Return from Clermont-Ferrand
Brian and I are back from our totally inspiring trip to Clermont-Ferrand. A big thanks goes out to those that made it possible for us to go there and get the lie of the land.
As I mentioned previously it will probably take a while for the things we learned in Clermont-Ferrand to register here on the blog and in our script. But already there are a few things that seem interesting and CF's resonance is beginning to be felt.
For instance, I have a far clearer idea of how I would like to position the look of my film. I feel that this is at once important and unimportant. There is no point in having a film that looks great if the story isn't there. This is blatantly obvious stuff as a broad filmmaking rule is concerned, but, all too often you find examples of work that suffer because of the image. This is by no means limited short filmmaking either.
I recently watched a feature that potentially had a great story with fantastic drama but the image was pitched in such a way that any emotional content of the film became secondary, the production values were just too high for the story which would have been immeasurably improved had there been a stronger sense of reality to the images. Too beautiful isn't the problem here either, the problem was of something being inappropriate. This message was firmly put home for me in Clermont-Ferrand more through discussion with other filmmakers more than with anything in particular that I saw. Those that had a strong focus on the image of their films seemed to be missing a vital ingredient. The upshot of this for me was that I have some way to go with my script before I'm ready to really consider the camera. I knew this anyway but there is nothing better to focus the mind than having the consequences of actions laid bare for all to see.
Of course, balance is everything. I still want to shoot on film and know that some of the strictures that come with that process could be damaging to my ability to catch certain things, but I need to learn to cope better with the medium and create an environment that allows for those issues. I believe that the discussions I've had and things I have watched recently have been very helpful towards getting the best out of my script, and of course getting my script to be the best it can be too, and that must come first. I will continue to plan to shoot on film for now but it is the script that will get the focus of my attentions and in the background I will be thinking about how best to achieve the results I want.
Back to the drawing board for me, to be forewarned is to be forearmed (or something?).
As I mentioned previously it will probably take a while for the things we learned in Clermont-Ferrand to register here on the blog and in our script. But already there are a few things that seem interesting and CF's resonance is beginning to be felt.
For instance, I have a far clearer idea of how I would like to position the look of my film. I feel that this is at once important and unimportant. There is no point in having a film that looks great if the story isn't there. This is blatantly obvious stuff as a broad filmmaking rule is concerned, but, all too often you find examples of work that suffer because of the image. This is by no means limited short filmmaking either.
I recently watched a feature that potentially had a great story with fantastic drama but the image was pitched in such a way that any emotional content of the film became secondary, the production values were just too high for the story which would have been immeasurably improved had there been a stronger sense of reality to the images. Too beautiful isn't the problem here either, the problem was of something being inappropriate. This message was firmly put home for me in Clermont-Ferrand more through discussion with other filmmakers more than with anything in particular that I saw. Those that had a strong focus on the image of their films seemed to be missing a vital ingredient. The upshot of this for me was that I have some way to go with my script before I'm ready to really consider the camera. I knew this anyway but there is nothing better to focus the mind than having the consequences of actions laid bare for all to see.
Of course, balance is everything. I still want to shoot on film and know that some of the strictures that come with that process could be damaging to my ability to catch certain things, but I need to learn to cope better with the medium and create an environment that allows for those issues. I believe that the discussions I've had and things I have watched recently have been very helpful towards getting the best out of my script, and of course getting my script to be the best it can be too, and that must come first. I will continue to plan to shoot on film for now but it is the script that will get the focus of my attentions and in the background I will be thinking about how best to achieve the results I want.
Back to the drawing board for me, to be forewarned is to be forearmed (or something?).
You know, there are many film blogs I've read along the way chock full of wayhey Im so cool,listen to me cause Im mr/ms uber hipster film maker with the true vision, that it is such a refreshing change to come here and see posts like the one you just made Colin.
Although I've only been to one film festival, Sundance, and all I saw there was just a bunch of postering, phoney networking attempts, being seen in the right places (and hitting the gifting places), I know little about how other festivals work, so it's a delight that an established person such as yourself and others at Sigma will go to these events and say-I've learn this etc. Its obvious despite those fun pics, you actually did some serious film talk and learning, and I am certain this will pay off in the end,no matter how many trips to the drawing board! Thanks for the honesty and candor about your process with Luci.
Hi Colin,
A question - what do you mean "shoot on film?"
This was a very interesting post. Thank you. I have often wondered what came first - the camera or the screenplay, so to speak. In other words, coming from my frame of reference which is theatre, we write scripts for the stage with only some consideration of the particulars of staging unless the staging is so unusual & therefore organic to the text that it must be written into the text. Otherwise, staging decisions are left to the director of each particular production of the script. Make sense? So, hence, I have often wondered to what extent "camera work" is written into a screenplay at the outset or worked in later by the director.
Sorry! - don't mean to make you explain "FILM 101" to me - just curious. Your post got me thinking.