OK. So at the time being I'm trying to do my take on the structure of dramatic composition. After the intro and after the 4 act model, I had planned to write something more on how the structure of drama is very much like the structure of music. Been scribbling on it on and off during this week in between treatment writing for a feature and rehearsal for a theater production.
Then today I read this post over at The Rouge Wave. Of course it is not my exact words, but it expresses precisely my understanding and experience with structure. So instead of tiring myself out at this moment with a piece on the same subject - I want you to go and see what Julie L. Gray has to say.
The only major aspect that she doesn't touch upon in her well-written and well-supported piece is how the tonality of comedy and tragedy also plays into the musical understanding of dramatic structure. So there will be a bit left for me to expound on. Later.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Picasso's Desire and Fear
”Then I understood what painting really meant. It’s not an aesthetic process, It’s a form of magic that interposes itself between us and the hostile universe, a means of seizing power by imposing form on our terrors as well as on our desires;” - Picasso
Picasso states clearly – not only what painting is about – but also what all art is about. Specifically we come to the drama to experience in action, the forms of those terrors and desires that cannot be expressed in plain words.
For some years now this has been one of my most precious quotes. We make drama out of conflicts. They arise from the clashes between fear and desire. It is where I turn to when I am stuck in my process. It is my constant touchstone, where I test my ideas. Are they born out of my desire? Out my fears?
This dichotomy of what we want and what we run away from is engraved in our two basic nervous systems, the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. They function in opposition to each other. This opposition can be understood as both complementary and antagonistic. The sympathetic system is responsible for our 'flight-or-fight'-reactions. When fear strikes us, it will pump out adrenalin, it will withdraw blood from the surface of our skin, it will accelerate our heart-rate and make us breathe quicker and more shallow. The parasympathetic system takes care of all things pleasurable. It will relax our muscles, send blood to the surface of our skin (making it more sensitive), make our breathing deeper, stimulate digestion and prepare our sexual organs for love-making.
This is our hard-wiring as organisms. Our ancient battlefield of internal conflicts and by proxy our external conflicts. Tune into it and let it be your guide to drama.
Picasso states clearly – not only what painting is about – but also what all art is about. Specifically we come to the drama to experience in action, the forms of those terrors and desires that cannot be expressed in plain words.
For some years now this has been one of my most precious quotes. We make drama out of conflicts. They arise from the clashes between fear and desire. It is where I turn to when I am stuck in my process. It is my constant touchstone, where I test my ideas. Are they born out of my desire? Out my fears?
This dichotomy of what we want and what we run away from is engraved in our two basic nervous systems, the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. They function in opposition to each other. This opposition can be understood as both complementary and antagonistic. The sympathetic system is responsible for our 'flight-or-fight'-reactions. When fear strikes us, it will pump out adrenalin, it will withdraw blood from the surface of our skin, it will accelerate our heart-rate and make us breathe quicker and more shallow. The parasympathetic system takes care of all things pleasurable. It will relax our muscles, send blood to the surface of our skin (making it more sensitive), make our breathing deeper, stimulate digestion and prepare our sexual organs for love-making.
This is our hard-wiring as organisms. Our ancient battlefield of internal conflicts and by proxy our external conflicts. Tune into it and let it be your guide to drama.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
10 Reasons for the Danish Film Miracle OR How Europe Can Beat Hollywood
During the 90s Danish film underwent a small revolution. From being a small nation that occasionally would get a film into the international market, as well as seeing it run away with the box office at national cinemas, the Danish film industry now has record setting statistics in all areas. Of all European countries Danish films does the best in their national market, often beating the more glamorous American productions at the box office. Every year several Danish films sell well in the international market. Almost every year there is a serious contender for the foreign film Oscar nomination. And all this in a very small country (5 mio+ population). It really shouldn't be possible. Its a case of the bumblebee that shouldn't be able to fly. Here is a look at some of the reason and circumstances that have made it possible.
