Underground video premieres Jan 25th on VEVO

[JOEinPHX]

I don't want him to block me.

[Hype]

I don't want him to block me.

You should sign up for another twitter account and send that to him.

Also, I kind of feel like he'd think it was funny and be diplomatic about it via twitter... like "Haha, yeah, that's exactly what we did. Except the boobs were bigger."

At least, that's what I'd say if I was him. Secretly I'd be stoked that people care enough about the band to wonder what the fuck is up with their "marketting"/"art".

[JOEinPHX]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

[Hype]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

That's weird. I think the opposite is true. It seems dickish to critique them "behind their backs", as it were, from afar... but not dickish at all to genuinely express your distaste directly to them.

[Tyler Durden]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

Yeah, like say some asshole contacted an estranged ex-band member, set up a 3 hour interview, and then posted it online for the world to see.

[JOEinPHX]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

That's weird. I think the opposite is true. It seems dickish to critique them "behind their backs", as it were, from afar... but not dickish at all to genuinely express your distaste directly to them.

It's not behind their backs. This is a public discussion forum. It's far different to have a dozen people giving their subjective viewpoint about the band's music and whatnot, than to have one dude send a message that says "fuck you. your video sucks."

This place they can ignore. Or they can dig as deep into the pages of replies as they want. It's all up to them what they see.

But one message on their twitter feed is shoved right in their faces. and that isn't cool. That's just malicious and meant to cause harm.

[JOEinPHX]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

Yeah, like say some asshole contacted an estranged ex-band member, set up a 3 hour interview, and then posted it online for the world to see.

That's just fucking EPIC.

US: You suck!
THEM: No we don't!
US: Yes you do!
THEM: No we don't!
Bass player: Yeah, they really do.
THEM: *pwned*

[Tyler Durden]

It's one thing to critique them from afar, but it's just a dick move to actually reach out to them specifically to say something shitty. I wouldn't want someone ruining my day like that.

Yeah, like say some asshole contacted an estranged ex-band member, set up a 3 hour interview, and then posted it online for the world to see.

That's just fucking EPIC.

US: You suck!
THEM: No we don't!
US: Yes you do!
THEM: No we don't!
Bass player: Yeah, they really do.
THEM: *pwned*

Pretty much.

[Romeo]

A good example is all the low budget indie movies that did phenomenal

Like Juno. It had a budget of 6.2 million which by most major motion picture standards is the Stars salary. Won best screenplay and was nominated for best picture. It ended up grossing 231 million

So you don't have to have a lot of money to put out something good & original.

[Pandemonium]

It's not behind their backs. This is a public discussion forum. It's far different to have a dozen people giving their subjective viewpoint about the band's music and whatnot, than to have one dude send a message that says "fuck you. your video sucks."

This place they can ignore. Or they can dig as deep into the pages of replies as they want. It's all up to them what they see.

But one message on their twitter feed is shoved right in their faces. and that isn't cool. That's just malicious and meant to cause harm.

Agreed. And it speaks more about the person going to such extremes to make their negative feelings known than to what if any degree it's affecting the artist in question. And I'd say it's almost a given Dave and Etty/Perry read this board too, so it's not like they aren't aware a certain segment of their fanbase is happy or unhappy with the band or music.

[Hype]

A good example is all the low budget indie movies that did phenomenal

Like Juno. It had a budget of 6.2 million which by most major motion picture standards is the Stars salary. Won best screenplay and was nominated for best picture. It ended up grossing 231 million

So you don't have to have a lot of money to put out something good & original.

I agree with you in spirit, but Juno is, for a variety of reasons, imho, terrible. (Not just because I didn't like it, but I think there are other reasons to suspect something strange was going on there...) I think, though, we probably agree that movies like Avatar (and the Chipmunks rehashes) are really, really, really bad.

[Tyler Durden]

A good example is all the low budget indie movies that did phenomenal

Like Juno. It had a budget of 6.2 million which by most major motion picture standards is the Stars salary. Won best screenplay and was nominated for best picture. It ended up grossing 231 million

So you don't have to have a lot of money to put out something good & original.

Gee, really?

Anyway, Juno was kind of crappy. And any movie financed by Fox Searchlight isn't exactly "indie".

