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

Contemporary Media Analysis

1. What does the media say about the world we live in?

Media creates a shared reality in our society. It projects the feelings of its creators as well as the needs of the audience to create an image of reality that we crave to see, whether we fear it, lust for it, or wish to experience it without discourse. Furthermore, a shared cultural attitude, it seems, creates the media we consume legitimate and acceptable. Media presents us with what someone thought was acceptable, and we consume and decide. Not only does it reflect ideas in a society, it can propagate these ideas, influencing a society and around and around and around. Media defines what a society thinks about, but not necessarily what it is.  Media is revealing that lines between the good and bad (transferred over from wars)  are blurred, such as Walt in breaking bad trying to gain money for his family, or the many possible protagonists in Game of Thrones.  There are also more positive things such as an increasingly accepted homosexuality in society (like on Glee) and the acceptance of Nerd Culture in Big Bang Theory. Furthermore, we are seeing more  sexuality and especially more violence on TV and in movies as part of medias increasingly inferiority complex.

2. Do you notice any one trend that keeps resurfacing through multiple media forms?

A trend that continually resurfaces itself  through multiple media forms is the idea of blurred lines. This can apply to the distinction of the protagonist and antagonist, and even to the distinction between good and evil in a protagonist, such as the anti-hero, which seems to be present in almost every work ever since the 70’s. Almost every modern TV show a new edgy “anti hero” who either conflicted about what he does because of his own morals, or we question his decisions by our own moral standards.

3. What do you see as the best and worst of what media portrays?

Media’s best usage is at its core, a tool. A tool of expression and consumption. As such, people feel the need to consume McDonalds Burger Meat when they also have Fillet Mignon with Salad on the menu. The worst of media is the stuff that ends up on TMZ, and I’m sure everyone is a likable person, with the benefit of a doubt, but acceptance of the hick culture or late with Duck Dynasty and Honey Boo Boo is for me a success and a failure. Its the acceptance of a culture, but is that appropriation and propagation a positive? Furthermore,

On the flipside, Media has been opening up to accept many things lately. Of course, the hick culture as above, but also Homosexuality and nerd culture have come to acceptance. Homosexuality, in particular, has been getting alot of play in many modern shows, for one, Glee is a landmark in teenage homosexual fiction, and its popularity brings its closer to mainstream.

Nerd culture has particularly come into play, not only on the TV circuit, but on the Internet Media as well(if not mainly). Big Bang Theory in the mainstreaming of nerd culture on a major television show where general audiences pretend to understand references that the cult followers really appreciate. On the internet, many what would be considered “geeky” web shows have risen to popularity, in a direct correlation with the mainstreaming of video games.

4. Where do you see yourself contributing to the conversation?

I see myself as a person obsessed with pushing the envelope. Continually film class creates an environment where healthy competition creates an ever innovating environment, leading to new boundaries to be broken with every film. I've worked on the first war film at Cappuchino Film, a sexually charged noir film, and a film that sets new standards in violence through comedy.

Media always needs ways to excite. And in the ever growing capitalist society we live in, media because raunchier and more violent every year. I feel like this trend, like all expanding trends, lead to a depression or inflation of the market and then to collapse. Therefore, I feel that media needs to come to grips that they can't always outdo last season; but more importantly: the consumer needs to do the same.  If I ever do contribute to the media itself, it will be the consumers who define what they want and how I can entertain them.

End of Year Reflection

Independent Film Research:

What do you feel are your strengths in approaching the research required in the class?

I think that in terms of research that I am not very strong but am able to conjure a lot of resources, work depending. For example, I can go on EBSGO Host  and find tons of articles and scholarly writing but it never has good implementation, my analysis resulting from it is lacking.

What areas do you feel you need more support or training with?

In terms of film research and analysis I need more support with the analysis aspect of research. I can find the sources, but its hard for me to find the proper elements in my writing that connect to the topic. I tend to also feel writing from opinion of a film, as it is art, and art is definitive of usually having a “how do YOU see it” subjective meaning. In writing my opinion, I feel like sometimes it turns more into a critical review then a critical analysis, and it affects my writing.

What suggestions, support or additional training could you use from me to help you accomplish this?

I would say make sure that they know that they not making a review, but an analysis. They should try and focus your analysis to certain aspects of the filmmaking process; and focus on understanding them deeply so they know what you’re talking about. I also dislike how blog posts are so close together in such sequence. I wish that the blogs were more spread out and I think requiring students to turn them in the day they are due will greatly increase their will to do them. I would probably make it so that after you watch a film each semester that the blog posts were more structured (not internally but externally) so that their submission and release would create an easier CREATE TURN IN mechanical proccess.

Oral Presentation Experience:

What do you feel are your strengths in approaching the oral presentation in the class?

