Do people really need this explained?

Jay... I have a different Question... My MacBook Pro just died... poor thing it was a 2011 17" ... loved it. I would have had to buy a newer Mac anyway, since I want to use Final Draft for Screenwriting... Question: What Apple Computer should I buy... Also... not only will I be writing screenplays, I want to Film and Edit short films too. Thank you Jay for your help.

Noah Cross, Dude

Solid video. Explained things I missed like the rubber band.

Thanks for the great info. I must be slow--how did you make money on the books if they were free? Does your profit have to do with following up with the 1400 people who did not get a free book? Thank you

your the only one who figured it out...

Where would I go to get good information about publishing a very small softcover book, 12 pages with cover, and what my best avenue would be?

A lot of the facts here are wrong: 1. George lucas never actually wrote a single script, he only had a "story by" credit due to him creating the timeline of the show and very rudementry plot outlines of the episodes. All things like major and minor plot points, character arcs, and motivations were left up to the actual script writers. There tons of writers tasked with the scripts Jule Selbo, Carrie Fisher, Jonathan Hales, Carl Shultz, Frank Darabont and more. Also the first episode of "The young Indiana Jones CHONICLES" is called curse of the jackal" the rest of the show aired as either 45 min or 1h 30mim episodes throughout 1992-1993, due to ABC dropping the show at the end of the second season, the family channel picked it up and made 4 more tv movies. "The ADVENTURES of Young Indiana Jones" is a series of re-edits done between 1996 and 1997 where lucas put all the episodes into chronological order and cut certain scenes (including 93 year old indy)

Thank you SO much. You've answered many of my questions regarding I.S. vs. Amazon.

There is literaly no argument for any of that. It just aswell could be a sign of his declining mental health 😅

Re: Your concern about the twist at the end of the movie when Alejandro takes the script from Kate: Consider Kate an unwitting mule for Alejandro, and the revelation that it was Alejandro's mission all along comes into focus. The final (superficially incongruous) twist in development reveals Alejandro metaphorically emerging from the tunnel as the true Sicario. Everyone else on the US team was along for the ride. In conclusion, Kate's narrative arch was abandoned at the side of the road (hotel room) because her purpose had expired. Kate's expiration date matches the date on the contract Alejandro forced her to sign at the end. That was Kate handing Alejandro the baton. Her narrative arch was tamped out like her final cigarette on the hotel room balcony. It was always meant to be his victory. Only Matt and Alejandro knew the real purpose of the mission.

that would be a bad segway for a potential 2nd part. besides him threatening the client with a slow death from a radioactive substance after himself drinking from a bottle laced with a radioactivity would be some strange coincidence.

He does the same eye twitch earlier in the movie before the final scene. When he’s in the bathroom with Dolores and the VO is saying “Forbid empathy”. I think its more him kind of cracking at the seams. The way he’s been cracking at the seams the whole film.

Thanks for your review! I started out with Movie Magic, then Fade In, which has been my main solid, dependable choice for the last 8 years or so, but I would love for you (or someone else) to do a review/comparison on Drama Queen, which I've been test-driving recently. I think it's very powerful and yet under-rated. I'd love to hear from others who've used it as well. Thanks.

Can you do a review of the movie The Realtor

My personal way of looking at things like this is to reference the book first. I really like that you look at the script too. I'm sure there is a lot of information between the book what we see on the screen, that you can only see in the book. Just one minor point; Paul's mother, Jessica, was not Duke Leto's wife, she was his concubine. As I recall, he lamented not marrying her in the end, but they never married. I'd never thought much about Paul's battle with Jamis, except to assume it was the way for Paul to move forward and be accepted by the Fremen (and of course, the first time Paul took a life). One possible way of looking at it would be where the voice says, "When you take a life, you take your own..." she is saying that the life of Jamis is the life that needs to be forfeit to bring about the Kwisatz Haderach. Jamis is the life of Paul in this respect, much as Paul represents the life of his mother during the fight... I'll add, that even in our world ("Reality"), taking a life, even in defense of your own self, ends your innocence, and you'll never get it back. You'll always know that someone never gets to experience a smile, laughter, or the touch of another's hand, because of you. Edit: BTW, you just got another sub!

nice work dude

5:16 that's what I love and appreciate about the first sicario.

