apple have made to leave the skills stepway open down into casual intelligible use - for completely laudable fundamental reasons - if FCPX really starts to switch on and take hold visibly as an in operation system that you can aspire to, then there is something like the appearance of an almighty klondike gold rush for those in a position to sell maps, chisels, training videos and workflow guidance for the incalculable tangential hordes across photographers, prosumers and you name it. probably a genuinely electric scale of an audience. they run up in the hills, and other people sell a lot of chisels.

I don't see mestman starting avidworks.

I'll say one other thing - on a recent FCPX grill I was reminded of two fairly weird FCPX things - you simply cannot, without crass hacks, lock an element in time, and you cannot operate editing keyboard shortcuts outside of the primary. If its true that the rational voices in FCPX development are back a bit more in charge after the dust binning of the first three years worth of basic organisational constructs, there is maybe going to be a really interesting tug of war between fundamental efficacy and immediate intelligibility for this software. which has been an interesting question since the get go.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 11:16:50 pm
Last Edited By TImothy Auld on Dec 30, 2013 at 11:17:50 pm

FCPX does do some things that could fit into a feature workflow. But in its current state of flux and instability to think that it would be the primary NLE on any budgeted feature is laughable.

Tim


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 11:35:12 pm

[TImothy Auld] "But in its current state of flux and instability to think that it would be the primary NLE on any budgeted feature is laughable."

Rubbish it's perfectly possible to cut a major feature on it, certainly no more difficult than cutting one in FCP Classic

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 11:41:55 pm

When Murch cut COLD MOUNTAIN with FCP 3, Apple advised him NOT TO attempt it. And it was fraught with issues, but it was done. I'm very sure that a feature could be cut on FCX. Especially if shot on RED or Alexa...it seems like it would be perfect for those formats.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 12:02:50 am

broadly so then: do you believe FCPX, at around version 10.0.8 (?), with the event project architecture, is currently editing a hundred million dollar, major studio feature as described by mestman and jordan?

I'm half inclined to think I'm going to be really horribly stupid in hindsight given how incredibly clear the statements have been.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 12:48:19 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "broadly so then: do you believe FCPX, at around version 10.0.8 (?), with the event project architecture, is currently editing a hundred million dollar, major studio feature as described by mestman and jordan?"

No. I highly doubt the studio would allow that. They would only go with proven workflows. New editing apps start on smaller budget films....at least out here.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 12:57:44 am

[Shane Ross] "No. I highly doubt the studio would allow that. "

While that may be true, think back to the press when Fincher was originally doing "Zodiac". This was a custom-developed, file-based workflow using GV Viper cameras. Rock Paper Scissors and Fincher's in-house post operation handled the post at a point where it would be normal for only a proven lab to provide those services. It was only because Fincher personally went to bat to stand behind this decision that it happened. But, it was allowed.

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2006/12/16/zodiac/

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 1:59:29 am

[Shane Ross] "When Murch cut COLD MOUNTAIN with FCP 3, Apple advised him NOT TO attempt it. And it was fraught with issues, but it was done."

Actually, if it wasn't for a studio totally putting their NDA at risk with Apple, Murch would have been screwed. He made it by the seat of his pants, with some help from people willing to break the rules.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 30, 2013 at 11:47:54 pm

[TImothy Auld] "in its current state of flux and instability to think that it would be the primary NLE on any budgeted feature is laughable."

that's all on you Auld. I myself was carefully non-committal.

sure really, thinking about it, all this requires is sam mestman stepping in to calm the whole thing down. with a clear statement about the film and any likelihood of future public developments.

simple as really. just any clear future statement about the hundred million dollar FCPX feature that doesn't go beyond the self publicity himself and Jordan have engaged in to this point. and then the cheap seats in the wee lunatic forum are covered in egg as they should be.

and lets face it - larry jordan was incredibly specific regarding direct studio feature X editor conversations, nda's, timelines, major studio provenance, budget etc.

it is actually kind of inconceivable that that could all prove to be less than on the complete level by all parties.

again - adults simply step in to clarify = egg on cheap seat faces.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 12:30:11 am

All my statements are all on me. And in my opinion, without going anywhere else - and there's lots of other places to go - it just does not seem stable enough to me for use as the primary NLE on any long form project. Yet.

Tim


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 1:38:01 am

[TImothy Auld] "it just does not seem stable enough to me for use as the primary NLE on any long form project. Yet."

also -hey - you might like to perform certain reliable editing actions to trigger, say, that tube purchase, if FCPX is to be the blade for three thousand dollar razors.

if fcpx is to be a come hither for a deadly serious 4K hardware purchase, shouldn't they raise their non-consumer skirts a bit more? tearable Tabs?
timeline demagnetising for the ingrates? as in the ability to lock elements to time? the ability to invoke david lawrence style universal time as discussed at fcpx grill? any functional keyboard editing outside the primary?

the inspector focus switch live dot feels like apple trying to avoid the reality of the primary timeline problem. if they were to allow keyboard editing command focus to become slave to the dot it would get worse. but they still have to allow keyboard driven editing out of the primary regardless at some point. that dot is a massive version of them not accepting that reality.

also Ganging? how would that work? real match frame? a scrubbable viewer? it really doesn't half feel like its piling up at their doorstep.
If those questions could be happily ignored then fine - their intellectual schema worked.

you might think it hasn't and the entire software project is fundamentally amidships.

they are pitching their most surreal hardware with FCPX - 38 4K screens etc - they maybe need to decide fairly soon what that software is actually for.

determining that it is somehow all things to all people is, in a way, a pretty crappy intellectual conclusion.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 9:44:12 am

[TImothy Auld] "it just does not seem stable enough to me for use as the primary NLE on any long form project. Yet.
"


I've read that a few people have had stability issues, but for most people including me, the later versions of FCPX have been as stable as any other NLE.

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Jan 12, 2014 at 5:30:45 pm

Just for you Aindreas ;-)



- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Marcus Hardy
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 6:27:42 am

I cut a micro budgeted 3000 dollar feature film in FCPX, all SFX was done inside FCPX. From personal experience. With the right setup, you can have zero problems cutting a feature film worth many times more than my tiny feature.

For those interested we released it online for free, cause that's how we roll.







Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: whatever happened to baby jane - and that hundred million dollar FCPX film?
on Dec 31, 2013 at 9:41:28 am

[Marcus Hardy] "I cut a micro budgeted 3000 dollar feature film in FCPX, all SFX was done inside FCPX. From personal experience. With the right setup, you can have zero problems cutting a feature film worth many times more than my tiny feature. "

I also cut (and re-cut!) a feature on FCPX, interchange with sound post and grading was no problem and FCPX was as stable as any other NLE I have ever used.

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]