關於 turn off monitor ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【我親愛的Zoom視訊客人們】
To My Dear Zoom Clients

我忍了真的⋯⋯真的⋯⋯很久，今天過後實在忍無可忍，一定要叮嚀所有過去和未來的客人們。

我年紀很大了，受不了太大的刺激。

拜託，你們可以Zoom好來嗎？😓😑

一、Zoom視訊的視角 = 拍護照照的視角

護照自2020年起就已成為古董，但大家這一生應該有拍過證件照吧！

對了，就是要頭髮整齊，讓我看到你的雙耳、雙眼、鼻子、嘴巴、頸項和肩膀，到胸部。

我批八字時，需要看整個面相。不要讓你一半的臉掉出鏡頭外，這樣很像鍾無艷，也不要嘴巴不見掉，這樣我很像在跟一條羅漢魚視訊。

我看面相包括看你的嘴巴、牙齒和說話時的嘴形。是的，看相就是需要那麼仔細。

如果你的螢幕太低，那就找書本或舊報紙，把螢幕墊高一點。別讓我整一個小時半只看到你的雙下巴，會把你的面相比例給看錯。

不要一直告訴我不好意思，方法是人想出來的。

•

二、光線

太暗，我看你如見鬼。
太亮，我會看不清你的膚色。
拉開窗簾，不要背向陽光。
有必要的話，就直接開燈！

•

三、勿放什麼椰樹沙灘/金門大橋的虛擬背景圖

什麼虛擬背景圖都不要放啦～

我的家美最重要，我不在乎你的家美不美，我只是來看命的。

如果你的Wi-Fi不是很強，電腦功能不是很厲害，這類的虛擬背景圖會讓你的視訊畫面卡卡的。

有時你轉個身，整個右邊不見了，或部份的頭髮少了，讓我覺得我好像在看恐怖片，嚇人啊～

•

四、環境和聲音

有些海外客人其實非常用心。為了與我視訊，特別去買有麥克風的耳機🎧，讓我能更清楚的聽到他們的聲音。😍

沒有使用耳機和麥克風的客人，往往他們的聲音會有種空氣般的回音，如果他們本身講話又小聲，我的耳機聲量開滿，我還是聽得滿辛苦的

也有香港和馬來西亞客人租過會議室、鐘點房間或單人工作室，就是為了不受家人的干擾，能安心的與我視訊。😍

最有趣的是，去年新加坡阻斷措施時，有位男客人跑到屋外的走廊坐在地上與我視訊。只是外頭風聲有點大，我好幾次都聽不清楚他的聲音。

曾有客人在咖啡廳與我視訊。咖啡廳裡的高談闊論聲和器皿的敲擊聲，頻頻從我的耳機闖進我的耳朵，哇～我的耳朵那時真的是活受罪，還要裝一副氣定神閒的樣子。

天啊，兩次過後，我寧願退錢，也不再見這樣的客人了。耳朵只有一對，我要保護好啊！

在這裡聲明：一般我們買手機時的那種有麥克風的耳機，就已能視訊。沒有戴耳機和麥克風的客人，我一概會拒絕諮詢，把費用原銀奉還。

五、孩子

曾試過諮詢的前20分鐘，一直被女客人的小孩打擾，進來哭著要媽媽主持公道。

如果你家中有六歲以下的兒童，會時不時來敲你的門，我建議你還是先別約我。你這樣會分心，無法聽好我交代的事，而我也得一直等你去安撫你的孩子，就無法在限定時間內看完你的八字，這樣對誰都不公平。

