Crapshoot

In class this week we digitized what footage we managed to collect--you know, the footage with NO SOUND. With all the groups trying to digitize at once, we ended up waiting a while for our clips to be finished. I was hoping by this point to be able to begin editing, but some major scheduling and film storyline issues have prevented us from even filming a solid chunk of our movie. Even though we did manage to shoot about three minutes of the new storyline last week, we decided to re-shoot it because it seemed too chaotic with all of us yelling and arguing.

My group talked a bit about our plans for shooting while we were waiting on the footage to be digitized, and we made yet another plan. I volunteered to write out a brief guideline of the script (with suggested lines and shots) for the new storyline and then send everyone a copy for approval. And since we were able to snatch the camera for a week, Sam and Tommy said they would film over the weekend. Also, both Lynn and Katie said they would help in any way they could with the filming process (since they, and I, are all editors there really isn't a lot to do until the filming is complete). Even though, we didn't get a lot finished during class time last week, I think we all left feeling a little better at least knowing that we had a plan.

However, now it is Tuesday and we still have not filmed anything. A series of avoidable problems got in the way of filming this past weekend, such as not knowing where the camera is and scheduling conflicts. Lynn, Katie, and I all, independently, decided that since we were having so much trouble finding a time when we could all meet together to film that we would let Sam and Tommy take over the actual shooting. That way, there are only two schedules to deal with and work around (well, along with the actor's schedules) instead of five. Also, some other film groups mentioned that all group members were not needed on set; filming went smoother and quicker when there were fewer schedules to work around.

So, as of right now, I'm stressed about the film. I don't know when the filming will take place and I'm almost to the point of picking up the camera myself and figuring out how to work it. In saying all this, I'm not particularly worried about the film being finished, I'm just worried about the quality of the product and the unnecessary stress involved with completing it on time. Being an editor, my work begins with the raw clips, and now with just a week to go, I'm not sure how much I can get finished. Lynn also being an editor helps relieve some of the pressure, but I still can't wrap my head around not having ANYTHING to start editing yet. While other groups are thinking about soundtracks and effects, our group has yet to even shoot!

One good thing about being the editor as well as writing the script (even if it is just a basic script) is the fact that I can visualize the film in my head. I know the shot sequences and effects I want with certain scenes (and several quick options for each idea to allow for other group member's input). I think that since I have an idea of where the film will go, then the editing process should go relatively smooth. It's just a matter of getting the variety of shots, the right actors to nail the characters, the little logistical requirements (the props and camera shots), and simply enough footage to work with in order to complete the film and call it a success.

So, here's where we are at the moment:
-Sam and Tommy have free-reign over filming...as long as it is finished before Thursday at class time (so we can digitize). Supposedly, they will film tomorrow. Since I am free tomorrow I told them that I will help in any way they need me to. I expect to help more behind the camera (guiding the shots through the vision in my head) than in front, especially since Sam (the director) will be serving as one of our main comedic actors in the film.

Meanwhile, Lynn, Katie, and I are awaiting the digitized footage impatiently so we can fulfill our group roles. Lynn and I will edit the footage while Katie will edit the sound.

Things need to start falling into place...soon.

Brief but productive

This past week in film class, we met for a short while but achieved a lot. Katie and I laid out the basic plot structure for the new idea and bullet-pointed the key issues within the film. We also bounced around the idea of writing up character "identities" in which we type up a background for each character in our film (based upon us, since we are the filmmakers and our film is about filmmakers). Then the idea was to give the background to each person in our group as a basis for which qualities to highlight. I've found that after two completed, unused screenplays, our group works best with guidelines rather than exact instructions (as far as dialogue goes anyway). As far as the setting, we plan to shoot the rest of our film in a dorm room with the four of us (everyone beside Tommy, who will be running the camera) serving as the main actors. A large portion of our movie will be filmed in a dorm room since the main focus is the sequence of events that occur during the idea process of making a movie (highlighting the stress and irritation involved) and not exactly about where it is that the characters are/go.

After we finished laying out the structure of the film we scheduled the next film shooting and then second checked our ideas (as far plot layout and settings) with everyone in the group. With everyone’s approval on the details of the film, I think the pick-up shot days will go smoothly (especially in comparison to last week). While there is still a lot of work to be completed and the filming process has been slow, the rest of the process should be very productive now that we have a concrete idea and excitement surrounding it.

