Name the most obvious goof you have ever noticed in a movie
-
rockmail — 15 years ago(July 31, 2010 01:51 PM)
Except that's not a "Goof". It was edited from the best takes from a few days shooting, and believe it or not the producer/director/editor didn't care about the color change as much as getting the "best" performance.
I know one of the producers personally, and this is a story he tells all the time. -
CGSailor — 14 years ago(July 09, 2011 10:33 PM)
Just because the director did not bother to correct it and left in the best performances does not mean that it is not a goof. It is a goof that was intentionally uncorrected and left in.
Or did (in story) the attorney magically change clothes or strip down in front of the Jury?
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(October 04, 2015 04:36 PM)
It's not a 'goof' if it is intentional. No one makes that kind of mistake on a set not only are there several wardrobe people those costume changes had to go through, the script supervisor would have to approve the costumes. What happened, in my professional opinion, is that the scene was originally several scenes set over several story days and the director had to condense them into one scene to stay within the delivered cut time. It happens. That is not a goof. That is a weighed decision.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 04:15 AM)
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
Too bad you didn't pay more attention to your own signature. You really should take your own advice.
in my professional opinion
Ummm yeah.. sure professional
Yes, what you said is true concerning it being from multiple different takes over the course of a few different days. However it was by accident that the actress was wearing a different wardrobe on subsequent takes and in the end they had little choice but to go with the shots they had or reshoot the entire scene again. Likely by the time they noted the mistake, it was too late to reshoot. Thus it IS a goof.
Regardless Unless there is some "in-universe Point of View" explanation (Not from a production POV) for the suddenly changing clothes it's a goof.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 08:27 AM)
Apparently you did not comprehend what you read when you read my reply. I didn't say it was multiple takes. I said it was most likely multiple SCENES set on DIFFERENT STORY DAYS which means the wardrobe changes were INTENTIONAL.
And yes PROFESSIONAL opinion as I am a script supervisor and have my own page here on IMDB.
Look who just removed all doubt. LOL!!!! -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 11:32 AM)
Oh I comprehended what you said alright, however in your defense you left out the relevant bit.
You now:
I said it was most likely multiple SCENES set on DIFFERENT STORY DAYS which means the wardrobe changes were INTENTIONAL.
You then:
is that the scene was originally several scenes set over several story days
and the director had to condense them into one scene
to stay within the delivered cut time.
It does not matter if the original intent was that they were multiple scenes taking place on successive days The final product was a single scene on the SAME DAY. and thus the magical changing of the clothing without having ever taken a break to go change is a goof.
As far as professional opinion I've know quite a few professional idiots.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 12:39 PM)
I see no relevant difference between the two statements. They both say the same thing to whit: several scenes (multiple scenes) set (taking place) over several story days (different story days). I mean, really?
And you may know a few professional idiots, but I am not one of them.
Done and done here.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 03:27 PM)
I see no relevant difference between the two statements.
And THAT is why you fail.
They both say the same thing to whit: several scenes (multiple scenes) set (taking place) over several story days (different story days).
Incorrect.
Your second claim was that they are different scenes on different days.
Your original claim was that though they were originally shot to be different scenes on different days were edited for brevity into a single scene on a single day.
The fact of the matter remains the scene in question was NOT over the course of several In film universe days but different shots of the same scene in the same day.
Ergo a GOOF!
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(October 09, 2015 02:04 AM)
Incorrect.
Your second claim was that they are different scenes on different days.
Your original claim was that though they were originally shot to be different scenes on different days were edited for brevity into a single scene on a single day.
OMG - you really are an effing idiot!
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. -
ardsnarf — 10 years ago(October 18, 2015 07:20 PM)
CGSailor..
I too have an IMDb page but I don't have nearly as much self-importance or arrogance. You are absolutely correct. Scriptys are why it takes 10 years to even shoot a film, and by the end, the wardrobe is antiquated anyway. I'm starting to wonder if it was a film she fuc worked on. -
ardsnarf — 10 years ago(October 18, 2015 07:07 PM)
Except that in the interest of continuity, the actor would wear the same wardrobe for that shot, regardless of how many days it took to shoot, unless the director did it intentionally or scripty was 'sleep at the wheel. Sometimes "goofs" are intentional when the director purposely breaks continuity. If he filmed the same shot over days and used different wardrobes, theres some pissed off producers out there going "Uh HUH!!!!"
-
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(October 18, 2015 10:17 PM)
Ok you're not understanding me. STORY DAYS are not the same as shooting days; story days are the days in the story. I really don't know how to make it any simpler. AGAIN: this was most likely THREE SEPERATE SCENES that took place on THREE DIFFERENT STORY DAYS thus the different costumes (a character almost never wears the same costume twice on different story days unless it is a story point) and was combined as one scene in the edit for cut time reasons. There is NO WAY that this was a mistake made on set.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. -
ardsnarf — 10 years ago(October 19, 2015 11:06 AM)
No!
You're
the one not paying attention. The goof in question was a ONE STORY DAY (I know you like caps for emphasis) but different story day shots were edited into a ONE story day final cut, most likely a budget issue NOT TIME issue. And speaking of wasting time, no one does that more than scripty. So even if it was done on purpose, it's still a "goof" in the continuity. You're acting all uppity like you were scripty on this movie, and more importantly, like it was your call. Probably why your credits are listed in miscellaneous UNDER transportation, and why no one yells out "points" carrying heavy objects next to your tent. -
ScriptiSandy — 10 years ago(March 16, 2016 12:28 AM)
ALL script supervisors are listed under miscellaneous on IMDB. We are a department of one so we don't get our own category. I see from most of your comments on other posts that you're in the sound department (at least that seems to be all you care about in the few of comments I read). So your snide comment about my credit being in Misc is petty and stupid as you well know that plenty of crew don't have their own category. So because you do, that makes you better than me? Now who is the arrogant one?
And what do you mean that no one wastes time more than scripty? Maybe on shows you work on. Not mine. And how disrespectful of the scriptys you have worked with. I would never say anything to malign you as far as your work as a sound guy is concerned because that would be maligning all the guys I work with and I respect them far too much to do that. But as for a department wasting time - I have never heard anyone say "there goes another costly scripty delay".
And noit would not be a budget issue how would that be? Explain.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. -
mtworkowski — 9 years ago(November 02, 2016 07:35 PM)
They did the same thing in Nacho Libre. One minute the babies watching the TV are dressed and then they're sitting in diapers. Yeah, you're right. It's not a goof if a ladder falls on the talent and you leave it in. Totally true.
-
mtworkowski — 9 years ago(November 02, 2016 07:38 PM)
They did the same thing in Nacho Libre. One minute the babies watching the TV are dressed and then they're sitting in diapers. Yeah, you're right. It's not a goof if a ladder falls on the talent and you leave it in. Totally true.