1. Script is the foundation
By the late 80s or early 90s it became clear to both producers and the National Danish Film Institute that the script is the all-imporant foundation for a good movie. This should be self-evident, but in many countries the script is the weakest link. And also so in Denmark before early 90s. And not just realizing it, but acting upon it, the early 90s saw the establishment of two new national educations for writing - the script line at the National film school and the National Playwright Education (which also dedicate periods of its 3 years to film, TV and radio scripts), as well as a dramatic increase in the Film Institutes support for development of scripts. The institute changed its strategy on scripts - from selecting a few that they would eventually also support the production for - to supporting the development of way too many scripts. The wisdom being that you have to get too many scripts to choose the best. This also meant more professional scriptwriters, as even the ones who didn't make it into production got paid (to some extent) for their hard work. It also became the standard that the consultants at the institute (who are the ones that single-handlely choose which scripts and film to support) would act as proper consultants, giving advice and know-how support to projects in development. Meanwhile the production companies also got the idea and began to develop more scripts.
2. Education is vital
Denmark has had a good National Film School since the late 60s, but by the 90s it became upgraded with the new script-department, and this also lead to the students learning to work in the all-important triangle of director-producer-writer. The script-department excelled at teaching the students to work with 'the natural story', the concept of its scriptwriting-guru Mogens Rukow, who insisted on using natural stories - the family party, the dinner, the business meeting - whatever social structure, which already has it's own fundamental natural story, as a framework for all situations in a script - or even as the basic framework for a whole movie (like his own small masterpiece - Festen (The Celebration) which uses the celebration of big family birthday as its framework). The other areas of the Film School managed to attract the best Danish and international talent as teachers, as well as setting very high standards for the admittance of new students. In the same period Denmark also saw the opening of other schools around the country, which would teach film making at a lower lever, the entry level. They became the standard road to eventually being admitted to the National School.
3. Teamwork over auteur
Denmark has always been torn between the continental idea of the inspired genius and the auteur versus the anglo-saxon idea of solid work creates success. The anglo-saxon idea incorporates the concept that art can be taught, while obviously a genius can't be taught, but is something almost god-given. In the 90s there was a shift towards the Anglo-Saxon view, that manifested itself in a belief in teamwork - the Film institute stressed the need of a collaboration between the trio of producer-director-writer, and it more or less became a requisite for financial support. The production companies were quick to adapt to it, as well as most directors and writers. It became about teamwork - and this also went hand-in-hand with the new generation of actors, who were not primadonnas, but mainly relied a lot on teamwork.
4. Critical mass
In the 70s and 80s most directors would go years between making a feature film. This is not good for developing your art and skills. During the 90s the Film institute and the companies managed to increase the number of yearly productions dramatically, due to their success - as they made more money and also managed to pressure the politicians into increasing the budget for the Film institute - to support the Danish Film Miracle. And it is necessary in the small country to have a substantial state support to carry the burden of risk, as a small country can't have the big money of major studios that allows for risk taking. Also the critical mass applies to the number of production companies, which increased throughout the 90s, both in numbers and in the number of 'continually producing companies'. The critical mass also has an impact on the audiences as they get used to going to the cinema to see a Danish film, they come to expect it, even to expect that a new Danish film has always just opened its run.
5. Companies help out new talent
A tradition already existed in Denmark for established companies to give a helping hand to young talents' no-budget productions by lending or renting out equipment for free or at a very low cost. This tradition became all the more important as the 90s saw a steady growth in the amount of young people seeking a life in film-making. By staying in touch with the new talent the companies were able to both stimulate them and harvest the best of them. The Lars von Trier company, Zentropa, is especially famous for this, as well for employing a big number of volunteers, often working a year without pay for the company. At the same time Zentropa and other companies were often quick to take a chance on new talent.
6. Actors are real stars
The 90s also saw a new generation of actors entering the screens and stages. This was a generation who played more 'natural', meaning they would speak lines more organic and less artificially - but most of all they understood to reflect modern society in their acting. They became stars in a new way. They didn't become Hollywood glamour stars, but real stars, in the sense of remaining to be real people that the audiences could relate to in a more real way. The producers of both films and theatre understood to take advantage of this new generation, and make them stars of a new kind - and thereby help to attract audiences.
7. Mainstream and art
The famous division between art and mainstream is not so divisive in Denmark. Many films which could be considered art house material are just about mainstream enough to do well in box office. Also the institute support both types of films, as the philosophy is that the two oft-estranged cousins of cinema actually help each other out. Its all one big pot - if the companies make money on mainstream they are better situated to take a chance on art.