Try to keep up

Last week was the first week in which Donna and Eric handed the class period over to us and told us to “Do with it what you will”--however in not quite those exact words. We were to work in our groups doing whatever it is that we need to get done. Here's what went down:

Sam (our director) and Tommy (our cameraman) were filming on a nearby mountain with a few people they gathered to serve as our actors in the film. This left myself, Katie, and Lynn to meet in the classroom and group together all the things we needed (the skull, cheese grater, clown make-up, and a guitar...you know, the usual) and then meet them on the mountain. After about 15 minutes, we were in the car driving towards the location. We called Tommy to get directions but he told us that they were leaving. All three of us, confused and frustrated since this was the first day we had been able to shoot (and the only day we would have) turned around to meet them somewhere close-by.
We met Sam, Tommy, and four guys (whom we do not know) at a gas station to regroup and see what the hell was going on. Tommy said that they had to drop the actors off at campus because they had prior commitments. We (the girls of the group), still confused about how we were to film with no actors if we drop them off, follow them back to campus.

When we arrive, we get out of the car to talk to Sam and Tommy. At this point, we’re all so frustrated and tense that we all begin to get very short with each other. After an awkward few minutes with us griping back and forth, and the actors sitting in the back seat of the car, the actors leave and we choose to meet back up on the other side of campus.

When we get there, we all decide to think of a different film idea since we do not have our actors or enough time to film our screenplay-ed idea. So, basically, we started over...again. After standing in the parking lot for about ten minutes talking quietly (and carefully--I think everyone was afraid to be the first to erupt the stress-volcano that was boiling inside each of us) we drive back to the dorm to reconvene in Sam's room. At this point in the night, I felt defeated. I was worried about finishing on time, having enough shots to edit, and the overall quality of the product. I think the same things were running through everyone else's minds too. We were all getting a little frantic…well except Tommy. He seemed relatively calm throughout, thank goodness.

[This next part is the kicker]

We talked for a little bit in Sam’s room before deciding to watch the footage they collected on the mountain. The camera is connected to the television and after finding the remote control, we begin the playback. It's silent. "Silent" as in there was no sound coming from the TV. The film was playing, and the cords were hooked up correctly, but there was NO SOUND. We tried not to the think the worst as we flipped switches, turned knobs, and adjusted settings on the camera in the hope of hearing something. Katie called her sister, who deduced that we had in fact, not recorded sound with the footage.

You can imagine our disappointment.

However, we didn't get angry. No sense in getting worked up when all you have to do is fix the problem and move on. We immediately began to brainstorm new ideas for our film. After about twenty minutes (and a few chucked ideas, including the proposed re-adoption of our very very first screenplay)we came up with a simple, yet funny (we believe anyway), idea in which we all had lots of personal experience.

We are going to film the process of making a student film. Specifically, we are going to film our experiences that night in class. I'm excited about our idea; I think it has lots of potential. Everyone in the group seems to be on board with the new idea and even a little excited. I'm just glad that we've all come to consensus on what is funny. After recapping the night's activities we all agreed that that particular three hours on a Thursday night was a little funny, if very irritating at times. If anything I was glad to see everyone leave in a little better mood then in which they came. I'm optimistic and ready to edit.

Now we just have to make sure that we record sound as well as film next time.

Adaptation

This past week we watched Adaptation by Spike Jonze. I think I enjoyed this film more than any other movie we’ve watched this semester. I was definitely the most excited about it because Charlie Kaufman was one of the writers for the movie (he’s a favorite of mine). The intricately designed screenplay is genius in the way it weaves together reality (what the audience is watching) and the movie reality (what the characters experience).

In the beginning of the movie I wasn’t exactly where the story within the movie began and the making of the movie ended. The ideas Kaufman (played by Nicholas Cage) had during the writing process where included in the movie—even the ideas he discarded. We, the audience, saw every idea that the character Kaufman envisioned as if we were the ones watching his (the character’s) movie. The screenplay blurs the lines between the story within the movie (played by actors) and reality (Nicholas Cage plays Charlie Kaufman, one of the actual writers of Adaptation for example).

