The Raid: Redemption

[Urizen]

Originally Posted by Krispy

Having actually poked my head around a few movie budgets, I can tell you the only reason it cost this little is because they paid the Indonesian crew members essentially nothing, it takes place in one location, and it was all done on cheap digital equipment.

You know what, that doesn't fly with me at all. Fine, Indonesian cast and crew don't have the same unions or pay rates, but what's your factor? Cheap digital equipment gave me better effects than an episode of Spartacus on Starz for what's probably the same money, so what's your factor?

5x? 10x?... 15x?

If Hollwood could have made this movie for $20M, they would have, but they lack the creativity. You give them $250M and you get John Carter.

[AntonThaGreat]

Anyone know when this is coming out for the home? I'm itching to watch this and I can't find it anywhere through my regular channels. :/

[Urizen]

Originally Posted by AntonThaGreat

Anyone know when this is coming out for the home? I'm itching to watch this and I can't find it anywhere through my regular channels. :/

Try a multiplex.

[AntonThaGreat]

Originally Posted by Urizen

Try a multiplex.

Looked through showtimes again, since last time I checked it wasn't showing in Brooklyn, looks like it will be available on Friday in my area. Going to have to organize a viewing.

[Urizen]

Originally Posted by Hyperglide

Oh and it was filmed on a $1.1 million dollar budget.

Eff you Hollywood.

Originally Posted by Krispy

Having actually poked my head around a few movie budgets, I can tell you the only reason it cost this little is because they paid the Indonesian crew members essentially nothing, it takes place in one location, and it was all done on cheap digital equipment.

I assume it's an F U because Hollywood is full of bureaucracy and a lack of creativity that fuels action movies like Transformers, and has made Jason Statham the star of two franchises.

You say the budget is irrelevant/unrealistic to Hollywood because it was shot in Indonesia.

I'm saying your argument is irrelevant because:

1. 'Cheap digital equipment' outperformed anything comparable Hollywood has done in years.

2. It takes some skill and creativity to shoot a movie in one location and not bore the audience.

3. If you're saying the magic of the budget is in the low wages Indonesians will work for, then there must be some ratio -- some factor -- we can apply to find out what the movie would have cost in to shoot in the US. My number would around 5 or 6. It should be possible to make this movie in the US for about 6 times what it cost in Indonesia or $6M. But even if you think the number ought to be closer to 20, making the US budget $22M, then show me the comparable movie that cost that much.

The Raid is a fantastic movie, with minor problems don't keep from being a classic in my book. I'm doubly sure after having watched it a second time. In every sense, it's an F U to Hollywood's movie-making model, and especially Hollywood's action movie-making model.

[Deadend]

Alright, it's coming to theaters I am okay with on 4/13!

I haven't seen The Raid to judge it's creative merits or if it's something incredible that couldn't be made by a traditional movie studio. Even though most movie studios have an inflating cost/de-risking method that is risky.. to make a movie less risky, they spend more on it, which makes it risky and thus gets more spent to be less risky.

There is also the staffing costs and the fact that the movie used a ton of trained martial artists, and those who are willing to work super cheap and do extremely risky stunts are not that common. As I have a feeling the Raid was made with very minimal safety standards.

[Hyperglide]

Originally Posted by Krispy

Perhaps this will diffuse your worry right away then: I did not take his words to involve any critique of creativity. I took them to be something along the lines of, "See, you can make action movies at a fraction of the cost of your normal Hollywood budget!"

That's exactly what I meant. Thanks for clarifying. I just meant that you can make an amazing and exciting movie for very little and also make a huge profit. But instead we get big budget borefests like Transformers, GI Joe, A-Team etc. blah blah.

[Urizen]

Originally Posted by Krispy

Perhaps this will diffuse your worry right away then: I did not take his words to involve any critique of creativity. I took them to be something along the lines of, "See, you can make action movies at a fraction of the cost of your normal Hollywood budget!"

I don't think we made different interpretations, and we if are being sticklers for Hyperglide, then he has issue with not just the size of Hollywood's budgets, but the uninteresting results of those budgets. So, I'm closer to bullseye we both hit?

I'm afraid I've had this conversation with you in the past. Since brevity is the soul of wit, brief I shall be.

