I can’t really call this a week. It was two days.
In Screenwriting we had some tutorial time with Richard on our outlines for our three minute films, and we’re to write them over the holidays. I’m looking forward to that actually, although mine requires considerable adjustment. We’re finally writing a screenplay though which is rather exciting.
On Monday afternoon I had a quick tutorial with Adam, just to see how this first term went and to discuss what next term has in store. Then of course there was the big deadline of handing in our Storylined TV Dramas and I think I got mine in with less than a minute to spare!
On Tuesday we watched the footage that we shot last week for our assessments and some of it was quite hilarious. On a serious note though some of it was quite poor and I’m hoping we, as a class, can take our technical skills up a notch in next term. After that we were done; finished Term 1, free to go home. Most of us didn’t though. We half decided to stick around and see if we could make something in the remainder of the day just as an extra. No-one really seemed that keen but the more time we wasted the more frustrated I would have been if we hadn’t made anything. Anyway, eventually we did produce a short gag which we called Tension (have a watch here if you wish: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=58YJBZxPGNY) and it was shot, captured and edited all in that day. It was tolerable but I’m just glad we made something.
I feel I should give a big reflection on Term 1 now, but I’m not going to. Bottom line is it was a fine introduction to a fantastic course and I’m at the stage I would hope to be at, at this moment in time, anyway. So nothing more remains to be said really. I’m going to enjoy the Christmas break and then… well… bring on Term 2! Bye for now.
Wednesday, 17 December 2008
Saturday, 13 December 2008
Week 11 – A Bonnie Wee Genie May forget her lines
It’s funny that the first thing we are told about Character is “Don’t think of them as a character”. It’s actually quite exciting, the prospect of creating a real, living person and letting other people see them by placing them in stories. It takes me back to the old Play Mobil and Action Man days and I realised that I’ve been ‘creating characters’ all my life, in a sort of way. Even now there is something real about those Play Mobil men, who all have names, backgrounds and personalities and I am certain if I dug them out now it would feel like meeting up with old friends (in fact, I might do that over Christmas; there’s nothing like indulging in a bit of nostalgia after all). I was rather surprised, and worried, that Richard gave us yet more homework for the last week especially as it was to write the biography of a serial killer which is unpleasant at the best of times but more so when I still had Adam’s storylining to do. It seems Screenwriting is the only class which has been going full-pelt right to the very end, but I suppose it’ll make the Christmas break seem all the more welcome.
So usually we get emailed a time to turn up for these Technical Formative Assessments and we pop in for an hour, do our thing, then leave. This time though there had been no email so we were kind of confused as to what we were supposed to be doing. I decided to simply turn up at half past nine and see what was happening and then take it from there. As it turned out we were scheduled for an eight hour assessment! It was great. We were split into two crews and told to write and shoot a twenty second piece each, with everyone having a go at camera, sound and directing. It was interesting to see how we all behaved and worked as a crew and I could begin to pick out some who were finding their niche in a particular role. Most of all it was enjoyable because we were actually making films, we were doing what we came here to do and it was part of, or rather a requirement, of the course rather than something we were doing on our steam. Exciting stuff!
Sherlock Jr was more impressive than entertaining. It simply didn’t have the charm of a Chaplin film but it far surpassed them in technical skill. I feel that had that been the same film, but with Chaplin in the main role instead of Keaton, it would have been far more enjoyable. Unfortunately the music soundtrack was rather distracting. It was bearable up to the car chase sequence where the James Bond Theme suddenly broke through and for me that broke the magic of the black and white film.
One of the best classes with Andy so far on Thursday morning: we got to play with flick books and Zoetropes! I find I learn best that way, when I actually do something practical, and I’ll remember that class because we made our own Zoetrope films (and we got chocolate). It’s also interesting that we talk a lot about The Moving Picture when in fact the whole notion of a moving picture is quite ludicrous. Pictures don’t move (unless it’s Harry Potter) but thanks to our Persistence of Vision we believe that they do.
Our last class with Andy for this term and it was on Cop Shows. I haven’t seen many but I think it’s a fairly full-proof form and it was mildly interesting coming up with our own ones. We watched an episode of House which I did enjoy, more for Hugh Laurie’s surly comments than the actual show itself, and this followed the general format of a Cop Show but cleverly replaced the Cop with a Doctor (or the ‘Holmes’ with a ‘House’).
Filmed a pantomime in Drymen on Friday night and I quite enjoyed both the experience of filming a stage show and the show itself, which was Sinbad (or A Bonny Wee Genie May Call; and the genie turned out to be a young girl who couldn’t quite remember her lines, but it didn’t detract from the overall enjoyment of it, in fact I’d say it added to it). It was great to get out into the world and do an actual job (I felt like a right professional cameraman) and of course the more use of those cameras I get the happier I am!
So usually we get emailed a time to turn up for these Technical Formative Assessments and we pop in for an hour, do our thing, then leave. This time though there had been no email so we were kind of confused as to what we were supposed to be doing. I decided to simply turn up at half past nine and see what was happening and then take it from there. As it turned out we were scheduled for an eight hour assessment! It was great. We were split into two crews and told to write and shoot a twenty second piece each, with everyone having a go at camera, sound and directing. It was interesting to see how we all behaved and worked as a crew and I could begin to pick out some who were finding their niche in a particular role. Most of all it was enjoyable because we were actually making films, we were doing what we came here to do and it was part of, or rather a requirement, of the course rather than something we were doing on our steam. Exciting stuff!
Sherlock Jr was more impressive than entertaining. It simply didn’t have the charm of a Chaplin film but it far surpassed them in technical skill. I feel that had that been the same film, but with Chaplin in the main role instead of Keaton, it would have been far more enjoyable. Unfortunately the music soundtrack was rather distracting. It was bearable up to the car chase sequence where the James Bond Theme suddenly broke through and for me that broke the magic of the black and white film.
One of the best classes with Andy so far on Thursday morning: we got to play with flick books and Zoetropes! I find I learn best that way, when I actually do something practical, and I’ll remember that class because we made our own Zoetrope films (and we got chocolate). It’s also interesting that we talk a lot about The Moving Picture when in fact the whole notion of a moving picture is quite ludicrous. Pictures don’t move (unless it’s Harry Potter) but thanks to our Persistence of Vision we believe that they do.
Our last class with Andy for this term and it was on Cop Shows. I haven’t seen many but I think it’s a fairly full-proof form and it was mildly interesting coming up with our own ones. We watched an episode of House which I did enjoy, more for Hugh Laurie’s surly comments than the actual show itself, and this followed the general format of a Cop Show but cleverly replaced the Cop with a Doctor (or the ‘Holmes’ with a ‘House’).
Filmed a pantomime in Drymen on Friday night and I quite enjoyed both the experience of filming a stage show and the show itself, which was Sinbad (or A Bonny Wee Genie May Call; and the genie turned out to be a young girl who couldn’t quite remember her lines, but it didn’t detract from the overall enjoyment of it, in fact I’d say it added to it). It was great to get out into the world and do an actual job (I felt like a right professional cameraman) and of course the more use of those cameras I get the happier I am!
Saturday, 6 December 2008
Week 10 - I always wanted to be a horse
Monday morning was a heart-to-heart session and there was a shocking lack of croissants! It involved taking it in turns to point out three of our flaws to the rest of the class. It was a helpful, if perhaps a rather unusual, experience because we could be entirely open and honest; admitting things which would not normally come up in conversation but allowing everyone else a deeper understanding of that individual’s personality. I must admit I got a few surprises from some of the things people said. I can see how this helps us to bond as a class and be more relaxed in each others’ company but I’m afraid that, as of yet, I’m unsure how much it will help our screenwriting. I suppose anything human, any truth or any belief can be utilised when writing a film.
We are transitioning from TV into short form, and ‘short-short form’ or mobile media, in Adam’s class now. We watched a number of very high quality short films; the cinematography of the Napier University films was particularly impressive. Then we watched some shorter films, some only ninety seconds in length, and some of them were very entertaining; Le Cheval, Non-fat and Operator being three examples. On the other hand some were hopeless but the advantage, of course, of this format is that instead of wasting two hours of your life on a bad film you’re barely wasting two minutes. I can see the appeal of this type of media and I’m fascinated by the sheer difference of film grammar when compared to feature films. I suppose there’s always the possibility that this is the replacement of cinema and longer films will gradually disappear which is more than slightly worrying. It seems the reason there is such a growing market for shorter films is not because people have a shorter attention span it is, I think, because we are more impatient. If it is comedy we are after then we want a laugh NOW and then we can move on or browse for more. We do not have the patience to sit and watch a comedy feature. Or if it is action we seek then we want it NOW and in small enough chunks so that if we get bored we can leave it without a second glance. Sitting down for two hours takes up too much time and is too much of a commitment. Maybe our lives are just faster and busier and to accommodate for this we purchase technology that allows us to deal with our business faster thus making more room for more business and making us ultimately even busier. So we don’t have time to sit down in a cinema. We want to squeeze in our entertainment around our business: on trains, at lunch, on the move… In my opinion we all need to slow down. The busier we are the faster we try to deal with that business, the faster we deal with that business the busier we become; it’s a vicious circle. For some people, that’s life. So, yes, there’s a place for short films but we cannot lose that good old fashioned storytelling where we gather round the fireside and settle down to hear what Granddad will tell us this evening. I fear that if he told us a ninety second joke we’d be rather disappointed.