The film plays with the ideas of uniqueness and connectedness—between the orchids as well as the characters. McKee’s comments to Charlie on change emphasize human connectedness in that we (he says “character” because he’s giving advice on writing a screenplay but the same idea exists in reality) all change. We all change in a different way and it comes from within us (“comes from them [characters]” as McKee says). However, in this ability to adapt or change we are all connected. The only thing we all have in common is our uniqueness. I think the rarity and uniqueness of the orchids emphasize the idea of connectedness through uniqueness. With this idea in mind, one of the most interesting aspects of Adaptation is the inclusion of a twin brother to Nicholas Cage’s character. Charlie “shares DNA” with his twin brother. They are genetically identical (and physically identical). By DNA, they are the same person—Charlie would seem to be robbed of his uniqueness, his individuality. However, the experiences shape him into a different person than his brother. Change makes them two different people. The rivalry between the two brothers offers a funny and interesting twist to the idea of them being the same genetic being yet completely different people. In the end, Kaufman realizes that he has the power to change himself and with that new power he can “take hold of the movie-ness and change himself” (the character that plays him) within the movie into anyone he wants (as Donna put it).

I think the play between uniqueness and connectedness resonates with a lot of people in that we all have moments in which we question our special-ness as well as our sense of belonging. We seem to want both qualities all at once and the boundary between the two is constantly shifting.

The last bit of the movie (after the meeting with McKee) was packed with events. There was a car chase, an on-foot chase through the jungle, a gun fight, drugs, sex, a crocodile attack…so much as to make you want to laugh because of the sensationalism (just as the filmmakers wanted). The whole movie up to the point in which Charlie meets McKee, Charlie tries to adapt the book The Orchid Thief to a screenplay—an impossible feat because “nothing much happens” in the book. In that impossibility of making a movie about just pure thoughts (not an actual story as in The Orchid Thief), is where the sensationalized ending comes in to “save” the movie. The movie in which “nothing much happens” now turns into a movie in which a lot of things happen, however unrealistic. By the cop out Charlie Kaufman (the character) takes in writing his screenplay, he says that movies need that “FLASH! BANG!” ending to work. Also, by including the over-done ending in Adaptation, the question of whether movies need sensationalized endings to be successful is posed to the audience.

The intertwining and weaving together of stories and ideas is what makes the film both brilliant and slightly difficult to talk about.

From the source

This week in class we watched a student film from our own college entitled "The Last Summer” by Corey Womack. He didn't tell us beforehand that it was based on the events and feelings he felt the summer before leaving for college, but from the nostalgic tone of the film I gathered that it was more than just a story he came up with one day. The main plot was of a high school graduate stuck between the need to leave the town he grew up in and the things (like his girlfriend and just fear of what is to come) that keep him from being excited to leave.

I liked his take on the home town atmosphere. I find that some teen movies in which the main character has the opportunity to leave his/her small hometown are over exaggerated and degrading to the small hometown. While I think Corey’s film definitely had that sense of limitation that comes with unrealized potential and unsatisfied ambition, I don’t think it was overly critical of the small town atmosphere. In fact, the film seems to emphasize that the main character appreciates all the things his home has given him—the decision to move away to college is just the next step in becoming who he is. I appreciated Corey’s attention to detail, especially when conveying the emotions the character feels throughout the movie. The screen frame closing in on the main character emphasizing the suffocation he feels adds a lot to the tone and depth of the film.

Hearing Corey speak about the decisions he made in the film making process after seeing the finished product really helped me connect the idea of creating a film as a creative, artistic expression of emotion. While all the movies we’ve watched this semester had that artistic quality that makes them unique, I especially felt the emotional pull between Corey and his film. Maybe there is just something to be said for being in the same room as the filmmaker as he/she talks about their creation—you can see and feel the connection between the person and the product. I wonder if Corey was even the slightest bit nervous at showing his film. I’m sure he was more relieved to be finished (as he kept reiterating that he was finished editing and that we were seeing the final version) than nervous, but I considered his film to be a very personal form of expression (especially since it was autobiographical).

