Production Mistakes I think they Made on the Movie

[Jeff Wrangler]

The low budget is a partial explanation for that. But on a trip to LA for a reunion of old classmates in February, I had a long conversation with a Warner Bros. techie who gave me another reason for bloopers being allowed to remain in movies:

There are lots of incidents during movie shoots where the actors in the scene get it exactly right - just right on the button for what the director had in mind; BUT there's some continuity detail that's out of sync, a scarf on a costume is slightly askew, etc. So the director has to make a decision: do we keep re-shooting hoping that lightning will strike a second time or do we run this shot that's perfect in every other detail and just live with the minor blooper? As often as not, they take the second option because acting - and for that matter, technical art such as lighting - is a chancy, mysterious thing. The scene could be re-shot a half-dozen more times, with the consequent increase in production costs and possibly frayed tempers on the set, and the most essential elements still wouldn't work as well.

Great input, Marge!

Ultimately what matters is Heath's performance, not the piece of apple pie on his plate. 

[nic]

Thanks for that Marge, never thought of that view before.  I bet it would apply in the majority of cases for BBM rather than sloppiness, and many could be attributed to the low budget so ultimately BBM is nearly perfect once you have accounted in this way! 

I still can't get over why the wrong ending got in on the final edit 

[moremojo]

There are lots of incidents during movie shoots where the actors in the scene get it exactly right - just right on the button for what the director had in mind; BUT there's some continuity detail that's out of sync, a scarf on a costume is slightly askew, etc. So the director has to make a decision: do we keep re-shooting hoping that lightning will strike a second time or do we run this shot that's perfect in every other detail and just live with the minor blooper? As often as not, they take the second option because acting - and for that matter, technical art such as lighting - is a chancy, mysterious thing. The scene could be re-shot a half-dozen more times, with the consequent increase in production costs and possibly frayed tempers on the set, and the most essential elements still wouldn't work as well.

This might give some insight into the motives of late director Stanley Kubrick, who was infamous for the numerous takes he would shoot of every little scene. A perfectionist such as he must have wanted everything to be ideal, from the performances he desired to how a picture might be hung on a wall.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Tell you what, this hardly qualifies as a "production mistake," but the preceding posts have reminded me that I've secretly--or maybe not so secretly--harbored the suspicion that the real reason we see Jack warshin' those clothes wearin' nuthin' but his boots (though we don't really see anything) is because we've already seen Ennis warshin' ever'thin' he could reach wearin' nuthin' but his hat (though we don't really see anything there, either).

In other words--one star gets a nude scene, the other one has to have one, too.

Same deal with seeing both Michelle and Anne topless. One has a topless scene, the other has to have one, too.

Ooops, do I sound cynical?

[Marge_Innavera]

I still can't get over why the wrong ending got in on the final edit 

That depends on your view of what the "right" ending is. Morbid sore-picking has never exactly been my thing.

[serious crayons]

In other words--one star gets a nude scene, the other one has to have one, too.

Same deal with seeing both Michelle and Anne topless. One has a topless scene, the other has to have one, too.

Ooops, do I sound cynical?

Do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, the other star insists on being nude, too? Or do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, that same star insists that his/her counterpart has to be nude somewhere in the movie, too?

So did Heath win or lose when he was the only star jumping off the cliff? 

[Jeff Wrangler]

Do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, the other star insists on being nude, too? Or do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, that same star insists that his/her counterpart has to be nude somewhere in the movie, too?

Maybe the actors have nothing to do with it, or no say about it. They obviously didn't object because they did the scenes. I guess these are just two more sets of bookends: Naked Heath and naked Jake; topless Anne and topless Michelle.

So did Heath win or lose when he was the only star jumping off the cliff? 

That would depend on your point of view, I guess. Didn't I read somewhere that it was contractual obligations because of other film commitments that prevented Jake from making the jump?

[Marge_Innavera]

Do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, the other star insists on being nude, too? Or do you mean that if one star gets a nude scene, that same star insists that his/her counterpart has to be nude somewhere in the movie, too?

It might have been just a matter of keeping a 'balance.' As for them jumping off the cliff - if it were up to me I'd never have let either of them do it. Even a sprained ankle could have thrown a monkey wrench into the shooting schedule for days.

[serious crayons]

Didn't I read somewhere that it was contractual obligations because of other film commitments that prevented Jake from making the jump?

I think I read Jake was chicken.  But Marge is right, it was risky to let Heath do it.

[Jeff Wrangler]

It might have been just a matter of keeping a 'balance.'

That's it exactly.