六、我只見客人一人

這個規矩，從我一出道就定下來，也清楚的寫在網站上，根本不用一而再的來試探水溫。

但這兩個星期，還是有客人硬闖關，事先安排自己的配偶/孩子坐在電腦的另一面，要他們聽我講他的八字。

我從不改我的規矩，也沒有八字或風水是我非看不可的。

讀書這麼高，連自己的命都不能自己負責，這已經不是能改到命的人了。

你一定要你的配偶陪你聽，那你需要的不是我來教你改命，是你的配偶來安你的心。

將來若還有這樣的事，我會直接中斷視訊，把錢退回去。

七、「我第一次用Zoom！」

可是從報名那天到今天的諮詢，你有兩個月的時間去摸索。

兩個月，怎麼還是錯誤百出？因為客人根本沒有事先準備和練習。

結果我就這樣等了20分鐘，還得等對方下載軟件。

Zoom不難使用，但如果是你沒有花時間去摸索，就不要撒謊，直接說，我就直接退現錢。

品德是改命的資糧，不要為了自己能脫身就隨便編一個漏洞百出的謊，還說自己是好人。這...不會臉皮太厚了嗎？

小事都不願做好，絕對不會成大器。

八、暈車

有些客人用Ipad或手機來視訊。

重點是，他一支手拿著手機，一支手拿筆寫筆記。他一邊寫，另一支手就一邊搖晃。他做在床上，移動一下，手機就彷彿大海嘯幾下🌊

我一天如果見三個這樣客人，我的視線就搖晃了5個小時。工作完畢後，頭也會痛得厲害，無法完成晚上製片的工作。

沒有自拍器三腳架，也應該有些書本或東西來頂著手機。

各位，多點善心，為我著想一下吧⋯⋯

__________________________

To My Dear Zoom Clients

I have been enduring it for a really really long time. That's it! I am gonna put a stop to this after today and send out this reminder to all my past and future clients.

I am getting on in years, and cannot stand too much stimulation.

Please.... can you guys do a proper Zoom?

Number 1: Going on screen in Zoom = Taking a photograph for your passport.

Since 2020, the passport has become something of an antique but I believe everyone has taken some kind of ID photos! Yes, the ones with your neatly combed trusses where I can see both your ears, nose, mouth, neck, shoulder all the way to your chest.

I would like to see your full face during the Bazi Consultation. Please don't allow half your face to fall off the screen and you end up looking like Zhong Wu Yan! Please also don't hide your mouth making me feel like I am talking to a Arrowana.

When I analyze your facial features, it includes your mouth, teeth and the shape of your mouth while you are talking. Yes, it is down to such level of details.

If your PC / Laptop monitor is too low, please find a book or old newspapers and stack it on top. Please don't let me only see your double chin for that 1.5 hours, as I would probably get the proportion of your face wrong.

Don't keep telling me you are apologetic. Think of a way out.

Number 2: The background lighting.

Too dark, you risk looking like a ghost.

Too bright, I cannot figure out your skin color.

Draw open the curtains, but don't face your back to the sunlight.

If necessary, just turn on the lights!

Number 3: Background images of coconut trees on sandy beaches or the Golden Gate Bridge.

There is no need to put on a virtual background. I only care about how my hone looks, I am not bothered by yours. I am only here to see your Bazi.

If your WIFI signal or your PC / Laptop performance is poor, using the virtual background can often make your Zoom video choppy. Sometimes when you turn your body, one side of your body or some part of your hair will disappear. It's really like one of those spooky movies scaring the wits out of me.

•

Number 4: Background environment and noise.

Some of my overseas clients really put in effort for our Zoom sessions. They bought a headset with a mic so that I can hear them properly and vice versa.

Those that did not use a earphone or a headset often sounded echo-ish, and if they spoke softly, I would have to turn on the volume on my side full throttle and still have a hard time trying to hear them.

There are some clients from Hong Kong and Malaysia who would rent meeting rooms, hotel rooms or private work spaces by the hour so as to reduce any disturbance from others and better focus on the Zoom session with me.

I recalled an interesting incident during the Circuit Breaker last year. A client from Singapore Zoom-ed with me along the corridor outside his house. Most of the time, I was hearing the howling of the winds rather than his voice.

Some clients sat themselves in coffee places for our session. These places are often filled with loud chatters and the clanging of cups and plates, and my ears suffered terribly. Yet, I have to continue to be seen as composed and attentive.

Goodness me, after 2 of such experiences, I decided that I rather refund these clients and never see them again. I have only 1 pair of ears and I want to protect them at all costs!

A normal earpiece that comes with the purchase of a handphone is good enough for Zoom video calls. For clients who do not have a earpiece/headset and a mic, I would end the consultation and refund the monies.

•

Number 5: Children

There was once where a session with a female client was repeatedly disrupted by her kids, running in crying for their mother to settle their quarrels. If you have children below 6 years of age, and likely to interrupt our session, I suggest you don't book a consultation with me.

You will be distracted, unable to focus on my advice and I have to wait for you to clear up the situation with your children, eating into the allowable time for me to complete the consultation. This is unfair to both you and me.

•

Number 6: I only meet one person, that is the Client.

I have set this requirement the day I stepped into this line of work, and it is clearly written in my booking form. There is no need to try your luck under any circumstances.

But in the space of 2 weeks, there were some clients who rode their luck and got their spouse / child to sit on the other side of the screen to listen in on our consultation.

I never change my stance, and there is no single client that I cannot afford to lose.

If you insist to have your spouse sit in, it is apparent that you do not need me to help transform your destiny. Rather you really need your spouse to put your heart at ease.

If such things happen the next time, I will end the session immediately and refund the fees.

•

Number 7: "My first time using Zoom"

But you have 2 full months to prepare before our actual consultation. You did not end up wasting time exploring the software and I wasted 20 mins waiting for you to download the software.

Zoom is an easy software to use but if you did not spend the time to familiarize yourself with it, please quit the lies and tell me directly. I will refund the consultation fees on the spot.

Our moral ethics serve as the foundation for our transformation. Stop weaving web of lies to get out of sticky situations, and still claim that you are a good person. Isn't this too thick-skinned?

•

Number 8: Giddy spells

Some clients use Ipad or their handphones for the Zoom session. Crucially, they hold the device with one hand, and take notes with the other. As they write, the other hand holding the phone becomes shaky. If he is doing that on his bed, his handphone would shake like a tsunami wave every time he changes his position.

If I see 3 such clients within a day, it would be 5 hours of shaking visuals for me. That would mean a splitting headache at the end of my work day, and not being able to work on my videos at night.

Even if you don't have a tripod stand, at least prop up the device with a book or something.

Please everyone, please be kind and have mercy on me......

