This is the part where i talk.
Showing posts with label editing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label editing. Show all posts
Friday, November 1, 2013
Monday, October 28, 2013
WHITE THUNDER Production Portfolio
Production Portfolio
IB Film HL
Session: May 2013
Rationale
I chose to do White Thunder because I really wanted to make a cheesy movie and experiment
with the lost art of zooms. I think that lowballing rather than super serious can be quite an
advantage with the audience. I also notice it is easier to get a reaction from the audience if you
make them laugh rather than feel bad or emotional, and my bitter reaction to my last super
serious film, the bitter tragedy of it being comedic to the audience. After seeing the film black
dynamite, I knew what I had to do for my next film.
Word Count 100
Trailer
It is a rational trailer. First, I set open framed shots in the beginning to create questions in the
viewer. The car shots and mechanized sound effects represented speed, and the zooms
accentuate fast feelings. Afterwards, I introduce Thunder and his qualities such as violent, being
a “loose cannon” and needing a partner. Panama is introduced characteristics of being cocky.
Using Andy, we establish that they are both cops down on their luck. A shot of Panama and
Thunder disagree on musical taste explains their relationship, and ending shots conclude the
bad guy’s role, Dragon Wang.
Word Count 98
Written Commentary for White Thunder
I had always wanted to do a really fun film. I had made a White Thunder short before, and
I wanted a to expand on the character. Once my co produced project Epic Roll , I knew that a
comedic cheesy fun film was something I had to make. The idea for White Thunder came from
my love of Buddy cop movies and the recent explosion of parody blaxploitation and cheesy 70’s
parodies. The plot itself is a cliched buddy cop story, present in many films from Rush Hour to
Running Scared to Bad Boys. They would always begin with introduction to the characters, how
they were forced to conform to each other, find how different they were, mess up, take the case
into their own hands, and become friends. And thus our plot was created as so.
The script began as a treatment that was created at the end of sophomore year basically
outlining the events that would transpire in the full version of White Thunder. A short “pilot
episode” screentest proving ground for the show was shot later that year but not a full version.
With the help of 3 different screenwriters, a continuous edit and a 2nd draft, we completed the
majority of the major scenes, and I was very happy with actually having a almost full script by
the time of actual production, unlike many of my other productions. Unique characters would end
up being the most important part of this film, rather that could have been an intimate relationship
between Panama and Thunder. For better or for worse, this was the influence Jonathan Nievera
brought onto the project, and this would lead to the notorious marketing campaign. My “dual
meaning backhand” blunt style of writing was somewhat present in this project, as in the intro
scene, which was loosely scripted. For example, Thunder says “ Stop being a pansy, Jet. You
know I love you...” which at first glance is not inherently obvious, but under tighter scrutiny is
clearly recognized. The script was a marvelous thing, it created not only cohesion and efficiency,
but direction on the project., and was very beneficial.
Setting the film as a period piece was really a challenge with this film. Having to amass
the wardrobe, sets, props and even vehicles for such a large project was quite an undertaking,
but I think it was a really good learning experience. Even behind the scenes our film was a period
piece; This type of practical effect, home movie blockbuster production harkens back to the 70’s
Super 8 genre style filmmaking usually identified with Spielberg’s early works, and homaged to in
the film Super 8. To that end, each character in our film was uniquely characterized by their
wardrobe and choice of props. For example, White Thunder uses a large .45 Colt, and Panama
Jack uses a small, almost insignificant .22 revolver. Thunder is a brash and hulking fighter,as
well as speaker, whose large and flamboyant style may not actually relate to his actual
effectiveness. Panama, on the other hand, is a small and sly guy, he can hide his secrets until
he wants to strike. However, most of the Panama direct characterization didn't make it through
the first few drafts, and his character is very flat, letting the script focus more and Thunder’s
epiphany. Dreyfus has suspenders to suggest his maturity and wisdom, and the “Other Buddy
Cops” wear Hawaiian shirts not only to address the era, but to also suggest their laid back
nature, contrasting with their reactions later, creating ironic comedy. Dragon Wang Chan wields
a large, blunted sword to suggest his way of getting things done; he is a doppelganger to
Thunder, in the egotistical sense, he is the dark side of Thunder, brutal, blunt, and violent. The
setting of the film was important as well, many of the assorted sets we tried our best to adapt it
to be period acceptable or try to not face the camera towards such things as flatscreens and
cars. Modern cars are however a major error in the film, but are very luckily very subtle. The
choice of Penn School seemed to fit with it’s Cold War Era Architecture, the rest of the locations
were time period anonymous. The use of cars in films seems to be ramping up. Our usage of a
the 1976 red Chevelle was a little different. Because our car was restricted by time, driver, and
the fact that it was old, we decided to go with the green screen route rather than practical.
