HopkinsCinemAddicts

Filmic Swagger

 I’m sorry folks, I posted something earlier tonight (technically it was yesterday but I was rushing to get some school work in so I didn’t check if it actually got posted) and it didn’t go through… so I’m back for you guys.  Things have been hectic, but hey they always are when you’ve been done with academia since the 7th grade and you’re in the 16th grade.  But it’s how you approach your problems right?  If you approach them with fear and doubt, or swag (that’s the ebonic truncation of the word swagger) and style, and with that our topic for tonight is style.

 People always talk about a director’s style.  Oh, that’s Scorsesse’s style, or that’s Lucas’s style (I guess for Lucas he only made 3 different kind of films, or should I say 2 and a ½, but you know him so I picked him), that’s Tarantino’s style, et cetera… it’s all BS -at least to me.  Style is connected to the content; to talk as if it’s totally detached is wrong.  And I’m not trying to say that some films are not all about visual style, but that doesn’t mean those films don’t have a story, or are not about something.  (I remember some girl telling me in 4th grade that a particular film didn’t have a story…for some reason that statement pissed the hell out of me… just because a film didn’t make sense to you doesn’t mean we’re all that narrow minded).  Films always have something to translate to you if they don’t tell you through dialog. Let me paraphrase a great film quote I heard:

Film… Some tell a story and leave you with a feeling.  Some tell you a story, leave you with a feeling, and give you an idea.  Some tell you a story, leave you with a feeling, give you an idea, and reveal something about you and the people around you. How you tell that story relates to what the story is about –if not, you as a filmmaker are neglecting a vital part of film. 

 I mean don’t you think that’s what style is… the way in which you tell a story (just say yes – it makes things easier)?  Once you decide what a film is about, your whole crew -whether it’s you and your friend, or hundreds of people- mobilize to portray that story in the best way possible.  Form follows function.  Now you can talk about all this auteur hoopla, but lets take a look at one auteur and from there analyze why so many auteurs seem like that have one distinct style seen in all of their films. Lets take Godard for example… in their simplest forms, how many of his films were about contemporary culture of the time (both French and bastardized American) that starred either Anna Karina or another beautiful woman with a suave male?  So many.  This is not a knock on his brilliant work at all, but this basic template seen in his early work was certain to make his films have a certain style.  Plus you add the certain techniques, limitations, and crew he used in many of his films (especially Raoul Cotards very natural camera work)…damn right he is gonna have a distinct style.  Now look at any auteur and tell me that they don’t work with certain players for a good amount of their films, DP’s, story types, and so on.  I bet you can’t find one without a constant trend.  Let’s move on to how style comes into the film making process…for me.

 I decide on style a few different ways. Usually, I examine what the film is about and try to create a visual language to accompany the philosophy of the film.  I like philosophy, so this always comes up.  For example, if the film draws inspiration from Baudrillard’s Simulacra and Simulations work (a philosophical treatise about the increasing non-reality and mediation of our lives through technology and society), I might tell the DP to make sure the camera works as much as a frame within a frame in the film (shots of windows and mirrors, and shots of different media objects in the film, etc.).  Sometimes the style I’ll pick is apparent because the film is a blatant genre piece, ala film noir, western, et cetera.  Many times it’s based on accentuating the particular actors that are in the film.  You will decide on style depending on your character, the story, and your crew.

 Film is composed of thousands, and sometimes millions (I hope I am alright with these numbers cuz math is not my strong suit) of frames you have to set up (I’m lying you don’t have to set up every frame, but that leaves hundreds of set ups unless you want one of those Andy Warhol films of someone play masturbating in one place, in which case you can pretty much say screw style), all different to come together and make one coherent film.  It is best you and your crew know how you are going to represent it visually.  If you know this and successfully execute it, you can make a brilliant film out of the most mundane or hackneyed story.  Lets not forget, film is a visual medium.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Film ideas...it's not that hard to pick one

It's been a long day of filming... hell it's been a long week of filming, but in film's defense I will say it is the most sublime masochism...the most magnificent fakery, and if i didn't have it in my life at this point I don't know what I would do.

 

I promised in an earlier post to talk about settling on an idea...I'm a man of my word, well at least 85% of my words, so lets keep one of my foolish, human scruples afloat.