十首台灣詩X十位愛爾蘭詩人朗讀
　　
藍色矢車菊　◎#柴柏松
　
沒入兵役體檢室，緩慢地我旋進
旋進地面沉沉的流沙，
看見無數門窗敞開（或闃然地
隱閉），許多張陌生臉孔
震動喉結與聲襞——
士兵們衣物褪盡，開襟的
罩袍底呈示出雄渾地
臂膀與闊肩。我似乎預見，
年輕的體魄們持槍
進入射擊位置。
　
盤起過肩黑髮，
我掩飾略施脂粉的腮頰
輕解羅衫，像雛妓
在人前獻祭初熟的時日。
沒人發現我褪下的麻質長裙
在置物櫃裡放大了
怖慄——走進體檢列隊之中
彷彿雨水投入湖心，失去
被區辨的線索，
陰影洶湧地向我麋集。
　
終於哀傷起來了。
X 光切碎我的
身體，我假想在場的人們，
能看見我沉睡於腔體的乳房，像白鴿
舒展她毫無所畏的翅膀。
帷幔背後，一些目光掠過，
不會有人吧——不會
有人能證實這體檢室不是我
應該棲止的捕籠。檢測片緊貼著
我在床上，聽心電圖響徹促音。
　
屏息，在列隊裡
我等候醫師涉手每個士兵陰部的囊袋。
斜靠牆頭，廊緣
一盆藍色矢車菊1靜靜萎頓——
每一分鐘每一秒鐘，葉脈不斷地
浮出皺紋。我無法設想
輪到我的那刻
世界如何無動於衷，且我肯定無法設想
一位雛妓如何從女孩變成女人。
矢車菊葉貼伏在地上，終於疲憊地掉落。
　
體檢記錄表。櫃檯。
士兵們成群結伴地袒胸更衣，
沒有人看見一雙沉默
歷劫後的眼——躲進隔間
放下過肩黑髮，整好身上一襲麻質長裙。
緩慢地我旋進
旋進地面沉沉的流沙，
看見無數門窗敞開（或闃然地
隱閉），許多張陌生臉孔離開——
我的雙腳卻無能拔出來
　
--
　
“Blue Cornflower”
by Chai Po-sung (1993-)
Translated by Colin Bramwell and Wen-chi Li
Read by Anna Loughran
　
I didn’t go into the physical examination room
but slowly swirled into heavy quicksand
I saw countless doors and windows open (or quietly
close), many strange faces
vibrating Adam’s apples and vocal folds—
the soldiers’ clothes were taken off
their robust arms and shoulders
could be seen under the robes.
I foresaw young bodies holding guns
and waiting in line to shoot
　
I did my hair in a bun
hid my cheeks (they had a little face powder)
undressed myself, like a child prostitute
sacrificing their first fruit in front of a crowd
no one had noticed my long linen skirt
was laid in the locker, its fear intensifying—
I joined the examination line
like a raindrop falling into a lake
and losing its distinguishable features
shadows violently pulled me under
　
I started to mourn
as the X-ray dismembered my body,
I imagined the people here
could see my breasts sleeping in their cavity,
like a pigeon stretching her wings without fear
behind the curtains some eyes inspected me
can anyone confirm this room
is not a cage?
On the bed, with patches on my skin
I listened to the cardiac monitor
　
I held my breath in line
waiting for the physician who touched each soldier’s genitals
leaning against the wall, at the end of the corridor
a pot of blue cornflowers was quietly withering
every minute, every second their veins slowly
wrinkled. When my time came
I couldn’t imagine how the world could be
so indifferent, I couldn’t imagine
how a child prostitute could turn from a girl into a woman
the cornflower leaves languished and finally fell
　
Examination record form. Service counter
A group of soldiers changed their clothes
their chests were exposed but no one saw
a pair of silent eyes after the calamity— I hid myself
in another room, released my long hair
put on a linen dress, slowly swirled into
heavy quicksand
and saw countless doors and windows open (or quietly close)
and many strange faces, leaving the room—
but I could not pull my feet out of the sand
　
聽詩人Anna Loughran 朗讀：
https://youtu.be/n88ETzVBDzc
　
#每天為你讀一首詩 #柴柏松 #Chai_Po_sung #藍色矢車菊 #Blue_Cornflower #Anna_Loughran #台灣詩選 #Taiwanese_Poetry #駐愛爾蘭台北代表處 #愛爾蘭文學館 #Museum_of_Literature_Ireland

【水世界】的前製設定與現場劇照

WATERWORLD (1995)
In celebration of today’s anniversary of this wet mess/epic. Let’s celebrate the hard work this crew put into bringing this world to life. Water movies are never easy but when it comes to this movie anytime you bring it up and a crew member from it is in earshot, the stories pour out. Not always bad, I know a AC that said he had a blast, he loved the boat rides out and all the camaraderie the crew had to have to get thru it. To all the crew that helped bring WATERWORLD to life, We salute you and thanks for the memories. I personally enjoy this hot mess of a movie, it’s one of the last ones of its kind...done practically...in a way.
let’s take a deepest of dives into WATERWORLD

The director, Kevin Reynolds, knew there would be problems before production had even started, “During pre-production. Because having never shot on water to that extent before, I didn’t really realise what I was in for. I talked to Spielberg about it because he’d gone to do Jaws, and I remember, he said to me, “Oh, I would never shoot another picture on water”.
“When we were doing the budget for the picture, and the head of the studio, Sid Sheinberg, we were talking about it and I said, “Steven told me that on Jaws the schedule for the picture was 55 days, and they ended up shooting a 155 days”. Because of the water. And he sat there for a moment and he said, “You know, I’m not sure about the days, but I do know they went a hundred percent over budget”. And so, Universal knew the potential problems of shooting on water. It’s monstrous.”
The film began with a projected budget of $100 million which had reportedly increased to $175 million by the end of production. The principle photography had overrun for at least thirty days more than originally planned due to one major decision.