One other thing that interested me in class was this little clip we watched of Alfred Hitchcock talking about tension in movies. He spent a few minutes setting up a scene for us (I say that as if he were in the room with us) to make the distinction between surprise and suspense. He described the two as: “When you show a group of characters talking and a bomb goes off, that's surprise; when you tell the audience there's a bomb and then show the characters talking, that's suspense.” The most interesting part of the clip was when Hitchcock stated that the most important thing to remember is that “the bomb must never go off.” I wondered at the reason behind never “completing the bomb sequence” (never allowing the tension to release perhaps in a metaphorical sense).

I wondered what would happen if you did let the bomb go off. Then I realized that that was just it. The bomb would go off. And there would be nothing. No story, no characters, no purpose—you negated it by destroying everything you built up to that point. I am reminded of the MacGruber Saturday Night Live skits (spoofs of MacGyver)in which the bomb ALWAYS goes off despite MacGruber’s efforts to disable it…so funny. However, in every movie I’ve seen with a bomb problem, the bomb never (or if it does, it does so in a continuation of the story and not the end) actually goes off. I always wondered why this was so prevalent in movies. Then, Hitchcock explained his reasoning: By throwing the bomb out the window and then letting it go off, you still have your characters and their reaction to the explosion (you still have something with which to work).

The main thing I gathered from class this week is that I love hearing people speak about their art almost as much as I love experiencing it myself.

The Player

-- After watching Robert Altman's The Player I felt uneasy. The ending lies somewhere between quaint and grotesque. The very last scene in which Mr. Mill is greeted by a pregnant June Gudmundstottir (his wife) in true American style with June waving over a plethora of flowers as he gets out of the car. They then hug and kiss each other sweetly. You would never suspect that June happened to be the girlfriend of the screenwriter Mill had killed not too long before.

The emphasis on the traditional "happy ending" within the last scene illuminates Altman's view of the audience. He seems to be commenting on the real desires of movies watchers. He spends the entire film building these characters and the story only to end with the murderer not only living happily with his new family but at the peak of his career as well. Everything that we as the audience expect to happen (the bad guy getting caught and paying for his crime, the woman feeling remorse for the death of her boyfriend, etc.) takes a twist. The audience seems to be made fun of for getting so involved with the story and even the characters, because they all turn out to be something else then you originally thought.

One of the most interesting aspects of the movie, in my opinion, is the way power is used--power between the audience and the filmmakers. The audience spends an hour and a half watching a film; they connect to the characters, and begin to predict an outcome before it is over. It's almost as if the audience believes that they have a certain power over the film, in that they came to the conclusion of the story before being shown the ending. The audience figured it out without being told--and in a lot of cases, they do figure it out. The movie delivers. However, in this instance, the filmmakers play into the audience's idea that they could predict the ending and uses that against them. Altman exercises the power to twist the ending in a way the audience doesn't always expect. However, he also gives in the audience's power in a way. Altman creates the happy ending, giving the audience what they think they want--a new, successful family living together amidst flowers and sunshine but at what cost? The murderer goes free.
Who wins? Who has the power now? The audience gets the happy ending they demand but is it really what they wanted?

Donna explained The Player as a movie commenting on movie watchers and what the audience really wants from a film. She brought up the point that Altman wants us to "own up to wanting the happy ending" and knowing this about the audience, he gives us a disturbing ending with a sweet facade.

Workshop!

This week was all about tying up loose ends before we start filming our project. Eric gave us some tips on just about every aspect of filming--from production to shooting to set design. Some of the ideas I didn't even think about until Eric mentioned them, such as: You shouldn't leave a wall blank in the background since it is a great opportunity to create atmosphere in a film.

I never thought background scenery was all that important but now I find myself noticing the setting behind the actors in shows and movies that I watch. The scene would be sterile without something in the background to add interest and believability. Little magnets on a refrigerator behind a family eating breakfast add a sense of realism.

Also he stressed the need for a Producer role in our groups. The producer is the person who manages the location agreements, the actor agreements and questionnaires, and organizes everything. This is perhaps the person I admire most in the filmmaking business. The main aspect of filmmaking that overwhelms and amazes me (when I see a quality finished product) is the organization is takes to put everything together. The producer seems to be the reason why filming runs smoothly (or not) on set. The organization required for those multi-million dollar blockbusters is especially overwhelming. I am an organized person in that I know (pretty much) where everything is. I can find what I need to find in time, but having to organize the workings of an entire film is a bit daunting. However, I think with everyone in my group working together we'll be fine when it comes to keeping things in line. We decided that everyone should have their own copy of the script and any other papers that pertain to their "job" in their own folder in order to stay organized.

