What I want to see:
Thomas Kinkade’s Snakes on a Plane 2: Cottonmouth Cottage
Yeah, that’s what I want to know. Did a large letter N save his life 30 years ago, perhaps on the set of Sesame Street?
Kinkade gives artists, movie producers and all Thomases a bad name.
My understanding from the article was that this was to be a theatrical release movie, but instead is going straight to hel…DVD.
Poor, poor Peter and Marcia. The other guy too, I imagine.
How about written in blood on the walls of an old, dilapidated, yet still colorful and nostalgic barn? Full of quaint animal skulls. That’d be nice.
Pajiba’s video review is pretty hilarious.
And why does Peter O’Toole look like he’s watching someone fuck a Smurf in the eye?
I don’t plan on watching the movie and didn’t read the linked article but it sounds awfully similar what famed caricaturist Al Hirschfeld used to do with his daughter’s name, Nina, in most of his cartoons.
I believe the cameraman just happened to capture the moment when Peter came to the realization that he was appearing opposite Jared Padalecki and Richard Moll in a movie based on a Thomas Kinkade painting.
Why doesn’t Peter O’toole blink?
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought he had died.
Dean: Damnit Sam!
Peter O’Toole’s dead gaze terrified me.
I actually have a Kinkade product in my house - a throw blanket depicting a generic Christmas scene. I’m not sure where it came from - probably a gift from my grandma.
Yeah, this item is particular error-riddled:
First, short focal lengths are wide-angle lenses. Without getting into too many details, unless you’re shooting very close to your subject, short focal lengths are generally not a good pick for shallow depth-of-field photography (which is what Kinkade describes in the next sentence.) “Stopping down” has nothing to do with focal length, but it does have something to do with depth of field and, in fact, creates the exact opposite effect of what Kinkade describes in the previous sentence. What he means to say is “10) Shallow depth of field. In general, I love a focal plane that favors the center of interest, and allows mid-distance and distant areas to remain blurry. Recommend ‘opening up’ to decrease depth of field.”
I laughed my ass off when I read that suggestion. I can imagine a cinematographer and cameraman having much the same reaction. Well, that or shuddering at the thought that this guy was giving them instructions.
What a bunch of snobs here. I thought the list was very helpful for organizing an overall production design to the movie that would comport with the look of his paintings. If you don’t like his paintings, ok, but no need to be so snarky about it.
If you’re going to use technically terminology, either use it correctly, get somebody to go over it, or, better yet, don’t use technical terminology in the first place if you have no idea what it means. Trying to look smart by using phrases like “stopping down,” when it turns out you’re looking for the exact opposite term just makes you look like an idiot.
Even then, hiding the letter “N,” anniversary dates, and numbers throughout the movie. Oh come on, now.
I don’t like his paintings. No snark there. But when he thinks he’s explaining things to people who know their jobs far better than he does and uses terminology incorrectly, AND makes suggestions that come off very egotistically, I laugh.
Well, if he normally does this with his paintings, his devoted fans (who will presumably make up a large part of the movie’s audience) will expect it.
I had to look this up, but apparently he does do this in his paintings. What a cheeseball. I didn’t think it was possible for me to dislike his paintings any more, but there ya go.
We have it in the store. I’ll watch it for $100. Email me for my paypal.
IMDB says that its getting a theatrical release in Iceland. You know you’re in a special kind of hell when you entire country’s economy has imploded and a Thomas Kinkade movie is in the theaters.
No offense, but I don’t think you’d be able to top this comment in the review Troy linked to: