How can this be? The highest (thus far) of the high-definition formats available to home consumers is something I don't like?
It's true.
My local Best Buy and Circuit City have had the full Blu-Ray/1080 HDTV setup on display for a few months now, and every time I go, I make a point of checking it out, especially when they have a new DVD release. And EVERY time, I get freaked out, in a bad way, at the image quality I see.
It's just TOO good. Films look like it's high definition VIDEO. It almost looks like live-action. It's too crisp. Too clean. Too grain-free.
From many many experiences watching TV and movies with non-media people, I know that 99% of the viewing public usually doesn't notice, or can't tell the difference between a video look and a film look, and even when I point it out to them, they don't care. So I know that when I gripe about the look of Blu-ray, I'm going to be in the extreme minority.
I know I sound like those nutjob audio purists that turn their nose up at CD's and mp3's, saying that only analog playback (like albums or audiotape) can truly present music in it's full glory. But my complaint is the exact opposite.
Film, or the 'film look' is NOT a pristine image. It's a purposefully grainy and/or degraded image. It's how film has always been, and how I WANT it to always be. Even films shot on HD video in recent years retain that 'film look' when projected from a film projector, because it's still film as an end product.
But now, we have Blu-Ray, which bypasses the film projection step, so the image that appears on your HDTV is perfect. What's worse, is that the studios have actually gone back and REMOVED grain from films because people with new HDTV's were complaining about it. Gah!
I don't want total clarity with the FILMS that I watch. I don't want it to seem like it's happening NOW, or right in front of me. The 'film look' allows for that layer of separation, that filter of being at least one step removed from the events unfolding on screen. It's still a story being told with some perspective, rather than something happening like a news broadcast or reality show.
I know that it's all over for me. There isn't going to be some "Let's Save the Grain!" movement that's going to pop up. This is what the masses want, even though the don't know it's not what they really want. But it's what they're going to get.
So don't feel sorry for me when in a few years when you see me scouring the plain old DVD releases as opposed to the Blu-Ray shelf. I'm there on purpose. I'm stubbornly and (correctly) holding on to the BEST movie experience available to me.
Okay... it's been a week since we turned in our film nine minutes late. I wish I could say I feel better about the whole experience, but I don't. And it doesn't have anything to do with turning the film in nine minutes late. I think if we'd have gotten it in on time I'd actually feel worse.
While our film is 'okay', by no means is it a good film. We did the best we could with the time we had. The fact that we even wound up with something that had a semi-coherent narrative was a miracle in itself. On THAT level, this year was a resounding success.
Here's a slightly altered version of the film (I'll post the official version that we turned into the festival in the next day or so.)
I'm still intending on doing the Director's Cut, and it will be a massively different take. I played around with it a bit last Friday and there are some entire scenes I've already removed. I think it might be able to be turned into a film I feel better about...eventually.
There were a variety of reasons why we didn't get the film in on time, notably audio problems and lack of a dedicated editor, but neither of those were reasons why the film didn't live up to my expectations.
For starters, unless all elements line up perfectly, producing a GOOD 48 Hour Film is a losing proposition. The weekend is filled with nothing but compromises and cutting corners and having to settle for whatever you happen to have at that moment. Not one of the decisions we made this year were good, outside of the selection of our acting talent. We were blessed with that this year, and if not for them, our film would have been much less successful.
While I feel like I'm done with this contest (and other time-limited filmmaking contests), there's still a hint of a groundswell among other team members that we give this one more try. While I'm not going to push for it, if someone else steps up and takes on most of the back end stuff, I'm not opposed to participating again, with some major changes in how we operate.
For one, the need for a dedicated editor is a top priority. We need someone capturing footage and piecing together scenes BEFORE Sunday morning rolls around. Not just for getting the film in on time, but for really putting together the best film we can, with the least amount of scrambling as possible. We had a dedicated editor this year, but he bailed out at the last moment, leaving us in a bind that we never really recovered from. If we can't get a dedicated editor next year, and if we can't get a real commitment from him/her, then I won't even consider participating.