8. Dogma
There's no way around mentioning the event of Dogma-films. The stunt played a major role in re-inventing Danish cinema. It brought everything down to earth, back to basic, and maybe most importantly it made it possible to produce more films, as they were quite cheap, because the rules of the Dogma-manifesto decreed the absence of all the superfluous, expensive stuff like effects, lighting and so on. It became all about the story and the actors. The fundamentals. The general lesson here is to focus for a while on some core values of film-making that can inspire and propel forward a new generation of filmmakers.
9. Film, TV and theater are connected.
In Denmark there is not a great division between the three, which means a lot of the same talent, especially actors, work in all three fields, but this also goes for some directors and writers. This means several things. The talent are able to earn a living, because they have more options. They are more well-rounded in skills. And they can bring the experience in one field to enhance the others.
10. Lars von Trier
As with Dogma, its impossible not to mention Lars von Trier as a major influence for the blossoming of Danish Film. By his personal example, by his Dogma-initiative and by the activities of his hugely successful insurgent company, Zentropa, led by famous pretend-maverick Peter Ålbæk (always sporting a big cigar) he has brought inspiration and helped open doors for other Danish filmmakers. No matter how you rate his films, there is no discussion that he has made a huge impact on the Danish film industry and his fellow filmmakers. And unlike Sweden, were Bergmann was a huge national symbol that almost blocked out anybody else (not intentionally of course) Lars von Triers personal success seems more generous for others, more like a catalyst, than an unreachable standard.
There are of course other reasons and circumstances. But these are the 10 most important in my opinion. Some of these are easily copied by other (small) nations, who wish to stimulate their film industry. And they should do so - because the smaller countries of Europe and around the world need to step up and challenge the hegemony of Hollywood. Smaller countries can't beat Hollywood at it's own game. The country and the film studios are just too big. The money too big. They can't compete with that. This is why they most look at different strategies. There should be a healthy competition. And USA and Hollywood became big by rigging the playing field in the post WW2 situation, where USA took its payment for the famous Marshall-help by forcing European countries to embrace the American industry. Pre-WW2 European films were dominant in Europe. This all changed after the Marshall-plan had helped the war-torn countries back on their feet by force-feeding the American products.
1. Script is the foundation
By the late 80s or early 90s it became clear to both producers and the National Danish Film Institute that the script is the all-imporant foundation for a good movie. This should be self-evident, but in many countries the script is the weakest link. And also so in Denmark before early 90s. And not just realizing it, but acting upon it, the early 90s saw the establishment of two new national educations for writing - the script line at the National film school and the National Playwright Education (which also dedicate periods of its 3 years to film, TV and radio scripts), as well as a dramatic increase in the Film Institutes support for development of scripts. The institute changed its strategy on scripts - from selecting a few that they would eventually also support the production for - to supporting the development of way too many scripts. The wisdom being that you have to get too many scripts to choose the best. This also meant more professional scriptwriters, as even the ones who didn't make it into production got paid (to some extent) for their hard work. It also became the standard that the consultants at the institute (who are the ones that single-handlely choose which scripts and film to support) would act as proper consultants, giving advice and know-how support to projects in development. Meanwhile the production companies also got the idea and began to develop more scripts.
2. Education is vital
Denmark has had a good National Film School since the late 60s, but by the 90s it became upgraded with the new script-department, and this also lead to the students learning to work in the all-important triangle of director-producer-writer. The script-department excelled at teaching the students to work with 'the natural story', the concept of its scriptwriting-guru Mogens Rukow, who insisted on using natural stories - the family party, the dinner, the business meeting - whatever social structure, which already has it's own fundamental natural story, as a framework for all situations in a script - or even as the basic framework for a whole movie (like his own small masterpiece - Festen (The Celebration) which uses the celebration of big family birthday as its framework). The other areas of the Film School managed to attract the best Danish and international talent as teachers, as well as setting very high standards for the admittance of new students. In the same period Denmark also saw the opening of other schools around the country, which would teach film making at a lower lever, the entry level. They became the standard road to eventually being admitted to the National School.
3. Teamwork over auteur
Denmark has always been torn between the continental idea of the inspired genius and the auteur versus the anglo-saxon idea of solid work creates success. The anglo-saxon idea incorporates the concept that art can be taught, while obviously a genius can't be taught, but is something almost god-given. In the 90s there was a shift towards the Anglo-Saxon view, that manifested itself in a belief in teamwork - the Film institute stressed the need of a collaboration between the trio of producer-director-writer, and it more or less became a requisite for financial support. The production companies were quick to adapt to it, as well as most directors and writers. It became about teamwork - and this also went hand-in-hand with the new generation of actors, who were not primadonnas, but mainly relied a lot on teamwork.