[Romeo]

Nice try Bunky but it was DISTRIBUTED by Fox Searchlight. It was financed by Mandate Pictures. Ever hear of them. Didn't think so

[Hype]

Who knows... that's why I said that there are just reasons to suspect something strange...

David Edelstein of New York magazine felt that the film was desperate to be "a movie that confers hipness on teens, that makes kids want to use the same slang and snap up the soundtrack". Music reviewer Jim DeRogatis criticized the film's stylized dialogue and what he saw as a casual take on abortion and Juno's naïveté in becoming pregnant, claiming: "As an unapologetically old-school feminist, the father of a soon-to-be-teenage daughter, a reporter who regularly talks to actual teens as part of his beat and a plain old moviegoer, I hated, hated, hated this movie."

[trevor ayer]

u know janes is makin a comeback when their new playboy video inspires a JUNO debate .. yay! hoka, tgea, juno .. all 4 letter words .. coincidence?

[Romeo]

Other hugely successful indie films (since apparently ANR becomes the siskel & ebert of using examples)
Reservior Dogs
Little Miss sunshine
Easy Rider
Eraserhead

and one of my favorites, a little film from 1953 called The Little Fugitive



But no worries on Money vs art...Janes has a video on playboy.com That's all that matters

[Tyler Durden]

Other hugely successful indie films (since apparently ANR becomes the siskel & ebert of using examples)
Reservior Dogs
Little Miss sunshine
Easy Rider
Eraserhead

and one of my favorites, a little film from 1953 called The Little Fugitive

What's your point exactly? I'm pretty confident that everyone here knows that good movies can be made on a low budget...and I'm sure everyone here can cite examples. All a great movie requires is a great script.

However, with music videos, it's a totally different medium. To compare the two (mediums) is ridiculous. For a great video, you need a great concept. And sure, that doesn't require money. But my initial point was that unlike the movie industry, the music industry has changed. Due to downloading, there isn't the same demand to produce music videos (in order to promote product), hence there isn't the demand for aspiring music video directors. Labels can't pay a director the kind of money the director of a commercial makes because there just isn't the profits that there used to be. This in turn means there is a smaller pool of highly creative minds...and probably less people willing to make art for little money (An up and coming director will probably rationalize things as "Why would I dump all of my creative energy into a music video that I am only getting X number of dollars for when I can direct a commercial that people will actually see and I'll make way more money"). Ad agencies and film studios generally don't look at a music video director's work anymore (for potential future projects) because there is no way of measuring their success monetarily.

Could the "Underground" video have been better? Of course. But think about this band's track record in recent years; we're lucky we got a video that was this decent.

Anyway, as I previously stated...this whole debate over Jane's music videos is a moot point. The music is either good or it's not. There are bands out there with great albums and crappy music videos and vice versa.

[Hype]

All a great movie requires is a great script.

That's a really strong claim. Isn't it possible that a great script could be turned into a terrible movie by bad acting and/or bad directing and/or (maybe) bad production?

[Romeo]

Tyler Durden ...and MONEY.

My point is to you who kept saying the reason the video was predictable & bland is because of a lack of money.

Tyler just admit it....

You were wrong.

[Tyler Durden]

Tyler Durden ...and MONEY.

My point is to you who kept saying the reason the video was predictable & bland is because of a lack of money.

Tyler just admit it....

You were wrong.

I wasn't talking specifically about video budgets per se. I was talking in more general terms with regard to the entire music industry. Videos don't generate revenue (read "MONEY") like they used to, hence there isn't the same amount of creativity involved with making them anymore.

And anyone can cite "outliers" as examples that go against almost any argument.

[Tyler Durden]

All a great movie requires is a great script.

That's a really strong claim. Isn't it possible that a great script could be turned into a terrible movie by bad acting and/or bad directing and/or (maybe) bad production?

Yes. However...if you have great acting, great directing, etc and a bad script, you have nothing. The script is the most important component of a great film; without it, nothing else matters. I suppose I should have worded things better. Anyway, this is a an entirely different debate.

[Matz]

Nice try Bunky

'Bunky'? Never heard that before, but I like it. It's almost as good as brick

[Romeo]

It's better than using "Buster"

[Kajicat]

I love how Casey showed up at 2:15 in the vid.