Secondly, the creative team/writing team has to be limited to two, maybe three people, including me. For three years now, we've had a writing team of five or six or more, and while everyone on that team is very creative and had great ideas, they all ultimately didn't mesh. Too many disparate ideas and visions that had no chance of coming together in one whole. The first two years we managed to work through it, mostly because the initial idea we came up with had fewer directions it could go, but this year, the idea we had was so cerebral and so open-ended that all the various ideas we had pulled this film in too many directions. At the first call, we didn't even have a full script, just a couple of scenes that kind of could be turned into something later (we were assuming we'd come up with a script for the rest of the film throughout the day, which we kind of did... kind of).
It's a testament to everyone there that we actually managed to salvage it this year, as we had almost nothing as late as noon on Saturday.
But back to the scripting- For good or ill, the writing team has to be no more than three people. The problem is, there are way more than three people that want to be on the creative team. How do you pick? Who do you tell, "Thanks, but we won't need your help on the writing team this year" ? I have to be on it, because one, for a project like this, I trust my own instincts, and two, I know what I can shoot and edit in a two day span.
Something else that probably won't sill well with some people is that I have no interest in attempting a 'serious' film again, or one with a 'message'. Not for this contest, anyway. It just doesn't work. People want to laugh. People want the film to be straightforward and to make clear sense every step of the way. Message films are great, and I'm totally in favor of making them, but to do them right, they need to be really massaged and refined every step of the way. Slamming together a message film just creates a mess.
In all honesty, the person I feel would be most helpful in the writing room on Friday night would be my brother, Guy. He's not a filmmaker or a writer, but he and I bounce ideas off of each other better than anyone else I know. Collaboration is such a delicate, fragile thing, especially when time is of the essence. With some people, on commercials and other projects, I work fantastically with them, but when it comes to something like a film, it's a total clash of sensibilities. I can't put a value on collaborating with someone that shares your mindset. I've been fortunate enough to work with many people over the years who fit that description, but only a couple where the collaboration turns into something magical or inspired.
It's not an easy thing to balance.
Over the past couple of weeks, I've joked with some people that the 48 Hour Film needs to be run like a benevolent dictatorship, not a democracy. These things need one singular vision to work right. That singular vision can come from one or two or three people, but it has to be rock solid. We didn't have that this year by ANY stretch of the imagination. Everyone, myself included, had a different vision of what this film was going to be.
This becomes more pronounced when I compare our films (this year's, and the previous two) to the one I think is the best this year. In fact, I think it's the most successful 48 Hour Film I've seen, period, any city, any year. It's called "Rushin'" and I thought it was absolutely fantastic. Take a gander here.
This film had a very clear vision, and everything in the film contributed to that vision. As far as I'm concerned, this film didn't make one false step.
What's interesting (to me) is the conversations I had with them after the film, and the answers they gave during the post-screening Q&A. They talked a lot about problems they faced previous years, such as too many cooks/writers, attempting to do something serious, attempting to deliver a message, attempting too many locations, etc. In fact, based on their previous films, I wouldn't have thought they had this film in them. Having spoken with them, I see that their previous films had failed for the same reasons I think our films have failed. But this year, they went into it with a totally different plan. Everything they talked about is exactly what I wanted to do this year, but let it get away from me again, and their success only underscores how the 'Reduce and Simplify' plan is the best one.
And while my ideas may very well turn out to be crap, at least the failure will be one that I can own. It really just doesn't sit well with me that this film I directed has no connection to something I would have wanted to do if I had done this entirely on my own. I know it sounds arrogant, but I know that if I had done it all by myself (writing and directing, that is), the film would have had a beginning, middle and ending, and would have had a cohesive and filmable story.
I guess we'll see if I'm right when I attempt to produce "Zombie Wrangler" later this summer. That will be a script I write and direct entirely on my own. If I have any idea what I'm doing, I guess we'll find out then.
So I apologize if you're still reading all the way to here. I know I've drifted over into ranting, but I kind of have to in order to put this experience to bed. It's just been a very frustrating and enlightening experience. Creative democracies just don't work on films. One vision, and everyone else can help round out that vision as much as the visioneer allows them. But in the end, it has to be one person's vision. That's how it has to work.