On Tuesday afternoon we had a brief class on Game or Quiz Shows. It was informative and to the point. Afterwards Andy seemed to think we hadn’t engaged very well with it but I didn’t think it was particularly negating, just very short.
I simply love Chaplin films. They’re warming and simple, no thinking is required, and they always get me laughing at some point and laughter is a good thing. Like all good things it can be used for the wrong reasons: laughing at someone else’s expense, laughing as an encouragement of evil human desires or laughing to cover up true emotion, but it seems that Chaplin avoids deriving laughter from these things and instead gives us a character who reflects the simple nature of the common man; thus we are in fact laughing at ourselves. The Gold Rush wasn’t quite as enjoyable as The Kid but there was a noticeable advancement in Chaplin’s filmmaking abilities in those four years. I think the narration was unnecessary and I much prefer the silent style where the imagination can heighten the humour.
Yet another half day on Thursday (that’s three in a row… the course seems to be winding down considerably) and this time we looked at the birth of cinema and some of Mitchell and Kenyon's work. Watching some of the very first reels of film was both exciting and informative and it struck me just how constant mankind is. Places, society, buildings, clothes and transport all change and eventually become history but people… humans… men, women, children… we have always been the same. The same matter, the same emotions and the same spirituality. Looking at the faces of those people, more than a hundred years ago, was like looking at a reflection of ourselves in a different time.
We had a whole day of sound on Friday which enabled us to develop confidence with the kit, and try recording interviews both interior and exterior. We had a go at micing up a piano which was great fun especially as I got to play it! I feel I’ve got a pretty good grasp of the technical fundamentals and I look forward to the challenges of next term. However there’s Christmas to look forward to before then of course!
We are transitioning from TV into short form, and ‘short-short form’ or mobile media, in Adam’s class now. We watched a number of very high quality short films; the cinematography of the Napier University films was particularly impressive. Then we watched some shorter films, some only ninety seconds in length, and some of them were very entertaining; Le Cheval, Non-fat and Operator being three examples. On the other hand some were hopeless but the advantage, of course, of this format is that instead of wasting two hours of your life on a bad film you’re barely wasting two minutes. I can see the appeal of this type of media and I’m fascinated by the sheer difference of film grammar when compared to feature films. I suppose there’s always the possibility that this is the replacement of cinema and longer films will gradually disappear which is more than slightly worrying. It seems the reason there is such a growing market for shorter films is not because people have a shorter attention span it is, I think, because we are more impatient. If it is comedy we are after then we want a laugh NOW and then we can move on or browse for more. We do not have the patience to sit and watch a comedy feature. Or if it is action we seek then we want it NOW and in small enough chunks so that if we get bored we can leave it without a second glance. Sitting down for two hours takes up too much time and is too much of a commitment. Maybe our lives are just faster and busier and to accommodate for this we purchase technology that allows us to deal with our business faster thus making more room for more business and making us ultimately even busier. So we don’t have time to sit down in a cinema. We want to squeeze in our entertainment around our business: on trains, at lunch, on the move… In my opinion we all need to slow down. The busier we are the faster we try to deal with that business, the faster we deal with that business the busier we become; it’s a vicious circle. For some people, that’s life. So, yes, there’s a place for short films but we cannot lose that good old fashioned storytelling where we gather round the fireside and settle down to hear what Granddad will tell us this evening. I fear that if he told us a ninety second joke we’d be rather disappointed.
On Tuesday afternoon we had a brief class on Game or Quiz Shows. It was informative and to the point. Afterwards Andy seemed to think we hadn’t engaged very well with it but I didn’t think it was particularly negating, just very short.
I simply love Chaplin films. They’re warming and simple, no thinking is required, and they always get me laughing at some point and laughter is a good thing. Like all good things it can be used for the wrong reasons: laughing at someone else’s expense, laughing as an encouragement of evil human desires or laughing to cover up true emotion, but it seems that Chaplin avoids deriving laughter from these things and instead gives us a character who reflects the simple nature of the common man; thus we are in fact laughing at ourselves. The Gold Rush wasn’t quite as enjoyable as The Kid but there was a noticeable advancement in Chaplin’s filmmaking abilities in those four years. I think the narration was unnecessary and I much prefer the silent style where the imagination can heighten the humour.
Yet another half day on Thursday (that’s three in a row… the course seems to be winding down considerably) and this time we looked at the birth of cinema and some of Mitchell and Kenyon's work. Watching some of the very first reels of film was both exciting and informative and it struck me just how constant mankind is. Places, society, buildings, clothes and transport all change and eventually become history but people… humans… men, women, children… we have always been the same. The same matter, the same emotions and the same spirituality. Looking at the faces of those people, more than a hundred years ago, was like looking at a reflection of ourselves in a different time.
We had a whole day of sound on Friday which enabled us to develop confidence with the kit, and try recording interviews both interior and exterior. We had a go at micing up a piano which was great fun especially as I got to play it! I feel I’ve got a pretty good grasp of the technical fundamentals and I look forward to the challenges of next term. However there’s Christmas to look forward to before then of course!
Saturday, 29 November 2008
Week 9 - Silent Night, Music Hall Night
We were introduced to theme in Screenwriting which is, in my opinion, the soul of any piece of writing. It is, after all, themes that move people, that mean something, that can contain truth. The characters, plot or setting may be memorable but what implants itself in the subconscious, and penetrates through superficial emotion, is that statement of belief. Do you know what you believe? If there is no theme in a film then the audience will try to create one. I know what I believe.
It was pitching time in Adam’s class and Murdo, John and myself eagerly sold our drama Corridors of Power; which I was loathe to part with, having invested so much time and energy in it’s creation. Anyway, who knows? Perhaps one day it will be commissioned and written! Hey, I can dream can’t I? One thing the exercise highlighted for me was that working in small groups is much more effective, and produces far greater results, than working as an individual. Ideas can be bounced back and forward and immediately discarded or developed which cannot happen in one mind (I could try conversing with the mirror) and that is why I know I will find the next assignment, to individually storyline a drama, far more challenging.
We all turned up, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, on Tuesday morning to be confronted with the news that there was no technical class that morning after all. So that was fair enough, we’d have to just hang around until Gavin’s class in the afternoon. The thought was literally in my head when Gavin appeared to inform us that there would be no class that afternoon either. A day off! I set off back to the flat feeling slightly disappointed but also rather grateful for the unexpected break.
Silent films! They’re just like reading a book really… a book with lots of pictures! Actually I believe they are a cinematic form in their own right, and are still very relevant and enjoyable today (I mean Mr Bean is pretty much silent cinema!), the master of this form being Charlie Chaplin, I would argue from the examples that I’ve seen so far, and I thoroughly enjoyed The Kid. It’s just fantastic, feel-good, funny and flamboyant filmmaking. I love the unique mish-mash of Vaudeville-style slapstick comedy combined with cinematic techniques to provide entertainment which is an experience somewhere between theatre and cinema. In fact, I suppose it harks back to those Music Halls of the early 1900s and the birth of cinema.
The Britannia Panopticon Music Hall was a fantastic venue. Being there, on yet another field trip from our loving and generous tutor Andy Dougan, was like reliving life more than a hundred years ago. I could almost see the people crushed in their thousands in the gallery and hear the noise of shouting, heckling, laughter and applause. I could smell the odour, the urine, the decay and I could feel the cold… I could quite literally feel the cold which helped add to the experience and made it seem all the more realistic somehow. Seeing this place was very worthwhile because of its significance to the history of cinema. Knowing where it started helps put into perspective where it is now, and why. Aside from that, I am fascinated by history and the stories of people in different times and therefore I enjoyed the spirited and graphic description of the Music Hall experience that we received. All in all it was a very successful trip and on reflection it would be a fantastic location to make a film…
Friday morning brought us our first class on Sound. I’d say it was pretty sound… first class in fact! Actually I found it just slightly tedious and uninteresting, however I do appreciate that it is very necessary and there is an art to good recording and design and I have great respect for anyone who really understands how sound works. I remember doing some sound-related activities in Standard Grade Physics but I fear that this barely touched the surface. Anyway, at least we’ll soon be able to point a microphone into some poor actor’s face and produce something mildly comprehensible which is, I suppose, progress.
An enjoyable class on sitcoms to end the week. I Love Lucy (1951) was rather entertaining and displayed the extent to which it has defined the form of sitcoms as they are no different today. The Dick van Dyke Show is, I have decided, my favourite sitcom. It never relies on cheap, sex-fuelled comedy or unimaginative vulgar language for its laughs and true to the Carl Reiner format there is even a lesson learned in each episode. Unfortunately the episode we watched in class was not one of the best, it was rather slow in getting to the gags. The Simpsons delighted as expected. However, I disagree with the idea that they are not a dysfunctional family. They have love yes, even unconditional love but love alone is not sufficient to keep a family functioning properly. Respect, discipline and action are also required but the Simpsons are a perfectly functioning family for the purposes of the sitcom and I would not want them changed. Finally we watched an episode of Two and Half Men which succeeded in lowering the tone and the quality of the afternoon’s entertainment. It is programmes like these that give the impression that any kind of moral conscience, or will to communicate that which is good, on television died with Ed Murrow.