I think my ability to talk more from myself rather than talking from a script is a vital ability in presenting your material. If you know what you’re talking about, you can think of things on the spot that would have never occurred to you before, but that requires more work beforehand because to successfully pull this off you need to know a lot more about your material.  

What areas do you feel you need to work on in your preparation for this assessment?

Ironically, I think that I need to work on more planning of outline that I was going to follow: structure. The structure is what was lacking mostly in my oral, and I felt that creating a deeper outline of what I were going to do and transitions between my topics would have created a more cohesive and easier to classify presentation/podcast thing. In hindsight I also could have created a stronger

What suggestions, support or additional training could you use from me to help you?

I wish that the recording process was more streamlined and not as fragmented, just so that students would be forced to record on a certain day making them feel more need to prepare and turn it in.

Production Experience:

What roles did you feel you accomplished well this semester?

I think I was a good director and a good cinematographer.

What areas do you feel you need to work on in your productions?

I think I need to work on directing, editing and structuralization. I think that my directing could be more structuralized, that is more fitting to a planned routine and also more planned out. This brings me to the idea of forcing students to create a shooting script and a new style 2 column. As a director, I think I made huge steps for film when I created a full script for White Thunder, but I applaud Mr Max Mak for taking a giant leap for filmkind by creating a rigid shooting schedule and sticking to it.

I also liked that the films were due before finals.

What suggestions, support or additional training could you use from me to help you accomplish this?

Give those ones that really care about Film ample time to create their script. In fact, I think you should force people to create rough scripts and just suggest storyboards a little stronger. I think that that would require a major change to the idea of the 2 COLUMN SCRIPT. Let me explain. In my experience, making a 2 column script has been an awful experience. People mainly BS the audio part. I think that it should be revised (or rephrased really) to have the treatment on one side a dialogue script on the other, not including sound effects as it does now. Thats what we did on WHITE THUNDER and I really enjoyed it. Its more important to tell the student that its a Script ON a Treatment to get them more enticed and less beleaguered by the idea of writing a Script.  I think EL CAMINO would have been amazing if we hadn't written the majority of the script on the spot. I think you should also FORCE IB FILM STUDENTS to create a shooting script to complement their (new) 2 column. In an extreme extent, I think you should try to weed out people in the beginning with blog posts and then find those that are interesting in film.

I liked and wish I could elaborate on this Wiki article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_script

"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

This film is very interesting. Its way ahead of its time, and even now we watch videos just like this on Vimeo. There many more cuts than Bicycle Thief, and is quite a sight to behold. MWAMC implements ideas of mainly Formalism but also Realism as well.  The film uses alot of imagery, and tries to recreate the reality we live in on film. It also uses contrast of images to create new meaning. For example,  "At first we'd see the life of rich aristocrats, then the following shot would be of a man stuck in poverty and starvation." Vertov uses these juxtapositions to create meaning, which only you can decide what that is. Another side effect of the quick cuts is a heightened intensity and speed that goes with the film such as a very interesting train shot cutting between the man on the tracks and the train wheels. An aspect of realism in the film are certain shots of just landscape. They simply hang around for  a while, giving us a chance to analyze the scene for ourselves. It also gives a sense of location.  Formalism at its core is based on these thematic meanings, and I would like to explore one in a film down the line. 

Bicycle Thief

Bicycle Thief borders on Realism and Classicism.  Some cuts seem longer than normal, with deep focus, and some seem cut to action. Early in the film we classicism  and later we see the not so dynamic neo-realism. Formalism is present in the scene with the father and son near the bike racks, as he, unable to have a bike after his was stolen, is surrounded by hundreds of unattended ones. He looks down at his kid who is clutching himself in his own arms. From this we understanding a deeper meaning despite his flat face: he wants to steal a bike.


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.

Mad Max 2: Sequels Aren't Always Bad

The Road Warrior tells the story of a man named Max, a lone wanderer in a nuclear wasteland build on gasoline. People have moved away from the cities and into this desolate wasteland. Max comes across a oil refinery,in the midst of a war. A group of people defend it whilst a bloodthirsty motor gang has them under seige.

In light of the announcement that another Mad Max film was coming, Mad Max: Fury Road, I decided to pick this film because it was one of my favorite movies in terms of set and character design, which I find much interest in. The sheer influence this film has had on the post apocalyptic genre, not just in film, but the lucrative video game market as well, also urged me to review it. I wanted to show people the movie that influenced some of their favorite games and movies, from Borderlands to Fallout To Heartbreak Ridge to even a 2Pac album. Filmmakers Guillermo Del Toro, David Fincher, James Cameron, and Robert Rodríguez have cited Mad Max 2 as one of their favorite movies.