After the workshop in class we were able to meet with our groups to discuss the first draft of our screenplay. I think our meeting was very beneficial. We ended up changing our film idea completely. I realize that it may sound a little stressful the idea of having to start over and write a whole new script. However I think since everyone in our group is a lot more comfortable and excited about our new story, the writing process will go a lot faster and smoother than last time.

Blow Out night

In class last week we watched Blow Out directed by Brian De Palma which I recommend to anyone wanting to watch a really thoughtful and carefully constructed film. Like Donna said, everything had a clear purpose and was placed in the film carefully but with confidence. From the prolific patriotism imagery to the constant reminder that we are watching a film, De Palma does what he wants with the movie and doesn’t make any excuses.

Particularly I find that the view on the role of audiences to be one of the most interesting aspects of the film. Blow Out is not a movie in which we get “sucked into” the created world on the screen. With the special camera shots (like the spinning shot, overhead shot, and just the camera reel prop in lots and lots of shots, etc.) we never really forget that we are in the audience watching a film. Also, just the content of the film serves as a reminder that we are watching a movie what with the shallow use of nudity and vulgarity (within the frame story film that is, Coed Frenzy). We are given a dramatized and mixed view of reality which emphasizes the idea that we are purely shallow entertainment-seekers as audience members.

Another thing that I thought was interesting in the film was the treatment of the idea of American ambition. I can’t decide if Blow Out was mocking the idea of the investigative, honest, skilled, good citizen-character making a difference or if the film genuinely tried to give a view of the ambitious “regular” guy doing something big (like figuring out a murder of a high profile political leader). Some part of me (the optimistic, patriotic side I guess) wants to believe that De Palma was actually making a comment on the patriotic spirit within some citizens. Jack (a very nondescript name—emphasizing how he could’ve been any guy off the street) fights for truth in that he refuses to back down in regards to the actual happenings of the murder. However, I also think that all this overt patriotic imagery and the ending in which Jack ends up where he started (just with a more authentic scream in the crappy movie he works for) only mocks the idea of the “American ambition” (all idealized and utopia-esque). I’m leaning more towards the latter, but I wish I could believe the former view. I think that’s De Palma’s intention though, to mock the audience’s idea of a “good” story—complete with damsel in distress, young brave attractive hero-man, and creepy demented bad guy. He “disrespects” the audience in giving us “reality chopped up and mixed with vulgarity and nudity” (noted from Donna’s end-of-movie comments). But he also makes fun of that type of entertainment by providing it to us using methods that keep us from forgetting that we are watching a movie.

I think the fact that Jack worked on the sound for a film, a job in which he must create/find each noise and make it sound believable, is particularly interesting in that it gives another dimension to the already multi-faceted views of reality within the film. We see the murder scenario from the media’s view, Jack’s view, and then our own view watching the film. Reality is a plaything throughout the entire film. The battle between these different views inspires much thought about what “reality” exactly is. Is it what the media shows us, what we see for ourselves…can we ever truly know and witness reality? If not, then what limits us? Is our own subjectivity keeping us from seeing the “real” in reality?

Day 6

I'm excited about screenwriting. In class we went over the basics of the process of writing a screenplay (complete with character dialogue, camera notes, and action) and it actually didn't seem all too complicated. The only thing that kinda makes me nervous is how we must know exactly how each scene will play out (with the camera notes). I know the director will "man" the exact set up of the shots but still, it's the screenwriter's job first to pen the film.

I wonder how the screenwriter comes up with ideas about the way a scene will play out. Does she see the film play out as a finished movie in her head or use her "mind's eye" to record the film? I find intriguing how people can envision something in their head and then just record it (whether on paper, film, canvas, etc.). Film especially strikes me as a terribly demanding form of expression in that you must create a whole situation for the viewer with dialogue, camera movement, plot, conflict, action…and all this starts with the screenplay.