It was pitching time in Adam’s class and Murdo, John and myself eagerly sold our drama Corridors of Power; which I was loathe to part with, having invested so much time and energy in it’s creation. Anyway, who knows? Perhaps one day it will be commissioned and written! Hey, I can dream can’t I? One thing the exercise highlighted for me was that working in small groups is much more effective, and produces far greater results, than working as an individual. Ideas can be bounced back and forward and immediately discarded or developed which cannot happen in one mind (I could try conversing with the mirror) and that is why I know I will find the next assignment, to individually storyline a drama, far more challenging.
We all turned up, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, on Tuesday morning to be confronted with the news that there was no technical class that morning after all. So that was fair enough, we’d have to just hang around until Gavin’s class in the afternoon. The thought was literally in my head when Gavin appeared to inform us that there would be no class that afternoon either. A day off! I set off back to the flat feeling slightly disappointed but also rather grateful for the unexpected break.
Silent films! They’re just like reading a book really… a book with lots of pictures! Actually I believe they are a cinematic form in their own right, and are still very relevant and enjoyable today (I mean Mr Bean is pretty much silent cinema!), the master of this form being Charlie Chaplin, I would argue from the examples that I’ve seen so far, and I thoroughly enjoyed The Kid. It’s just fantastic, feel-good, funny and flamboyant filmmaking. I love the unique mish-mash of Vaudeville-style slapstick comedy combined with cinematic techniques to provide entertainment which is an experience somewhere between theatre and cinema. In fact, I suppose it harks back to those Music Halls of the early 1900s and the birth of cinema.
The Britannia Panopticon Music Hall was a fantastic venue. Being there, on yet another field trip from our loving and generous tutor Andy Dougan, was like reliving life more than a hundred years ago. I could almost see the people crushed in their thousands in the gallery and hear the noise of shouting, heckling, laughter and applause. I could smell the odour, the urine, the decay and I could feel the cold… I could quite literally feel the cold which helped add to the experience and made it seem all the more realistic somehow. Seeing this place was very worthwhile because of its significance to the history of cinema. Knowing where it started helps put into perspective where it is now, and why. Aside from that, I am fascinated by history and the stories of people in different times and therefore I enjoyed the spirited and graphic description of the Music Hall experience that we received. All in all it was a very successful trip and on reflection it would be a fantastic location to make a film…
Friday morning brought us our first class on Sound. I’d say it was pretty sound… first class in fact! Actually I found it just slightly tedious and uninteresting, however I do appreciate that it is very necessary and there is an art to good recording and design and I have great respect for anyone who really understands how sound works. I remember doing some sound-related activities in Standard Grade Physics but I fear that this barely touched the surface. Anyway, at least we’ll soon be able to point a microphone into some poor actor’s face and produce something mildly comprehensible which is, I suppose, progress.
An enjoyable class on sitcoms to end the week. I Love Lucy (1951) was rather entertaining and displayed the extent to which it has defined the form of sitcoms as they are no different today. The Dick van Dyke Show is, I have decided, my favourite sitcom. It never relies on cheap, sex-fuelled comedy or unimaginative vulgar language for its laughs and true to the Carl Reiner format there is even a lesson learned in each episode. Unfortunately the episode we watched in class was not one of the best, it was rather slow in getting to the gags. The Simpsons delighted as expected. However, I disagree with the idea that they are not a dysfunctional family. They have love yes, even unconditional love but love alone is not sufficient to keep a family functioning properly. Respect, discipline and action are also required but the Simpsons are a perfectly functioning family for the purposes of the sitcom and I would not want them changed. Finally we watched an episode of Two and Half Men which succeeded in lowering the tone and the quality of the afternoon’s entertainment. It is programmes like these that give the impression that any kind of moral conscience, or will to communicate that which is good, on television died with Ed Murrow.
Saturday, 22 November 2008
Week 8 - Dickie and James
Got lost in Glasgow on Monday morning which was, apart from being rather embarrassing, kind of frustrating because I wasn’t able to help toil and sweat in the arduous task of carrying all the kit from the Halls to the Academy. Gutted. We watched the first episode of The West Wing in Adam’s class and were assigned the exciting task of storylining a season for a TV drama featuring a Scottish Prime Minister, a task which proved to be more of an undertaking than I first expected. Murdo, John and I came up with a rather interesting drama called Corridors of Power. It’s definitely got potential.
Only had to nip in for an hour today for another formative assessment on camera and this time we were required to record a pan and a tilt. Exciting stuff! Actually I wasn’t all that happy with mine but I’m sure practise is all that’s required. Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning were spent on another shoot – this time for a Gaelic Short Film competition – making it the second one in the space of a week. May there be many more.
I was impressed, yet again, by Richard Attenborough with his compelling film Cry Freedom. It was very well made, quite powerful and must have been, at the time it was released (1987), very thought-provoking and challenging. I would be exaggerating to say that it hooked me from the start and took me on a roller-coaster ride of emotion only letting me off when the credits began to roll… It didn’t. However, it was a brave statement on the issue of racism and like all Attenborough’s films gave a helpful insight into a period of history. What fascinated me most about the film, and what caused it to make a bigger impression than it might otherwise have deserved, was that it tackled the portrayal of family life honestly and unashamedly. Instead of modernising and americanising the typical family it was accurate even down to the excitement of the children at getting to stay up and watch a movie… as long as they got their pyjamas on first. It was just the same in my family, if only it was the same in many more in today’s society. Many do not even understand the concept of family and it seems the Donald Woods father figure is a rare find.
Dickie Darling is the epitome of an old English gentleman. That veteran actor sat in his chair, more experience on his shoulders than everyone in that room put together, and talked about… his fame, his success, his knowledge? Oh no, he captivated us like his own grandchildren gathered before the fire and talked about love, family and friendship; the only things of any consequence in this fleeting world. There was something surreal about hearing him talk about having breakfast with (‘sweet’) Steven Spielberg and I look forward to the rumoured Jurassic Park 4! I felt honoured to be the first one to ask a question which was well answered and highlighted the significance of the description The Actor’s Director; he makes films about historical people and events because he is more interested in real people and real events than in the art of cinema. It was truly a privilege to see and speak to a genuine legend and let’s face it how often does one get called “Darling”… never mind by Richard Attenborough?
“Well, I was working with James McAvoy on Friday, having a word with Richard Attenborough on Thursday… can’t recall who it was on Wednesday….” Such is the life of an Academy student! It was an interesting workshop with DFTV 4 and the second year actors, made slightly more interesting by the presence of a Hollywood star, but I was not all that impressed by the directing or camera skills of the fourth years. However, they did work well as a unit and the finished shot looked pretty professional. All the actors’ comments, along with the gems of wisdom offered by James, were probably the most helpful aspect of the whole workshop as it is vital to know the processes and point-of-view of an actor when faced with a lens. It is important to bear these things in mind and I look forward to putting this into practise in the future. The near future, I hope.
Only had to nip in for an hour today for another formative assessment on camera and this time we were required to record a pan and a tilt. Exciting stuff! Actually I wasn’t all that happy with mine but I’m sure practise is all that’s required. Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning were spent on another shoot – this time for a Gaelic Short Film competition – making it the second one in the space of a week. May there be many more.
I was impressed, yet again, by Richard Attenborough with his compelling film Cry Freedom. It was very well made, quite powerful and must have been, at the time it was released (1987), very thought-provoking and challenging. I would be exaggerating to say that it hooked me from the start and took me on a roller-coaster ride of emotion only letting me off when the credits began to roll… It didn’t. However, it was a brave statement on the issue of racism and like all Attenborough’s films gave a helpful insight into a period of history. What fascinated me most about the film, and what caused it to make a bigger impression than it might otherwise have deserved, was that it tackled the portrayal of family life honestly and unashamedly. Instead of modernising and americanising the typical family it was accurate even down to the excitement of the children at getting to stay up and watch a movie… as long as they got their pyjamas on first. It was just the same in my family, if only it was the same in many more in today’s society. Many do not even understand the concept of family and it seems the Donald Woods father figure is a rare find.
Dickie Darling is the epitome of an old English gentleman. That veteran actor sat in his chair, more experience on his shoulders than everyone in that room put together, and talked about… his fame, his success, his knowledge? Oh no, he captivated us like his own grandchildren gathered before the fire and talked about love, family and friendship; the only things of any consequence in this fleeting world. There was something surreal about hearing him talk about having breakfast with (‘sweet’) Steven Spielberg and I look forward to the rumoured Jurassic Park 4! I felt honoured to be the first one to ask a question which was well answered and highlighted the significance of the description The Actor’s Director; he makes films about historical people and events because he is more interested in real people and real events than in the art of cinema. It was truly a privilege to see and speak to a genuine legend and let’s face it how often does one get called “Darling”… never mind by Richard Attenborough?
