Sunday, January 22, 2012

Week 2 Homework

15 Minutes of Faye is a dark comedy of manners about a talentless narcissist obsessed with becoming famous by seducing his celebrity ex-girlfriend. The film could be loosely classified as mumblecore, a genre which traditionally does very well in film festivals. Though the film is microbudget, it was shot on high definition with professional lenses, giving it the look of a much higher-budget film. The fact that it is microbudget also means it will cost less for you to acquire than similar, but higher-budgeted romantic dramedies. The film was partially crowdfunded, both through personal connections and through the internet (including our official website and our Facebook page), so there is already a small market for this film in Florida. Also, the title begins with a numeral, which would help with a potential VOD release. Campus MovieFest will help us market the film, as part of a grant we won with their organization during pre-production.  In addition, we've held three test screenings with unbiased audiences, who rated the film highly in terms of its pacing, comedy, and thematic material.

Examples of similar films which were successful include Chad Hartigan’s film Luke and Brie are on a First Date, and one of my personal favorites, In Search of a Midnight Kiss, which cost $12,000 to produce, and grossed over $170,000 after being acquired for distribution, not to mention playing at over twenty film festivals, and winning the jury award at the Florida Film Festival. I believe with the right marketing strategy, 15 Minutes of Faye could achieve equal success.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Week 1 Homework

Info on 5 Theatrically-distributed Films:

1. Martha Marcy May Marlene
Distributor: Fox Searchlight
Shot On: 35mm
Budget: No data available.

2. Into the Abyss
Distributor: IFC Films
Shot On: High-end digital.
Budget: Less than $1 million.

3. The Artist
Distributor: Weinstein Company
Shot On: 35mm
Budget: $15 million

4. Red Tails
Distributor: Fox
Shot On: HDCAM SR (1080p/24)
Budget: $58 million

5. Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey
Distributor: Submarine Entertainment
Shot On: Sony HVRZ1U (and iPhone 4)
Budget: No data available.

Info on 5 Films Which Did Not Have Theatrical Distribution:

1. Nothing But the Truth
Distributor: Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
Shot On: 35mm
Budget: $11.5 million
Gross Sales: $3 million

2. Dog Soldiers
Distributor: Pathé
Shot On: 16mm
Budget: $500,000
Gross Sales: $5.5 million

3. Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer
Distributor: Anchor Bay Entertainment
Shot On: Arricam LT/ST
Budget: $2.5 million
Gross Sales: No data available.

4. Almighty Thor
Distributor: The Asylum
Shot On: HDSLR
Budget: Less than $1 million
Gross Sales: More than $1 million

5. Luke and Brie are on a First Date
Distributor: Self-distributed
Shot On: Low-end Digital
Budget: $5,000
Gross Sales: More than $5,000

Friday, September 30, 2011

The Last Laugh COP

Loss begets misery.

This is assuming the ending isn't taken into account.  The film itself admits the ending is essentially a joke.

Learning From My Failures

Failure is a sore subject for me, because I've failed a lot with my artistic endeavors. My greatest failure is a feature-length film I shot in 2006 called Reaper. It was a neo-goth microbudget fantasy epic. To this day, I still hold that the film's concept is incredibly good. I just wasn't prepared to direct a feature-length film, and got myself in way over my head. While most beginning filmmakers have a hard time getting through pre-production, and successfully shooting their film, I've never really had a problem with all that practical stuff. What I always fail to account for - starting with Reaper - is the personal toll the film will take on me, and whether it's a sustainable project in the long run, both on my money, and on my time. Reaper cost about $7,000 to create, and we shot the whole film: about forty hours worth of footage. But then school ate my time, and I didn't get a chance to edit the movie for two whole years. By then, I could look back on the project and see how much of an amateur I was - so I actually never finished the film, even though it had been shot. It was still early in my growth period, where I was consuming new information about filmmaking and evolving as an artist very quickly. Because of this evolution, my work had a brief shelf-life in my own mind, and became out-of-date with remarkable speed. This same concept also applies to my web series, which we started shooting in 2007, and is still in the post-production process. I learned from these experiences that it's vital to finish what you start in a timely manner. It's a terrible feeling to have a project lingering, hanging over your head, when you know even as you're editing it that it's old news, and you could create exponentially better work now.