After all our workshops and movie-making discussions we are now at the stage in class where we must put our new knowledge to use in creating our own short film. The class is split into six groups with about four or five people in each group (and each with a different job). The assignment is to create a five minute film based on an assigned genre. And of course, there are some other fun requirements such as the film must include a mime/clown, skull, cheese grater, a guitar, and the lines "Why is this happening to me today of all days?” and "It would be better for us not to talk about that." I'm not worried about these requirements too much, it'll be fun.

I can’t decide whether my film group was blessed or cursed with the genre of comedy. On one hand, there are so many different forms of “funny” which can help us in that we’ll have a lot from which to choose. However, so many different types of humor could make deciding on a specific idea difficult. I’m up for the challenge, don’t get me wrong, but I am very indecisive. Hopefully with five people in our film group we can come up with a really good idea that we all feel comfortable with. Also, I hope everyone can find a middle ground on an idea that we think everyone will find funny, since people have very different ideas of what is and is not funny.

During our short discussion in class, we tried to list a few things that are funny in every situation and to nearly everyone. We came up with people falling (nothing too serious though, no one wants to see something fall do their death from a cliff…or I don’t), people farting (you can’t deny that that noise is funny, maybe it’s the child in us), and butts (yeah). Granted this is JUST A START. I've been stewing over some ideas the past few days, writing down what makes me laugh (which probably looks interesting to people around me because every time I write down something funny I end up laughing to myself, again) and any other particularly interesting ideas.

I think the main decision our group has to make is deciding the source of the humor in our film, that is, if the comedy will be character driven (we'll need to recruit some funny actors...or funny looking HA), situation driven, a little bit of both, or maybe "off the wall" random (which I kinda like from time to time, but it can get a little risky). Personally, I'm leaning away from the character driven comedy just because our pool of established comedic actors may not be as accessible as creating a funny situation. We're in funny situations every day right? I can usually find something to laugh at anyway. We'll see. Maybe I'll run into Steve Carell on my way to class and he'll agree to be the lead in our film for the price of a Hot Pocket. It could happen.

Until then, I plan on rewatching all of my favorite funny skits and movies…to get ideas of course.

Dignity, always Dignity

This week we watched Singing in the Rain, which I must confess I had never seen before that night, and I loved it. After the movie I just felt happy. The movie has all the ingredients to put you in a good mood (well, me anyway): bright colors (Technicolor could make mud look exciting), upbeat tongue-twister songs, fun dance numbers, quippy dialogue, and then there's all that cinematography, screenplay, and sound editing stuff that helps too.

The cinematography and editing in Singing in the Rain seems to focus on making everything as smooth and seamless as possible to enhance that comfortable, entertaining, show-like quality surrounding the story. The techniques that really stood out to me are the way the dance numbers are filmed in that we (the viewer) are automatically transported to a theatre seat. The spectacular dances are performed as if on a stage and we are watching the show not a screen but on a stage.

Donna mentioned an interesting contrast in class between musicals of this time period (50's) and now. Modern musicals are filmed more like music videos than the theater show style of earlier musicals. I've noticed before how movies like Moulin Rouge and Sweeney Todd have song and dance numbers that have a lot of cuts and editing either to add excitement or to keep the story line going. However, sometimes I get frustrated (this goes for Moulin Rouge more than Sweeney Todd) that I can't just see what's going on. The cuts and flashes and angles and music...I just want to see what they are doing. In saying this, I recognize that the effect behind the sometimes frenzied film editing is to create excitement and emphasize some aspect of the story, but every now and then, I just want to watch someone dance and know that they are dancing rather than doing a lot of quick poses.

I didn't have to worry about seeing dancing in Singing in the Rain. I appreciated the continuity of the dance numbers and even though I only saw a 180* view (of the implied stage) I still felt that I could see everything pertaining to the story. The use of the dolly shots (to the point of going through walls so we don't miss one second of the action) adds to the comfortable flow of the performance scenes.

Along with the show quality of the performances, the fun and light atmosphere the screenplay creates is why I think this movie is loved. The little quips here and there from Cosmo, the playful banter between Kathy and Don on their first meeting, and the jokes floating just above the gorgeous but unfortunate voiced Lina kept me smiling throughout the entire movie. Between the perfectly timed dialogue (unrealistic but whatever) and the happy ending for the happy couple, I couldn't help but feel good after watching it.