Can’t get there with this. The radioactive speck line was meant to sound cool. We’ve seen the Killer is actually bad at his job, and doesn’t take precautions and puts his loved ones at risk. This guy can’t handle a non pop culture alias let alone dangerous radioactive waste

Nah

Heya, maybe you're the right guy for this video request. I once asked another channel, but the comment was likely lost among thousands of comments.... or ignored because the idea sucks, lol. Anyhow, I think it would be very interesting to make a video about behind-the-scenes roles of film making. It's kind of confusing for the layperson. We all get the concept of a director, cinematographer, etc, but what exactly does everyone do? Who's vision is the film? Is it the producer? The director? Who selects the vibe of the film? Is that the director or cinematographer? How do they collaborate with costumes and lighting? Does the costume person get full discretion? Or does the producer, director, etc... have to approve? Who decides what the actor does? The actor or the director? What is an executive producer? The money guy? or do they have a say in the actual movie. What about the writer? do they have any say post writing? Who decides what and who can veto those decisions? What does a grip do? Why is catering included in the credits? When I exhibit a painting, I don't list the name of the place of where some dude at the paint manufacturer likes to eat lol. And why tf are there so many stunt people? What are all those company logos before the movie? I now one is the studio, but why are there sometimes multiple studios? What about rights and commissions? The list can go on and on....obviously lol TL;DR In short, what is the backstage ecosystem of the film making process? I see nothing lie that on KZbin and it could be an anchor video for you. You have a great voice and disposition, and I'm sure nio matter what, your channel will grow! :)

short and sweet.

Enjoyed this so much!

The great animated flick rango alludes to Chinatown in many hilarious ways. Clint Eastwood too.

Dude this is your opinion. A different opinion for anyone familiar with FBI and other Agencies. They don't like each other, and are each their own feifdom. Matt has different objectives and knows what works. Obviously you have no experience with military or agencies.

How old is this film? 2015, your not giving any new information

It is a very good film that uses or plays to Fincher's strengths as a Director and story-teller, as while being noticeably different it still has similarities to many other Fincher films ("Se7en", "Zodiac" and others) and the casting of Fassbender is A++. Don't think he died or got poisoned though & there seems an opening for a sequel due to 'The Expert's conversation & opening him up further to introspection & change or progression as character where maybe the Client (Claiborne, being a billionaire) has turn of hubris & decides To Go After him ... seems likely but also arguably too easy of plot possibility. Guess we'll see. Very good breakdown & analysis tho. Nice work.

Great video sir!

Jay, the reviews on the appstore for SL2 are bad because people are being charged for unexpected upgrades. But it's a good chance they're just idiots. Thoughts?

I know its an odd pull, but I've been searching my heart for a bit and I'd love for you to do an examination and breakdown of The Grand Budapest Hotel. In my opinion, it is a modern day Citizen Kane (I'm not nearly attempting to flex that it is the same cinematic majesty or legacy as the film, but,) spiritually it feels like a modern day successor to this kind of film. I cannot find the words, but there is some kind of cinema magic that happens in that movie that steals me and charms me between the "bookends" of the movie, the (spoilers from here on) way the film is set as a book being read on a bench by a grave, narrated by the author, as an interview, of a person narrating their story from sixty years ago; just this layers upon layers of context that, when you watch the film you lose, and then right at the end it sucks you right back. You listen to this whole story, but then you remember its not a story, its a story within a story, and then you remember still its a story within a story within a story. It has the same emotional impact of the Rosebud reveal to me, this frission that I can't quite place but feels rather profound and leaves you feeling quite open. I'd love an examination of it from this narrative perspective.

Absolutely wonderful. So reassuring!

You didn’t say sheet

The plane didn't fly to Juarez, it flew to Fort Bliss in El Paso where the DEA intelligence center is located...where they hold the briefing

I thought the exact same thing when he sipped the whiskey. Then he tells the billionaire how it would end him. I was watching super close at the end and when I saw him twitch I yelled yes! Great ending! My girlfriend who was on her phone most of the movie hated the ending until I told her what she missed. Great analysis man!

