Posted by Bastich at ws99.cuna.org on September 22, 2000 at 16:07:56:
In Reply to: Great article comparing Wild things to Chasing Amy posted by Japanfreak on September 22, 2000 at 11:55:13:
: ...But the main difference was the number of zeroes involved in the final figures-well, that, and the fact that the Hollywood picture (Wild Things) sucked, and the indie flick (Chasing Amy) rocked.
: First, some background: Chasing Amy (1997) was the third film by then-26-year-old Kevin Smith, and was shot with determined indie spirit before being picked up and distributed by Miramax. The budget for the whole shebang was $250,000; this was after Smith shot Mallrats for $6.1 million and watched it tank. Wild Things (1998) was directed by John McNaughton, who also has an indie background (his first film was the cult favorite Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer). But it was his recent deal with Columbia Tristar's newly-formed Mandalay Entertainment that led to Wild Things' budget of $20 million. Got those numbers straight? Chasing Amy: $250,000. Wild Things: $20,000,000.
: The Chasing Amy commentary, which you'll find on the Criterion DVD (and their Laserdisc), features Kevin Smith along with producer Scott Mosier, actors Ben Affleck and Jason Mewes, and View Askew "historian" Vincent Pereira. It's a very funny, very spirited peek into the world of indie filmmaking. You can tell right from the start that this group of artists believed in the value of their project, and were determined to make it work despite their budgetary handicap. This doesn't make them vain, mind you; they discuss Chasing Amy with a healthy dose of irreverence.
: But what they do is show you how the corners got cut; how simple, multi-purpose sets became everything from comic book conventions to lesbian bars; how you can turn a skyscraper's lobby into a train station if you pick the right office building (as in, one with trains going by in the background); and how simply you can create an environment in film with just a handful of extras moving in just the right ways.
: As an example, the commentators discuss the last-minute addition of a hockey game scene. Until that point in the film, hockey had been a motif in the film only through one characters' constant Sega game playing; but Smith realized that one character confrontation could take place in the stands of a hockey rink, and that the violence of the game (which dissolves quickly into a fistfight) would reflect the inner conflict of the main characters. Great idea. Now how do you get a hockey rink, on short notice, and with no money? The movie's supposed to be set in New York City, but the 30,000+ extras who would ordinarily populate a Rangers game just weren't available. Smith got a college rink and maybe thirty extras and managed to make it seem like a lively, happenin' affair-so much so that, until I heard the commentary, it never even occurred to me that they were anywhere else but at the big game.
: Wild Things' commentary features McNaughton, editor Elena Maganini, composer George S. Clinton, cinematographer Jeffrey Kimball and producers Rodney Liber and Steven A. Jones. They discuss the pros and cons of filming on location in Florida-cons, like weather, bugs, and never enough ice for their wine coolers. If I'm sounding a bit glib here, it's because these guys actually congratulate themselves on how much cash they saved on their shoot, not considering that their final budget would have accomodated 8 Chasing Amys.
: For the film (which starred Matt Dillon, Kevin Bacon, Neve Campbell and Denise Richards), McNaughton needed an upper-crust private school, a lush courtroom, and a lot of sailboat shots for the big finale. Each time one of these sets come up, the commentators discuss the options they had for locations, and invariably their solution was to shell out extra dough to get the most expensive ones, because "it was the only one that would have worked." The only time they didn't go that route was for the ending, which was supposed to be in the Caribbean. "We wanted to shoot in the Caribbean, but it was just too expensive," said McNaughton. So they shot in Virginia Key instead, and simply imported palm trees, grass huts and tons of white sand to give the beach a Caribbean look. Now there's a cost-effective solution, don't you think?
: Cinematographer Jeffrey Kimball's comments are perhaps the most revealing in underlining the differences between Wild Things and Chasing Amy. Kimball, who shot Top Gun and Mission: Impossible 2, is clearly a fan of gadgetry. For the courtroom scenes, which (for some reason) demanded bright sunlight shining in through high windows, Kimball defied the rain and generated sunlight using huge, iridescent helium balloons. No floodlights for this fella; you want ambient sunlight, you got it.
: I was fascinated by the description of these giant floating light bulbs, because I'd never heard of them before and wondered if they've ever been used since. Whatever their final effect, though, they must have cost a fortune. And why? To make it seem sunny out, for a lengthy court sequence which takes place entirely indoors. Maybe if they'd settled for the second most expensive courtroom, they wouldn't have had to contend with windows at all?
: To be fair, hearing the commentary to Wild Things did increase my appreciation for what is, at its heart, a sleazy B-movie dressed in lush, gaudy trappings. But hearing the commentary to Chasing Amy only reminded me of the huge gap between indie and Hollywood filmmaking. Not only are the finished products very different, but the whole mindset has to change. It's essentially the difference between using a sturdy reliable Swiss Army Knife for all your home repair needs, and buying a brand new set of tools every time you see something that needs fixing. Or, to hell with that, just buy a new house.
: Scott Sharplin
: The views of this commentary are those of the writer alone, and in no way are meant to represent the views of DVD Verdict or a majority of its contributors.