I think Neill Blomkamp is a great world builder and filmmaker. However, he's not the best storyteller. If he could find a really great writer to collaborate with who could help give his films a better narrative flow and focus then he would be cranking out classics. I find him to be one of the most frustrating filmmakers to watch, because he obviously has a lot of talent... There is so much potential there, he just needs the right person to help him tell better stories.
If you are die hard mac because you like the style or use FCP then by all means spend loads of money on an official computer or build a hackintosh. However, if you are determined to use macs because you think that they are somehow miles ahead of PCs in stability and performance then I think you might be misguided.
Over the last 6 years I have worked as an editor and motion graphics artist for various production companies and for broadcast. I have worked on various Mac Pros, iMacs, and have owned 3 Macbook Pros. I also built my own PC back in 2012 and just upgraded it's motherboard and CPU earlier this year.
Having done the same exact work on both PC and Macs simultaneously for years I can tell you that I have not noticed that either was leagues ahead of the other in terms or stability or performance. I have had just as many issues on the various macs that I did on my PC.
I honestly believe that a lot of PCs bad rep comes from bloated poorly built branded PCs you'd buy at the store. If you take the time to learn how to build your own, which really isn't that hard, then you can easily have a solid, powerful, and reliable PC workstation like I have had for years.
Even being a closed ecosystem, Mac OS isn't somehow impervious to issues. I have struggled with many crashes, bugs and slow downs. Also, upgrading a custom built computer is more cost friendly than having to buy a whole new Mac every few years. A couple of years ago I upgraded my RAM, last year I upgraded my graphics card, this year I upgraded my motherboard and CPU. If something goes wrong in my computer, I can fix it myself. I don't have to take it in to a store, or send it off. It's incredibly liberating having control over your system and understanding how it works.
From my experience the whole "Mac is more reliable/stable than windows" hasn't been true for a while. For the last 6 years I have worked on both Mac and PC regularly doing the same exact kind of work on both.
The majority of production companies I worked for used Macs, plus I have owned 3 different Macbook Pros during this time, all of which I did a considerable amount of editing/motion gfx work on. I also built my own PC back in 2012, and I just upgraded it with a new processor and motherboard earlier this year.
Having consistently worked on several different Macs from iMacs, Mac Pros, and Macbook Pros plus my custom built PC ... I can tell you that there is little difference in reliability and stability between the two platforms. I have just as many issues on the Macs that I do on my PC.
If I had to lean one way, I would choose my PC. I like having control over my hardware and upgrading is much more affordable.
I think that many people who believe Macs are so superior only have used bloated store bought PCs. If people take the time to learn how to build a PC ( which really isn't hard at all) then you get a lot more bang for your buck especially considering the long term and upgrades.
The way I look at it is that the rules help you better understand the craft. Over the years artists have learned how different aspects of their craft impact an audience. If you do this, it can have this effect. It's sort of a programming language of sorts. Because of how society operates and communicates, certain things will have a universal effect on people... more or less. This applies to all aspects of art.
In western society we read a story from left to right. So it feels natural to see a character walk from left to right. If they walk right to left then something feels off.. like maybe they are lost. This is a film "rule" that taps into how our minds are conditioned.
Drama is what drives a story. There needs to be something set in motion that grabs our attention. Something we want to see played out. Here's the situation, so what happens next? We enjoy engaging in a story and the characters. We enjoy empathizing with and exploring the mind of someone else.
Many of the rules that I find in screenwriting books are just tips on ways to do that effectively. It's not any different the learning how colors can effect an audience in a certain context. Why the 180 rule gives character interaction continuity and how breaking it can effectively disturb your audience at the right time (i.e. Inglorious Basterds)
Learning the "rules" is about learning how aspects of the craft can effects the audience. Once learned, then the artist can choose how they wield them. Sometimes breaking the rules can be very effective.
That being said, I do agree that people get too caught up in trying to find a perfect formula. A recipe to success. People certainly develop an unhealthy obsession with these "rules".
I think the best way to approach it is to not think of them as rules, but as tools. The 180 is a tool. It can give the audience comfortable continuity and it can be broken to disturb them for a moment and indicate a shift in the scene.
Yeah, I think they thought, like a lot of people, that GoPro would keep the same port on the back in future iterations of their camera. I am sure they were a little annoyed that GoPro decided to ax that feature of the camera in the Hero 5, making their work obsolete for future generations. Also, there were a couple of drones that relied on that bus port for their video feed connection, i.e. 3DR Solo.
Definitely puts them in a tough spot for sure.
Something I would add, and perhaps this is what the guy was trying to say at 7:30, is don't preach. Or to put it another way, "discuss but don't preach". There are a lot of filmmakers who have some very strong beliefs about certain issues. They want to use films as a vessel to get their message out. This typically means speaking out against an opposing view and of course the potentially large group of a people who hold on to that opposing view. These people hold on to their beliefs just as strong as the filmmaker holds on to their's.
If the filmmaker wants to spark meaningful change with their film, then it needs to first spark meaningful discussion. How the filmmaker handles the issue in their film will determine what sort of discussion, if any, takes place afterward. If the film is strongly biased with little or no research/time given to the opposing view then the discussion it sparks will also be strongly biased and meaningless. If the filmmaker makes an effort to represent the opposing view in a fair and honest way, then there is a much better chance that the discussion will be fair and honest... and meaningful.
As filmmakers, we set the stage for the change to come. We have to hold ourselves to a much higher standard than we think. We have to be willing to challenge our core beliefs and open our minds. That is how we will change the world.