G. Laing's Blog of Motion Picture Wonderment

Hilarity In Shoes

2010-05-24T23:02:00.007+01:00

Oh bloggy, it's been a while. But here I am, back to reflect upon the making of our second year films as they happen. Now I hope that it won't seem narcissistic, but I will pretty much be exclusively focussing on Sole Mates. There are two reasons for this; 1 - as I'm directing, this is the production I'll be most heavily involved in, and 2 - I'll be off to the States so shortly after it wraps that I won't actually be very involved in either Breathing Room or Broken Bubbles.

I think first I should talk about the story. I've only recently cemented what the story is about in my head, and I think that writing it out will help me. In fact, I think that regular blog-posts will give me the time I need to gather my thoughts and turn them into ideas that I can easily communicate to everyone.

What is Sole Mates? At it's heart, I think it's the story of a girl who isn't a part of her generation, content with her life in a world of grey, suddenly trying new things. In her world, all that's colourful is placed out of sight. It's not forbidden, it's just not wanted. Having lived in that world, Lucy has never been daring - never taken risks. There's so much she's never done. So much she's never tried...

One day she finds a pair of high heels in the colourful backroom of the charity shop in which she works. They're expensive, richly coloured and exciting. Something within Lucy pulls her towards these shoes. A new curiosity. And when she tries them on, it triggers feelings of excitement that Lucy has never experienced. Lucy is then pulled into a world of trying new things - secretly taking risks wearing the heels, dressing up to match them, befriending some girls, going into the city. But suddenly, somehow, she loses what made her Lucy.

She blames the heels - they caused this whole mess! - and she throws them away. But she comes to realise that what happened wasn't because of the heels, and she admits that she can be herself and wear the heels, even if they're different.

Now, whilst this is what I believe the story is about, I'm still not convinced that the latest draft properly explores this. As such, I will work on another draft - which I hope, pending approval, will be the draft that gets locked.

In my next post I think I will talk about the characters, as I think this will prove useful as we move towards casting.

--

Discovering 'Nemo'

2010-02-18T21:14:00.002Z

Take a scene of your choice and deconstruct it with relation to sound, cinematography, editing, or art direction.

The pre-titles scene of Pixar’s Finding Nemo (2003) gives context to the rest of the story, and I find it to be an emotionally stimulating piece of filmmaking. To look at this objectively, I intend to deconstruct the editing of this scene by analysing decisions made by the filmmakers and, using well-regarded editing theories, discussing their effect. There are four primary areas of interest with regards to this scene; motivations behind the editing, the pacing of the scene, breaks in continuity, and the repetition of imagery. I will look at these areas in detail and explore their purpose. However, as this is an animated film, and particularly because Pixar are renowned for their unique workflow, it is important to first establish just how Finding Nemo was edited.

As the film went through an impressive storyboarding and full pre-visualisation process, the editor, David Ian Salter, was not solely responsible for all editing decisions. The editing process used (further explained in Appendix 1) meant that the editor worked together with storyboard artists and animators to create the edit, and this was perfected over time as parts of the film were reworked to produce the best possible cut of the film.

In his book In the Blink of an Eye, Oscar-winning editor Walter Murch explains that each and every cut should be motivated by a number of factors. Murch provides a list with each factor weighted in terms of importance;

Emotion (51%), Story (23%), Rhythm (10%), Eye-trace (7%), 2D Plane of Screen (5%), 3D Space of Action (4%)

In Finding Nemo, this first scene is about seeing Marlin happy with all he has, before seeing him lose everything apart from his unborn son. In-keeping with Murch’s ideas, the editing of this scene very clearly follows Marlin’s journey, and is heavily reflective of his emotional state – with which the audience is to empathise, according to director Andrew Stanton, in order to set-up Marlin as an overprotective character with whom the audience can still relate. Murch’s other criteria are also met by almost all of the cuts in the scene (though I will go on to discuss the exceptions later). Of particular interest is the use of rhythm in the scene, which features a dramatic pacing arc.