“Well, I was working with James McAvoy on Friday, having a word with Richard Attenborough on Thursday… can’t recall who it was on Wednesday….” Such is the life of an Academy student! It was an interesting workshop with DFTV 4 and the second year actors, made slightly more interesting by the presence of a Hollywood star, but I was not all that impressed by the directing or camera skills of the fourth years. However, they did work well as a unit and the finished shot looked pretty professional. All the actors’ comments, along with the gems of wisdom offered by James, were probably the most helpful aspect of the whole workshop as it is vital to know the processes and point-of-view of an actor when faced with a lens. It is important to bear these things in mind and I look forward to putting this into practise in the future. The near future, I hope.
Saturday, 15 November 2008
Week 7 – Woe to all the bottles!
Well Monday was mid-term holiday (mid-term already!) so this week began on Tuesday with an MER meeting about the ELIR process outlining what us reps will be required to do whilst the Academy is under review.
I think Andy oversold Network for me. It wasn’t as amazing as I had hoped. It seemed like all the characters were corrupt in some way and I think it was supposed to be funnier than I found it. However, I was entertained and it did make some interesting points about television. Mass hysteria is one of my favourite topics and, whether intentionally or not, Howard Beale’s stirring speeches were good examples. It is all very well to say “Turn off your TV and go and shout out of the window” but ultimately nobody did, because they all turned it back on again to see what he would say next. Like all mad and weird new hypes people eventually adjust, get used to them and finally get bored and in this way Network displayed the futility of ‘pushing the boundaries’. It always has to be bigger, crazier and less conforming and of course the natural end is simply death. Not at all surprising and I have to admit I was not at all surprised. Another point was the enjoyment with which everyone yelled at the world “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore” which of course sounds good but isn’t clear on what they’re not planning to ‘take anymore’ and exactly why they’re mad. Personally, I enjoy life, I think it was made to be enjoyed, and I find it rather saddening that people might imagine they have to be angry about it.
Here’s a question: When does a film start? Does it start after the last opening title has faded? Or when the lights first dim? Or as soon as you enter the cinema? Or does it start from the moment you are initially aware that the film exists? I would argue that, commercially, the latter is true. A cinema trailer was my first encounter with Choke and that made a pretty rubbish start of the film. Nothing in it made me want to see the film and by the time I was leaving the building I had totally forgotten it existed. So the film tried to start, and failed. Next I was told the title. Once again the film tried to make a start and, once again, it failed. A few hours later I had totally forgotten the title. So finally, on Wednesday morning I was sitting in a darkened cinema and the film started. Well, my review highlights my main thoughts on the film and of it there is little more to be said. Frankly I plan to forget it as soon as possible.
I actually really enjoyed For Your Consideration but perhaps only because it contrasted my experience of the morning. It was refreshing to watch a film that I actually found funny and it was educating at the same time, in some small way, about the real situation with the Oscars instead of all these ‘prophetic’ films (Broadcast News, King of Comedy, Network) which instead, are speculating.
A very hard day on Thursday as we had two teaching sessions back to back both of which required brain-related work, instead of the usual afternoon screening where the film does the work for you! However, they marked the end of the first section of these modules now so there was a bit of evaluating and reflecting to be done and it made me realise that I am in fact learning rather a lot. In the evening those of us doing the film-in-a-weekend competition had a meeting to get everything planned out, the revealed ‘object’ being a water bottle.
Yet another intense day on Friday, this time in the practical realm. Learning about back-focus and exposure with Ray was great and he requested that we take the 570s for our weekend shoot instead of the 150s, a decision I am very grateful for, despite the fact that we thought we weren’t ready. The written ‘exam’ in Gavin’s class came as quite a shock – I didn’t expect it to be so hard – and if I am honest it is the first time, since coming to the Academy, I felt like I was back in school!
Shooting our short film over the weekend was an amazing experience and I am rather proud of the result. My first real taste of a professionalish film set and it made me realise two things: first that I am destined to work in film, and second that I can’t wait to start making films properly as part of our course. Anyway, all in good time. Patience…
I think Andy oversold Network for me. It wasn’t as amazing as I had hoped. It seemed like all the characters were corrupt in some way and I think it was supposed to be funnier than I found it. However, I was entertained and it did make some interesting points about television. Mass hysteria is one of my favourite topics and, whether intentionally or not, Howard Beale’s stirring speeches were good examples. It is all very well to say “Turn off your TV and go and shout out of the window” but ultimately nobody did, because they all turned it back on again to see what he would say next. Like all mad and weird new hypes people eventually adjust, get used to them and finally get bored and in this way Network displayed the futility of ‘pushing the boundaries’. It always has to be bigger, crazier and less conforming and of course the natural end is simply death. Not at all surprising and I have to admit I was not at all surprised. Another point was the enjoyment with which everyone yelled at the world “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore” which of course sounds good but isn’t clear on what they’re not planning to ‘take anymore’ and exactly why they’re mad. Personally, I enjoy life, I think it was made to be enjoyed, and I find it rather saddening that people might imagine they have to be angry about it.
Here’s a question: When does a film start? Does it start after the last opening title has faded? Or when the lights first dim? Or as soon as you enter the cinema? Or does it start from the moment you are initially aware that the film exists? I would argue that, commercially, the latter is true. A cinema trailer was my first encounter with Choke and that made a pretty rubbish start of the film. Nothing in it made me want to see the film and by the time I was leaving the building I had totally forgotten it existed. So the film tried to start, and failed. Next I was told the title. Once again the film tried to make a start and, once again, it failed. A few hours later I had totally forgotten the title. So finally, on Wednesday morning I was sitting in a darkened cinema and the film started. Well, my review highlights my main thoughts on the film and of it there is little more to be said. Frankly I plan to forget it as soon as possible.
I actually really enjoyed For Your Consideration but perhaps only because it contrasted my experience of the morning. It was refreshing to watch a film that I actually found funny and it was educating at the same time, in some small way, about the real situation with the Oscars instead of all these ‘prophetic’ films (Broadcast News, King of Comedy, Network) which instead, are speculating.
A very hard day on Thursday as we had two teaching sessions back to back both of which required brain-related work, instead of the usual afternoon screening where the film does the work for you! However, they marked the end of the first section of these modules now so there was a bit of evaluating and reflecting to be done and it made me realise that I am in fact learning rather a lot. In the evening those of us doing the film-in-a-weekend competition had a meeting to get everything planned out, the revealed ‘object’ being a water bottle.
Yet another intense day on Friday, this time in the practical realm. Learning about back-focus and exposure with Ray was great and he requested that we take the 570s for our weekend shoot instead of the 150s, a decision I am very grateful for, despite the fact that we thought we weren’t ready. The written ‘exam’ in Gavin’s class came as quite a shock – I didn’t expect it to be so hard – and if I am honest it is the first time, since coming to the Academy, I felt like I was back in school!
Shooting our short film over the weekend was an amazing experience and I am rather proud of the result. My first real taste of a professionalish film set and it made me realise two things: first that I am destined to work in film, and second that I can’t wait to start making films properly as part of our course. Anyway, all in good time. Patience…
Choke Review
Choke is a tasteless and unimaginative stew. Look at the ingredients: the typical, middle-aged male with a problem to be solved or not; his friend the fat and simple ‘best-mate’; a broken relationship; and of course the obvious love interest. Contrived and generic characters that apparently supply everything needed for a good story, and in this case a comedy… I think… although the topic was such that to laugh would have been to publicly announce, “Yes, I’m sick and twisted”.
This film is about a sex addict trying to sort out his life and relationships. It manages to portray holistic human degradation: of the body, with mindless and insensitive sexual references; of the mind, by depicting mentally unstable characters as a source of humour; and of the spirit, by blasphemy and by disregarding the concept of real love or indeed any true emotion. Worse, it does this without ever making a clear point and even the meaning behind the title, Choke, is a plot point that has little or no importance and, again, is pointless.
Ultimately there was not a human moment in it. What I saw was animals in a disgusting celebration of the darker side of human nature.
This film is about a sex addict trying to sort out his life and relationships. It manages to portray holistic human degradation: of the body, with mindless and insensitive sexual references; of the mind, by depicting mentally unstable characters as a source of humour; and of the spirit, by blasphemy and by disregarding the concept of real love or indeed any true emotion. Worse, it does this without ever making a clear point and even the meaning behind the title, Choke, is a plot point that has little or no importance and, again, is pointless.
Ultimately there was not a human moment in it. What I saw was animals in a disgusting celebration of the darker side of human nature.