4. Critical mass
In the 70s and 80s most directors would go years between making a feature film. This is not good for developing your art and skills. During the 90s the Film institute and the companies managed to increase the number of yearly productions dramatically, due to their success - as they made more money and also managed to pressure the politicians into increasing the budget for the Film institute - to support the Danish Film Miracle. And it is necessary in the small country to have a substantial state support to carry the burden of risk, as a small country can't have the big money of major studios that allows for risk taking. Also the critical mass applies to the number of production companies, which increased throughout the 90s, both in numbers and in the number of 'continually producing companies'. The critical mass also has an impact on the audiences as they get used to going to the cinema to see a Danish film, they come to expect it, even to expect that a new Danish film has always just opened its run.
5. Companies help out new talent
A tradition already existed in Denmark for established companies to give a helping hand to young talents' no-budget productions by lending or renting out equipment for free or at a very low cost. This tradition became all the more important as the 90s saw a steady growth in the amount of young people seeking a life in film-making. By staying in touch with the new talent the companies were able to both stimulate them and harvest the best of them. The Lars von Trier company, Zentropa, is especially famous for this, as well for employing a big number of volunteers, often working a year without pay for the company. At the same time Zentropa and other companies were often quick to take a chance on new talent.
6. Actors are real stars
The 90s also saw a new generation of actors entering the screens and stages. This was a generation who played more 'natural', meaning they would speak lines more organic and less artificially - but most of all they understood to reflect modern society in their acting. They became stars in a new way. They didn't become Hollywood glamour stars, but real stars, in the sense of remaining to be real people that the audiences could relate to in a more real way. The producers of both films and theatre understood to take advantage of this new generation, and make them stars of a new kind - and thereby help to attract audiences.
7. Mainstream and art
The famous division between art and mainstream is not so divisive in Denmark. Many films which could be considered art house material are just about mainstream enough to do well in box office. Also the institute support both types of films, as the philosophy is that the two oft-estranged cousins of cinema actually help each other out. Its all one big pot - if the companies make money on mainstream they are better situated to take a chance on art.
8. Dogma
There's no way around mentioning the event of Dogma-films. The stunt played a major role in re-inventing Danish cinema. It brought everything down to earth, back to basic, and maybe most importantly it made it possible to produce more films, as they were quite cheap, because the rules of the Dogma-manifesto decreed the absence of all the superfluous, expensive stuff like effects, lighting and so on. It became all about the story and the actors. The fundamentals. The general lesson here is to focus for a while on some core values of film-making that can inspire and propel forward a new generation of filmmakers.
9. Film, TV and theater are connected.
In Denmark there is not a great division between the three, which means a lot of the same talent, especially actors, work in all three fields, but this also goes for some directors and writers. This means several things. The talent are able to earn a living, because they have more options. They are more well-rounded in skills. And they can bring the experience in one field to enhance the others.
10. Lars von Trier
As with Dogma, its impossible not to mention Lars von Trier as a major influence for the blossoming of Danish Film. By his personal example, by his Dogma-initiative and by the activities of his hugely successful insurgent company, Zentropa, led by famous pretend-maverick Peter Ålbæk (always sporting a big cigar) he has brought inspiration and helped open doors for other Danish filmmakers. No matter how you rate his films, there is no discussion that he has made a huge impact on the Danish film industry and his fellow filmmakers. And unlike Sweden, were Bergmann was a huge national symbol that almost blocked out anybody else (not intentionally of course) Lars von Triers personal success seems more generous for others, more like a catalyst, than an unreachable standard.
There are of course other reasons and circumstances. But these are the 10 most important in my opinion. Some of these are easily copied by other (small) nations, who wish to stimulate their film industry. And they should do so - because the smaller countries of Europe and around the world need to step up and challenge the hegemony of Hollywood. Smaller countries can't beat Hollywood at it's own game. The country and the film studios are just too big. The money too big. They can't compete with that. This is why they most look at different strategies. There should be a healthy competition. And USA and Hollywood became big by rigging the playing field in the post WW2 situation, where USA took its payment for the famous Marshall-help by forcing European countries to embrace the American industry. Pre-WW2 European films were dominant in Europe. This all changed after the Marshall-plan had helped the war-torn countries back on their feet by force-feeding the American products.
