Here's a nifty artifact showing the creative process for a very well known movie:
Mystery Man links to the transcript of George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Lawrence Kasdan's story conference for Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's over 120 pages long.
Reading the summary and skimming the transcript, it's clear that these guys aren't slackers in any sense (even if they were the "Movie Brats"). Lucas' overall vision was incredibly well-thought out, and its a testament to these men's talent in how fluidly they generate and consider ideas.
Amazing that this sees the light of day.
3.25.2009
3.19.2009
The Geography of Everywhere
"How in the face of all moving and intermixing, can be retain any sense of place?" - Doreen Massey
"Place" has become something strange in the film industry-- every sucessful film must pertain to and somehow make money off of someone in everyplace, the result of a globalized economy that depends as much on dollars from Russia and China as from New York or Idaho.
A blockbuster has to achieve some sense of universiality: the stuff that puts butts in seats everywhere. Violence, sex, action that doesn't require any particular enculturation to understand. Essentially, movies that appeal to the average 6-year old boy.
That's all fine and dandy-- many of us are 6-year old boys at heart. "Big, dumb, loud" movies should be made as long as an audience appreciates them.
But what if you want something with more of a sense of place? A film that may not speak to the Czech Republic, but could sell tickets in New Orleans?
Movie capital comes from India, the UAE. It's been removed from its place of origin and tossed into a global system, where product must meet everyone's needs... and ultimately no one's.
Because really: when was the last time a recent blockbuster changed your life? (Yeah, I know about the TDK, but I mean, really seemed to speak to you personally?)
"Place" has become something strange in the film industry-- every sucessful film must pertain to and somehow make money off of someone in everyplace, the result of a globalized economy that depends as much on dollars from Russia and China as from New York or Idaho.
A blockbuster has to achieve some sense of universiality: the stuff that puts butts in seats everywhere. Violence, sex, action that doesn't require any particular enculturation to understand. Essentially, movies that appeal to the average 6-year old boy.
That's all fine and dandy-- many of us are 6-year old boys at heart. "Big, dumb, loud" movies should be made as long as an audience appreciates them.
But what if you want something with more of a sense of place? A film that may not speak to the Czech Republic, but could sell tickets in New Orleans?
Movie capital comes from India, the UAE. It's been removed from its place of origin and tossed into a global system, where product must meet everyone's needs... and ultimately no one's.
Because really: when was the last time a recent blockbuster changed your life? (Yeah, I know about the TDK, but I mean, really seemed to speak to you personally?)
3.17.2009
Future Thoughts
I wrote a while back about the "collapsing" film industry, and what can be done about it. But I didn't really go into the alternatives that would keep such a doomsday from occurring:
The New Media.
Everybody loves YouTube and Hulu, even if almost all of the content on the former is pure, unfiltered junk. The questions here involve what sort of revenue system is viable, and when truly great content is available.
Let's face it-- there's been no Birth of the Nation to send online media into the stratosphere. Of course there are the viral videos, but they don't have that blockbustery attribute of making most people want to re-watch them.
Nor are they exactly raking in the dollars.
New media takes care of distribution needs, but marketing is still a sort of challenge. Getting blogged about and e-mailed generates good word of mouth, but if some brilliant kid from Wyoming uploads the next Citizen Kane onto YouTube without promotion, it's gonna be a long time before anyone discovers it.
There's also the question of what sort of aesthetic quality users/the audience accepts. The glossy 35mm look is still dominant in the cinema world, but a bargain-basement webcam is fine for vlogs and other ephemeral online video.
I think as time goes on, audiences will be more willing to accept media that defies genre expectations for appearance-- which could allow for popular feature length films to be made on $300 budgets, and 1080/24p video diary entries.
Yay for cross-pollination.
The New Media.
Everybody loves YouTube and Hulu, even if almost all of the content on the former is pure, unfiltered junk. The questions here involve what sort of revenue system is viable, and when truly great content is available.
Let's face it-- there's been no Birth of the Nation to send online media into the stratosphere. Of course there are the viral videos, but they don't have that blockbustery attribute of making most people want to re-watch them.
Nor are they exactly raking in the dollars.
New media takes care of distribution needs, but marketing is still a sort of challenge. Getting blogged about and e-mailed generates good word of mouth, but if some brilliant kid from Wyoming uploads the next Citizen Kane onto YouTube without promotion, it's gonna be a long time before anyone discovers it.
There's also the question of what sort of aesthetic quality users/the audience accepts. The glossy 35mm look is still dominant in the cinema world, but a bargain-basement webcam is fine for vlogs and other ephemeral online video.
I think as time goes on, audiences will be more willing to accept media that defies genre expectations for appearance-- which could allow for popular feature length films to be made on $300 budgets, and 1080/24p video diary entries.
Yay for cross-pollination.
3.15.2009
Spring Break updates
Quite a lag, huh? I'll be back with some original content shortly. Here's a quick update of what happened on the personal project front:
More on career stuff to follow.
- I started writing the brand-new version of my feature length. I'm on page 12. Heh. Luckily I know where I'm going with it all, I just don't have the time/energy to do it.