The editing of the scene is visually represented in the diagram above, and I have highlighted the main pace-changes using colours. Initially, the rate of cutting is quite slow (the blue area). This creates a relaxing and gentle introduction to the characters and world of the film, and reflects the mood of the protagonist, Marlin. As we build familiarity with the characters, we move to a faster pace of cutting (the green area). This, again, is representative of the emotions of the characters. However, it serves this purpose in two ways. The first part of this section is playful, but it suddenly turns into a sequence of tension. Whilst the pace here does not change, editing decisions such as shot-choice play a big part in creating this tension. The sequence changes from busy close-ups to motionless wideshots, as shown here:

The tension erupts into a ferocious attack (the red area), which is cut incredibly fast, before returning to a sedate pace – but now one of loss, not optimism. This change in mood is achieved using visual repetition, but first I will return to an earlier point, regarding the attack sequence.

As I discussed, not every cut in the scene keeps to Murch’s hierarchy of editing. On a live-action film, Murch says that the lesser rules should be sacrificed for the more important ones if necessary – but on an animated film such as Finding Nemo, the editor would have to meticulously and purposefully break continuity, and this is exactly what happens during the attack sequence. Here, when viewed at the proper frame-rate, the editing appears to be seamless. However, when you play it back slowly and look at the positions of the characters, there are clear errors in continuity, geography, and even the observance of 180° rule (or the “2D plane of screen” as Murch calls it). For instance, the following 12 frames are sequential in the scene – with the separation representing the cut.

Marlin is hit twice here, breaking the basic principle of continuity editing. To explain this, we return to Murch’s top priority in editing: emotion. Marlin is very disorientated and confused here, and in order to subliminally replicate this in the audience there has been a purposeful breaking of the very rules that are to prevent confusion and disorientation.

Sergei Eisenstein, one of the forefathers of editing, had theories which primarily related to the creation of ideas through editing. Whilst Eisenstien’s theories were originated with regards to montage editing, there are several instances in this scene where new ideas are generated. For instance, there is very clear visual repetition in the scene. Three particular camera angles that are used throughout the optimistic opening of the scene are repeated towards the end, as shown here.

The filmmakers are using what Eisenstein referred to as “intellectual” editing, in which shots can elicit an intellectual meaning to the audience. In this instance this is not created by use of montage, but by returning to a previously seen image. By having the audience associate strong positive emotions with the image the first time it is presented to them, this heightens the feeling of loss when we return to the images in the new context. Just as the collision of two images creates an idea, returning to a previous image in a different context creates an idea through juxtaposition. This elaborate effect has similarities to the Kuleshov experiment – regarded as one of the most important ideas in the history of film editing – which proved that an audience will find meaning in a shot based on its context within the scene.

In conclusion, in what some dismiss as just a film for kids, I have found the use of some very elaborate and sophisticated editing techniques. I truly respect this quality in Pixar, and I think that this is the sort of dedication that truly helps to create inspiring films. This scene is a perfect example of Murch’s editing principles in play, and also proves that it is okay to break rules if you do so with a purpose. In deconstructing this scene, I am able to better understand how my initial emotional response was triggered by the filmmakers, and I can now acknowledge the practical applications of theories from the very genesis of editing as an art form, such as those of Kuleshov and Eisenstein.

Word count: 1,094

~~~

Appendix 1: Pixar's Editing Workflow

As the story-team develop ideas, they storyboard them to see if they work. At this early stage, the artists are not only deciding on the story, but they also decide what they cut to and when. The film goes through this process many times, until the team are satisfied with the story. As scenes get finalised, they move into the animation process. The editor is given a low-quality and very basic render, and they then edit the scene in accordance with the storyboards, finessing the edits. This then feeds back into the animation and original story development until everyone is satisfied.

~~~

Bibliography

DVD

Finding Nemo 2 Disc Collector's Edition (2003)
- Original Feature Film
- Extended Commentary
- 'Making of…' Featurette

WALL-E 2 Disc Special Edition (2008)
- 'The Pixar Story' Feature-length Documentary

Books

'To Infinity and Beyond!: The Story of Pixar Animation Studios'
by Karen Paik

'Grammar of the Edit'
by Roy Thompson

'In the Blink of an Eye'
by Walter Murch

'The Film Sense'
by Sergei Eisenstein

'Film Form'
by Sergei Eisenstein

Websites

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

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266543/

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

http://introtoediting.com/

http://www.pixarplanet.com/

-

Macro-Reviews

2010-02-10T20:05:00.000Z

Dear Blog, sorry I broke my promise to post more. Here's a massive set of mini-reviews to make up for it, starting with the academic screenings.