Okay... I'm still a bit burned out, but I think I'm about ready to get back to full creative steam.
I should be sleeping right now. In fact, I was. I got to bed at about 2:30, after finally arriving home after a long long long day marked by TV commercial production, 48 Hour Film preparation, trips to Louisiana and back, and a session with a friend on how to use the Firestore with the HVX 200 (that's 100% video geekspeak...don't attempt to figure out what that means unless you KNOW what it means.) Oh yeah, I even managed to squeeze a funeral in.
But today's going to be a long day, too. So why am I not sleeping???
Because I woke up about thirty minutes ago with something I ate last night not setting well with me. I'm not nauseous. It's more like a stomach cramp. I took some Pepto, and while I wait for it to work its magic, I'm sitting here typing.
This year is shaping up to be both more organized and prepared AND more chaotic. I think we have our best team yet, both in front of and behind the camera. For once, I won't be the only editing option, as we have a skilled, dedicated editor assigned. He should be able to start editing while we are still shooting. That should make Sunday's final edit session a thousand times easier. Plus, there will be at least two others of us (me and Chris) who will be able to either spell him, or work on segments or special effects on separate computers. We also have a dedicated composer for our film's music (but we still have Digital Juice on hand as backup).
The more chaotic part comes in the form that we aren't nearly as set on good locations as we were in previous years. We've got my office secured, a few outdoor areas, and I've got paperwork in for using our office building's interior (which has some cool elevators and a wide open atrium). Also this year, we don't have ONE perfect staging area. We'll be meeting at one location for the giant group gathering, a different location for the script-writing session, and a third location for editing. If not for the fact that my office building turns off the A/C on weekends, we could do everything there. As it is, we can probably meet for SOME of the time on Saturday (especially if we are doing any shooting there). But for Sunday, if we want to use my edit systems, we'll have to suffer through horrible stuffy heat (or else bring a couple of dozen fans. Our other option is to set up the edit system at someone's house. We WERE going to set up at the dedicated editor's house, but within the past week or so, he has moved, so all of his stuff is in boxes. We still haven't got this one figured out yet.
But I'm most excited about our cast. We have a rather large pool of talent this year, just about all of which have prior acting experience (either in REAL films, or else have been on our team in years past). My only concern is our coming up with a concept and a script that manages to give everyone a solid part. Because of the talent level this year, I'm more confident about our writing a looser script and allowing the actors to improvise more. This will make it easier at the script stage, but a bit tougher during the edit. We'll see.
As we do every year, we try to anticipate potential story ideas based on the potential genres we might pull. If our film ends up with a zoo murder in it, or a jury deliberation room, or a kidnapped newscaster, or extensive funny subtitles, then you'll know we managed to use one of those ideas. However, as also happens every year, we will almost certainly come up with something brand new that really integrates the required elements. I'm confident in our ability to come up with something really good, either way.
It's always an incredibly fun weekend, but amazingly exhausting. The last two years, our goal was to WIN this event, which we didn't do (although we did win bunches of individual awards/smiley face stickers). THIS year, our goal isn't to win, but to produce an amazing short film. Winning would be a nice byproduct obviously, but at the end of the day, we're more concerned with ending up with something we're very proud of.
This is another blast from the past. This video was done for a friend of mine, Tammy, who was making an elaborate video for her friend Cheryl as a surprise birthday gift. I don't remember what the genesis of the Mission: Impossible part was, but I think it turned out really good. It's still some of the best editing I think I've ever done, and this was in the days BEFORE computer editing. If you look closely, you'll even catch a glimpse of me in there. If I remember right, there's something like 160 edits in a 45 second long video. That's a lot.
Obviously it integrates footage from the actual title sequence of the first Mission: Impossible film, but not a whole lot.
And finally, a bit of explanation for the first couple of seconds. Tammy had brought up BAGS of video she'd shot over the years of her and her friends (all of which went into the overall video we produced for Cheryl). After a particularly long day of working on the video, we suddenly couldn't find most of the tapes. Where had they gone?? Well, while we were working, the cleaning people came in and picked up what looked like (to them) a garbage bag filled with tapes. They'd then proceeded to toss them all in the dumpster out behind the building. Fortunately, we figured this out before the dumpster got emptied and I thought it would be fun to videotape Tammy digging through the trash retrieving grimy tapes. I don't think any of them were permanently damaged, thankfully.