Friday, 7 November 2008
Week 6 - King Obama
Well it’s a good thing DFTV 1 were arguing for the Democrats or Obama would never have become president! The debate was a bit of a washout. Frankly, we milled them! Actually I was very impressed with all us Democratic speakers and the amazing improvement from last week. I think being smartly dressed (and the American flag) was a nice touch. I was less impressed with my own rebuttal which was a bit rushed, not all that clear and could have been better prepared; however Murdo’s quick note-passing was a bit of a life-saver. There was the old “We love Obama” song which I would have loved to squeeze in somewhere but in the end I’m glad I didn’t do it; it was a serious atmosphere and the event was handled quite professionally so I would have been lowering the standards somewhat! On a serious note the preparation for the debate was a fine opportunity to clue myself in on the presidential situation in America, the Democrats’ policies and the attitude of Obama himself. I can’t help feeling he may start to feel he’s got more than he bargained for… but I hope he makes a good president and the best of luck to him.
Adam was unavailable on Monday afternoon so we just watched two episodes of Still Game (that Rab C. Nesbitt is still evading us!). It’s an interesting sit-com because it is rather serious and sincere about such matters as family, friendship and home whilst being very satirical and light hearted on every other subject. I laughed a few times but I’m afraid the humour didn’t really agree with me; it seemed to stem mainly from the spectacle of old cronies making offensive remarks and behaving immaturely. I think this kind of comedy is a cheap way of getting laughs. Instead of thinking of something clever or witty it’s much easier to chuck in a bit of swearing, some innuendo, a joke on some taboo subject and voila! you’ve got a comedy. One thing it does do well is fit nicely (and perhaps satirically) into the stereotype of a Scottish community.
Had a sort of informal, unofficial assessment on camera with Ray just to check we weren’t going to be dropping it or throwing it around or playing rugby with it or whatever. It was fine and the important thing is both myself and Ray now feel confident about me taking the camera out, which was, I think, its purpose. Funnily enough we can set up, configure and operate a camera and monitor now but we still haven’t been told how to load a tape! Ah well, patience… it will come.
A very warm and wearying afternoon in the DTU learning how to log and capture footage using a tape deck. It’s all good stuff but the conditions are sometimes somewhat summery.
Wednesday morning, first thing, I had a meeting with my PAT (and his black and white cat), namely Andy, and I was disappointed to discover he was not wearing his postman uniform and his nose was much smaller than I remember… Anyway, we both agreed that things were pretty much fine except that I was finding I didn’t have as much free time as I would like; for music, extra projects, writing, etc. However it seems that next term things will be different and the timetable may not be as full.
Biographical films must be a huge challenge. How to fit the story of a person’s life into a couple of hours and still make it interesting and yet as accurate as possible? It restricts the filmmaker somewhat. I do believe that restrictions can be the source of extraordinary creativity but they can also limit the film to a narrow valley of dull formulaic nature. Chaplin, in my opinion, was trying desperately to heave itself out of this valley and didn’t quite make it. However it was fascinating to get an insight into the life and work of Charlie Chaplin; I was impressed with Richard Attenborough’s directing (this was the first of his films that I’ve seen) and it had a certain poignancy about it as it was almost a homage from Attenborough to the man who inspired him to go into film in the first place. Similar, I suppose, to Peter Jackson remaking King Kong, the film that inspired him to become a filmmaker. Interesting also to see the historical link between Chaplin and Good Night, and Good Luck in the form of Joseph McCarthy. Anyhow, I was satisfactorily entertained and informed by this film and look forward to meeting the man behind it all.
I think the phrase most commonly muttered after watching Donnie Darko was “You can take from it what you want”. Let me express that sentiment in a different way, “There’s not really much meaning in it so you have to make that up yourself” or “It’s deliberately vague and open-ended so that, basically, you can think what you like”. Cop out. I don’t think this film was a clever, insightful, meaningful piece of storytelling, I think it was a messy mush of ideas and concepts that were sufficiently stated to enable the viewers to believe some meaningful truth had been communicated surrounded by a black, swirling mist and if they look long and hard enough in order to see through that mist… It reminds me of that Emperor’s New Clothes story where no-one wants to risk being called a fool by admitting that the Emperor is naked. Donnie Darko is naked (not literally), there is nothing of substance in it, and yet people don’t want to be called ignorant or narrow-minded and so they pretend that there is deep, hidden meaning in it and say, “You can take from it what you want” as if it is able to touch each individual in a unique way. Allow me to finish the sentence: “You can take from it what you want, ‘cause I certainly ain’t gettin’ anything from it!”. It wasn’t even particularly well made. I remember thinking when it was halfway through that I hadn’t been hooked yet, I wasn’t rooting for anybody or engaged in the plot. Apparently it ‘speaks to’ my demographic. I imagine teenagers like it because it’s kind of weird (we love to be confused) and because it centres on a teenage character who has psychological problems and turns out to be the most important person in the world. In that sense all teenagers must, of course, be able to relate to him. After all, we all have problems and we all think we’re the most important person in the world… right?
I didn’t really know what to think when watching The King of Comedy. It wasn’t all that funny but it didn’t seem to be taking itself too seriously either. It redeemed itself at the end. The last thirty minutes or so were the best in the whole film and not because they were embarrassing or comical (which they were) but because you saw a man achieving his ultimate goal through sheer determination and foolhardiness. There’s something refreshing about seeing a character who just wants to get on TV. He knows full well he’ll go to prison immediately afterwards and he’ll have no reputation to speak of but he takes it all in his stride in order to live out his dream. Beneath all this though there is a sincere message being communicated; some people will do anything to become famous, and, more worryingly, it works; because the more outlandish they are the more memorable they will be, the more irresponsible they are the more infamous they will be. Look at Big Brother or any celebrity programme and it’s clear to see the relevance of this film; people will do anything to be famous, to be on TV, to get their picture in the paper, and so on. The boundaries of decency and respectability are fast disappearing.
The Open Day on Friday was a bit of a disappointment. When I turned up, in the afternoon, there were no prospective students around to chat with at the booth. The screening of DFTV films was interesting, I’d seen some of them before, and it gives us an idea of what standards we have to meet (and, here’s hoping, surpass!) but, again, no chance for conversation. Anyway, that was that and then it was the weekend.
Adam was unavailable on Monday afternoon so we just watched two episodes of Still Game (that Rab C. Nesbitt is still evading us!). It’s an interesting sit-com because it is rather serious and sincere about such matters as family, friendship and home whilst being very satirical and light hearted on every other subject. I laughed a few times but I’m afraid the humour didn’t really agree with me; it seemed to stem mainly from the spectacle of old cronies making offensive remarks and behaving immaturely. I think this kind of comedy is a cheap way of getting laughs. Instead of thinking of something clever or witty it’s much easier to chuck in a bit of swearing, some innuendo, a joke on some taboo subject and voila! you’ve got a comedy. One thing it does do well is fit nicely (and perhaps satirically) into the stereotype of a Scottish community.
Had a sort of informal, unofficial assessment on camera with Ray just to check we weren’t going to be dropping it or throwing it around or playing rugby with it or whatever. It was fine and the important thing is both myself and Ray now feel confident about me taking the camera out, which was, I think, its purpose. Funnily enough we can set up, configure and operate a camera and monitor now but we still haven’t been told how to load a tape! Ah well, patience… it will come.
A very warm and wearying afternoon in the DTU learning how to log and capture footage using a tape deck. It’s all good stuff but the conditions are sometimes somewhat summery.
Wednesday morning, first thing, I had a meeting with my PAT (and his black and white cat), namely Andy, and I was disappointed to discover he was not wearing his postman uniform and his nose was much smaller than I remember… Anyway, we both agreed that things were pretty much fine except that I was finding I didn’t have as much free time as I would like; for music, extra projects, writing, etc. However it seems that next term things will be different and the timetable may not be as full.
Biographical films must be a huge challenge. How to fit the story of a person’s life into a couple of hours and still make it interesting and yet as accurate as possible? It restricts the filmmaker somewhat. I do believe that restrictions can be the source of extraordinary creativity but they can also limit the film to a narrow valley of dull formulaic nature. Chaplin, in my opinion, was trying desperately to heave itself out of this valley and didn’t quite make it. However it was fascinating to get an insight into the life and work of Charlie Chaplin; I was impressed with Richard Attenborough’s directing (this was the first of his films that I’ve seen) and it had a certain poignancy about it as it was almost a homage from Attenborough to the man who inspired him to go into film in the first place. Similar, I suppose, to Peter Jackson remaking King Kong, the film that inspired him to become a filmmaker. Interesting also to see the historical link between Chaplin and Good Night, and Good Luck in the form of Joseph McCarthy. Anyhow, I was satisfactorily entertained and informed by this film and look forward to meeting the man behind it all.