 

(This is aimed more towards those working on short student films, as well as those indecisive, extremely picky, extra-perfectionist film makers -notice I employ extra because all of us film makers are perfectionists, at least I hope so.)

 

When you have the means to make a film, the first thing to do is make sure you know what film you're going to make.  The definite, grand process of making a movie makes it where you go all bonkers concerning the multiple ideas you have in your head.  You say should I make a drama, comedy, or magical realism; you say is this tiny idea worth developing, would it work as a film; you say what would my friends say, what would my teachers say, what will the people at film school say; you say if I am famous one day will they spot any potential genius in this early film... but overall you say I have to make something great, encompassing all facets of the universe, hitting all genres, a post-modern masterpiece, setting precedents, blah, blah, blah, et cetera.  This type of thought is fine and dandy in its youthful sincerity and naivete, but it holds you back...and it is sisyphean in nature (step your vocab or greek mythology game up if you don't know that one). If you don't commit to an idea, when you do eventually start your film you will never be happy, constantly saying to yourself "I should have done this film", or "Jimmy's film is so much cooler than mines."

 

But first you need to know what kind of film maker you are.  If you know this it cuts down a superfluous selection of film ideas to a select, relevant (to you) few. Are you into racial politics, sociology, anthropology, gender issues, science, etc.? These subjects will be the supporting beams for your film.  Then start small, with an impetus for a narrative that you are really passionate about.  The impetus is the reason for the primary/main action in your film to occur, i.e.,why do the college kids go on a road trip, why does the friend steal from the other, why does the father shoot the son? Once you have this, build from the ground up.  I began one of my films with an interest in Hegel's master-slave dialectic and how it pertained to actual life.  I took the idea of young love and its power struggles and developed the film from there.  

 

If you have a concrete idea and it turns out that you execute it perfectly, and make a good film, you will hit on both the small and big concepts you wished to and more.  But you have to make sure those small aspects of the film are there, and they are well thought out and executed.

 

On another note,I shot some rough dance for the camera footage this Tuesday and it sucked.  Well not what I shot but the shoot in general.  How the hell are you going to tell someone (who has to bring a bunch of heavy film equipment around, by himself -thats me!) you are going to be on set at 9:00 and consistently come 20 to 30 mins. late, then come 40 mins. late, be in a rush to leave, bitch, and act like it's all good?  You should slap yourself for that one! That's just total indecency...  I feel like cussing but this is school regulated, Feivel decided to stay on the east and go in my closet, and I gotta go to sleep, peace. 

I hate titles they are too definitive

 

I've been gone for a while and I am sorry about that, but I'm back, I'm relatively good, and that's what matter's right?

Today we are going to talk about making decisions when it comes to a possible film idea/project, but before that I want to talk about organization.  The whole process of film making (no matter the scale or phase you currently are in -pre-production, production, post) is cluttered.  As a filmmaker you are trying to remember multiple things in each phase of a film (locations, budget, neutral density filter, Jeanie is lactose intolerant, flash the film, cut that shot, tell Rob the young actor to stop hitting on Erica the make-up artist -true story, etc.).  The only way to have a semblance of calm, because the nature of film is mercurial and won't allow you much ease, is to get you a trusty notebook or something you feel comfortable with, and use it for the pre-production and production phase of your film.  In this (insert whatever trusty thing you have chosen) you keep storyboards, scripts and extra scripts, master shot lists, schedules, location/actor photos -if your not into the whole digital thing, ideas, et cetera.  Sounds like a lot, but trust me one notebook can hold all of this stuff together so as you won't fall apart...completely. 

For the post production phase you should try to keep all of your digitized footage on one drive (they have those 1 terrabyte joints now, get one).  When it comes time to edit only create a few files.  When you 'save project as' every time you make a new cut, you take up alot of space and make it harder for your processor to to help you edit your footage (you also end up with titles like (The indelible Sharpie 2 Dir. cut copy copy copy of another copy of that copy -at least on Final cut).  

When it comes to film throw your finished reels in the refrigerator until you're ready to send them out.  Write on the reel cases how you want the lab to process your film (i'll probably talk about that in the future, 'that' being the different ways you can process film and the results).  When you get the film back always keep the reels together and label them.  If you are sitting down at a Steambeck throw some gaffers tape  at the tips of the film strips and label them so you don't confuse or have to constantly look at the homogenous film strips in the viewfinder every time.