Your First Feature Film
You are not an established writer/director. You are looking to make your break-through or just to get that first feature film financed and produced. Here are some thoughts on how to make that script.
Keep it simple. One novel provocative idea. Strong characters.
Keep it simple.
This is key for several reasons. You want to minimize your budget. Makes it easier to get the project financed and produced. Failing finding a producer, you might even be able to produce it yourself. Keeping it simple also let you focus on maximizing your strengths instead of trying to accomplish everything. Example: Instead of wasting your energy on directing many different actors/characters, you can focus on a few, strengthening their performance and the audiences relation to those characters. Simplicity is not the opposite of complexity in this context. Complexity in the sense of a fascinating, inexhaustible art-work comes from simple ideas connecting to create complexity. By working under the rule of simplicity, limiting your number of location, actors, plot-lines and so on, you will be forced to make meaningful connections between the elements you have - creating complexity.
One novel, provocative idea.
The criteria for your basic idea of your script should be novelty and provocation. The novelty can take many forms. It can be the world of the drama is a world we have never (or rarely) seen portrayed in film. It can be the way you shape your drama. It can be a basic conflict we have never seen before, or at least not seen treated like you plan to do. The provocation is required for your script and film to break through the carpet bombing of film projects and releases. You need to stand out. What is provocation? Basically to question in any way a well-established truth.
Strong Characters!
In a low-budget film you can't have all the expensive stuff that attracts people to film. Instead you can utilize the one fundamental thing we also love about drama - the characters. They are not expensive. But they demand all of your creativity, logic and sense of drama. Pour all your energy into them - making them stand out, being unforgettable. The kind of characters you wish you knew in real life, or in your dreams (if that's the kind of film you are planning), or that you yourself was one of them. Really, push yourself on this aspect. And it's not only about writing great dialogue for them. Its about their conflicts (external and internal), how they deal with them, their courage, their strength and weaknesses.
A sample of breakthrough films that have these characteristics. Find more yourself.
• Sex, Lies and Videotapes
Small ensemble cast. Good actors. Main character has a huge problem - he can't commit to a relationship. The novelty is that he deals with this by questioning convention and videotaping peoples most intimate, private stories. In doing so he stirs up status quo of their lives. By shaking up their world, finally somebody emerges to shake up his world. The provocation: Questioning the existence of love. A romantic lead who is everything he is not supposed to be.
• Reservoir Dogs
Ensemble cast. Few locations. Main character is thrown into the dangerous task of infiltrating a criminal gang - posing for one of them. The novelty is that this is not a film about a detective solving a crime. This is the crime-film as an existential metaphor regarding identity. The main character bonds with a father figure among the criminals, and when they are all lying dead or dying, he realizes the futility of all his aspirations - the bond between him and the criminal was what he cared most about. Added novelty: voluminous, imaginative dialogue. The provocation in this film is the blurring of black and white - ex: Our mixed enjoyment/vehemence at the torture of a police officer.
• Festen (The Celebration)
Ensemble cast. One location. Main character has a huge problem - he can't continue his life because of his father's abuse of him and his sister in the past. The novelty is two-fold: This was one of the first Dogma-films shot on DV. It was one of the first 'mainstream' films to talk about incest. This is also more or less its provocation, but its provocation has a deeper level. We are led to believe our main character's intention is to expose his father (get justice) and in the end of the film he succeeds - but he is not really happy about it. The main character's true intention is to find reconciliation with his father, to gain a real bond between them - and this is truly provoking as the gut-reaction towards incest-perpetrators are pretty much to castrate them (socially and physically). This film actually ends up siding with both the victim and the perpetrator.
Keep it simple. One novel provocative idea. Strong characters.
Keep it simple.