I think the phrase most commonly muttered after watching Donnie Darko was “You can take from it what you want”. Let me express that sentiment in a different way, “There’s not really much meaning in it so you have to make that up yourself” or “It’s deliberately vague and open-ended so that, basically, you can think what you like”. Cop out. I don’t think this film was a clever, insightful, meaningful piece of storytelling, I think it was a messy mush of ideas and concepts that were sufficiently stated to enable the viewers to believe some meaningful truth had been communicated surrounded by a black, swirling mist and if they look long and hard enough in order to see through that mist… It reminds me of that Emperor’s New Clothes story where no-one wants to risk being called a fool by admitting that the Emperor is naked. Donnie Darko is naked (not literally), there is nothing of substance in it, and yet people don’t want to be called ignorant or narrow-minded and so they pretend that there is deep, hidden meaning in it and say, “You can take from it what you want” as if it is able to touch each individual in a unique way. Allow me to finish the sentence: “You can take from it what you want, ‘cause I certainly ain’t gettin’ anything from it!”. It wasn’t even particularly well made. I remember thinking when it was halfway through that I hadn’t been hooked yet, I wasn’t rooting for anybody or engaged in the plot. Apparently it ‘speaks to’ my demographic. I imagine teenagers like it because it’s kind of weird (we love to be confused) and because it centres on a teenage character who has psychological problems and turns out to be the most important person in the world. In that sense all teenagers must, of course, be able to relate to him. After all, we all have problems and we all think we’re the most important person in the world… right?
I didn’t really know what to think when watching The King of Comedy. It wasn’t all that funny but it didn’t seem to be taking itself too seriously either. It redeemed itself at the end. The last thirty minutes or so were the best in the whole film and not because they were embarrassing or comical (which they were) but because you saw a man achieving his ultimate goal through sheer determination and foolhardiness. There’s something refreshing about seeing a character who just wants to get on TV. He knows full well he’ll go to prison immediately afterwards and he’ll have no reputation to speak of but he takes it all in his stride in order to live out his dream. Beneath all this though there is a sincere message being communicated; some people will do anything to become famous, and, more worryingly, it works; because the more outlandish they are the more memorable they will be, the more irresponsible they are the more infamous they will be. Look at Big Brother or any celebrity programme and it’s clear to see the relevance of this film; people will do anything to be famous, to be on TV, to get their picture in the paper, and so on. The boundaries of decency and respectability are fast disappearing.
The Open Day on Friday was a bit of a disappointment. When I turned up, in the afternoon, there were no prospective students around to chat with at the booth. The screening of DFTV films was interesting, I’d seen some of them before, and it gives us an idea of what standards we have to meet (and, here’s hoping, surpass!) but, again, no chance for conversation. Anyway, that was that and then it was the weekend.
Friday, 31 October 2008
Week 5 - Wires and Lights
I think we all felt rather ashamed after Screenwriting this week. Richard had asked for the speakers of the debate next Monday to prepare their speeches and none of them were at an adequate level. However we got our act together throughout the rest of the week and I began to really look forward to the debate.
A nice relaxed class with Adam on Monday afternoon and we watched Takin’ Over the Asylum; a classic example of bleak Scottish filmmaking. Seems to have more depth than most American TV shows which can be very sugar-coated and one dimensional. However, this means it is not so easily consumed; it is a bit too heavy and serious. I did enjoy the spectacle of David Tennant as a ‘loony’, as they put it; quite a contrast to the good old Doctor.
Exciting stuff on Tuesday morning. Basically a job offer for an event known as Show Light. It’s not so much a job offer though as an opportunity for the BBC to take advantage of cheap student labour but of course I’m fine with that because we get experience on a live shoot and the chance to almost run a studio (and free meals!). The guy did talk for ages about who they were hoping to have speaking (which doesn’t really affect us all that much) and used up almost all our camera time. However we had enough time to get out the monitors and learn how to calibrate both them and the viewfinder.
I had rather a busy Wednesday. MER meeting in the morning, which was very interesting and I think will be very useful in the future, then a Programme meeting and then we watched Erin Brockovich. Yet again, I underestimated how vital the star was to the success of the movie. As a Julia Roberts film it was rather good. As a Stephen Soderbergh film it was fairly average. We were covering structure of a screenplay on Monday and I did notice that the film managed to follow very closely the accepted Hollywood structure. I suppose the real story was pretty good Hollywood material from the beginning; a single mother taking on a big company. It’s that kind of David and Goliath situation again which audiences always enjoy.
We’re getting on to a bit of marketing in Andy’s class; looking at trailers and posters. It’s terrible really. How commercial the whole thing is. I actually really enjoy looking at how they sell films but it is a bit of a shame that it seems to be all about the money and very little about how good the film is.
Good Night, and Good Luck was actually a really good film. I liked the style and the attention to detail but it was quite a tiring watch. It seemed a lot longer than it was simply because there was no music to move it along and they did use rather long clips of actual 50s television footage. Ever since studying The Crucible in Higher Drama, which Arthur Miller wrote in response to McCarthyism, I’ve been very interested in that period of history. So this film was very illuminating on how exactly events happened and the part Edward R. Murrow had to play. When I read his speech I had imagined him as rather a benevolent, kindly gentleman; rather different from the character portrayed in Clooney’s film. It annoyed me that he would look at the camera to say "Good Night -" and then look away when he said "and Good Luck" as if he didn't really mean it. He did it everytime and I would think Ed Murrow would have been much more sincere than that. One other thing struck me whilst watching it: they smoked a lot of cigarettes in the 1950s!
The Ross/Brand incident, where they left an offensive message on Andrew Sachs' answering machine, was discussed in class on Friday morning. What it shows, I think, is that the BBC is not taking sufficient responsibility for what it broadcasts. What concerns me most is that the BBC should be providing a service for the public and it is the first place people go for quality TV or radio. We have to ask: are we getting the quality we expect? In my opinion the answer is no. If that is the case then something must be done.
A nice relaxed class with Adam on Monday afternoon and we watched Takin’ Over the Asylum; a classic example of bleak Scottish filmmaking. Seems to have more depth than most American TV shows which can be very sugar-coated and one dimensional. However, this means it is not so easily consumed; it is a bit too heavy and serious. I did enjoy the spectacle of David Tennant as a ‘loony’, as they put it; quite a contrast to the good old Doctor.
Exciting stuff on Tuesday morning. Basically a job offer for an event known as Show Light. It’s not so much a job offer though as an opportunity for the BBC to take advantage of cheap student labour but of course I’m fine with that because we get experience on a live shoot and the chance to almost run a studio (and free meals!). The guy did talk for ages about who they were hoping to have speaking (which doesn’t really affect us all that much) and used up almost all our camera time. However we had enough time to get out the monitors and learn how to calibrate both them and the viewfinder.
I had rather a busy Wednesday. MER meeting in the morning, which was very interesting and I think will be very useful in the future, then a Programme meeting and then we watched Erin Brockovich. Yet again, I underestimated how vital the star was to the success of the movie. As a Julia Roberts film it was rather good. As a Stephen Soderbergh film it was fairly average. We were covering structure of a screenplay on Monday and I did notice that the film managed to follow very closely the accepted Hollywood structure. I suppose the real story was pretty good Hollywood material from the beginning; a single mother taking on a big company. It’s that kind of David and Goliath situation again which audiences always enjoy.
We’re getting on to a bit of marketing in Andy’s class; looking at trailers and posters. It’s terrible really. How commercial the whole thing is. I actually really enjoy looking at how they sell films but it is a bit of a shame that it seems to be all about the money and very little about how good the film is.
Good Night, and Good Luck was actually a really good film. I liked the style and the attention to detail but it was quite a tiring watch. It seemed a lot longer than it was simply because there was no music to move it along and they did use rather long clips of actual 50s television footage. Ever since studying The Crucible in Higher Drama, which Arthur Miller wrote in response to McCarthyism, I’ve been very interested in that period of history. So this film was very illuminating on how exactly events happened and the part Edward R. Murrow had to play. When I read his speech I had imagined him as rather a benevolent, kindly gentleman; rather different from the character portrayed in Clooney’s film. It annoyed me that he would look at the camera to say "Good Night -" and then look away when he said "and Good Luck" as if he didn't really mean it. He did it everytime and I would think Ed Murrow would have been much more sincere than that. One other thing struck me whilst watching it: they smoked a lot of cigarettes in the 1950s!
The Ross/Brand incident, where they left an offensive message on Andrew Sachs' answering machine, was discussed in class on Friday morning. What it shows, I think, is that the BBC is not taking sufficient responsibility for what it broadcasts. What concerns me most is that the BBC should be providing a service for the public and it is the first place people go for quality TV or radio. We have to ask: are we getting the quality we expect? In my opinion the answer is no. If that is the case then something must be done.
Saturday, 25 October 2008
Week 4 - "Rosebud..." [Dies]
We watched some short films in Screenwriting. They were interesting but nothing spectacular in my opinion. I tend to think of short films as being merely a stepping stone to making features, or for compiling a show reel, but I suppose when thinking about it they are a form in their own right. What makes it difficult is that there is less time to tell a story in a short and therefore they normally focus on character or symbolism or they just end up being purely abstract. I believe every film should say something but I think sometimes in shorts people try and say too much. Simple but powerful is the best combination I think.
Discussed demographics in Adam’s class. I don’t like generalising society into ‘classes’, it seems unrealistic, but I suppose it’s necessary. I certainly learned that it’s no easy task coming up with an idea for a programme that everyone will enjoy. We came to the conclusion that sit-coms were the best bet with Friends being an example of a programme that is relatively universal.