It’s about narcos, sicarios, special forces and government

“Whar-Ez”

“HUAREEZ”

It's one of the best movies that I've ever seen in my whole life. Thank you for the explanation, your point of idea and what you get or take from this movie is great.

Such a deeeeeep tragedy, that his heart was broken trying to save his love. But he insured her death, though he was trying his best. That’s what he confides to Faye, in bed. But that is precisely what repeats for him, when she is shot by police, trying to escape her father, with her…..relative. Polanski insisted on that ending. Originally she would have lived and he would be in a courtroom with her, in the final scene. Nicholson spies on cheating spouses for a living. Not the most classy profession.

Can you do the 2nd film ?

My bearded friend what have you been smoking out there, what a goofy asf theory 😂

Thanks for your review and assessment of this film. As the film's story is written primarily from Kate's perspective, i think it's reasonable to say the main premise of the film is Kate's initial assumption that she is working within the law to deal with drug smuggling and decides to join Matt's team, to work more effectively by widening her knowledge, contacts and skills. She then realises that Matt does not follow the legal process, which troubles her but this is countered by his effectiveness and his insight into the corruption in the legal system in Mexico. Later she realises that cops in the US may also be corrupt, forcing her to question her trust in US law enforcement and undermining her belief in the system she has always worked in. When she realises the tunnel plot becomes the assassination of Gustavo, she tries to stop it but Alejandro shoots her, not to kill but to finish is mission. When she signs the legal certificate at the end, she has lost her naivety about the legal process but does not kill Alejandro, perhaps she respects him but also remembers that he chose not to kill her and that she has become embroiled in a war where there is no black and white, only shades of grey. Perhaps this is what the director wants the audience to realise as well.

Killer says it was too risky coz the net worth of the client and if he kills him police will likely go on a massive manhunt. Also client was innocent in killers eyes coz dude was scammed by hodges to pay extra 150,000 to cover up everything.

🔥🔥

The seconds when she asks for 'her bottle', drinks the other ones, but not the shot from the bottle, I thought about Fassbenders character: 'WHAT is he doing!! Drinking from her special bottle!'.

Suspension of disbelief is completely trashed when an otherwise okay film does something stupid like introducing a great actor (Jon Bernhal), in a key role (Ted), with absolutely no reason for the characters to cross paths other than plot convenience (he just happens to be friends with her coworker, happens to be in the bar, and she happens to let her guard down to a guy who happens to be exactly the guy they didn't know that we're looking for...). Bad writing.

Subscribed 🎉❤

I don’t know, she does tell the waiter to bring out *my* bottle, which could be a reference to a poisoned bottle (which she drinks from because she knows she’s about to die anyway) but that would mean that the waiter would know about the whole thing which seems unlikely, especially having a poisoned bottle in the kitchen just in case. As far as I can tell she never does anything to the glass although I may have missed something, and it would be odd to have a radioactive substance just on you just in case. Besides, she tries the knife, and why go to all that effort to poison someone if you’re just going to stab them. I think she looks like that when he drinks the whiskey because she referenced him being ‘afraid it’s tainted’ and when he does drink it she’s got him to break a rule, so she knows she’s had an effect on him. Her words outside the restaurant I think are more of a reference to her own death as she believes the killer, like her, will eventually meet his end at someone’s hands even if he doesn’t believe it, and the killer will then ‘remember our conversation’ as it’s the same situation he was in with her, just on the receiving end. The radioactive thing is possible though.

I enjoyed your video greatly. I consider the entire group of protagonists as yhe "sicario". In the film, we never actually see the cartels kill anyone. It is most definitely implied and we also see the victims but when it comes to the act of killing, only the US operatives and Alejandro kill anyone. (Not counting the shed bomb since it was actually the cops who activated the bomb by irresponsibly prying open a trap door). I feel that the 3 main characters represent emotions we all feel but at different times. Alejandro is vengeance. Matt is patience/logic and Kate is our sense of morality. The conflict lies in combing all 3 to accomplish a goal where really using only one is most effective and less chaotic. These are intense emotions and when we feel them, we often are blinded to what is happening around us and thats why I believe they have such a large amount of collateral damage without much concern.

I disagree indiana jones and the last crusade is the best indy