Well I was going to talk to you about deciding on projects, but I changed my mind...gotta keep you wanting (not really I'm just lazy and want to spread my material).  I promise to talk about ideas next time but philosophy calls and I'm tryna get my Terrence Malick on, ya feel me?

Why film people are the best artists, and some important stuff... I guess

So I just broke down and moved alot of film equipment by myself (3 trips worth), and I'm kinda irritated, plus I have to pee bad,  but whatever.  You crave edutainment, and I'm here to deliver.

See, film people (and I mean film makers) even though we are all creative and cool, and artsy, and smoke cigarettes, and are francophiles, and are kinda emo sometimes, and like scarves, and the color black, and shades, including a host of other things the French and the Beatniks played out decades ago, we are pragmatists -for the exception of Oliver Stone, Dennis Hopper, and Terry Gilliam, and some underground film makers who if I mention their names would just make me sound like a pretentious snob...which I'm not...I'm an elitist.  Sounds alot classier don't it?  When I say we are pragmatists I mean we understand the logistical limitations our medium imposes upon us.  All those other kind of artists are nuts...and we would be too if we could pee on our cameras without themshort circuiting (still love ya Jack and Andy).  But from my personal experience, other artists seem looser than us film people who are sticklers about time, money and such, and that's fine...just means their art isn't to be taken serious...I kid, people. 

What brought me to juxtapose members of the artworld is my current pairing with dancers.  See those from the Dance planet are a very particular species... they are incredible workers, fit for those 16 hour shooting days, it's just that they see things different... like time. When film peeps say be present at 8:30, be there at 8:15 and coil a freakin cord or something. Because most likely something is going to go wrong, or we're going to have to adjust for something...count on that. In fact I don't even want to talk about dancers in relation to film anymore...let's talk time.

Time is of the utmost importance in any production.  Before you go out to shoot you sould sit down and make a preliminary shooting timetable.  The crew should arrive an hour and thirty minutes before the cast. The thirty minutes is an arbitrary time, but this time however much you allot, should be used for crew to eat/warm up to work, or warm up to each other if they haven't met one another, then the next hour is really used for lighting set up, director and DP talks, and grips to dabble in some pre-shooting misogyny.  The call time for the talent should always be after lighting is set up.  So if your crew call time is 7am and you knowit will take a hour to get the lights up, you make the talent call time 8am.  It's rude to make the talent wait around for crew issues. Plus if they get to come in a hour later than everybody else it makes it harder for them to bitch about things, which they'll do anyway.  

And always start as early as you can in a day because most likely, if you can, you will go over time, way over time.  My longest day has been 18 hours, a friend of mines went 48 hours, but he's working on that Avatar flick by James Cameron, who has tanks and fighter planes in a concrete storage area with no windows on one of his private properties.  Also if you are late on set, film people will look down on you, blame you, and fire you if they can (well this is more Hollywood people behavior).  Plus you have to uphold the great tradition of fIlm peeps always being early.  This isn't as true with video people but they prefer tape and squares over film and circles.  Plus, what the hell is a videographer? What a lame title. But yes, time is important in film world, very important.

I'll talk more about time later on but I'm tired, I need some time off. Good night.

Dik's Introductory post

Hello everybody...

As you can tell by the title of my post my name is Dik, and I will be sharing my thoughts and experiences concerning the production aspect of film and video (yes, the two are different). This semester I am working with a choreographer from Towson University and we are combining our mediums to create a few Dance for the Camera pieces.  I have worked with writers, producers, directors, and others involved in the film making process, but never have I collaborated with someone outside the realm of film... so it should be interesting and lead to a lot of good and bad experiences to detail in this blog.

 

My posts will probably be extremely idiosyncratic, and continue in a stream-of-conscious like manner, so don't be alarmed if you come upon any awkward language, grammar, et cetera.  I meet with the choreographer and a few dancers tomorrow for some practice runs of our routine...after the run through I will begin writing specifically about production.  Until then, watch films, read the others‘ blogs, and I look forward to sharing my ideas/experiences with you. Au revoir!