Tuesday was a good day. Camera and more camera. We finally got our hands on the kit and learnt how to set up and take down a tripod and camera. It was slightly monotonous and repetitive but I actually really enjoyed that. Yes I’m eager to get going and learn the finer skills but I learn best by doing things over and over again, until they become second nature, and therefore I am perfectly willing to spend as much time as necessary on perfecting the basics.
On Wednesday we watched Citizen Kane. The greatest film ever made; for it’s time, perhaps, but since then it has been surpassed. My expectations were so high, I suppose, that it would have been hard pressed to meet them and unfortunately it under-shot quite considerably. However, it shows that what it takes to really advance and revolutionise anything is for someone to be brave and carefree. Then again it is also a gamble; I think Welles got lucky.
For me ‘Rosebud’ represented a childhood memory that had emotional value for Kane particularly because it recalls the time when he last saw his mother. Kane spends the whole of his life trying to recreate that security and satisfaction but goes about it in entirely the wrong way. He holds onto that ‘Rosebud’ memory like a family relic until the very last and perhaps realises, at his death, that it is still of greatest value to him than everything else he has gained. Also I thought that the actual meaning of the word ‘Rosebud’ could have significance (besides the alleged rude metaphor). It could represent a picture of a flower that has not bloomed. Even at the end of his life Kane remained a bud, he had not opened to reveal the flower that he could have been. Roses are often referred to as the most beautiful flower of all and if the rosebud symbolises Kane then it suggests he had the potential to become a metaphorically beautiful person but never did.
What I really did like about the film is that it is ultimately a story of a man who is looking for love. It highlights the futility of worldly pursuits such as fame, success, power, popularity and shows that there are some things that money simply can not buy. This is Kane’s fatal flaw. He has all these things but he lacks love for – and from – others. This is the reason he never blooms and remains a ‘Rosebud’. In a way this film harks back to good old Macbeth. A tragic hero whose ambition causes him to gain everything that is fleeting, and lose everything that is important.
We watched Broadcast News (Albert Brooks was hilarious) which made me think how much we accept nowadays that presenters are chosen for their looks and also how much fiction is being dressed up as fact. It’s scary to think how passive we are about the whole situation when quite frankly it’s wrong; news should inform and it shouldn’t matter what the presenter looks like if they’re good at what they do. I talked to my dad about it and he said that he has seen a dramatic decline in the quality of the whole BBC over his lifetime.
Embarrassingly I slept in on Friday morning and ended up turning up ten minutes late for class. I felt rather annoyed with myself since this was my first offence and there was really no reason why I should have slept through my alarm. Thankfully Andy was merciful.
Discussed demographics in Adam’s class. I don’t like generalising society into ‘classes’, it seems unrealistic, but I suppose it’s necessary. I certainly learned that it’s no easy task coming up with an idea for a programme that everyone will enjoy. We came to the conclusion that sit-coms were the best bet with Friends being an example of a programme that is relatively universal.
Tuesday was a good day. Camera and more camera. We finally got our hands on the kit and learnt how to set up and take down a tripod and camera. It was slightly monotonous and repetitive but I actually really enjoyed that. Yes I’m eager to get going and learn the finer skills but I learn best by doing things over and over again, until they become second nature, and therefore I am perfectly willing to spend as much time as necessary on perfecting the basics.
On Wednesday we watched Citizen Kane. The greatest film ever made; for it’s time, perhaps, but since then it has been surpassed. My expectations were so high, I suppose, that it would have been hard pressed to meet them and unfortunately it under-shot quite considerably. However, it shows that what it takes to really advance and revolutionise anything is for someone to be brave and carefree. Then again it is also a gamble; I think Welles got lucky.
For me ‘Rosebud’ represented a childhood memory that had emotional value for Kane particularly because it recalls the time when he last saw his mother. Kane spends the whole of his life trying to recreate that security and satisfaction but goes about it in entirely the wrong way. He holds onto that ‘Rosebud’ memory like a family relic until the very last and perhaps realises, at his death, that it is still of greatest value to him than everything else he has gained. Also I thought that the actual meaning of the word ‘Rosebud’ could have significance (besides the alleged rude metaphor). It could represent a picture of a flower that has not bloomed. Even at the end of his life Kane remained a bud, he had not opened to reveal the flower that he could have been. Roses are often referred to as the most beautiful flower of all and if the rosebud symbolises Kane then it suggests he had the potential to become a metaphorically beautiful person but never did.
What I really did like about the film is that it is ultimately a story of a man who is looking for love. It highlights the futility of worldly pursuits such as fame, success, power, popularity and shows that there are some things that money simply can not buy. This is Kane’s fatal flaw. He has all these things but he lacks love for – and from – others. This is the reason he never blooms and remains a ‘Rosebud’. In a way this film harks back to good old Macbeth. A tragic hero whose ambition causes him to gain everything that is fleeting, and lose everything that is important.
We watched Broadcast News (Albert Brooks was hilarious) which made me think how much we accept nowadays that presenters are chosen for their looks and also how much fiction is being dressed up as fact. It’s scary to think how passive we are about the whole situation when quite frankly it’s wrong; news should inform and it shouldn’t matter what the presenter looks like if they’re good at what they do. I talked to my dad about it and he said that he has seen a dramatic decline in the quality of the whole BBC over his lifetime.
Embarrassingly I slept in on Friday morning and ended up turning up ten minutes late for class. I felt rather annoyed with myself since this was my first offence and there was really no reason why I should have slept through my alarm. Thankfully Andy was merciful.
Friday, 17 October 2008
Week 3 - So it begins...
Unfortunately I was away competing at the Royal National Mòd in Falkirk for the majority of this week (that makes it sound like I hated it; actually it was very enjoyable… I came first in all four competitions!) so my experience of the first actual classes was somewhat limited.
The first hour of screenwriting was very productive though. We started with a simple game called ‘Statues’ (Richard always begins by doing a warm-up exercise to get our writer brains ticking) in which two people froze in certain positions and we had to create a story around that image. I got a good one going about an honourable soldier determined to do his duty even when it costs him his life. Feature film material! The short time I had in that class was enough to convince me it would be really enjoyable. It seemed like the perfect setting for ideas to come alive.
Content Origination was on Tuesday morning because Adam had been ill on Monday afternoon. We got a good introduction to this module and made a start on analysing television content and compared channel schedules. It was rather gratifying, in a way, to be told by Adam, two or three times, that we were not the lowest common denominator audience. Sure enough even within that one lesson I felt like a much more informed audience member than your average television viewer.
I missed out on a class that afternoon with Gavin; setting up our Edit Share accounts. I did take the necessary steps to catch up on that score.
If I thought the old Creative Beginnings was over then Wednesday morning proved me wrong. I knew it was coming, I just couldn’t be bothered. What made it worse was I arrived well before 9am to ensure I wouldn’t be late only to discover it didn’t actually start until 9:30. Not a good start to the day! Of the Group Presentations that morning I will say little – I prefer to forget – but it was obvious some groups had done more preparation than others. It was interesting however to get an overview of the previous two weeks from different people’s point of view. Anyway, enough of that. Creative Beginnings is over.
We had the first of our Programme Meetings at lunchtime that Wednesday. Not much to talk about yet though, we’ve barely got started.
Wednesday afternoon we watched Inside Man. I like heist movies in general so I enjoyed it but what I liked most was that this bank robbery was completely harmless. The tension rested on the fate of the hostages when in fact there was no threat to them at any point. I am fascinated by stories where the bad guy is not actually doing anything that bad but fools the good guys and the audience into thinking he is. To be fair I did actually guess, about a third of the way into the film, that the robbers did not intend to be violent but the clever placing of the fake shooting of the hostage caught me out momentarily. I did think that the tone of the film was slightly too light (maybe because of Denzel Washington) meaning that I did not feel enough concern for the hostages. I was expecting a good old gun fight at any minute when I should have been worried sick that someone would pull the trigger. It didn’t feel real enough to me. What amazed me most was the selling point of this film. 76% of the audience went to see Denzel Washington. I did not realise; first, that Washington was such an influential actor, and second that a film’s success could rely almost entirely on who stars in it.
I missed both Andy’s classes on Thursday but caught up sufficiently by looking at the slides which he emailed us.
On Friday morning we watched The Truman Show. I had not seen it and I loved it. It’s scary how close it has come to reality (no pun intended) and one wonders if TV will ever become that extreme. I’d managed to get a glimpse of the goings on in a BBC live edit suite during the Mòd and the director demanding what cameras to cut to rang true in the film as in real life. What fascinated me most about the film is that it makes the point that even if we lived in a world that was perfect, and we discovered that it was not the real world, we would still want to escape to the imperfect real world. It’s a similar idea to The Matrix, in ways, but in this case more realistic. Ultimately I suppose this is because humans are constantly searching for the truth. We are greedy for answers. It’s like we know there might be something bigger out there and we would sacrifice our present relative comfort in order to know what that is. An interesting one, this constant search for the truth. Something within all of us that needs to be satisfied… a hunger. I know a few people who seemed to have found a way to satisfy that hunger. They’ve found truth but surprisingly it wasn’t in learning, spirituality, some inner revelation or anything like that. In fact they simply call it faith in Jesus Christ….