The realism of the film, how every character has perfect timing and knows every dance, doesn't bother me like it does in some movies. I think the fun tone of the film recognizes the need for some escapism every now and then.

Day Four

After learning about the mechanics behind the different techniques used in film to create emotion and tone, I don’t feel so overwhelmed with the whole “create your own film” thing. The film making process doesn’t seem so daunting now that I know how the filmmakers do some of the little tricks they use to create a given effect. I’m sure I can use some of the tools Eric showed us in our short film at the end of the semester.

I’m particularly interested in the use of the camera in perspective shots. I like how point of view shots give the audience the eyes of the character—I think it adds another, more interactive, element to a film and the story. I feel that point of view shots gives the audience an opportunity to be involved in the story more so than being a looker-onner. Over the shoulder shots are also interesting in that it feels more secretive to me. It’s like you’re seeing the character’s reaction to another character or action that no one else is seeing. Overall, I like the idea of seeing things from many different angles, especially if the shot gives us a perspective not humanly possible (like an aerial or clear underwater view). The pool scene in Sunset Boulevard as I said before is one of my favorite examples of a really interesting and thoughtful use of perspective. Also the scene in Almost Famous in which William sees Penny off at the airport on her way to Morocco is a good example of point of view shots creating emotion. William Miller watches Penny’s plane leave through the airport windows and Penny watches William run with the plane through her little round window. The juxtaposition of these two point of view shots emphasizes the emotional connection between the characters. I like how the perspective lends film meaning and emotion. I don’t think I would be shy about moving the camera around and trying different angles in our film.
Now the image effects as far as shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and focal length are still a little intimidating. Anything to do with buttons on the camera I’m still a little touchy with (so hopefully I won’t be the one to operate the camera). I still feel apprehensive when it comes to which camera settings to use and in what combinations to create the best shot. Maybe all it will take is some playing around (the very careful kind) with the camera to find the best look.

Lighting seems really fun to me however. I think with more research and experience I can come up with some cool lighting effect ideas. Eric’s tips about using cardboard cutouts and reflective insulation panels inspired to look at things around me for their reflective/light bouncing potential. I think light is one of the most creative elements of a film when utilized properly. Again, Sunset Boulevard is a brilliant example with the play on spotlights and creepy shadows/harsh lights over faces to heighten stress and of course, drama. I really enjoy movies that play with light almost as another character.

I think I already have a start on the “eye for lighting” as well (I like to think I do anyway). Austin made a comment just tonight about how testy I get if I don’t have the right light in my room while doing homework or watching a movie, etc. And I must agree. Lighting is important to me. I hope I don’t turn out to be really bad at film lighting.

Day Three--I'm ready for my close-up Mr. DeMille

Sunset Boulevard is a brilliant movie first of all. I found it a very creative and interesting work of art. One of the first scenes stood out to me the most: a dead man floating in a pool surrounded by police and investigators, all seen from the bottom of the pool. The perspective of this one shot set the tone for the entire movie. The fact that we could see Joe's (as we later find out is the dead man) face and the flash of the investigator's cameras through the water eerily resembles a grotesque stage on which Joe Gillis's floating body is the star. The whole movie seems to follow the tone set by this image in that Norma (played by Gloria Swanson) is performing within her own creepy world throughout the entire film. Her mannerisms, voice, and attitude are dramatic and grandiose (elements only emphasized by the harsh lighting and bursts of playful yet eerie music).

I thought Max was an especially interesting character. I knew he was a little "off" when he shouted at Joe the first time with that Lurch-like posture and entitled/rude attitude. I just felt that he played a more important part in Norma's life than just the butler. While he is the liaison between reality and Norma's delusional world, he also performs. He plays the role of Norma's butler while he continues to watch over Norma (his ex-wife) and "protect" her from the harsh reality that her once-famous face has been all but forgotten. He is the selfless mastermind behind Norma's life and seems to truly love and care for her--especially in that he sticks around to see her marry multiple times and throw herself at Joe. I just wonder why he feels so connected to her. I suppose at one time she was a vibrant and youthful young woman and he feel in love with her spirit (all that crap) but you'd think he would run whenever she started the whole crazy, fame-starved, delusional thing. I think he may derive his meaning of life by keeping her life (however crazy) going.