Rome, Open City - In my head I thought Rome, Open City was very similar to The Battle for Algiers. So much so that I'm having trouble differentiating between them now. However, I do remember that I saw something very unique in the film, and whilst I wasn't entirely captivated by the story or the filmmaking, I could see that there was just something "new" about it. Of course I can now say with confidence that I was seeing the genesis of Italian Neo-Realism. You could feel that what was being presented was more honest and real than the rose-tinted world seen in many films that had come before, and it was certainly a very important turning-point in film history.

The 400 Blows - I really liked The 400 Blows. Again there was clearly something different about it. Visually, the most notable difference was seeing handheld footage, something which made me truly believe I was watching a modern film graded to look old. This, along with some strong acting from the young Jean-Pierre Léaud, and several iconic images and themes, really clearly define this film as an important part of the French New Wave.

Saturday Night and Sunday Morning - Parts of this film were quite enjoyable, and other parts of it were very soap-like. I suppose this is appropriate, given that it is part of the rise of "kitchen-sink dramas," but I do think the story's inclusion of extra-marital affairs would have been rather shocking for the time and revolutionary in its own way.

This is England - You could definitely see the similarities to The 400 Blows, and the visual references were a nice touch. The young Thomas Turgoose was very impressive in the lead role, and - as much as I have hated every character he has ever played - I think Stephen Graham was very appropriate for his role. This film also has a particular resonance at the moment, with all this BNP nonsense going on. Hopefully, though, there's far less support for nationalism now than was depicted in this film. I would also like to point out that I found several similarities between This is England and Billy Elliot - both using youth culture to reflect on Thatcherism (possibly because the filmmakers were in their youth during this time, which is in-keeping with the generational theory).

The Lives of Others - I thoroughly enjoyed this, and I will admit this film had the additional challenge of involving me because it was subtitled. The main reason this is a hurdle for me is because films are all about escapism, involvement and suspending-disbelief. In theatre there are primarily two main approaches; the more Brechtian style, where you are reminded that you are in a theatre, watching an performance, and the more believable and real performances, such as Stanislavski's approach. In film, only the latter is ever seen (with perhaps the exception of Dogville), and if a film has subtitles I find it a constant reminder that I am watching a film. However, The Lives of Others was so engaging that it managed to make me forget, which is pretty powerful. I only pray that a Hollywood remake is not in the works. The film is an important reflection of German history, told by Germans. Let's not go all Kevin Spacey on it.

And now some brief reviews on my recent cinema escapades.

Avatar - I was worried that there was a whiff of "boy-who-cried-wolf" when it came to Avatar's advertising, and that the film they were billing intensely as the best movie of all time would be a major and disastrous flop. And whilst I would never call it the best film of all time, I did really enjoy Avatar. Very few films allow me to immerse myself entirely in their world, but Avatar is one of them. Pure escapism.

Where the Wild Things Are - It was wrong. A good film with a nice story, nice cinematography, and brilliant monster-puppety-things, but it was wrong. It was not a film for children, and it was not a film for adults. Frankly, I don't know who it was for. Possibly people who liked the books, but are now all growed-up. I thought it was going to be like the Neverending Story; made like a proper fantasy, enjoyable for children, but also terrifying. Nope. Again: it was not for children.

Me & Orson Welles - The trouble with this film is that the only potential audience it has are the sort of people who will get incredibly irritated that the title is grammatically incorrect. The only other audience it has are tweens who love Zac Efron, of whom there were a few in my screen (they got very bored, I hasten to add). I liked the story, and I loved Christian McKay's portrayal of Orson Welles, and I think Zac Efron and Claire Danes were very believable. I'm sure that all three have great potential careers ahead of them.

Sherlock Holmes - I thought they were gonna pull a Pirates-of-the-Caribbean with Sherlock Holmes, and I wasn't far off with that expectation. It was very much trying to be the same sort of period action/adventure, and it was rather enjoyable. London seemed rather CG in parts, which was a little disappointing, and I didn't like that the audience were allowed no clues to work out the plot for themselves. It's always fun trying to do that.

The Princess and the Frog - An enjoyable and well-balanced film. They have the classic style of animation, story and music, with a good blend of humour and a more diverse collection of characters. I particularly liked the inclusion of a couple of cutaway gags (as modern audiences have grown to understand from Malcolm in the Middle through to 30 Rock), and I think this could be a classic Disney film to the children of today.