Generation Why is an interesting case study, because it was a series conceived as a single, solid story, told by only me, the director - a big no-no if you're creating content for the internet. It wasn't collaborative enough, making little effort to engage our audience beyond begging them to watch our stuff. I view this as a conceptual problem - not a marketing problem. We should have approached the series one episode at a time, and found a way to integrate our audience into the creative process. By conceptualizing the series as a single entity to be shot all at once, then uploaded at a later date, I short-changed myself and my cast. Not only could we have built more of an audience - we could also have created a better product, with input from more people.

Another massive failure was our film Sanctuary, which was a nightmare to shoot, and isn't turning out very well. I wrote the script for that, and was very passionate about it, then I was somewhat shut out of the creative process on set. My lesson learned from that experience was to choose with extreme care the people you work with. Will they be prepared? Are they interested in power or playing the politics game? Are they positive? Do they know what they're doing? Most importantly: do they care? After that project, I understood why so many film and TV writers complain their work is trashed during production.

What I Don't Like About Movies

Any number of things can set me off when I get angry at a movie. I dislike films which take no risks, which are most of the mainstream films. Anything that blatantly mimics a proven formula will set me off. That having been said, I usually find new combinations of old formulas to be some of the most interesting work, and Hollywood puts out a few of these every year. I also think it's important to note that the typical Hollywood formulas - the Joseph Campbell hero epic, the rom com, the action heist film, etc. - aren't the only formulas out there. I equally detest all of the pop indie formulas - the quirky family dramedy, the dark "war-is-bad" drama, the minority struggling against oppression, etc. After watching enough of these, you can easily read which older, truly original films influenced any of these ripoffs (and I'm sure this sensation will get worse as I age). True art lies not in how we mimic the films we idolize, but in how we use them to motivate us to create something just as creative and original.

I also don't like self-important films, where the film seems to be the end in itself, rather than the means to another end. Film school, and the film world in general, are full of these. Production for the sake of production. Good story ideas are great, as are deep characters, but you have to attach them to some deeper theme in order to make a film which will truly matter, and stand the test of time. I have my doubts about the specifics of the COP, but I absolutely agree with the general concept. I don't think most films - both mainstream and indie - have one of these, and it's a shame.

I don't like films which stand out as high-concept pitches. "What if you have a Western with cowboys ... but there are also aliens fighting them?" It makes a great pitch, but a pitch has a long way to go to becoming a film with a fleshed-out story, honest characters, and deep thematic roots.

The main quality I dislike in cinema today is a lack of genuine focus on story, despite a seemingly massive focus on story. The word "story" is thrown around a lot out in the film world, and in film school, but then why do most of the movies made suck so badly? I think modern storytellers forget how long the history of storytelling is, and the infinitely diverse stories which can be told. We let ourselves be confined by the past century of pop-culture consumption, where art is also an industry. I don't think people are afraid to think outside the boxes of genre, target market, and story structure - I just don't think it ever crosses people's minds, because we're so busy focusing on what will sell in the mainstream, or how to build an audience in the microbudget world. All that stuff is important; I just wish storytellers could learn to think outside of the box without resorting all the way to left-field experiments with the form.

I try to rebel against all of the above in my own work. I enjoy combining disparate old things into something new, defying genre expectations, while maintaining artistic humility. There's really not much else to write about it.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Films Which Have Been the Most Inspiring and Influential To Me

I love plenty of films, but there are few which have inspired or influenced my art in some way.  (For the purpose of this essay, I’m assuming “inspiring” means “inspiring my own art” instead of the “inspiring” Hollywood uses to market sports movies.)  For me, the most influential movies have been those which exposed me to a whole new genre or style of film, and did so with class.

When I was a child, my parents didn’t let me watch movies or TV (a decision I credit for much of my creativity).  It wasn’t until I turned 10 that they showed me Star Wars, which is both my dad’s favorite movie, and the cliché film which influences everyone to go to film school.  The magic worked on me.  Star Wars was a big movie - especially for a kid who’s barely seen a film in his life.  More than the spark which first got me into filmmaking though, the more lasting impression Star Wars gave me was a love for stories which create an entire universe around themselves - a universe larger than the story itself, into which the audience is mercilessly thrown and expected to fend for themselves.  Though pop sci-fi has since been degraded, there’s surprisingly little exposition or hand-holding in the original Star Wars.  I think the best “universe-creating” movies throw the audience in, in the same way.  It’s a smart means of suspending people’s disbelief in a fictional universe.  I aspire to achieve this in several of my unproduced scripts (some of them even microbudget).