Okay... for the 3rd week in a row, they've changed up the format of the show with no explanation (however, it's obvious that because of the disastrous ratings, they are going to continue to tweak the show until something hopefully clicks with the viewing public). So this week, instead of seeing a short film from each of the 15 remaining contestants, we are only going to see five, with one going home next week. I'm guessing they'll do this same format for the next two weeks, with five filmmakers getting put up for vote each week. I wouldn't be surprised to see the format change again three weeks from now.
Anyway, on to the films.
On the whole, the films were 1000% better than last week's efforts. Which is odd, because last time, they had a whole week to do a one minute film, and this week, they only had five days to produce a three minute film.
Film up was Sam with "Broken Pipe Dreams", a comedy about a guy who has to retrieve an engagement ring from the toilet where it had just fallen. It was okay, decently staged and shot. It didn't seem to know what kind of comedy it wanted to be, though. From that perspective, it was a bit aimless. I'd place it number three for the night, though.
Next was "Teri" by Trever. It was a typical blind date film where the guy's fears of who this person might turn out to be are manifested before him. Nothing at all original about this in any way. However, the lead actor is a British guy who could probably stand in as a young Christian Bale. I'd put it fourth for the night.
Poor Hilary. This show has been an absolute nightmare for her since the first episode. She can't do anything right. I'd be shocked if she doesn't go home this week, and I'd be even more shocked if she was just as relieved to go as the rest of America is to see her leave. The judges were again vicious about her film, and for good reason. "The First Time I Met the Finklesteins" was cliche, typical, boring, poorly acted, poorly written, poorly directed. She just doesn't get what connects with viewers.
"Dough:The Musical" was next in line, and it was the best of the night, in my opinion. It was a story about a man and a woman, both consumed with dough, she money, and he bread. The song was clever at times, and well-performed overall. The visuals were all relatively interesting (despite what guest judge Michael Bay had to say).
The final film of the night was a documentary by Shalini called "Laughing Out Loud: A Comic Journey" about a gay Indian (from India) comedian. It was a serious look at this person, and was well made overall. It's obvious that this is her comfort zone. I'd put this number two.
Overall, the one problem that each film had was that they were all too long. They each took every second of their three minute maximum time. As such, most of them dragged badly in places. If they had to fit the same films in a two minute span, I think they all would have benefited.
But as I said, much better this time around. If Hilary doesn't go home next week, then the voting system for this show is broken.
The Judges Awards were handed out last night, and while we did win the Best Writing award, that's all we got. The film that won Houston's overall award, "Morning Sickness" by XLAJ (I'll post a link when one becomes available) was very well done, and very deserving of representing Houston nationally. I have no problem with losing to that film.
However...
Many of the other individual awards, such as editing and cinematography, left us scratching our heads. After watching all of the other films, we're not sure how we didn't capture one or both of those awards (all humility aside). There were a couple of others that I wouldn't have minded losing those two awards to, but the ones that DID win weren't as deserving. And the award for best soundtrack (one we weren't expecting to be in the running for), went to a film who's entire soundtrack was a loud, three-note tone, repeated over and over.
Bottom line is, that it's driven home again how arbitrary and silly these sorts of contests are. We have no idea who the judges are or what their qualifications are for judging a contest such as this. In the past, after having lost at numerous advertising awards shows for a long time, then finally winning, I remember how pointless it was when we finally won. It was external validation for work we did that we knew was good before we entered it into this awards process. This is the first real experience with that sort of awards frustration in the Film Industry, and I'm having to relearn this all over again.