---

My Doctor

2010-01-17T23:53:00.007Z

This is another post that I had started over the holidays. Expect a more topical post shortly...

---

I don't think it would be right of me to allow the Tenth Doctor's regeneration to go past without acknowledgement. After all, Doctor Who is one of the main reasons I am so interested in this industry, and had it not come back in 2005 I'd probably be studying physics at some boring University. Warning - This post obviously contains some spoilers about Doctor Who. Don't read it if you're behind at all. I'm look at you, Forest.

I much remember the day that Doctor Who returned to our screens. I was watching the BBC Breakfast News whilst waiting in an airport, ready to fly off to Florida. They were talking about a new series of Doctor Who that was to launch in the UK that evening. They played a clip which didn't really impress me, and then we boarded the plane. 4247 miles away from home, I was probably gorging at an All-You-Can-Eat buffet when the new opening credits were broadcast for the first time. Two weeks later, I returned to find a few friends really enjoying the series, so I gave it a shot. I think I joined the show at episode four: Aliens of London. Now, even the most dedicated fans will admit that this two-parter is regarded as the weakest of the first series, and yet I still fell in love with the characters and the drama. The story of the episode, the monsters, the action - they didn't really matter! I loved the Doctor, I loved Rose, and I loved the show's ability to be anything it wanted to be.

The first time I realised I loved the show was five episodes later - Father's Day. It was such an engaging episode, with some really emotional scenes, and to me it was so much better than anything else on TV or in the cinema.

From that point on my love of the show has been growing exponentially. By Series 2, Saturdays were spent waiting for Doctor Who to come on, with friends joining me to watch. However, another holiday then got in my way at the end of the second series, and I missed the two-part finale. Having recorded it, I arrived back in the country and immediately set about watching it. Missing the publicity for it made it even better, as I had no idea what to expect. It was all new and surprising and exciting! And Rose left, and I was sad. And then Donna appeared in the Tardis, and I was happy! I had no idea who the character was, but I loved Catherine Tate, and I was just excited to see her in the show!

By Series 3 I was a serious addict. I irritated many friends and classmates by tapping out a certain drum-beat, which was particularly comical as this was during exam-time. I remember someone asking me if I had realised I was doing it during an exam, very quietly on the desk. I have no recollection of this, but it's fair enough to assume I was indeed tap-tap-tap-taping whilst solving some equation.

At my Series 4 launch party (yes, that's right) we had Doctor Who themed paper plates, cups, and a table-cloth. Everyone there remembers me literally screaming during a certain scene towards the end. And when I say screaming, I absolutely mean it. I had realised the importance of something before they had. And then, the woman turned around, and it was indeed - ROOOOOOSSSEEEEE!!!!!!!

Ahem.

But this moment was the moment I declared myself going spoiler-free. The excitement I felt in that moment, having no prior warning, was so unique that I dare not look at any set-reports or fan-forums any more. I still read Doctor Who Magazine, but they're great at keeping things a secret.

So, of course I was going to be all crazy-headed for David Tennant and Russell T Davies's final episodes, particularly going in spoiler-free. And personally, I loved them, and probably would have loved them no matter what. Whilst I am far from being objective, I will admit that the story of the final two-parter was a little underwhelming - but every scene between David Tennant and Bernard Cribbins forgives this, and the Tenth Doctor's final moments were perfect.

I think this is the first time I have tried to fully articulate my love for the show, even though most people are aware of it, but I still don't feel I've quite covered it - and I don't think I'll ever be quite able to explain why I love it so much. In honesty, I don't even know. But with a new series starting soon, it's only fair to warn you that I will be insanely excited and possibly a little manic. I don't fear the coming changes. I'm ready to embrace them, love them, and let my obsession grow!

Geronimo!

---

Thoughts on Genre

2010-01-11T22:45:00.006Z

Dear Blog, sorry I've neglected you recently. Various factors have prevented me from finding the time to finish a post. However, I have a selection of half-finished blogs that I will finish over the coming weeks. Hopefully this will make up for the weeks I missed last term. I started the following blog post on the 17th of November, but I only just finished it. I promise to take care of you from now on, and to remember that a blog is for life, not just for Christmas. Yours, Gavin

---

Genre is the French word for category or type. It's also the Mayan word for the end of the world*. So this post is about the two, as I delve deeply into a rather shallow pool of destruction, presented in the shape of Roland Emmerich's new film, 2012.