- I rewrote Dysart. It's subtler (and perhaps moodier) than it's ever been, and I'm quite satisfied. I'll go into more details as time goes on/I share it with my professor.
- I gave a call to Asymmetrical Productions out in LA. Yes. That is David Lynch's ProdCo. Left a message on the answering machine, giving my name, number, and status. I let them know that I was interested in helping them with any needs they had.
More on career stuff to follow.
3.03.2009
A Deconstruction of "300"
And now... for those of who like to take things critically:
Frank Miller's "300" and the Persistence of Accepted Racism
Frank Miller's "300" and the Persistence of Accepted Racism
2.27.2009
The Collapse of the Film Industry
Whoa, weighty topic huh?
This is in response to a post on John August's blog, reporting about a WGA panel addressing the state of screenwriting and tips for screenwriters.
It's not pretty. Even for an unashamedly commercial writer who'd kill to write Alien vs. Predator vs. Transformers 2, the present and future are not looking great.
More than ever, the marketing department determines which scripts get greenlighted. There's less money for production in general, so only the most commercial, most pre-sold (as in, based on a pre-existing property) projects get off the ground.
If the big boys (the majors) are tightening their belts like mad, where does that leave everyone else... you know, the alternatives like the supposed "indie scene"?
Okay, let me say it. I hope I'm wrong.
The American film industry is slowly collapsing.
Screenwriters are reporting that the market has gotten even more cutthroat in the last few years, but film quality has not noticeably improved. Movie attendance is up so far, but DVD is down and ticket prices are rising faster than the rate of inflation. Movies are more expensive than ever to make.
It's sort of an entertainment stagflation right now.
I believe that the industry is about where it was in 1964, when it was becoming clearer that Hollywood was leaving its transition stage (1948-1967) and about to blossom into its magnificent Silver Age, the fabled time of the American auteur, the time of 2001, M*A*S*H, The Godfather, Jaws, Star Wars...
But I'm having trouble seeing a New Silver age coming up.
The reason folks like Coppola and Spielberg got esteemed positions in the first place was because the powers-that-be hadn't a clue what the youth market wanted-- so they tried anything and everything to put bums in seats.
Allegedly the executives who got pitched Harold and Maude (1971) couldn't understand what the movie was about, let alone why anyone would want to see it. But with the suggestion of a hip soundtrack, it got the greenlight without reservations.
Marketing has evolved a lot since 1971, and now thanks to Facebook and Twitter a square old executive can (supposedly) figure out exactly what the kiddie's want, and then envision a movie with the intent of exploiting the latest "It".
Not a particuarly creative environment, huh?
Another difference is technology: enterprising young producers are turning to webcasts to deliver new media products. Of course, movies are designed to be projected on a screen [in film] in a dark room with other [attentive] people-- but this concept hasn't sat well with Generation Y and beyond, if the amount of talking and texting in multiplexes is a reliable indicator.
Okay, you say. So mass audiences are migrating away from the traditional notions of cinema. Can't it just evolve like live theater did after the "talkies": a smaller, specialized art form appealing to certain demographics?
My thought (and I hope this isn't the case) is no.
One point is economic. Films cost a freakin' lot of money. They take a freakin' lot of people to make happen. They take a freakin' long time to put together. Decreased interest and decreased capital availble means... decreased movies.
The other point is interest itself. I have been told that my generation is the most visually sophisticated ever.
But we also have as more entertainment options than ever before. And oddly enough, I don't think our generation's taste is any more sophisticated than the past.
Decades ago, there used to be campus film societies where geeks would sit around and talk about Ozu and John Ford and watch 16mm prints while the film-nerdiness would exude all over the screening room.
Some of that still exists online at IMDB and elsewhere. But as my Independent Cinema professor pointed out, that sort of subculture that fostered the nascent careers of the Movie Brats dried up with the introduction of VHS, and has gotten even more eviscerated since.
Few people of my generation want to be the next Welles, like Bogdonavich did. Or the next Lean, like Spielberg did.
I shudder to think of when wanting to be even the next Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen) is considered a statement of one's artistic integrity.
Will the movies die? I don't think so. I think we're going to see a schism between extremely professional "slick" films (in Digital IMAX 3-D and so forth) and extremely lo-budget "grunge" films made for $20. Hopefully the two can co-exist for a while.
But I'd hate to lose the middle ground for good.
This is in response to a post on John August's blog, reporting about a WGA panel addressing the state of screenwriting and tips for screenwriters.
It's not pretty. Even for an unashamedly commercial writer who'd kill to write Alien vs. Predator vs. Transformers 2, the present and future are not looking great.
More than ever, the marketing department determines which scripts get greenlighted. There's less money for production in general, so only the most commercial, most pre-sold (as in, based on a pre-existing property) projects get off the ground.
If the big boys (the majors) are tightening their belts like mad, where does that leave everyone else... you know, the alternatives like the supposed "indie scene"?
Okay, let me say it. I hope I'm wrong.
The American film industry is slowly collapsing.
