I learned something from this brief "making of" extra tacked onto the DVD release of THE DOOR IN THE FLOOR. But once again, the chance to really give us some insight or to actually justify the grinding out of such filler on its OWN merits is missed.
Filmmaker Tod Williams, producer Ted Hope and novelist John Irving are all perceptive about their material and how they handled it -bringing a tough-to-film novel to the screen, at least the first third of it. The cast chimes in with the usual "rah rah" love fest, but I would have been happier with some hard facts. You know, what are the real parameters (budget, casting, marketing, studio support) behind-the-scenes during this interesting if ephemeral era in so-called indie filmmaking which I guess we can kiss goodbye now. The days of Universal (in this case, with its high-profile Focus Features subsidiary), Warner Bros., Paramount, etc. hopping on the indie bandwagon is over.
So we're left with platitudes and hardly anything that amplifies what the finished film tells us on its face. I for one prefer "them good old days" when a film did speak for itself, without the nonsense of "director's cuts", commentaries, deleted scenes and all sorts of other crutches and alibis, none of which amount to anything. The film as released has to stand on its own two feet, without footnotes, explanations for the lame-brained or apologia.
Filmmaker Tod Williams, producer Ted Hope and novelist John Irving are all perceptive about their material and how they handled it -bringing a tough-to-film novel to the screen, at least the first third of it. The cast chimes in with the usual "rah rah" love fest, but I would have been happier with some hard facts. You know, what are the real parameters (budget, casting, marketing, studio support) behind-the-scenes during this interesting if ephemeral era in so-called indie filmmaking which I guess we can kiss goodbye now. The days of Universal (in this case, with its high-profile Focus Features subsidiary), Warner Bros., Paramount, etc. hopping on the indie bandwagon is over.
So we're left with platitudes and hardly anything that amplifies what the finished film tells us on its face. I for one prefer "them good old days" when a film did speak for itself, without the nonsense of "director's cuts", commentaries, deleted scenes and all sorts of other crutches and alibis, none of which amount to anything. The film as released has to stand on its own two feet, without footnotes, explanations for the lame-brained or apologia.