Whereas today they would film in water tanks with partially built sets, employing green screens to fake the locations, back in 1995 they decided to build everything full size and shoot out on the ocean.

This causes extra logistical problems on top of those that already come with making a major action blockbuster. Cast and crew have to be transported to sets. The camera boats and sets float out of position and will have to be reset between takes taking up valuable production time.

The first draft of Waterworld was written by Peter Radar, a Harvard graduate who wanted to break into the film business. His contact in the film industry was Brad Kevoy, an assistant to the legendary director Roger Corman.

Roger Corman is best known for making films very quickly on a small budget. He also liked to give young talent a chance to direct and write their own films. Brad informed Peter that if he could write a Mad Max rip off, he would arrange to finance and let him direct the picture.

Radar came back and pitched the idea for what would become Waterworld. Kevoy took one look at him and said,

“Are you out of your mind? This would cost us three million dollars to make this movie!”
So Radar kept hold of the idea and decided to re-write the script but, this time, going wild. He wrote what he wanted to see on-screen, limited only by his imagination, not a real world production budget.

He managed to get the newly written script shown to a pair of producers with whom he had made contact with. They loved it and ironically they passed it onto Larry Gordon. He shared the enthusiasm saying it had the kind of cinematic possibilities he was looking for. A deal was signed on Christmas Eve of 1989.

As further script rewrites progressed, it became clear that Waterworld was too big for the Larry Gordon’s production company to undertake by themselves. In February 1992, a deal was signed with Universal Pictures to co-produce and co-finance the film. This was now six years after the first draft had been written.

Universal had signed director Kevin Reynolds to Waterworld. Whilst he was finishing his latest film, Rapa Nui, pre-production for Waterworld was already underway.

The decision was taken that the largest set for the film, known as the atoll, would be built full size. The atoll was the primary location for film and in the story served as the location for a small population of survivors.

The logic behind this decision was due to the high percentage of live action filming required in this location, as well as a huge action set piece. No sound stage would be big enough to incorporate this number of scenes and it was crucial that we see the mariner sail his boat into the atoll, turn around and set out again. A full-size construction was the only way to go as the use of miniature and special effects would be impractical.

The next problem was deciding where to build this huge set. After much research, Kawaihae Harbour in Hawaii was chosen as the location. The atoll could be constructed in the harbour and rotated when needed thus allowing for open sea in the background. Later towards the end of principle photography, the atoll could be towed out into the open sea for the filming of the big action sequences which would be impractical to shoot in an enclosed harbour.

Director Kevin Reynolds also discussed the possibility of using the same water tank as James Cameron’s The Abyss, which had filmed there around five years ago,

“We had even entertained the notion of shooting at that big nuclear reactor facility where they had shot The Abyss, to use it for our underwater tank. But we found it in such a state of disrepair that economically it just wasn’t feasible. We didn’t have as much underwater work as they did. Most of The Abyss is interiors and underwater and model work, ours is mostly surface exterior.”

The production company had originally envisioned building the atoll by linking approximately one hundred boats together and building upon this foundation, just like the characters in the film. The production crew set out to search Hawaii and get hold of as many boats as possible.

During this search, a unique boat in Honolulu caught their attention. Upon further investigation, they discovered it was built by Navitech, a subsidiary of the famous aircraft production company, Lockheed.

They approached Lockheed with the strange request of figuring out how they could build the foundations of the atoll. Lockheed found the request unusual but didn’t shy away from the challenging. They agreed to design the atoll foundation and Navitech would construct it.

Meanwhile, an 11ft miniature model of the atoll was sent out to a model ship testing facility in San Diego. Scaled wave tanks are used to determine the effects of the open sea on large scale miniature models of new untested ship designs. This would help determine what would happen with the unusual design of the atoll when it was out of the harbour.

The atoll, when finished, was approximately ¼ mile in circumference. It took three months to construct and is rumoured to cost around $22 million. As the atoll would be used out on the open sea, it required a seafaring license. Nothing like this had been done before and after much deliberation, it was eventually classed as an unmanned vessel. This meant that all cast and crew would have to vacate the set whilst it was towed into position. By the end of production, the atoll was towed out to sea a total of five times.