Conversely, practical effects were an interesting but briefly used in our film. The blood spurts
were created from a air compressor and fake blood in surgical tubing, clogged at the end with a cut piece of a rubber glove. The dummy was a old scuba suit, filed for hours upon hours with newspaper “salvaged” from the neighborhood, and the head was an equally laborious process. I wrapped Jon’s head in an old cloth, and then duct taped its crevices (of course with breathing holes) , and filled with newspaper as well. It was promptly thrown from the roof as a test.
My job on the film was Cinematographer. I really wanted to experiment with zooms in this
project, a sort of underused art. In my research, I found the reason that zooms were so prevalent
in the 70’s was because they had just reached the mass market and were now “new”. Films
during the era had used so many zooms to simply show off their new technology, but as a result,
prime lenses not being used and smaller aperture of zooms led to more exterior day shots and
less low light shots. White Thunder had to have a lot of light pumped into it, as present in the
Andy Litili scene, because most of the film was actually shot at f/8. Stopping down the f stop also
helped with the zooms, as being at a lower aperture meant less depth of field, meaning easier
focus between zooming. Similarly, I found it to be increasingly annoying that short films shot with
DSLR’s made shallow depth of field almost cliche, many shooters rarely stopped down manually
and as a result had trouble pulling focus.
The DSLR revolution has let even the smallest budgeted film maker capable of capturing great images, but as a result the “market” you could say was over saturated with shallow depth of field films. It is quite interesting that zooms were originally the new craze, just coming to market, and now filmmaker are rediscovering, and in some cases overusing the prime lenses of old.
Another aspect I noticed was people who do not use primes shooting at the widest FOV
possible, say 18mm on a T2i. While this is not a bad thing, in fact I quite like it’s epic sweeping
feel, its not what I wanted to do with White Thunder. I used the Panasonic GH2, a smaller name
than the widely used and trusted Canons, to represent not only the reaction, but as reference to
the era itself. The GH2 has a smaller sensor, but more sharply grained noise camera that is
widely regarded but rarely used by the filmmaking community. Even buying this camera was my
reaction to modern filmmaking: everyone had Canons, and if i wanted to I could borrow those at
any time. Why not try something new? White Thunder, at its core, is a BMovie,
and at that time they were shot on 16mm film, smaller than 35mm cinema; therefore, shooting on smaller sensor would make sense and add to the overall period feel of the film. Making White Thunder was my
antithesis to the modern DSLR filmmaking age, as this is clearly present in the zooms, stopped
down aperture, lack of sliders, longer lenses, and usage of smaller camera sensor. However, I
am not completely immune to falling into such self set pitfalls. As exterior scenes and naturally lit
scenes became darker as night approached, I was forced to open the aperture to, I dare say,
blasphemous f/4.5. This, paired with my innate ability to not sense when things are slightly out of
focus, led to some shots being blurry, which I take complete responsibility for.
And score. Indie production is not without its difficulties, but the film scorer is always the
worst. I must say, working with Jonathan Nievera was very beneficial in bringing another mind
onto the intellectual property of the film, but relying on him to do score was the worst experience
of my life. Numerous times he checked out the audio gear and not once did he return with
anything. Not even loops, and despite devoting and promising he would deliver, he did not.
