Sunday, February 28, 2010

Blogging While Editing 2 - DYWTGO?


Now I've got them sitting on the couch so I can use the closeups (which are comprised in the first half of the same conversation as when they are trying to sit on the couch). The problem is that these shots show more of the akward “connection” though not as funny. They are also composed georgously, filmicly even. I may have to scratch the last five hours of editing and just get them to the couch before they talk. Again I'm reminded of the writing process involved in editing video.

Fell aslep contemplating next move. Time to pack it up and go to sleep.

Started back up around 7am. Was worried at one point about them having no connection whatso ever show up on screen but then I had a hapy accident. Some footage overlapped while I was trying to figure out the next shot and we see and hear kelli say, “so you repair computers?” and it was followed by her voice saying “that's cute”. The line is one she ad libbed while shooting from the unicorn's POV and the unicorn is what she was talking about. But with a little magic and some help from pre-“action” shy and figity smiles, I was able to make it look like it slipped out of her after he said, “yes”. So then it made it cute-funny when he starts to ad lib and ramble about working on “some laptops and PC's and some Macs – but I'm not really certified” Then another ad lib she gave was to ask him which which was better. It made the question go from good “yes-and” skills to brilliant. Because now it's clear she's asking because she thinks it's cute.

The only problem? The stupid director got in my way AGAIN! I actually cut them off as Mike started to explain and Kelli is really listening. I thought it was funny but didn't think I could use it. Looking back, maybe I sensed the real chemistry happening that goes along with good acting, and then I started feeling shy-akward – because that's what I'm seeing now on screen. Next time I need to wear a shirt that says, “Get out of your way, Jake”.

There's an “Oh” that could go anywhere. I can't figure out where's the best. For some reason I don't want to lose it. It's sort of a strange shot to hold on to.

These closeups are so much better than the full shots. That could be because the full shots don't look filmic. I intentionally left them as full shots, eye level, on tripods, in order to stay true to the film's spine - “Silent Film”. But the problem is that film gramar has evolved so much that this shot has become the mark of the amatuer. And that's a big problem in a short film from a nobody. It could get away with looking like a sitcom, but really I would have had to light it brighter. Or do a lot of timing on the colors. But that would take it away from the warm 16mm film look I had in the beginning.

I'm really thinking about scrapping all the work from yesterday and starting over to get them to sit without saying their lines.

It's interesting how LESS blocking can make something seem more filmic sometimes.

I just found another take with a few more GREAT lines. I'm going to have to get them in but that means going backwards for a bit. It shouldn't be too hard or too time consuming though. It should definitely be worth it.

Okay. Not sure it's worth it. Maybe it slows all that momentum down.

It actually did. Way better without it where I had it but it is perfect for slowing down the momentum just as Mary (Lauren) bursts through the door. I forgot to really push for the surprised “Buster Keaton-esque” reaction from Mike to the door, but I think we have enough to work with to keep it surprising and funny.

Made it to Lauren's entrance. Time for a break.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Blogging While Editing - DYWTGO?


Now I can feel why Kent with the first draft the way he did for the final scene. He took all the angles from the first take because those matched up the easiest. It was more of a rough assembly to get the thing in a sequence. Sort of like writing a screenplay draft without outlining/treament writing or breakdowns. It was a good move. After that first take, the continuity is CRAZY. I'm truly writing with my edits here. I'm using a separate take every 2 seconds. It's hard!

Every choice I make at each 2 second interval changes the story, the lines, everything.

It's crazy how a little outside stress can deflate all momentum. Since Kent has a brand new system, his saved files won't run on my Mac – it's too old. So, I have to borrow Ashley's laptop to get this done. I also don't have a hookup for an external monitor, so it's all on a tiny screen. But... it's getting done.

So I'm switching to something a little more “skill” oriented – putting together the DVD menu. Definitely going to use the poster but now I'm envisioning some sort of opening with all the info being typed in, like a chat room thing.

Maybe I don't design DVDs so well without the finished product.

