You must be a pretty big moron. First, this is an independent movie made for $50,000 and in case you are unaware of what even a low budget movie costs (about $1 Million), and you seem to be the type that has no clue, this movie has the quality of a $1 Million movie at only $50,000. There are no "executives" from a Hollywood film company and there is no "green lighting" from those "executives". You talk as if you are a smart industry insider and a big shot who knows how movies work. This isn't 1989 moron, and in case you need an education on film in today's age there is a whole industry of independent films made by independent filmmakers with independent money with independent locations and people working to make the films. Hopefully that helps "Mr. Hollywood".
The movie isn't trying to be the next Van Wilder and when compared to proper competition it is much better than any other movie in its "straight to DVD college comedy genre". It’s as if you hold it up to big budget blockbusters like Van Wilder or Old School which had budgets into the tens of millions. Movies like Foreign Exchange, Dorm Daze, or ANY National Lampoon's movie for that matter since 2003 are much worse than Fraternity House. Try the $5 Million Dorm Daze 2 or the $12 Million Bag Boy, both from National Lampoons, then actually watch Fraternity House all the way through and THEN tell me what’s worse (keeping in mind Fraternity House had the huge budget of 50K to work with).
Most of the straight to DVD college genre movies actually don’t even have the proper amount of music, composition, and sound effects that Fraternity House has. In that regard Fraternity House is up to par with the big budget blockbusters. Granted it starts a little slow, but in a genre where there literally are NO plot lines and there are NO properly structured Act I's, Act II's, and Act III's, let alone a Call to Adventure (the thesis of the movie), I'd say this movie was at the least nearly flawless in its structure and very clever in its writing. It has a clear thesis in which the 2 brothers don't want to graduate and will do anything to stay. They then consult with a mentor (again if you understood anything about script writing or properly structured movies you'd have SOME credibility) which is the next correct step in proper script writing. The mentor is someone who has successfully stayed in school and is sharing his wisdom in the form of what is actually a very funny and original idea of "10 Commandments" on how to stay in school. Again, following proper script writing the main characters follow these series of tasks that the mentor sets out for them throughout Act II only to have it fail. Once again, watch any properly written movie and with about 30 minutes left you'll see that the main characters are facing their toughest tests and have their backs up against the wall. Then when it seems that there is no way out of the situation, they find a way out and/or redeem themselves in which culminates in the "Happy Ending" at the end of Act III (end of the movie). Again, watch any good movie and you will see that same formula - but you'd already know that seeing that you're a genius when it comes to movie observation and constructive movie criticism. As for comedy, in this genre, 90% of the comedy is much worse than this movie, and it even has a clever twist in the end which is pretty funny - in which the 2 other frat guys have achieved, in the same manner the main characters tried, staying a 5th year (and of course the main characters didn't succeed with the 5th year). Also, it is clever how it ends with the foreign exchange students still locked in the trunk and not let out until one of the brothers and his dad open the trunk. Of course if you watched the entire movie you'd have actually enjoyed that rather uniquely smart and well thought out comedy.
Its people like you that are so fast to criticize and you all are the same – you sit behind your computer and bitch and complain all the while writing all the time about how bad things are (music, politics, sports, etc.). Its “small man” syndrome and pathetic to do nothing but always see the worst in everything. Your type is so predictable and 99% of what you write is over-the-top complaints or opinions on how bad everything is. Get a life, get out from behind your computer at some point in your life, and try actually seeing the positive in something.
reply
share
usetheforcejosh
14 years ago
First of all, the money from this film came from somewhere, and the term “green light” could be used loosely to describe the decision that the investors made to fund an independent film like Fraternity House, regardless of whether the investors were big studios, rich dentists, or the filmmakers themselves.
It's true that many good films follow the three-act structure, but that doesn't mean that every film that follows it is a good film. What determines that is the quality of the script and the manner in which the film is produced, and Fraternity House is lacking on both of these fronts.
You can't just say that Fraternity House is a good film because it's supposedly better than most of the terrible films that make up this particular genre. If Fraternity House is just a bad film and Dorm Daze 2 is a terrible film, the fact that a film exists that is supposedly worse than Fraternity House does not mean that Fraternity House is a better film. It's kind of a sad argument to say that this film isn't bad because “it's not the worst one out there.”
And just because a film is made for $50,000 doesn't excuse the fact that the two biggest creative forces behind the project--the screenwriters and director--have little to no talent. On low-budget independent films made by people who are just starting out in the business, both of those roles aren't highly paid (if they're paid at all) and therefore don't really count as an expense that's reflected in the budget. While small budgets do constrain small independent films, good films can still be made on shoe-string budgets if the people making them have enough raw creative talent to overcome their financial restrictions.
Finally, I'm going to assume that you, TheJonAlderman, are one of the filmmakers involved in creating Fraternity House. And please forgive me if I'm wrong, but you seem to have such an intricate knowledge of the process it took to produce this film as well some insight into the vague structure and themes that are supposedly present in the film, something very few members of the audience would have been able to pick up on themselves, which is again your failing, not theirs. You call Soulknife pathetic for barraging your film with negative criticism. Why? That's what audiences do. What I think is truly pathetic is when the creators of a film feel the need to defend their work on IMDB message boards, insult people who think their film is bad, and give some lame, obscure textbook analysis of why the film is good.
If your defense of the film was that you were just trying to tell a fun but shallow and pointless little story with the ultimate goal of getting your name out there or making a little money, this is at least understandable, but you can't argue that you've made a good film, because that's not for you to decide; it's for your audience to decide, and clearly the general consensus is that you've made a bad film. So if your real goal is to make a film that's actually good, instead of judging and belittling the audience members that write poor reviews of your film, maybe you should listen to the criticism that they're giving you, try to recognize the mistakes that you made with Fraternity House, learn from them, and then do a better job next time.
reply
share
crankyerma1984
11 years ago
Actually, "greenlight" really has more to do with the distributor (usually a studio.) You can literally have 12 mil lined up in funding on a low-to med budget pic but if you can't find a distributor you are SOL. It happens all the time, believe me.
reply
share