You're opening cans of worms only to find mint-in-box cans of worms inside. I'm not going to touch the sanctimonious apology for unions.

As far as the equipment used to shoot the movie, I had no problem with it. The movie was trying to tell a specific story in a specific setting with a specific mood. And the film-makers succeeded as far as I'm concerned. The sound editing and mixing were also top-notch. The score was terrific. The VFX removing wires and adding bloodwork were great. Dark details and depth of field issues? Did you also complain about the poor palette in Schindler's List? I didn't see any artifacting, but I'll concede that would be embarrassing.

When you called Drive an 'action movie', I had to re-read the sentence to make sure you weren't talking about Driving Miss Daisy. A better example would be El Mariachi vs. Desperado.

Evans can say what he wants at this point. He sold out. And I mean that in the best way, and I'm happy for him. That's why he's going to say nice things about Sony, and sign on to watch over a the Hollywood remake. It means a nice house and that he won't have to worry about his kids' education any more. And any self-proclaimed artist who passes up that opportunity fails as a human being.

To put it another way, as Northrop Frye said, "Shakespeare has a particular perspective on modern criticism of his plays, but not a particular authority".

But the problem with Hollywood remains. They don't want to help make these movies when someone has the script and the talent. They want to pick it up after it's being stretched on a shoestring to turn a profit, and then gains some international traction at niche awards. As part of the distribution rights, they pick up 'water-it-down-and-remake-it' rights with a soulless Will Smith and a PG-13 rating.

"Yippie Kai-yay, Mr. Falcon"

I'm out.

[Veregon]

Anyone who has this playing near them needs to go see it as soon as they can, it is pretty much the perfect action movie.

[digitalErich]

'The Raid: Redemption', aka 'Guys, line up... because everyone is getting stabbed'

[Urizen]

I wish there was something -- anything -- about my post that you understood.

In other news, I keep dragging people to see this movie. Seen it 3 times now. Can I make it 4?

[muddi900]

There are shots during some fight scenes that are longer than the sum total running time of action scenes in the first two Transporter movies. They did so without ever showing the fact that Silat looks incredibly silly otherwise. Felt the same way when I saw Hard Boiled the first time all those years ago. I wonder if this movie would age like that once other films employing these techniques.

EDIT: Also, did Krispy delete all his posts from here?

[Vandabo]

Saw this last night. I was definitely entertained, but much of it was just laughing at the ludicrous action.

The fight choreography was mostly pretty awesome, but the ceaseless pummeling the guys take verges on comical after a while. In the climactic 2 on 1 fight scene, I kept thinking I was watching the Matrix sequels. It was like a video game that makes you use an environmental special move to kill a boss, but for most of the fight they were in a blank room, so they couldn't trigger the death scene. It would be interesting to watch frame by frame and count how many punches and kicks are landed on each of the participants with no apparent effect.

This movie also has possibly the least character development I've ever seen in a feature length film. Most action movies are pretty light on this aspect, but this one eschews it almost completely. I didn't really miss it, to be honest, and the couple attempts at it were kind of speed bumps before getting back to the punching and stabbing.

[muddi900]

The guy shiv'd, so I guess he wouldn't die instantly, but he kept going...

[fitbabits]

Watched this a few days ago and felt very underwhelmed by it.

Hopefully Dredd will be a better take on a similar theme.

[pomeroy]

Originally Posted by fitbabits

Watched this a few days ago and felt very underwhelmed by it.

Hopefully Dredd will be a better take on a similar theme.

I think you'll be very disappointed.

[muddi900]

I don't know what you'd consider impressive fits...

[RandoM51]

Originally Posted by fitbabits

Watched this a few days ago and felt very underwhelmed by it.

Hopefully Dredd will be a better take on a similar theme.

OK, I'm speechless.

[fitbabits]

Originally Posted by muddi900

I don't know what you'd consider impressive fits...

I'll tell you:

Predator
Die Hard
Enter the Dragon
Assault on Precinct 13

Just to name four...action movies that I enjoyed way more than The Raid.

[muddi900]

Well you said underwhelmed, which is why I asked for impressive. Those movies are great, but not very impressive anymore.