Next time, all akward humor gets choreographed. Like a dance. I remember Kent trying to figure out when Kelli said the line and when Mike stood back up. I told him to forget it and basically I told him we'd fix it in post! He said, “who's editing this thing?” and I said, “me”. So he let it go. Then I tried to pay him way under his rate and he got to deal with it. Man, I really tried to screw Kent on this one! This is tough! But then it all came back to me and now I've screwed myself... This is why Ashley needs to be there during the reshoot. She's the only one I ever listen to when she says to stop and pay attention to continuity.

My son just showed a growth spirt in development. The kids called to say goodnight and he was telling me all kinds of things. Still can only pick out words here and there, but there is definitely a marked difference in his speech. Man that's awesome. And there's that little inspiration I needed.

Working really hard to stretch each beat of akward. They play it really well, it's just that there's no breathing room for the audience. We found so much good stuff while shooting! It was basically a really great rehearsal. Had we had this and then gotten to shoot, it would've put more of that funny into the silence. I'm still so impressed with my actors. I haven't had this great a cast to work with since Rich, Jubal, and Brent did a scene from A Simple Plan with me (that I totally screwed up in the editing of that one – I edited with Movie Maker while hiding in the editing lab at CSF over night on the last day of finals.)

Dad wants me to eat the last piece of chicken. Because it's there. I already ate one... and potatoes, but he said “eat that last piece of chicken.”
“No, Dad.”
“But it's dark meat.”
See: Blogging While Editing 2 - Entrance to Delerium for more funny on this very topic.

Made it through “sit on the couch play”. On to finding a connection. Having some continuity would have helped me already be there. I need to wear a shirt on my next shoot that says “I will NOT fix this in post”.
Dad's sleeping through Rocky IV blasting in the living room. Appolo Creed just died. I don't care if you are Russian and a Commie Sypathiser, that Rocky IV is a good show.

Monday, February 15, 2010

First Cut Round 2

Well. I survived my initial shock. It took some time to handle myself. It's strange how even when you know you're supposed to be disappointed, how you can still be devastated when you meet your first rough cut. My breakdown was documented as a way to exercise a few demons, it was a tad tongue in cheek, and I tried to go over board, but that feeling of helplessness was never-the-less there.

It is quite comforting to know that all directors experience this pain. And I'm wondering how they've come to manage it, or if that's why they now often have editing studios set up in their homes. Pillows to scream in to are never far away.

This time around, I showed some of the footage in a workshop. To 6-8th graders. Out of order. (It was in an effort to show how we write with images. They had different and changing perspectives based on what I chose to put on screen, when to focus on what, and how fast I was cutting. It's essentially describing the scene like in a novel but with images).

This was a brand new experience. I was informed that my movie was certainly a thriller, based on how nervous the main character was, and that there were two guys focused on for a minimum of five seconds. This was actually reinforcement of where I thought it was and so I felt like I knew what I was doing. It was encouraging.

Also encouraging was how funny the students thought the middle scene was. Michael Price is truly a gifted actor and this middle scene is hilarious. I didn't show the ending because I didn't want to give it away. I also know where I'm going with it in the next edit.

Not to mention: After I calmed down a bit, I gained a little more perspective. This rough cut was from the first take. And it was essentially, a shot of the rehearsal.

I know the scene has so much more energy because I've seen the dailies. And I'm excited to get back to it.

Just remember kids: The first cut is always the worst day of a director's life. You will get through it.


Tuesday I meet Kent to work the edit. I can't wait.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

First Cut Nightmare

I met with my editor on my latest short film over iChat via the new built in Final Cut Pro viewer. The experience was really awesome. I thoroughly enjoyed it and rarely experienced even the slightest lag time (and that's with AT&T wireless too!).
I told myself, "Now Jacob, this is only a rough cut. This is going to be the worst day of your life in this production. Prepare for that and maybe you won't take it so hard."

You see, it's a rule. It's just one of those "givens". The director's worst day will always be the day you see the rough cut. You should plan on drinking afterward.

When the footage started rolling, I followed right along... Rolling that is.
The rough cut looks AMAZING! I'm laughing just thinking about it! Sure there were things to fix, but nothing major, and certainly NOTHING wrong with it. I'm excited. I'm overjoyed. This could be big.