We've had classes on genre in many different modules, and they each bring something new to the table. Andy's recent class on genre gave a very good overview of the "Repertoire of Elements" we expect; Characters, Narrative, Iconography, Style, Setting. It was fun after this class to think about writing in genres that I haven't previously. However, we recently had a class with Richard, in which we also spoke about genre extensively. We looked at the structures of different genres, and audience expectations. After this class I was a little more cynical. The audience expectations (which are made as soon as they know the genre) have to be met, or you risk angering or upsetting the audience - and that wouldn't make Mr Hollywood very happy. It's a little upsetting to think that creativity and originality come second, and your storytelling really can become "painting-by-numbers".

Some genres are more generic than others. Fantasy, sci-fi and social dramas are all quite free to do as they please, in my opinion - but action, romcoms, and horrors are bound by tight rules. Romcoms are particularly bad, and you'll be pleased to know that I'm incidentally working on a romcom for Richard. Arguably it's a romcom with a twist, and that twist thankfully allows me to escape the apparent tight restrictions of the genre, and perhaps give the audience something they don't quite expect. Plus, I can poke fun at the genre a little.

Another generic genre (or "genreic" for short) is the disaster film. I saw 2012 the day after Richard's genre class, and so genre structure was still floating around in my head. I already knew that 2012 was going to be similar to Emmerich's previous disaster film The Day After Tomorrow, but I didn't quite realise just how similar they would be. Allow me, if you will, to present the formula for a Roland Emmerich "the world's going to end, but not before I make them a happy-family again" film.

A black British scientist is in India doing some research about a geological anomaly. The scientist (or someone who works with him) tries to convince the US Government that their findings point to disaster on a global scale. The US Government have a good "lol" at the silly idea that the world could be ending. Only when the President gets involved do they accept the idea to be serious. Meanwhile, the main character is having family problems, which are just as important - if not more important - than preventing the imminent extinction of the human race. Finally the supposed end of the world comes, yet our protagonists somehow all manage to survive. This generally involves lots of near misses with massive tidal waves, fire falling from the sky, and absolute-zero temperatures... Oh - and the death of the President! There's then at least an hour's worth of boring stuff, since they've spent the entire effects-budget on the destructiony bit. During this part of the film, the main character has to travel a great distance by impossibly silly means, and then learns a great lesson, which somehow enables him to bring his family back together (even if that means having to let his ex-wife's new boyfriend perish). It ends showing that, despite all of the destruction, there is some hope for humanity. Frankly, this sort of storytelling makes me believe the opposite.

Ignoring the similarities, I did kind of enjoy 2012. I was in one of those "brainless movie" moods. Though I hope it's the last of it's kind. If I want to see this sort of story again, I'll just rewatch The Day After Tomorrow. At least the family-reunion in that wasn't appallingly sickening and completely unrelated to the events of the story.

Also, as a sidenote - it's actually a myth that the Mayans predict the end of the world on the 21st December 2012. Their calendar cycle ends on this date, but they in fact celebrate this, and start the cycle again. For a crazy amount of information on this whole thing, check out this link. It's a pretty useful read, particularly because I'm sure that we'll have to battle against stupidity and pseudoscience for the whole of 2012.

*Not really.

---

There ya go, Bloggy. Much better!

Mini-Reviews

2009-11-17T20:02:00.004Z

I've not been able to watch many films recently, but I've certainly been active in my TV watching. I will soon do a set of TV reviews, speaking about shows I like, and possibly looking at new shows in the US. But, for now, here are the films I've seen in the past while.

The Searchers - I'm still not a massive fan of Westerns (sorry, Andy!), but this was a pretty good film nonetheless. It was a little slow-moving for my liking, but the pace at least suited the film. Having been shown the first few minutes in a previous class, I was more than a little surprised to see the family killed off at the start. However, it is interesting that there is a whole family history that one can read from the scene that is not of massive importance to the rest of the story. Normally such a perfectly executed scene of subtle exposition would only be present when a necessity to the story. Whilst it wasn't, it gave the film's world a sense of history, and it gave us some indication to Ethan's past. One minor let-down was the strange conclusion when Ethan finds Debbie and has a sudden and unprompted change of heart about her.