My critical analysis of the film was that it was a fun adventure buddy cop film but with
some issues in pacing and sound. The film was deeply influenced and teat genre research
shows throughout the film, with very good attention to detail in costumes, sets, and ways of
speaking. The acting was a little underdone, but it kind of fit with the B movie style and era piece.
The Cinematography also represented the era with zooms and lack of depth of field, but there
were some issues of inexperience with the zooms that made them choppy. Editing was very
compressed and kind of sloppy, leading to some bad pacing during the Informant scenes. Sound
design and score was very lacking in this project and the weakest link overall. Overall it was very
fun to shoot and the actors play it out, leaving the audience feeling the same.
Word Count: 1600
Marketing Campaign
https://www.facebook.com/WhiteThunderShow
IB Film HL
Session: May 2013
Rationale
I chose to do White Thunder because I really wanted to make a cheesy movie and experiment
with the lost art of zooms. I think that lowballing rather than super serious can be quite an
advantage with the audience. I also notice it is easier to get a reaction from the audience if you
make them laugh rather than feel bad or emotional, and my bitter reaction to my last super
serious film, the bitter tragedy of it being comedic to the audience. After seeing the film black
dynamite, I knew what I had to do for my next film.
Word Count 100
Trailer
It is a rational trailer. First, I set open framed shots in the beginning to create questions in the
viewer. The car shots and mechanized sound effects represented speed, and the zooms
accentuate fast feelings. Afterwards, I introduce Thunder and his qualities such as violent, being
a “loose cannon” and needing a partner. Panama is introduced characteristics of being cocky.
Using Andy, we establish that they are both cops down on their luck. A shot of Panama and
Thunder disagree on musical taste explains their relationship, and ending shots conclude the
bad guy’s role, Dragon Wang.
Word Count 98
Written Commentary for White Thunder
I had always wanted to do a really fun film. I had made a White Thunder short before, and
I wanted a to expand on the character. Once my co produced project Epic Roll , I knew that a
comedic cheesy fun film was something I had to make. The idea for White Thunder came from
my love of Buddy cop movies and the recent explosion of parody blaxploitation and cheesy 70’s
parodies. The plot itself is a cliched buddy cop story, present in many films from Rush Hour to
Running Scared to Bad Boys. They would always begin with introduction to the characters, how
they were forced to conform to each other, find how different they were, mess up, take the case
into their own hands, and become friends. And thus our plot was created as so.
The script began as a treatment that was created at the end of sophomore year basically
outlining the events that would transpire in the full version of White Thunder. A short “pilot
episode” screentest proving ground for the show was shot later that year but not a full version.
With the help of 3 different screenwriters, a continuous edit and a 2nd draft, we completed the
majority of the major scenes, and I was very happy with actually having a almost full script by
the time of actual production, unlike many of my other productions. Unique characters would end
up being the most important part of this film, rather that could have been an intimate relationship
between Panama and Thunder. For better or for worse, this was the influence Jonathan Nievera
brought onto the project, and this would lead to the notorious marketing campaign. My “dual
meaning backhand” blunt style of writing was somewhat present in this project, as in the intro
scene, which was loosely scripted. For example, Thunder says “ Stop being a pansy, Jet. You
know I love you...” which at first glance is not inherently obvious, but under tighter scrutiny is
clearly recognized. The script was a marvelous thing, it created not only cohesion and efficiency,
but direction on the project., and was very beneficial.