Shooting out on the open sea presented a series of logistical problem as Reynolds describes,

“We had an entire navy, basically – I mean, this atoll was positioned about a mile off-shore in Hawaii, it was anchored to the bottom of the ocean so it could rotate. What you don’t think about are things like, you’re shooting on this atoll to maintain this notion that there’s no dry land, you always have to shoot out to sea. Away from the land. So we chose a location where we had about a 180 degree view of open water. Nevertheless, any time when you’re shooting, there could be a ship appear in the background, or something like that, and you had to make a choice. Do I hold up the shot, wait for the ship to move out, or do we shoot and say we’re going to incur this additional cost in post-production of trying to remove the ship from the background.

And at that time, CGI was not at the point it is now, it was a bigger deal. And so, even though if you’re shooting across the atoll and you’re shooting out onto open water, when you turn around and do the reverses, for the action, you had to rotate the entire atoll, so that you’re still shooting out to open water. Those are the kinds of things that people don’t realise.

Or something as simple as – if you’re shooting a scene between two boats, and you’re trying to shoot The Mariner on his craft, another boat or whatever, you’ve got a camera boat shooting his boat, and then the other boat in the background. Well, when you’re on open water things tend to drift apart. So you have to send lines down from each of those boats to the bottom, to anchor them so that they somewhat stay in frame. When you’ve got a simple shot on land, you set up the camera position, you put people in front of the camera and then you put background in there. But when you’re on water, everything’s constantly moving apart, drifting apart, so you have to try to hold things down somewhat.

And these are simple things that you don’t really realise when you’re looking at it on film. But logistically, it’s crazy. And each day you shoot on the atoll with all those extras, we had to transport those people from dry land out to the location and so you’re getting hundreds of people through wardrobe and everything, and you’re putting them on boats, transporting them out to the atoll, and trying to get everybody in position to do a shot. And then when you break for lunch, you have to put everybody on boats and take them back in to feed them.”

The final size of the atoll was determined by the size of the Mariners boat, the trimaran. The dimensions for the trimaran were finalised very early on in pre-production, allowing all other vehicles and sets to be sized accordingly.

Production required two trimarans boats which are so called because they have three hulls. The first was based on the standard trimaran blueprint and built for speed but also had to accommodate a secret crew below decks.

During wide and aerial shots it would have to look like Costner himself was piloting the boat. In reality, a trained crew could monitor and perform the real sailing of the boat utilising specially built controls and television monitors below deck.

The second trimaran was the trawler boat which could transform into the racer through the use of special practical effects rigs. Both of these boats were constructed in France by Jeanneau. Normally this type of vessel requires a year to construct but production needed two boats in five months!

Normally once the boat had been constructed, Jeammeau would deliver it on the deck of a freighter, requiring a delivery time of around a month. This delay was unacceptable and so the trimarans were dismantled into sections and taken by a 747 air freighter to the dock Hawaii. Upon arrival, a further month was required to reassemble the boat and get them prepared for filming.

sets recreating the inside of the tanker were built using forced perspective in a huge 1000ft long warehouse which had an adjoining 2000ft field. In this field, they built the set of the oil tankers deck, again constructed using forced perspective. Using the forced perspective trick, the 500ft long set could be constructed to give the impression that it was really twice as long.

There’s more to a film than just it’s sets and filming locations. Over two thousand costumes had to be created with many of the lead actors costumes being replicated many times over due to wear and tear.

This is not an uncommon practice for film production, but due to the unique look of the people and the world they inhabit, it did create some headaches. One costume was created with so many fish scales the wardrobe department had to search the entire island of Hawaii looking for anyone who could supply in the huge quantity required.

Makeup had to use waterproof cosmetics, especially on the stunt players. As everyone had a sun burnt look, a three-sided tanning booth was setup. The extras numbering in their hundreds, with ages ranging from six to sixty-five, passed through the booth like a production line to receive their spray tan. The extras then moved onto costume before finally having their hair fixed and becoming ready for the day.