On the opposite end of the spectrum are two movies I saw early in college - Clerks and Before Sunrise.  I’d just finished taking courses about story structure, and learning Joseph Campbell’s monomyth like the Bible, and here were two films which were apparently about nothing.  They had no obvious structure, yet were still entertaining, moving, and meaningful to me.  This was when I learned that although story is important, storytelling is actually based more in characters … then the story comes from them.  These films gave me a sense of rebellion - the idea that a narrative film can be anything as long as it works for an audience.  There is no formula.  Also, Clerks was dirt cheap, and Before Sunrise could have been dirt cheap, so these were the first films which influenced my interest in microbudget filmmaking.  Only a year later, I saw Once, and in terms of artistic influence, it reaffirmed what I’d learned from Clerks and Before Sunrise, so I mentally group it in with those two.

Along the same lines was a little indie which played at Sundance called Mystery Team.  It was a gross-out R-rated teen comedy made on a micro budget by a group of college friends as an extension of their web series.  Naturally, I was encouraged and influenced by that, given my own web series, Generation Why.

The final film I count among those which have influenced me the most is an unlikely film - Into the Wild, Sean Penn’s film.  Growing up, I’d idolized the crafts of storytelling and filmmaking in and of themselves.  It seems like common sense now that the best films have some sort of theme, or message … or COP.  But this idea never clicked for me until I saw Into the Wild.  The message of that film moved me so much that I started to examine all my own work through the new idea that filmmaking and storytelling are means to an end - not the ends in themselves.  I saw An Inconvenient Truth around the same time (a few years after its theatrical release), and that had a similar effect on me - and also really got me interested in documentaries.

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Why I'm Making this Film, and What Makes a Great Film For Me

I wanted to make 15 Minutes of Faye for a number of reasons (outlined in the artist's statement on our website), but my primary goal is to influence positive personal and social change in my audience.  Based on my research and my personal experience, our culture’s idolization of fame is a massive problem not dealt with by much art.  Climate change, gay rights, and the economy are all important issues, but they’re also popular issues, and I feel there are many other artists to fight those fights.  I prefer to deal with a more obscure yet equally significant social issue.  This particular issue is one that’s near and dear to me, since it’s personally affected me quite a bit over the past several years.

I’m also attracted to the story at a genre level.  Though the film is not a mumblecore film, it takes cues from the genre, which is one of my favorites, second only to sci-fi.  Overall, I classify 15 Minutes of Faye as a dark romantic comedy - a genre of which you don’t see much.  I enjoy taking clichés, and elements with which audiences are familiar, and contorting them into something new and unique.

Truthfully, my interest in this film - and in film in general - comes from a very content-based perspective.  Artistic form, new media, and new distribution models are things I’ve learned out of necessity, both because I’m a filmmaker in the internet age, and because I go to school at UCF.  These are not, however, things which fundamentally interest me.  I’m interested in storytelling, in content.  (So I sometimes feel a bit out of place at UCF, which emphasizes those other things so much.)

My taste in film is eclectic, and I think great films take a variety of forms.  I love The Puffy Chair and Once just as much as I love Star Wars and Titanic, and just as much as I love An Inconvenient Truth and Inside Job.  Storytelling and originality are important to me.  I strongly disagree that there are only a few stories which can be told and that it’s all been done before, so I love films that do something totally new, and push boundaries - in content and in storytelling; not so much in form, though I often appreciate this as well.  I also have a soft spot for films which create fictional universes around their stories (which often, but not always, requires a big budget to pull off).

Films which inspire social change through non-cliché means are also some of the best.  Many filmmakers get caught up trying to move people, or to make people think, which are good motivators for art, but these should be the means to an end.  I think we have a duty as filmmakers to not only move our audience, but to change our audience.  A hundred years from now, a moving story will be obsolete, and a formal experiment with the medium will likely vanish into obscurity, but the way we filmmakers change and shape our culture will carry through.  A focus on positive change, with an original story, well-told, is what makes a great film to me.