This is key for several reasons. You want to minimize your budget. Makes it easier to get the project financed and produced. Failing finding a producer, you might even be able to produce it yourself. Keeping it simple also let you focus on maximizing your strengths instead of trying to accomplish everything. Example: Instead of wasting your energy on directing many different actors/characters, you can focus on a few, strengthening their performance and the audiences relation to those characters. Simplicity is not the opposite of complexity in this context. Complexity in the sense of a fascinating, inexhaustible art-work comes from simple ideas connecting to create complexity. By working under the rule of simplicity, limiting your number of location, actors, plot-lines and so on, you will be forced to make meaningful connections between the elements you have - creating complexity.
One novel, provocative idea.
The criteria for your basic idea of your script should be novelty and provocation. The novelty can take many forms. It can be the world of the drama is a world we have never (or rarely) seen portrayed in film. It can be the way you shape your drama. It can be a basic conflict we have never seen before, or at least not seen treated like you plan to do. The provocation is required for your script and film to break through the carpet bombing of film projects and releases. You need to stand out. What is provocation? Basically to question in any way a well-established truth.
Strong Characters!
In a low-budget film you can't have all the expensive stuff that attracts people to film. Instead you can utilize the one fundamental thing we also love about drama - the characters. They are not expensive. But they demand all of your creativity, logic and sense of drama. Pour all your energy into them - making them stand out, being unforgettable. The kind of characters you wish you knew in real life, or in your dreams (if that's the kind of film you are planning), or that you yourself was one of them. Really, push yourself on this aspect. And it's not only about writing great dialogue for them. Its about their conflicts (external and internal), how they deal with them, their courage, their strength and weaknesses.
A sample of breakthrough films that have these characteristics. Find more yourself.
• Sex, Lies and Videotapes
Small ensemble cast. Good actors. Main character has a huge problem - he can't commit to a relationship. The novelty is that he deals with this by questioning convention and videotaping peoples most intimate, private stories. In doing so he stirs up status quo of their lives. By shaking up their world, finally somebody emerges to shake up his world. The provocation: Questioning the existence of love. A romantic lead who is everything he is not supposed to be.
• Reservoir Dogs
Ensemble cast. Few locations. Main character is thrown into the dangerous task of infiltrating a criminal gang - posing for one of them. The novelty is that this is not a film about a detective solving a crime. This is the crime-film as an existential metaphor regarding identity. The main character bonds with a father figure among the criminals, and when they are all lying dead or dying, he realizes the futility of all his aspirations - the bond between him and the criminal was what he cared most about. Added novelty: voluminous, imaginative dialogue. The provocation in this film is the blurring of black and white - ex: Our mixed enjoyment/vehemence at the torture of a police officer.
• Festen (The Celebration)
Ensemble cast. One location. Main character has a huge problem - he can't continue his life because of his father's abuse of him and his sister in the past. The novelty is two-fold: This was one of the first Dogma-films shot on DV. It was one of the first 'mainstream' films to talk about incest. This is also more or less its provocation, but its provocation has a deeper level. We are led to believe our main character's intention is to expose his father (get justice) and in the end of the film he succeeds - but he is not really happy about it. The main character's true intention is to find reconciliation with his father, to gain a real bond between them - and this is truly provoking as the gut-reaction towards incest-perpetrators are pretty much to castrate them (socially and physically). This film actually ends up siding with both the victim and the perpetrator.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Bravo Bale!!
The internet toilet-tubes are overflowing with pro et contra Christian Bale's outburst (well, tirade is maybe more like it) against the DoP on set of Terminator. Here's my 7 and a half cent (not american cents, european cents, that is).
Caveat: No one really know the full context, except to a certain degree the involved persons.
Blame McG
Don't blame Bale, blame McG: Flaming Bale for this on the basis of the recording is ridiculous as the guy supposed to take responsibility for the situation, the director, clearly doesn't do it. On the the recording the director, McG, when asked by Bale to pitch in, just flummox out of being put on the spot by the time-honored "I didn't see it" (Like one of the famous three monkeys). Even very good and professional actors can loose it - and then you, the director, must pick up the ball. McG was even thrown the ball by Bale, but didn't want to catch it - "I didn't see it" - come on, McG.