The first hour of screenwriting was very productive though. We started with a simple game called ‘Statues’ (Richard always begins by doing a warm-up exercise to get our writer brains ticking) in which two people froze in certain positions and we had to create a story around that image. I got a good one going about an honourable soldier determined to do his duty even when it costs him his life. Feature film material! The short time I had in that class was enough to convince me it would be really enjoyable. It seemed like the perfect setting for ideas to come alive.
Content Origination was on Tuesday morning because Adam had been ill on Monday afternoon. We got a good introduction to this module and made a start on analysing television content and compared channel schedules. It was rather gratifying, in a way, to be told by Adam, two or three times, that we were not the lowest common denominator audience. Sure enough even within that one lesson I felt like a much more informed audience member than your average television viewer.
I missed out on a class that afternoon with Gavin; setting up our Edit Share accounts. I did take the necessary steps to catch up on that score.
If I thought the old Creative Beginnings was over then Wednesday morning proved me wrong. I knew it was coming, I just couldn’t be bothered. What made it worse was I arrived well before 9am to ensure I wouldn’t be late only to discover it didn’t actually start until 9:30. Not a good start to the day! Of the Group Presentations that morning I will say little – I prefer to forget – but it was obvious some groups had done more preparation than others. It was interesting however to get an overview of the previous two weeks from different people’s point of view. Anyway, enough of that. Creative Beginnings is over.
We had the first of our Programme Meetings at lunchtime that Wednesday. Not much to talk about yet though, we’ve barely got started.
Wednesday afternoon we watched Inside Man. I like heist movies in general so I enjoyed it but what I liked most was that this bank robbery was completely harmless. The tension rested on the fate of the hostages when in fact there was no threat to them at any point. I am fascinated by stories where the bad guy is not actually doing anything that bad but fools the good guys and the audience into thinking he is. To be fair I did actually guess, about a third of the way into the film, that the robbers did not intend to be violent but the clever placing of the fake shooting of the hostage caught me out momentarily. I did think that the tone of the film was slightly too light (maybe because of Denzel Washington) meaning that I did not feel enough concern for the hostages. I was expecting a good old gun fight at any minute when I should have been worried sick that someone would pull the trigger. It didn’t feel real enough to me. What amazed me most was the selling point of this film. 76% of the audience went to see Denzel Washington. I did not realise; first, that Washington was such an influential actor, and second that a film’s success could rely almost entirely on who stars in it.
I missed both Andy’s classes on Thursday but caught up sufficiently by looking at the slides which he emailed us.
On Friday morning we watched The Truman Show. I had not seen it and I loved it. It’s scary how close it has come to reality (no pun intended) and one wonders if TV will ever become that extreme. I’d managed to get a glimpse of the goings on in a BBC live edit suite during the Mòd and the director demanding what cameras to cut to rang true in the film as in real life. What fascinated me most about the film is that it makes the point that even if we lived in a world that was perfect, and we discovered that it was not the real world, we would still want to escape to the imperfect real world. It’s a similar idea to The Matrix, in ways, but in this case more realistic. Ultimately I suppose this is because humans are constantly searching for the truth. We are greedy for answers. It’s like we know there might be something bigger out there and we would sacrifice our present relative comfort in order to know what that is. An interesting one, this constant search for the truth. Something within all of us that needs to be satisfied… a hunger. I know a few people who seemed to have found a way to satisfy that hunger. They’ve found truth but surprisingly it wasn’t in learning, spirituality, some inner revelation or anything like that. In fact they simply call it faith in Jesus Christ….
Friday, 10 October 2008
Creative Beginnings – A Retrospect
A lot of this module was very personal and geared towards ME: my needs, my concerns, my problems, my experience. Being introduced to the Programme staff, the Academy building and other staff, the Academic Administration and Support Department (aka ‘The One Stop Shop’), Health & Safety, the Principal and ultimately the Creative Beginnings module – and what was involved in it – was all very interesting and helpful and, although tedious at times, necessary. Despite all the introductions it took sometime before it finally sunk in that I would be here, at the Academy, for the next three years at least. In fact, if I’m totally honest, it never really sunk in.
The first proper Workshop was led by Contemporary Theatre Practice students in their second year and it involved running round in circles, playing games and mapping out (both mentally and literally) a map of our lives up to the point when we got into the RSAMD. I assume it was supposed to help us get used to reflective practice (which it did to a certain extent) but it made me realise just how little I remember of my childhood. I think this is probably because it was a happy one. I have very few painful experiences from my early days branded into my memory which I am very grateful for.
Whilst we’re on the subject of ‘me’ we may as well skip to the last Workshop we did in Creative Beginnings; Personal Development Planning. If the first workshop was to help us look back, then this one was certainly to help us look forward. It involved considering what I have achieved, where I want to get (by setting goals), what might prevent me from getting there and how I can overcome those barriers. This is all well and good and I understand the necessity for looking ahead but I am always cautious when it comes to focussing on oneself. I believe setting goals is important, achieving them is important, achieving success can be important but these things should never be top of the priority list. If they are they can lead to a mind which is self-centred, self-obsessed, insensitive, uncaring and ultimately power-hungry. The creative industry is a collaborative industry so such a mindset should be avoided at all costs.
Of the Body Image Workshop I will say little. I had thought this would be a very integral part of the module; learning how to be a healthy practitioner, exploring body image as portrayed by the media and the ethics concerning how we perceive others’ physicality. Instead it seems it consisted mainly of a slightly over-weight pretentious woman telling us to spell rude words using our bodies. At this stage in the module I was impatient to get started on the actual course anyway and I couldn’t help feeling this was a waste of my time. I got very little from it.
Where Creative Beginnings really succeeded for me was in the workshops which were designed to highlight the importance of collaboration. I think especially of the infamous Dérive. I think it would be fair to say that most of the students (myself included) were rather sceptical about how effective a silent walk around a city would be. It turned out that it was very effective for scaring members of the public. If there is one thing more threatening than a group of ten youths walking towards you it is a group of ten youths walking towards you in complete silence. There’s no telling what they’ve got in mind. However I do readily admit that it was a unique exercise that I would not have had an opportunity to experience in normal circumstances (and yes, these are not normal; I’m at the RSAMD for goodness sake!) and therefore it was worth it. Creative Improvisation and the Film Discussion were other examples of workshops that illuminated the importance of collaboration and etiquette.
All in all Creative Beginnings did what it said on the packet. It was full of Creative mumbo-jumbo and it was the Beginning of my experiences and relationships at the Academy. I feel I will come to be grateful for it, sometime in the future, but at present I’m more grateful that I’ve actually started doing what I signed up for.
The first proper Workshop was led by Contemporary Theatre Practice students in their second year and it involved running round in circles, playing games and mapping out (both mentally and literally) a map of our lives up to the point when we got into the RSAMD. I assume it was supposed to help us get used to reflective practice (which it did to a certain extent) but it made me realise just how little I remember of my childhood. I think this is probably because it was a happy one. I have very few painful experiences from my early days branded into my memory which I am very grateful for.
Whilst we’re on the subject of ‘me’ we may as well skip to the last Workshop we did in Creative Beginnings; Personal Development Planning. If the first workshop was to help us look back, then this one was certainly to help us look forward. It involved considering what I have achieved, where I want to get (by setting goals), what might prevent me from getting there and how I can overcome those barriers. This is all well and good and I understand the necessity for looking ahead but I am always cautious when it comes to focussing on oneself. I believe setting goals is important, achieving them is important, achieving success can be important but these things should never be top of the priority list. If they are they can lead to a mind which is self-centred, self-obsessed, insensitive, uncaring and ultimately power-hungry. The creative industry is a collaborative industry so such a mindset should be avoided at all costs.
Of the Body Image Workshop I will say little. I had thought this would be a very integral part of the module; learning how to be a healthy practitioner, exploring body image as portrayed by the media and the ethics concerning how we perceive others’ physicality. Instead it seems it consisted mainly of a slightly over-weight pretentious woman telling us to spell rude words using our bodies. At this stage in the module I was impatient to get started on the actual course anyway and I couldn’t help feeling this was a waste of my time. I got very little from it.
Where Creative Beginnings really succeeded for me was in the workshops which were designed to highlight the importance of collaboration. I think especially of the infamous Dérive. I think it would be fair to say that most of the students (myself included) were rather sceptical about how effective a silent walk around a city would be. It turned out that it was very effective for scaring members of the public. If there is one thing more threatening than a group of ten youths walking towards you it is a group of ten youths walking towards you in complete silence. There’s no telling what they’ve got in mind. However I do readily admit that it was a unique exercise that I would not have had an opportunity to experience in normal circumstances (and yes, these are not normal; I’m at the RSAMD for goodness sake!) and therefore it was worth it. Creative Improvisation and the Film Discussion were other examples of workshops that illuminated the importance of collaboration and etiquette.
All in all Creative Beginnings did what it said on the packet. It was full of Creative mumbo-jumbo and it was the Beginning of my experiences and relationships at the Academy. I feel I will come to be grateful for it, sometime in the future, but at present I’m more grateful that I’ve actually started doing what I signed up for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