The result of this realization is that it's silly and pointless to enter these contests expecting or hoping to win. They don't allow for you to produce your best work, and in order to win, you have to appeal to a very narrow spectrum (i.e., the more disgusting your film, the more laughs it will get). The one important thing we all got out of the 48 Hour Film project (and entering any sort of contest like this) is validation that we CAN do this. We CAN make well-written, well-directed, good-looking films. We can do it in 48 Hours under amazing stress. And while we more or less like our films, we know that they have serious flaws that are entirely the result of only having one crack at writing, shooting and editing it. We can look at our films and we know what the problems were.
So what we need to do now is stop 'practicing' with contests such as this. It's time to just start making films where we can put the time and care into them that will allow us to (hopefully) avoid most of the problems experienced in those contests.
Ultimately, I think I'm glad that we didn't do better in the judging portion of this contest, as I think that would have encouraged us to continue to put our efforts into projects such as these contests, rather than into something more substantial.
Well, not episode one, but the first of the episodes where they show the contestants films in their entirety and viewers at home get to vote.
And after watching 18 of these short one-minute comedies.... enh.
There were only four of them that didn't fall totally flat for me. Will Bigham, Zach Lipovsky and Shira-Lee Shalit and Sam Friedlander. Of those, I'm voting for Will Bigham's "Lucky Penny" film which clearly was the best tonight. Zach "Special Effects guy" Lipovsky was technically the best.
Of course, as an aspiring filmmaker, I was watching these with a "could I have done better than these?", and the answer, at least tonight, was absolutely. I didn't enter this contest, partially because I thought I wouldn't be in the class of what they were looking for.
Oh well...
On to the individual films this week.
Dance Man - clever idea. I was mildly amused. Solid filmmaking overall.
Deliver Me - Shot interestingly, but a bit incoherent as to what the film was supposed to be about.
Spaced Out - Not bad. I wasn't as amused by the projectile puppet puke as some seem to be. But overall, well made.
Wack Alley Cab - ?????????? Bye bye Kenny... What a mess. What was he possibly thinking?
Bus #1 - I didn't get this. I got what the joke was supposed to be (urine smells bad! LOL!!) but I didn't get why she thought this would be a good idea to make a film out of. Still scratching my head.
The Big Bad Heist - The trailer was all imagery and no story. I agreed with the judges that he should have followed the rules and made a short FILM, not a trailer. When he said "I want to take risks.", I thought to myself, you mean like not following any of the rules of the contest? Good idea.
Lucky Penny - For me, this one was the best overall effort of the night. A coherent story from beginning to end. Interesting angles. Can't say it was that FUNNY, but I thought it was the most complete FILM. Nothing jumped out at me as wrong.
How to Screw in a Light Bulb - I didn't get this one at all. What was she thinking?
Soft - Interesting idea, but horribly executed. None of the camera angles matched, color-wise. The humor was way too obvious. Sorry, pal. I didn't like it.
Blind Date - Again...?????? What was she thinking? This was a total wreck.
Getta Rhoom - I totally agreed with the judges. The first thought was that this poor fellow had Downs Syndrome, and it turned from potentially amusing to uncomfortable. Even if that's not what he was intending, a good director would have recognized that the actor had drifted all the way over into Mentally Challenged, rather than Nerdy, and would have corrected it.
File Size - I get what he was trying to do, and appreciated the camera work, but overall, this was sloppily conceived and put together.
Danger Zone - While I didn't think it was all that FUNNY, it was clearly the most competently put together of all the films. While I didn't put Zach at the top this week, I think he is clearly going to win this competition. He's the one that most GETS what filmmaking and creativity is all about. Even if he doesn't win On the Lot, he'll win in the long run.
A Golf Story - Tried to hard to be clever, and in the end didn't do exactly what the judges were saying. It didn't have any mini-golf shots (which are funny in and of themselves) or anything that really played off of the silliness that a mini-golf championship should have had. Looked nice. But nice try, but sorry.
Love in 2007 - Again, another film that makes me question if this filmmaker has ever seen a film before, or any sort of narrative.
Please Hold - Could have been good, but totally went off the rails with that first shot of the girl doing her nails while waiting on 911. And I thought the whole 911 thing was great the first time I heard it... on the Simpsons back in 1994. "You have selected regicide! If you know the name of the king or queen being murdered, press one."