Neurotic Numb-skull
Please, please, I beg you all, stop the neurotic I will never see a Christian Bale film again, he needs anger management, he is a psycho, he is unprofessional and whatever else scaredity-analysis and conclusion you believe is the truth. The thing here is that people are way too frightned of aggression and conflict. You know what? Film and theater - the dramatic arts - they are all about conflict. We love to watch them because most of us are such huge chickens in real life. In his outburst at the DoP, Bale is actually trying to achieve something, he is not just blowing off steam (but he is doing that too). All the answers of the DoP are vague, non-commital, responsibility-avoiding. Bale is trying to make him stand up and be a man about the situation - not to act like a typical neurotic conflict-suppressing, numb-skull. I've been in similar situations where the only tool to get through to some people is the sledgehammer - then later, when you have broken down the neurotic defences, you can have a nice, reasonable talk. Hell, I've even done the same to a producer who kept displacing her responsibility. Sometimes you just have to call people on their shit in a very loud way, or else they'll keep fucking you in their polite, smiling, nice-talking ways.
So long live Bale! Go see all his movies (if they are any good). Find your own balls.
(And what has this got to do with scriptwriting? Its all about conflict)
Caveat: No one really know the full context, except to a certain degree the involved persons.
Blame McG
Don't blame Bale, blame McG: Flaming Bale for this on the basis of the recording is ridiculous as the guy supposed to take responsibility for the situation, the director, clearly doesn't do it. On the the recording the director, McG, when asked by Bale to pitch in, just flummox out of being put on the spot by the time-honored "I didn't see it" (Like one of the famous three monkeys). Even very good and professional actors can loose it - and then you, the director, must pick up the ball. McG was even thrown the ball by Bale, but didn't want to catch it - "I didn't see it" - come on, McG.
Neurotic Numb-skull
Please, please, I beg you all, stop the neurotic I will never see a Christian Bale film again, he needs anger management, he is a psycho, he is unprofessional and whatever else scaredity-analysis and conclusion you believe is the truth. The thing here is that people are way too frightned of aggression and conflict. You know what? Film and theater - the dramatic arts - they are all about conflict. We love to watch them because most of us are such huge chickens in real life. In his outburst at the DoP, Bale is actually trying to achieve something, he is not just blowing off steam (but he is doing that too). All the answers of the DoP are vague, non-commital, responsibility-avoiding. Bale is trying to make him stand up and be a man about the situation - not to act like a typical neurotic conflict-suppressing, numb-skull. I've been in similar situations where the only tool to get through to some people is the sledgehammer - then later, when you have broken down the neurotic defences, you can have a nice, reasonable talk. Hell, I've even done the same to a producer who kept displacing her responsibility. Sometimes you just have to call people on their shit in a very loud way, or else they'll keep fucking you in their polite, smiling, nice-talking ways.
So long live Bale! Go see all his movies (if they are any good). Find your own balls.
(And what has this got to do with scriptwriting? Its all about conflict)
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Amerika Square
A new consultant job. I'm helping Yannis Sakaridis with the script for his first feature film. He made a successful short film, "The Truth", which he and the film company Argonauts are developing into a feature. They presented the project at Thessaloniki International Filmfestival's Crossroads - a forum for hooking up projects with international co-producers - and the project picked up interest as well as a prize (Yes, they also have festival prizes for projects in development).
So far we have had one real meeting (excluding the initial "to see if we can work together"-meeting) and we have covered the fundamentals: Type of film (thriller with a social aspect, realism, comedy=ends in harmony), Basic conflict (compassion vs. greed), the main character's core characteristics (wants justice, needs love, strong compassion, weakness short tempered).
Yannis is going to the Berlin festival next week to do the network-thing and follow up on the interest from European producers. So we are working intensely on getting him ready to present the story as clearly and convincingly as possible in all those meetings. I guess he will also be seeing a lot of films - and drink a lot of drinks - and wearing a lot of clothes as Berlin can get pretty cold in winter. Ah, Berlin is such a great city. Wish I was going.
So far we have had one real meeting (excluding the initial "to see if we can work together"-meeting) and we have covered the fundamentals: Type of film (thriller with a social aspect, realism, comedy=ends in harmony), Basic conflict (compassion vs. greed), the main character's core characteristics (wants justice, needs love, strong compassion, weakness short tempered).
Yannis is going to the Berlin festival next week to do the network-thing and follow up on the interest from European producers. So we are working intensely on getting him ready to present the story as clearly and convincingly as possible in all those meetings. I guess he will also be seeing a lot of films - and drink a lot of drinks - and wearing a lot of clothes as Berlin can get pretty cold in winter. Ah, Berlin is such a great city. Wish I was going.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
