Comments on Getafilm: REVIEW: Ink

Yeah I'm totally slacking on a review, but that wa...

2009-11-05T12:22:19.103-06:00

Yeah I'm totally slacking on a review, but that was the rumor on Colin - $70, or 45 British Pounds, however the conversion works.

"Frugal filmmaking does not necessarily mean fanta...

2009-11-04T21:30:11.334-06:00

"Frugal filmmaking does not necessarily mean fantastic filmmaking." That's exactly it.

$70?! That's insane.

Couldn't have said it much better myself, Danny. I...

2009-11-04T10:08:14.981-06:00

Couldn't have said it much better myself, Danny. I'm not trying to take anything away from Ink as a sharp-looking film made on a dime, but as I see more "truly" independent films like this I'm increasingly hesitant to give them a pass primarily on effort. I didn't see Paranormal Activity, but I did see at this festival the zombie hit Colin, reportedly made for $70. That movie is probably the best example of this new trend that we've seen, and I'll have some thoughts up on that one soon.

Moral of the story is: great job getting a movie made and not wasting a lot of money, but frugal filmmaking does not necessarily mean fantastic filmmaking.

The question you raise in your first paragraph is ...

2009-11-03T21:53:47.796-06:00

The question you raise in your first paragraph is a fascinating one because I feel that so many times critics fall in love with a film if it is small and original. Examples that come to mind are films I have seen recently such as Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project.

I loved Paranormal and was a little disappointed with Blair Witch, but they were both efficiently made films regardless of the budget. I think that it is unfair to give "leeway" to a film simply because its budget is small. However, I do think it is fair in some ways to praise a good film with a small budget over a good film with a large budget. It is a bit of a paradox, but when a filmmaker is able to make the most out of his resources, it is certainly an admirable thing.