I was ecstatic.

I had the privilege of viewing another two sequences and I couldn't tell you how awesome it felt. This is really coming together.

My editor (Kent Jones) finished another sequence. The final sequence. The stuff with talking. The culmination. The punchline - the button. I was so excited to see even the footage in a rough assembly. Kent told me he was scrapping the first cut of this sequence all together and approaching it another way. But it didn't matter, I was just so anxious to see a cut, after seeing the other sequences - I'm a brilliant auteur destined for greatness.

Pride. And I forgot to warn myself about that little rule. Well, two rules, now that I mention it. One about Pride and before the falling. The other being the said "Rough-Cut-Ready-to-Drink" Rule.

I watched it. What in the Sam Hill was I thinking? Why did I let the actors get away with that ... that crap? How did I not see the life being sucked out of the room with the pure lack of energy?! I remember telling them to mumble a bit - and even talking my main character out of playing it up too much. What was I thinking?! They were doing exactly what I told them to do!

Lauren Ryan is playing a mean person - why didn't she stay in character after the take - and SLAP ME! Michael Price is some sort of genius, right? He should of told me. He should have said - the physics don't work here, Jake. It's some sort of conspiracy. I know it. Those three actors don't like me. They did it on purpose. It was probably because I didn't feed them - I mean, that is sort of a cardinal sin in film production.

It's everyone on set's EFFING FAULT. No, it's my fault.

Oh saxophone!

This is the worst day of my film career. And my last too. I'm sure of it now. It's obvious.

It's bad. I'll never work in this town again.

Someone tell me it's okay. Kent is starting over. It's going to be okay, right?

I...

Oh nightmare before Valentine's Day. Don't let it be so.

I should quit filmmaking. I seem to be doing pretty well with that EdTechSpecialties thing over there.

Son of ---

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Section 181 Highest Priority for Filmmakers Right Now

Do you know about The Jobs Creation Act of 2004?  Particularly Section 181? There seems to be a lack of knowledge about the subject around the filmmaking community. In fact, I found out about this in the year the law was scheduled to sunset. Luckily it was renewed. But then it sunset again, and now it is up for debate in our the Senate Finance Commitee. 

This law provides for investors to have a 100% write off on ANY invested dollar amount from $1 up to $15 million ($20 in economically depressed regions). The ONLY requirement is that the investor is classified as a passive investor in order to write off passive income, or be an active investor to write off active income. Passive investors need have to not do anything. You send them a company letter that thanks them for being a passive investor and points them to their tax advisor to fill out the proper paperwork. 


Assuming you are approaching investors that make enough to invest, they probably pay 35% taxes. This means that you provide the investor with a 35% benefit for investing with you. If they invest $100,000, then $35,000 was NOT lost because it was going to go to taxes anyway. This means to make your investors money back, you only have to get 65% of the way there.


Even better, this federal incentive can be combined with ANY other incentive. Which means if your film is shot in Oklahoma, at the close of principle photography, you will receive your 35% rebate. Which means just by setting up shop in Oklahoma, you are at 70% benefit to the investor. Which means you only have to make up 30% when you move to distribution. 


What business can an investor put money in to where that is the case? 70% of the money is not risked!


But the law has sunset. And the renewal proposal has passed the House. It would have passed right on through the Senate as well had some Republicans not viewed it as a part of Health Care, and some Democrats not viewed it as a "Bush Tax Plan".


So there will be debate. This Section 181 will be scrutinized along with the rest of the law.


As filmmakers you CAN NOT allow this law to sunset!


Call your senators' offices (or call them all) and let them know you support and desperately need Section 181.


They are business people and often don't get that film is a business. But let them know that film creates jobs. And that American movies are one of the largest money making exports from our country.


Some points to make to your Senator: Not just film makers go to work when production companies roll in to town, either. But hardware stores spike in sales, newspapers go flying off the racks, tourism gets a MAJOR boost, catering services, hotels, bars, event planners, drivers, etc, etc. Even our court systems see a boost as Oklahoma City found out as Jessica Alba and her United Way / Save the Sharks "Campaign" landed her with major fines (you don't necessarily have to make that point - I'm just sayin'). 