Setting the film as a period piece was really a challenge with this film. Having to amass
the wardrobe, sets, props and even vehicles for such a large project was quite an undertaking,
but I think it was a really good learning experience. Even behind the scenes our film was a period
piece; This type of practical effect, home movie blockbuster production harkens back to the 70’s
Super 8 genre style filmmaking usually identified with Spielberg’s early works, and homaged to in
the film Super 8. To that end, each character in our film was uniquely characterized by their
wardrobe and choice of props. For example, White Thunder uses a large .45 Colt, and Panama
Jack uses a small, almost insignificant .22 revolver. Thunder is a brash and hulking fighter,as
well as speaker, whose large and flamboyant style may not actually relate to his actual
effectiveness. Panama, on the other hand, is a small and sly guy, he can hide his secrets until
he wants to strike. However, most of the Panama direct characterization didn't make it through
the first few drafts, and his character is very flat, letting the script focus more and Thunder’s
epiphany. Dreyfus has suspenders to suggest his maturity and wisdom, and the “Other Buddy
Cops” wear Hawaiian shirts not only to address the era, but to also suggest their laid back
nature, contrasting with their reactions later, creating ironic comedy. Dragon Wang Chan wields
a large, blunted sword to suggest his way of getting things done; he is a doppelganger to
Thunder, in the egotistical sense, he is the dark side of Thunder, brutal, blunt, and violent. The
setting of the film was important as well, many of the assorted sets we tried our best to adapt it
to be period acceptable or try to not face the camera towards such things as flatscreens and
cars. Modern cars are however a major error in the film, but are very luckily very subtle. The
choice of Penn School seemed to fit with it’s Cold War Era Architecture, the rest of the locations
were time period anonymous. The use of cars in films seems to be ramping up. Our usage of a
the 1976 red Chevelle was a little different. Because our car was restricted by time, driver, and
the fact that it was old, we decided to go with the green screen route rather than practical.
Conversely, practical effects were an interesting but briefly used in our film. The blood spurts
were created from a air compressor and fake blood in surgical tubing, clogged at the end with a cut piece of a rubber glove. The dummy was a old scuba suit, filed for hours upon hours with newspaper “salvaged” from the neighborhood, and the head was an equally laborious process. I wrapped Jon’s head in an old cloth, and then duct taped its crevices (of course with breathing holes) , and filled with newspaper as well. It was promptly thrown from the roof as a test.
My job on the film was Cinematographer. I really wanted to experiment with zooms in this
project, a sort of underused art. In my research, I found the reason that zooms were so prevalent
in the 70’s was because they had just reached the mass market and were now “new”. Films
during the era had used so many zooms to simply show off their new technology, but as a result,
prime lenses not being used and smaller aperture of zooms led to more exterior day shots and
less low light shots. White Thunder had to have a lot of light pumped into it, as present in the
Andy Litili scene, because most of the film was actually shot at f/8. Stopping down the f stop also
helped with the zooms, as being at a lower aperture meant less depth of field, meaning easier
focus between zooming. Similarly, I found it to be increasingly annoying that short films shot with
DSLR’s made shallow depth of field almost cliche, many shooters rarely stopped down manually
and as a result had trouble pulling focus.
The DSLR revolution has let even the smallest budgeted film maker capable of capturing great images, but as a result the “market” you could say was over saturated with shallow depth of field films. It is quite interesting that zooms were originally the new craze, just coming to market, and now filmmaker are rediscovering, and in some cases overusing the prime lenses of old.
Another aspect I noticed was people who do not use primes shooting at the widest FOV
possible, say 18mm on a T2i. While this is not a bad thing, in fact I quite like it’s epic sweeping
feel, its not what I wanted to do with White Thunder. I used the Panasonic GH2, a smaller name
than the widely used and trusted Canons, to represent not only the reaction, but as reference to
the era itself. The GH2 has a smaller sensor, but more sharply grained noise camera that is
widely regarded but rarely used by the filmmaking community. Even buying this camera was my
reaction to modern filmmaking: everyone had Canons, and if i wanted to I could borrow those at
any time. Why not try something new? White Thunder, at its core, is a BMovie,
and at that time they were shot on 16mm film, smaller than 35mm cinema; therefore, shooting on smaller sensor would make sense and add to the overall period feel of the film. Making White Thunder was my
antithesis to the modern DSLR filmmaking age, as this is clearly present in the zooms, stopped
down aperture, lack of sliders, longer lenses, and usage of smaller camera sensor. However, I
am not completely immune to falling into such self set pitfalls. As exterior scenes and naturally lit
scenes became darker as night approached, I was forced to open the aperture to, I dare say,
blasphemous f/4.5. This, paired with my innate ability to not sense when things are slightly out of
focus, led to some shots being blurry, which I take complete responsibility for.