Mad Max truly portrays the time period it was made in. It was a time of gas prices soaring to an all time high, Trucker movies were all the rage, and no CG meant all practical effects and stunts. These are all beautifully executed, and even now Mad Max stands the test of time and is considered one of the greatest stunt movies of all time. For example the final chase scene of max defending an oil tanker truck from multiple cars includes stuntmen hoping from car to car, onto the truck, falling off and being crushed, riding on the outer part of the truck at high speed.
Mel Gibson (in one of his earliest roles) plays a superb max, supported by a wonderful Bruce Spence as the air captain. The characters are all memorable in some way; the tricky scoundrel in his gyro, the strong captain Papagello, the insane old man/genera ( who has a samurai sword)l, the old and wise woman, the young “sex appeal” and the feral boy. The production design of this movie is amazing, probably the defining feature of the film. The cars , the the costumes, and even the landscape itself have a character of their own. The score of the film is by Brian May, and it is of an archetypical "fantasy-late 70's early 80's" sound, even having some visceral quality of the ET score. The film is set in the Australian Outback, which is perfect for a post apocalyptic action movie based on vehicle combat. The cinematography of this film is breathtaking. When you first switch from the full screen intro to anamorphic widescreen, you know an epic movie is about to unfold, on par with Dorothy’s change into technicolor.

Every film has its flaws. In Mad Max these prove to be minor with substance, rather average than lacking of. These average traits include average lighting, which works but doesn't impress, which makes sense for an action movie.

In conclusion,Mad Max is a stunning work of art that influenced many IP’s of today. It’s gritty texture, it’s stunning visuals and unique production design make it one of my favorite films of all time. It is a “classic” but by no means is it boring. It a high octane action movie on par with any one made today. 30 years later it hasn't lost it’s touch, and i with gas prices skyrocketing once again, it hasn't lost its core message either I give the film a 10 out of 10. It is a must see movie that might inspire you as well.

Starship Troopers (1997)

Humans are the Bad Guys!

What tradition or genre is it in?
Starship troopers falls under the action, science fiction, and war genres. Critics and audiences alike found this film only to be cheesy scifi action flick with ridiculous amounts of gore and laughable dialogue, and dismissed it as so. However, what they failed to realize, was that it could also be considered a propaganda film for that future society. In this regard, it effectively portrays the society as the overlords would wish to portray it.

What are the features determining genre?
It is set in a near future where “Warp Travel”, and psychic mind control studies are being fielded. One of the characters even says “It may be a new era in human evolution.” Soldiers travel through space to fight on distant worlds. It also contains elements of the war drama, such as exploring the horrors of war and joining the fight despite one’s parent’s detest, that of the bildungsroman. The squad is made up of social stereotypes, such as the heavy, the naive solider, the naive soldier who thinks he’s a badass, and the typical leader character.The squad is also made up of racial stereotypes, such the Hispanic guy who acts like he’s Scarface (and a badass), the African guy with the heavy weapon, and the White soldier in the leading role (respectfully). Yet these are subverted from the norms of the genre, as the black soldier has the sniper rifle, rather than being the big, slow, heavy, "machine gun guy". The Latino is killed almost instantly after reciting “get some, get some” towards the bugs he is shooting, once again subverting our expectations as an audience.

What other work might it be connected to?
This movie is based off Robert Heinlein’s novel Starship Troopers; however, the film has a lot of tweaks that may disappoint Henlein fans. It radically changes the characters, plot and even thematic intentions. Whereas Henlein’s novel was a about serious war drama, the film was a political satire.

Who made this? Why? What can we tell about its’ creators?
By using overexageration of plot elements, Paul Verhoeven made Starship Troopers as not only a parody of fascist society, but also a parody of US society.
Paul Vehoeven was born and raised in a Dutch city that was taken over by Nazi’s in WW2. Because there was a V2 missile base located near, his neighborhood was constantly bombed by the Allies. He recounted seeing “dead people everyday” and this influenced his later films, such as Robocop, and Starship Troopers excessive use of gore and violence as well as an anti-violence message.

How does it fit within the director’s other work?