Screenwriters are reporting that the market has gotten even more cutthroat in the last few years, but film quality has not noticeably improved. Movie attendance is up so far, but DVD is down and ticket prices are rising faster than the rate of inflation. Movies are more expensive than ever to make.
It's sort of an entertainment stagflation right now.
I believe that the industry is about where it was in 1964, when it was becoming clearer that Hollywood was leaving its transition stage (1948-1967) and about to blossom into its magnificent Silver Age, the fabled time of the American auteur, the time of 2001, M*A*S*H, The Godfather, Jaws, Star Wars...
But I'm having trouble seeing a New Silver age coming up.
The reason folks like Coppola and Spielberg got esteemed positions in the first place was because the powers-that-be hadn't a clue what the youth market wanted-- so they tried anything and everything to put bums in seats.
Allegedly the executives who got pitched Harold and Maude (1971) couldn't understand what the movie was about, let alone why anyone would want to see it. But with the suggestion of a hip soundtrack, it got the greenlight without reservations.
Marketing has evolved a lot since 1971, and now thanks to Facebook and Twitter a square old executive can (supposedly) figure out exactly what the kiddie's want, and then envision a movie with the intent of exploiting the latest "It".
Not a particuarly creative environment, huh?
Another difference is technology: enterprising young producers are turning to webcasts to deliver new media products. Of course, movies are designed to be projected on a screen [in film] in a dark room with other [attentive] people-- but this concept hasn't sat well with Generation Y and beyond, if the amount of talking and texting in multiplexes is a reliable indicator.
Okay, you say. So mass audiences are migrating away from the traditional notions of cinema. Can't it just evolve like live theater did after the "talkies": a smaller, specialized art form appealing to certain demographics?
My thought (and I hope this isn't the case) is no.
One point is economic. Films cost a freakin' lot of money. They take a freakin' lot of people to make happen. They take a freakin' long time to put together. Decreased interest and decreased capital availble means... decreased movies.
The other point is interest itself. I have been told that my generation is the most visually sophisticated ever.
But we also have as more entertainment options than ever before. And oddly enough, I don't think our generation's taste is any more sophisticated than the past.
Decades ago, there used to be campus film societies where geeks would sit around and talk about Ozu and John Ford and watch 16mm prints while the film-nerdiness would exude all over the screening room.
Some of that still exists online at IMDB and elsewhere. But as my Independent Cinema professor pointed out, that sort of subculture that fostered the nascent careers of the Movie Brats dried up with the introduction of VHS, and has gotten even more eviscerated since.
Few people of my generation want to be the next Welles, like Bogdonavich did. Or the next Lean, like Spielberg did.
I shudder to think of when wanting to be even the next Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen) is considered a statement of one's artistic integrity.
Will the movies die? I don't think so. I think we're going to see a schism between extremely professional "slick" films (in Digital IMAX 3-D and so forth) and extremely lo-budget "grunge" films made for $20. Hopefully the two can co-exist for a while.
But I'd hate to lose the middle ground for good.
2.26.2009
Project Update redux
Duh, I forgot the one I just completed, my experimental "autobiography" video.
Here is my rant: I think the idea of an autobiography is impossible. Even if you accept that every bio and autobio is going to be painfully subjective, I feel that the nature of the autobio is so hopelessly subjective that it's more fantasy than fact.
Not that it's impossible to know one's self. Or that it's impossible to represent one's self in any context. But as your conscious awareness is so selective to begin with, autobiographies are like the literary equivalent of Fantasy Football: full of "best-of"s and hypothetical renderings pretending to be the real deal.
If I had to write a straight up autobio, I would claim to be raised by natives in Papua New Guinea, before stowing away on a cargo ship and ending up at a migrant worker camp in Texas. Because that's a far more interesting story to me than my actual past life.
So I decided to make a "subconscious video diary", a somewhat surrealist account of an average day in my life. I think it works for the most part: lots of sound design, lots of manipulated footage, lots of bizarre edits, lots of snatches of music.
Some parts work, some don't. I think my professor won't find it autobiographical enough-- I'll do my best to defend.
I'll keep you updated on how it goes.
Here is my rant: I think the idea of an autobiography is impossible. Even if you accept that every bio and autobio is going to be painfully subjective, I feel that the nature of the autobio is so hopelessly subjective that it's more fantasy than fact.
Not that it's impossible to know one's self. Or that it's impossible to represent one's self in any context. But as your conscious awareness is so selective to begin with, autobiographies are like the literary equivalent of Fantasy Football: full of "best-of"s and hypothetical renderings pretending to be the real deal.
If I had to write a straight up autobio, I would claim to be raised by natives in Papua New Guinea, before stowing away on a cargo ship and ending up at a migrant worker camp in Texas. Because that's a far more interesting story to me than my actual past life.
So I decided to make a "subconscious video diary", a somewhat surrealist account of an average day in my life. I think it works for the most part: lots of sound design, lots of manipulated footage, lots of bizarre edits, lots of snatches of music.
Some parts work, some don't. I think my professor won't find it autobiographical enough-- I'll do my best to defend.
I'll keep you updated on how it goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