And score. Indie production is not without its difficulties, but the film scorer is always the
worst. I must say, working with Jonathan Nievera was very beneficial in bringing another mind
onto the intellectual property of the film, but relying on him to do score was the worst experience
of my life. Numerous times he checked out the audio gear and not once did he return with
anything. Not even loops, and despite devoting and promising he would deliver, he did not.
My critical analysis of the film was that it was a fun adventure buddy cop film but with
some issues in pacing and sound. The film was deeply influenced and teat genre research
shows throughout the film, with very good attention to detail in costumes, sets, and ways of
speaking. The acting was a little underdone, but it kind of fit with the B movie style and era piece.
The Cinematography also represented the era with zooms and lack of depth of field, but there
were some issues of inexperience with the zooms that made them choppy. Editing was very
compressed and kind of sloppy, leading to some bad pacing during the Informant scenes. Sound
design and score was very lacking in this project and the weakest link overall. Overall it was very
fun to shoot and the actors play it out, leaving the audience feeling the same.
Word Count: 1600
Marketing Campaign
https://www.facebook.com/WhiteThunderShow
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Writing about Film
FILM ANALYSIS
Second is Film History. Film History I can show ideas through thematic elements, through the film itself. This kind of analysis focuses on the history and related history of the film.
Third is an Ideological Paper. This form of film analysis is an analysis that promotes sets of beliefs and biased opinions towards other causes.
Next is Cultural Studies and National Cinema. This form of Film analysis reflects cultural perspectives and backgrounds. In this form of analysis, you can visualize how certain nations create unique films influenced by their culture.
Finally, the last form of film analysis is the Discussion of the Auteur. The Discussion of the Auteur is a paper that analysis the possibility of an auteur in the production of a film. An auteur is someone who is supposedly responsible for every major aspect of the film; from editing to shooting to directing to even cinematography; the auteur also gets much credit, instead of the art design team, among others.There is a solid line in where one cannot derail from, but that’s a common misunderstanding as many people are needed to make a film successful. It’s the collaboration of the director, the editors, and designers that make a film successful.
Notes on films you plan to analyze are essential. You can include basic notes, but you will not profit from them if you do not special “film notes.” These include the types of individual shots used in each sequence. This makes it easier to keep track of the scene when reviewed later. This is also beneficial as it provides insight into patterns of the cutting of the film and how those cut influence the audience's feeling towards them.
By saying “Think Beyond the Frame” you ask yourself “Who made the film?”and find out who directed the film, and what other films this director made. From this, you distinguish similar creative choices from the director and styles. You also ask “What is the production history of the film?” and how that affected the film or relates to the society or message of the film 9again checking if, say over budget, is a pattern with this director). You also ask yourself “What can you learn from the film's genre?” And finally, “Does the film reflect an interesting cultural phenomenon?” Events of movements in time can influence films more than what is simply seen onscreen. In conclusion, Film Analysis is not a summary, but a very diverse and deep kind of subdivsion filled analyes.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
EL CAMINO Short Trailer 2
Henry Gyles is photojournalist who's down on his luck. His boss, whom was once his friend, continually puts him on murder cases relating to the mob boss Douglass Mclafferdy. When Mclaffeddy is killed, he returns to town and his boss, Hammond, gives him the case to write up. It requires him to go and talk to Mclafferdy's 2 year wife, who has since reverted to Ms. Janice Wetherby. Seeing nothing more than another murder case, he refuses the job. As he is about to leave the office, Hammond that secrets may be fatal, and that Gyles doesn't want that guilt on his hands. Knowing that the poor widow may be sent to be interrogated, tortured or even killed by the mob, Gyles takes the case, not knowing something sinister lies ahead.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
EL CAMINO - Film Support Site
A support site for our latest film, EL CAMINO.
