A joke a page seems really low to me.  Maybe that was Burrows being facetious?  

You’re also probably not getting a PA job on a 200M movie unless you’ve got some experience, or you’re day playing to do lock-up for a big action scene and you’re a block or ten away from where you can really do any damage.

I’m one of those tradespeople myself (at least when the industry isn’t shut down). It’s…

It’s a fine line, of course. My general thought is that you take 3-6 months of doing the free gigs when they come up (naturally assuming you have some other source of income, preferably flexible). In that time, if you don’t make any connections that move you into the next tier (at least some paid PA work, for…

Isn’t the whole point of the Babadook that you have to learn to live with your demons?  What possible storyline could there be to continue that?

Don’t work for free for any project that’s got any kind of real budget, for sure.

That said, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with working for free very early on, but you should only be doing that on short films, music videos, that kind of thing. Stuff where no one can conceivably make any real money on it. You…

No one on a studio film is working for free.  Indie films are another story, but nothing with a eight or nine figure budget.

“Very well” is a bit of a misnomer here. Obviously, the stars make tons of money, and even more if the film is a hit and they have a good back-end deal. Producers make most of their money on points, so they only do exceedingly well if the movie does too.

The crews do fine (when there isn’t a six month work stoppage),…

Maybe it’s because this is a classic AVClub “let’s report on someone else’s interview article” where it’s basically three or four quotes that the writer attempts to give context to, but none of that made a lick of sense.

Most of these sound pretty bad, though that might be colored slightly by the fact that Tarantino’s output has left me increasingly underwhelmed with each new film since Kill Bill, give or take a bounce up for Hateful Eight.

He was supposed to do one of the new series (Primeval), but it never panned out I guess.

Just rewatched it a few days ago, and you’re right, it really is a fantastic movie.  It actively makes me mad that so many John Landis movies are so good, since he is such an unrepentantly awful person.

Says: “I appreciate your respectful response” [goes on to continue to slam a perfect stranger’s experience of and opinion on a show for 500 more words]

Again, glad you get more from the show than I do.  From this point on, you’ll be talking to yourself.

You’ve put way more thought into any of this than Filoni did. I applaud you for taking the time to write all that, and I’m glad that you seem to have enjoyed the show a lot more than me.

Interesting.  My experience is exactly the opposite.  I find horror audiences to be some of the most forgiving out there.  Horror fans will watch absolutely shitty movies that were executed terribly, but if the concept was decent, they’ll still give it a decent rating.

Here’s the thing about Halloween III-- you can love it and still acknowledge that it’s not a very good film.  It’s a great concept with a couple of great scenes (including an all-time ballsy ending), but mostly its wrapped up in laughably bad acting, writing, and effects.

I’ll give you TLJ being pretty focused on the characters. Personally, I don’t care for most of the character choices made in that film, but I’ll grant that they do have more internal consistency (ie, within that film, not the overall series) than most characters since Disney bought the IP.

The first It movie is legitimately great. The second is almost unwatchable.

Ah, that makes sense now.

That sounds about right to me. I think both of them start with plot and big “reveals.” In Abrams case, he doesn’t know what they actually are, but he knows he wants them.

Ha ha!  That’s great.  Where’d you find that?