In some scenes, extras were actually painted plywood cutouts to help enhance the number of extras on the set. This can easily be seen in one particular shot on board the Deez super tanker.

Filming on the water is not only a difficult and time-consuming process but also very dangerous. It’s been reported that Jeanne Tripplehorn and Tina Majorino nearly drowned on their first day of filming.

Waterworld’s star Kevin Costner reported having a near-death experience when filming a scene in which the mariner ties himself to his catamaran to survive a storm. The pounding water caused him to black out and nearly drown.

Unbeknownst to most of the crew, Kevin Costner’s stunt double was riding his jet ski across 40 miles of open ocean between his home on Maui and the film’s set on the Big Island. When he didn’t show up for work one day, the production team phoned his wife, who informed them he had already left for work. The stunt double’s jet ski had run out of gas halfway through his “commute” and a storm had swept him farther out to sea. It took a helicopter most of the day to find him. The stunt doubles name was Laird Hamilton.

As well as the logistical problems of creating a film of this scale and on water, they also had to deal with the press who seemed intent on wanting the film to fail. Director Kevin Reynolds discusses the situation,

“It was huge, we were constantly fighting – people wanted to have bad press. That was more exciting to them than the good news. I guess the most egregious example of that that I recall was that the publicist told me that one day…we’d been out the day before and we were doing a shot where we sent two cameras up on a mast of the trimaran and we wanted to do a shot where they tilled down from the horizon down to the deck below. We’re out there, we’re anchored, we’re setting the shot up and a swell comes in, and I look over and the mast is sort of bending.

And I turned to the boatmaster and I said, “Bruno, is this safe?”. And he looks up the mast and he goes, “No”. So I said, “Okay, well, we have to get out as I can’t have two guys fall off from 40 feet up”. So, we had to break out of the set-up, and go back in a shoot something else and we lost another half-day.

Anyway, the next day the publicist is sitting in his office and he gets this call from some journalist in the States and he goes, “Okay. Don’t lie to me – I’ve had this confirmed from two different people. I want the facts, and I want to hear about the accident yesterday, we had two cameramen fall off the mast and were killed”.

And, he goes, “What are you talking about?”. And he goes, “Don’t lie to me, don’t cover this up, we know this has happened”. It didn’t happen! People were so hungry for bad news because it was much more exciting than…they just said it, and you know, it hurt us.”
Upon release, the press seemed to be disappointed that the film wasn’t the massive failure they were hoping it to be. Universal Studios told Kevin Reynolds that one critic came out of an early screening in New York and in a disappointed tone said,

“Well, it didn’t suck.”

It is true that during principle photography the slave colony set sank and had to be retrieved. However due to bad press, the rumour became much bigger and to this day when you mention the sinking set, most people assume it was the huge atoll.

During production, press nicknamed the film “Kevin’s Gate” and “Fishtar”, referring to 1980’s box office failures Heaven’s Gate and Ishtar. Heaven’s Gate failed so badly it led to the sale of United Artists Studio and has become synonymous with failure in Hollywood.

As well as the exaggerated set problems and other various production rumours, there were also difficulties with the script. In a risky move, the film was green lit and moved into production without a finalised script.

The final total is a reportedly thirty-six rewrites. One of the writers involved was Joss Whedon. Joss had worked on many scripts before becoming a director having being at the helm of both The Avengers and the sequel Avengers: Age Of Ultron. He described his experience on Waterworld as,

“Seven weeks of hell”
Everything came to a head just three weeks before the end of principle photography. Kevin Reynolds who was an old friend of Kevin Costner allegedly walked off set or was fired. There was no official statement on what happened.

When Reynolds left the production this event caused many changes to be made. Composer Mark Isham had already composed approximately two-thirds of the film’s score by the time Reynolds left and that event ultimately caused him to leave production. As Mark describes in this interview excerpt,

“Kevin Reynolds quit the film, which left me working for Kevin Costner, who listened to what I had written and wanted a completely different point of view. He basically made a completely different film — he re-cut the entire film, and in his meeting with me he expressed that he wanted a completely different approach to the score. And I said, “oh let me demonstrate that I can give that to you”, so I presented him with a demo of my approach to his approach, and he rejected that and fired me. What I find a lot in these big films, because the production schedules are so insane, that the directors have very little time to actually concentrate on the music.”
Rumours report that Costner took control of production. He directed the last few weeks of principle photography and edited the final cut of the film that was released in cinemas.