Film productions bring in "free" money to a location that wasn't getting that money anyway. 


They went back in to session January 19th. Make the calls or send the emails NOW.


Refer to HR 3931 to be more precise. Or find out more here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR03931:@@@X


This link will give you all the Senators' contact information.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state


Add more points to make in the comments - let's make sure all of us know all the angles.

Oscars Make it 10 - America Wins

In case you didn't know, the Academy has added 5 more nomination spots to the Best Picture category. So 10 films will be nominated. Voters will have 10 films to choose from.

At first glance this seems like an awful idea. Can you think of 10 great films from last year? Won't that just water down the competition? What's the point of having a best foreign film category or "Best Animated"? Doesn't that cheapen their nominations? People say.

But I like it. I mean, let's face it, just because your movie is long, emotional, dramatic, and has great cinematography, doesn't mean your film should have a leg up in the Oscar run. Especially when your film is blown away by the cinematic experience that was The Dark Knight, or even something like Iron Man. Did anyone see "The Reader" last year - I yawned at the cover (and I'm not one to skip over dramatic fair for popcorn adventures either).

Those films aren't taken seriously, in fact it's extremely hard to get noticed in the major categories with a scifi, fantasy, comic book, or even animation merely because of their genre. With opening to ten we will begin to see these films that speak to us in different forms. I find this extremely important. No longer will you need to be a huge studio drama or an indie darling looking to settle for best screenplay and grounded in reality.

The real benefactor here is the Academy, and film in general as a business. Some believe that lengthening the category means lengthening the broadcast. This, to them, equals less viewers.

I have to whole-heartedly disagree! You see, the problem with viewers is not that they don't have attention spans, it's that with the internet, our attention spans are becoming more focused. We are seeing clear divisions within genres (comedy: romantic comedies, bromances, buddy pics, parody, mockumentary, etc) because audiences are able to more clearly find what it is they are interested in. Therefore, there are less viewers because there are less people interested in the subject matter. I don't mean celebrities or movies in general. I mean that movies like "The Reader" aren't interesting to people, and they don't see it as a "great" achievement in film making if it doesn't interest them.

I'm not advocating "Transformers" being nominated for Best Picture, or even trying to appeal to mass markets in general - that's what the MTV Movie Awards are for. 


What I'm saying is that there is a GREAT NEED to select more films for best picture because the category is so subjective anyway, and our subjects have divided greatly. Therefore there is a need for more representation across the board.

People will tune in because they will now have their favorite in the race. The south and central states (a traditionally tough sale for the Academy) will double their viewership from The Blindside. The other hard market for films to sell to, black Americans, will double in viewers from Precious. Two deserving films to be in the running for Best Picture, but hardly a chance when only five films would be nominated.

Another unusual nominations who will bring more people in who usually wouldn't bother, District 9, a sci-fi action film, part fake documentary, part traditional thriller. This is the "dark-horse" in the race. This could possibly win by the other films knocking each other off the top spot.

With 5 nominations we'd have five traditional "bland" choices (not bland movies, I'm sure - but obvious Oscar-darlings non-the-less). Now we have films we really care about in the race, and a more interesting race all together.

The winners, again, will be the studios. Now 10 films get to put that all-important wreath icon on their DVD covers. This has proven to be a major push in DVD sales and will help more DVDs sell across the board.

Theaters win here, too. Like Gladiator a few years back, a summer movie was re-released into the theaters after it was nominated for best picture, and it made more money for the studio and the theaters from repeat and brand new viewers.

Another group of winners? Advertisers. It's been the popular trend to treat the nomination like a political affair. The more money spent on advertising with "Pick me! Pick me!" the better chance you have of winning. Now 10 films - 10 production companies - will be spending a LOT more money to fight for space in Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, on TV, on billboards, etc. More advertising dollars spent means more money spread out. And we are talking tens of millions of dollar bills.

When you look at it, it's a a win for Uhmurica, people. DVD sales means retail movement, theaters get more,  ad space skyrockets, people go to work here, people.

Economy: Win.