Check Out - I thought this was one of the better ones of the night. Well made all around. An actual beginning, middle and end.
Replication Theory - I put this one number four for the evening. Funny idea, and ambitiously shot (with a variety of locations and settings), but it wasn't pulled off as well as it could have been. It took me a while to figure out what the title (Replication Theory) had to do with anything. A better title would have done more to set up the joke a bit better. But overall a solid effort.
Overall, the show is an odd duck. On most of these reality shows, the person showing their talent actually gets to be the focus of the presentation, but with this, they are the behind the scenes people, so it's hard to really gauge their personalities. Perhaps they will show more making of stuff as the show progresses.
But after having done a couple of 48 Hour Film contests, the films that these people came up with (with significantly more than 48 Hours) weren't any better than the average 48 Hour Film (which isn't saying much). I was really expecting a lot better, especially since a vast majority of these filmmakers attended some sort of film school.
We'll see how the survivors of round one react to the comments their first films got and see if they were really that clueless, or if they were just a bit nervous.
Going home (three people) I predict will be Kenny, Jason, and Claudia.
The above video is just one of nearly two dozen similarly brilliant short videos made for this new show.
It's a filmed-comedy-sketch show that premieres on VH1 every Friday night (9Central) and replays numerous times throughout the week and is also available on their website, acceptable.tv (it's just acceptable.tv, no dot com) What makes this show particularly interesting to me is that it's attempting to wrangle this viral video phase the world is going through and bring some order to it.
The premise of the show is that each week, they debut five short "pilots" for new continuing sketches, each one about two and a half minutes long. Of those, you can go to the website and vote for the two you like best, and new episodes of those will be filmed for the next week's episode.
These 'official' pilots are produced by the Acceptable.tv repertory company, but each week, they play one user-submitted video, also voted on by the website visitors (actually, you have to be a registered member to vote... it's free though).
It's a really neat concept, and so far I'm loving it. Of the skits that the official group have produced, I've really liked almost all of them. In fact, out of 21 current skits, there are only two that I'm lukewarm on.
The people behind this show are executive producer Jack Black, and the group from Channel101, the people that have been doing stuff like this before they started getting financed by VH1/Viacom. Previous Channel101 alums are the Lonely Island guys, of which three of them are now SNL writers/performers. They're living the dream all us video producers nurture.
I could tell you about the funniest videos, but thanks to embeddable flash video, I can just show you. There's a bunch of them, and they are all funny. Enjoy. And if you like these, there are many, many more at the official website.
So, thanks to the flurry of activity by the writing group I'm a part of, I'm re-inspired to get off my butt and get creative again. Even though my job actually requires me to be creative on a daily basis, it's not the sort of creativity that leaves me with any sort of satisfaction at the end of the day. Well, sometimes...
Anyway, I've ideas for countless screenplays, short films, novels, essays, graphic designs, photographic composites and artwork, etc etc etc. I just need to stop procrastinating and DO them. At least ONE, anyway.
So hopefully this blog will act as a sort of accountability partner for me. Something that will guilt me into increasing my creative output.
Next really big project coming up is 48 Hour Film Project 2007. We did really good last year (link to the video "Eternal" on our Irony Coast YouTube page should be on the sidebar on the right), and we have every intention and expectation to win this year... That's coming up the weekend of May 18th. Should be fun.
Still need to finish my NaNoWriMo novel. I'm only 17,000 words from reaching my target, and I still really like my story, so I have no excuse not to work on it.
I also need to pick which screenplay I want to work on. "Paper Heroes" has the most work done on it, and the one I think has the most potential to be made into a film. "Sword of Texas" has a lot of work done on it as well. "Camp David" is the one most easily filmable by my film group, and the one that has gotten the most positive feedback and requests that we actually produce. Plus, there are a few ideas I've come up with over the past month or two that are jumping up and down trying to get my attention. Tentative titles for these are "The Royal Family", "The Lion and the Lambs", plus my untitled Vegas heist film, and my untitled serial killer movie.
Plus, there's still the "Zombie Wrangler" short film that's percolating, and the "Flunkies" webisodes we need to produce before half of our cast moves away.