Reynolds discusses his surprise at discovering that one of the most famous scenes from what is known as the extended version, was left on the cutting room floor,

“…it would have differed from what you saw on the screen to some extent, and one of the things I’ve always been perplexed by in the version that was released, theatrically, although subsequently the longer version included it, and the reason that I did the film, was that at the very end of the picture, at the very end of the script, there’s a scene when they finally reach dry land and The Mariner’s sailing off and he leaves the two women behind, and in the script they’re standing up on this high point and they’re watching him sail away, and the little girl stumbles on something.
And they look down and clear the grass away and that’s this plaque. And it says, “Here, near this spot, 1953, Tenzing Norgay and Edmund Hillary first set foot on the summit of Everest”. And that was in script and I was like, “Oh, of course! Wow, the highest point on the planet! That would have been dry land!”. And we got it! We shot that. And they left it out of the picture. And I’m like, “Whaaat?!”. It’s like the Statue of Liberty moment in Planet of the Apes. And I was like, “Why would you leave that out?”

Written by John Abbitt | Follow John on twitter @UKFilmNerd

If any the crew cares to share any of their experiences on it please comment.
Thanks for reading
If you want more deep dives visit
https://www.facebook.com/groups/crewstories/?ref=share

Subscribe for more awesome videos! ► https://bit.ly/2M1H2Fy

Streets of Rage 2 gets a lot of attention, and deservedly so, but Streets of Rage is also an excellent game.

Its music is darker and more depressing than its sequel's. It encapsulates the latent feeling of fear in the streets of New York City in the 1990s perfectly.

During the 16-bit era, a lot of developers tried to make their sprites as big as possible, and their games, in turn, were impressive to look at, but it wasn't always in the best interest of the gameplay to have such big sprites taking up a lot of the screen. With Streets of Rage, I think the sprites are the perfect size so that they don't crowd the screen too much.

A good way to illustrate my point would be to look at the Megaman-games on NES, and then look at Megaman VII on SNES. The sprites are huge - unnecessarily huge, in Megaman VII. The game is still playable, of course, but sizing sprites appropriately is very important.

Streets of Rage is also more difficult than Streets of Rage 2, but not too much in a cheap way, unlike Final Fight.

When I was in high-school, I once went over to someone's house and we played Streets of Rage 2. There, I learned about the infinite combo, where instead of doing a full melee-combo, you hit an enemy once or twice, and wait... and hit him or her once or twice again. The enemy will be stunned, unable to do anything. It also works in Streets of Rage. You can see me using it as much as possible, especially when I'm only fighting one enemy.

I had little trouble until Round 4. I got myself thrown into a hole, which took off one life instantly, and the boss that breathes fire gave me trouble as well.

The two palette-swaps of Blaze that serve as Round 5 bosses also historically give me trouble and today was no different.

In Round 6, I encountered the rotund fire-breather mid-level, and he gave me trouble again.

In Round 7, I started throwing people off the elevator, but unfortunately, I got thrown off as well.

In Round 8, I tried jumping out of the way of the first moving table, but I got hit, so I decided to attack it instead, and it worked. My biggest worry was facing the Round 4 boss again, but I caught him in an infinite combo, and he went down. I had a lot more trouble against the Round 5 bosses than I did during Round 5 itself.

I wasn't sure I had enough lives and continues to take down Mr. X, but he was easier than I thought he was.

To play and record, again I used a Model 1 NTSC Sega Genesis/Megadrive using HD Retrovision component-video cables and line-quadrupled the 240p signal to 960p using an OSSC. I captured the footage with a Micomsoft XCapture-1. Today I tried line-quintupling (5X), and my monitor liked it, but the XCapture-1 did not.