1. Does it share significant narrative or thematic concerns?
2. Does it share particular visual or technical elements?

Starship Troopers is a Paul Verhoeven film. Verhoeven always associates himself and his movies, with controvesy, exploring topics such as facism, religion, gay rights, sexuality, and corruption (Starship Troopers, Spetters, The Fourth Man, Showgirls, Basic Instinct, Robocop, respectively). Starship Troopers is no different. It explores what our society would look like if we were fascist. It also makes us realize how similar we came to being such during point in our history like WW2.
What is the film’s theme?
According to Verhoeven himself, the theme is “War makes Fascists of us all.” But Ed Numeier (screenwriter), who worked closely with Verhoeven on the film, wrote it to be a parody of American Society itself, a social commentary on our mannerisms. It almost parallels what happened after the terrorist attacks on 9/11 (yet the film was made in 1996). It also parodies the media and how even in a democracy, we can look very similar to Fascists. Thus, it explores the way that this cataclysmic event, a war, can make fascists of us all.
Visually it uses extreme gore and nudity. Both are staple in Paul Verhoeven film, recalling the scene in Robocop where Murphy's limbs are blown off by shotguns, or when the Prototype service robot kills the company executive. His casual use of gore stems from his childhood in Nazi-Occupied Holland (which ill talk about later)

What is the target audience? How does it address its audience?

Starship Troopers has extreme nudity,
which is present in many Verhoeven
films.

Most people fall into one of three groups: Those who treat it as a shoot-em up and think it's a lot of fun, those who wanted an adoring, "Lord of the Rings"-style adaptation of Heinlein's novel, and those who see it as a message film, one that is very different from the message Heinlein intended with his book. What most reviewers who hated this film fail to realize is that this is not a film about a future society - it is meant to be a propaganda film produced by that future society. We don't really know exactly what the world looks like that produced this film, but we must visualize it from what we see here. Verhoeven is asking us to do the same to the world we see on our televisions - that what appears on the screen is what others want to believe, not what is. Verhoeven is also portraying a fascist society that is meant to be appealing - attractive people, patriotic themes; the message is that fascism is seductive, and that the world we see is mainly one of deception.

Blog Response- Article- Intensified Continuity

Blog Response- Article- Intensified Continuity
According to David Bordell, explain how and why continuity has intensified in Hollywood cinema. Also consider whether anything has been lost with this change.
http://crocodoc.com/hDIyjZb

INTENSIFIED CONTINUITY
The term “intensified continuity” is defined as “traditional continuity amped up and raised to a higher-pitch of emphasis.” Elements of intensified continuity differ greatly from the more traditional approach to continuity of film. According to David Bordwell, continuity has intensified cinema through more technical means such as lens choice, aspect ration, and screen size. Detail continues to be lost as well as cohesiveness of the continuity of the piece as a whole. Thus, the continuity of the piece is defined by the evolving taste of audience’s acceptance the methods of cinematography and distribution and/of the medium.

Technology has effected continuity the greatest. For example, in the early days of cinema, most shots were locked down static shots (such as Arrival of a Train) because of the great bulk and size of the cameras used. As time progressed, camera became more and more agile that it was almost necessary for the audience to stay entertained by epic, moving camera shots. These evolved into what we now know as “free roaming camera” shots. Beyond cranes and Steady-Cams, overuse of CG has also brought the overuse of the digital camera’s used in the digital world. These are not restricted by, say gravity, or space. Thus as an audience we expect more and more from professional Hollywood films as our appetite for free roaming camera has grown.

Bordwell is saying that over time, films continue to intensify cutting of shot length and shot density, compared to traditional films of the 30’s to the mid 60’s. During these times, the ASL (average shot length)  of a Hollywood feature film were about 9 seconds long. Today, ASL's have gotten surprisingly low in modern Hollywood films. Some films even go as low as 2 seconds ASL. Bordwell asks, "Has rapid cutting therefore led to a 'post-classical' breakdown of spatial continuity?" Thus, “Can such high shot densities continue to have a coherent nature?” I can say from personal experince that some actions scenes have been cut to a point where I have lost coherence. “Today, most films are cut more rapidly than at any other time in U.S Studio filmmaking. Indeed, editing rates may soon hit a wall.” In this quote, Bordwell says that despite the inventive fast cuts of today, the continuity of a film is more important (than action created by quick cuts) in a a mainstream film and can become incomprehensible if there are fast-action clips without any long establishing shots. Many techniques can be used (such as the 180 degree line rule and constants such as direction) in order to keep the audience coherent, however.

Traditionally, you would choose a lens length depending on your shooting style and material. Speilberg once said that what intensified Hollywood films' concept of continuity was how directors decided to "freely mix long-focus and wide-angle within a single film." Directors that used this technique pushed the limits of relying on only certain shots to create successful films, thus becoming successes themselves. Bordwell stated “If a scene relies on rapidly cut singles, the filmmaker must find fresh ways to emphasize certain lines or facial reactions.” The simple idea that Hollywood has accepted both styles of filmmaking supports acceptance of this intensified continuity in American films today.

In conclusion, today’s movies heavily rely on rapid cutting, fluid free ranging camera movements, and what medium they are in. Cinematographers, such as Kuleshov or Pudovkin, differentiated themselves by defying these rules and setting their own rules in terms, thus differentiating themselves as artists, like canvas to printing press.