Joe gets a taste of the twisted life of an "actor" when he plays the role of Norma's lover/companion while trying to continue to live a normal life in the real world. He dresses up in costumes and puts on a character to please his "sugar momma."

Overall, I learned a lot about film noir from this movie and the discussion afterward. The point about which "world" is more believable was particularly interesting. I didn't think about that aspect of the film before Donna brought it up. I found it intriguing that the real world (outside of Norma's house) was less believable than the world within the lavish mansion's walls. I think I wanted to believe the real world so much simply because it was a relief from the eerie atmosphere of Norma's world that I didn't notice the "hokey-ness" (as Donna put it) of it.

Day Two

Oh, okay. So that’s how a film is created. I totally get it. –That’s what I wish I could say after class, but I don’t quite feel that confident. I’m not saying that I didn’t learn a lot from the workshop last class (Eric did clear up a lot of fuzzy areas), just that it was so much information all at once that I couldn’t digest it. Every step in the process of making a film seemed to have ten sub-steps and about fifty people for each of those sub-steps (I’m probably being conservative on those estimates).
The main quality that I admire in these artists called filmmakers is their ability to make decisions. They seem to know (well the filmmakers on the behind the scenes clips from LoTR and Star Wars seemed to know anyway) exactly what they want out of every shot. Maybe it’s because of my indecisive nature that I find it hard to imagine seeing something so clearly that you automatically know what has to happen for the end product to turn out the way they want. It takes me twenty minutes to figure out what kind of toothpaste to buy, I can’t imagine the amount of stress it takes to decide what lighting, music, sound effects, special effects, and dialogue to include in a scene. Hopefully my indecisiveness won’t hinder me too much in class. It seems as though, more so in filmmaking than any other art, there are so many more decisions to be made to create a quality product. I find, for myself anyway, that things just come to mind naturally with a pencil and paper in front of me. However, with a camera and an infinite number of ways to tell an infinite number of stories or invoke a mood…where do they start?
Another thing that struck me while watching the short videos about making LoTR and Star Wars was the trust is must take to create a film. There are so many people doing so many different tasks on this one project and each person has to hand over complete trust to every other person. True, there are people who look over the progress and make sure that the work is cohesive, but even then, people must trust each other completely. Their name will be attached to this work from now on. I’m slightly worried about this aspect of filmmaking. If I have an idea that I feel strongly about and have a certain vision for, I can get kind of closed off until I see my idea through. I think that’s a good problem to have in a way: feeling so strongly about an idea that I must see it realized. Hopefully, it won’t turn into stubbornness.

Day One

The first day of film class begins and as soon as I sit down I realize, with a drop of my stomach, that I don’t know anything about filmmaking or the history behind it. After a minute of thinking about this fact, I come to the conclusion that everything will be fine as long as I pay attention and stay enthusiastic. I’m excited but scared at the same time, honestly. I think I’ll be okay at analyzing films, but the whole creating a film is a bit daunting to me. There are so many different possibilities in film making--so many different stories you can tell, ways you can tell the same story, characters you can introduce to the audience, and places you can take the audience even if just for an hour or so. I wouldn’t know where to begin, but that is what class is for after all: to learn.
I began to think about perspective a lot as a result of class and the discussions of how film evolved through the different techniques used. Film gives us a different set of eyes. We have no choice in the matter in what we see. We see what we are shown and we hear what we are subjected to. Your eyes and ears are no longer yours during a film. While I would argue that watching a movie or a show is a more passive form of entertainment than reading for example (in that you, the audience, are subjected to the visual and audio experience within the film), I think it is perhaps the most personal form of expression for the filmmaker. It takes a tremendous amount of creativity and vision to create a film (I’m guessing anyway). Through film we experience every sense except smell and because of this; films guide our emotions in a way.
It amazes me how people can create an entire alternate reality within the frame of a movie or show. Film is, in my opinion, the ultimate form of expression for the film makers. They are creating this entire alternate reality for the audience to watch, hear, think, and feel about. Obviously, everyone will not think and feel exactly the same way about a film, but the filmmaker’s vision and purpose is still present. The audience sees not only into the lives of the characters within the film, but into the mind of the filmmaker and everyone contributing to the film. I think that’s also one thing that strikes me the most about film--the connection between filmmaker and audience.