Henry Gyles is photojournalist who's down on his luck. His boss, whom was once his friend, continually puts him on murder cases relating to the mob boss Douglass Mclafferdy. When Mclaffeddy is killed, he returns to town and his boss, Hammond, gives him the case to write up. It requires him to go and talk to Mclafferdy's 2 year wife, who has since reverted to Ms. Janice Wetherby. Seeing nothing more than another murder case, he refuses the job. As he is about to leave the office, Hammond that all secrets are be fatal.
Enter
https://sites.google.com/site/retrofuturisticnoir/
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
"Man with movie Camera" and "Bicycle Thief"
a. What was Pudovkin's concept of constructive editing and how did it manifest itself on film?
b. What was the Kuleshov effect and give me an example of how is it used in today's film's?
c. What was Eisensteinian Montage and how does it work in the "Odessa Step" sequence?
4. Andre Bazin and Realism
a. What were Andre Bazin's frustrations with Classical and Formalistic film making?
b. What do Realist filmmakers strive for in their work?
c. What techniques to realists use in their filmmaking?
Similarities
Realism and Formalism are both non-standard film editing styles. Realism is the use of long shot duration and deep focus, with limited camera moves. Formalism is the juxtaposition of themed or non themed shots to create meaning. Mostly, these types of films are relegated to art films but can be interpreted any way by the viewer. On the hand of Thief we have long shots where you decided the meaning. On the other we have associative cuts that add meaning in Movie Camera. Andre Bazin states that...
"film should not stick to one simple style of film but encompass different perspectives and types of story telling."
And thus, most films are not one or the other, but rather a mixture.
The Man With a Movie Camera
Bicycle Thief
This film is part of a less-dynamic movement, the Neo-Realism movement. For example, during the chase scenes, I was surprised by the use of deep focus and odd length clips compared to what I am used to. Not really an extreme of Realism, but a subtle one as if you were there watching the chase happen in front of you. The cuts are used to show a change in action or emotion and it flows so well with the film that the audience accepts it as normal. There were no surprises in the cuts, unlike in The Man With a Movie Camera.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Editing: Realism, Classicism, Formalism
Editing
Editing has been grouped into 3 groups, Realism, Classicism, and Formalism, in order of amount of editing. Realism is the use of long static shots and minimal editing, letting the viewer determine what is the most important thing in the scene, it was made famous by the neorealists of Italy in the 1940's. Classicism is cutting in a very modern sense, cutting to dramatic action, letting the editor explicitly express what is the most important thing in the scene. Formalism is the juxtaposition of images in a montage, with editing creating meaning form related or unrelated imagery. This technique was pioneered by Russians in the Soviet Union.
The film I chose to express these 3 styles of editing is the classic 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Formalism
Formalism is the juxtaposition of images to create meaning. Is this scene, the Ape moves forward on the first step of evolution towards man. The ape figures out how to use a bone as a tool and thus a weapon, and we see him crush more bones. The cutting in a a falling pig creates meaning in the context: we can see that the ape will or is thinking about using the bone as a more of a weapon than a tool. It is a thematic montage, IE a montage of related images to create a theme to connect them. Another example of formalism is at the end of the film. Kubrick juxtaposes images of babies in embryos and inverted color landscapes. What you would expect of an eyeline match from the old man (a few seconds ago an young astronaut) leads to him as an older man in bed looking at a monolithic black pillar. 
Realism
Most of the movie is cut is a mix of the classical and realist styles of Kubrickian editing. Therefore, I will examine both ends of the spectrum. In this shot sequence, The camera never moves and we never get any cuts to their faces individually or over the shoulders. The deep focus in this shot allow us to realize the ominous HAL in the background reading the lips of the astronauts. The scene itself lasts over 3 minutes, with no cut aways or the like. Kubrick uses this and the lack of a consistent score throughout the film to give the viewer a sense of uncomfortableness and emptiness, fitting for the long voyages in space. Also, this realism makes us feel as if we are in the scene, and Kubrick uses all the visual vectors in the scene to suggest that HAL is the most important thing in the scene.
Classicism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)