Saw - Paul decided that he should introduce me to Saw, and so we sat and watched it the night before reshoots on The Golden Rule. I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was actually a very watchable and enjoyable thriller; not a horror like I had presumed - and I don't think I can be blamed for that presumption! The psychological tomfoolery (if the term is not too tame) is really interesting, and the dilemmas and tricks were well-played. A part of me thinks that coincidence plays a big part, because if anything had played out differently in that room then perhaps the game would have been rather less interesting. But, to be honest, that was an afterthought, and it didn't intrude on my enjoyment of the film. So I now join Paul in recommending that you see Saw. And then try the slide. It's delightful.

Zombieland - My favourite zombie films are Shaun of the Dead and Dead Set (okay, not really a film). Both mock the zombie-genre, and both are very funny, but they do it in very different ways. In Zombieland, we find yet another unique zombie-comedy: a zom-com, I believe. Much less of the comedy comes from the zombies or the genre itself. A lot of the humour comes from the characters and the dialogue. I would lie if I said it was witty, but it was certainly funny and enjoyable. The characters were pretty expanded, which is always a plus, and I found that Jesse Eisenberg had one of the few characterisations of the awkward-teenager that I actually liked. Additionally, I really liked the road-trip structure of the film, and the device of the rules coming up on screen - which I don't think I would have normally liked.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus - As I had expected, this was a curiously fun and strange film. Heath Ledger's performance was good, but it certainly wasn't the strongest part of the film. I was far more interested in the story, and I really wish we had found out more about the fantasy world. I'd like to highlight that I was quite impressed by the young'uns in the film. Both Lily Cole and Andrew Garfield really captivated me, and I found similarities in the latter's character to Tristan in Stardust (which is only a good thing). I really like this young, noble and British archetypal character that is developing in new fantasy films.

The Battle of Algiers - Whilst I did find myself getting into and enjoying The Battle of Algiers, I now find that I've forgotten almost everything about it. I'm quite surprised by this, and a little bemused too, particularly because it makes reflection on the film rather difficult. I can't quite explain or justify my lack of memory, though it could have been an overwhelming sense of excitement about an impending episode of Doctor Who which just made it all fall right out of my head, or possibly a lack of connection to the film itself. Either way, I enjoyed the film whilst it was on. I didn't quite buy into it being like a documentary (and Andy isn't the only source that I've heard the comparison from, either) but it did feel very realistic in its depiction of the circumstances and events of the time.

2012 - Fun Day-After-Tomorrow-like destruction, and in more ways than one. So much so that I'm actually saving my thoughts on the film for a post about the similarities between the two, and the defined structure used in all films of the disaster genre. I know; you just can't wait!

Visuals vs Dialogue

2009-11-10T21:19:00.013Z

Still shiny? Good. Now, where was I? Ah yes, I was about to post about 12 Angry Men when I... well, didn't. Yes, extraciricular work has yet again prevented me from blogging like it's 2004. But fear not - I will make up for it with numerous extra posts. Like this one.

So, first on my agenda, I think I had better discuss my response to 12 Angry Men, which was a pretty unusual film. It was certainly well-directed, and the performances were far more intricate than those in most films of that time, but it did suffer from a looming sense that it was based on a stage-play. Nothing wrong with that, plays are good. But this brings up an interesting argument which I've been having with myself for a while. And, as most of you know, I can argue both sides of an argument pretty well. 'Tis a curse.

Does a film necessarily have to be led by visuals, or can the visuals supplement the dialogue-driven story? What I mean is, do films need to be told almost exclusively through visuals, as Richard pushes for? Often when I pitch ideas, they can be put to one side as either for theatre or radio. The trouble is I've no interest in writing for these platforms at the moment, so that ever-growing "stage pile" is just a nuisance. And, in fairness, I think a few of these ideas would make good short films. Okay, they require dialogue to be told, and some lack a strong visual drive, but that doesn't stop them from working as films. Very few films, and even fewer TV shows, take advantage of the visual medium in the same way that is expected of short films.

I would argue that films should use a healthy balance of visuals and dialogue (or sound, in general) to tell their story. Richard always says that if you can shut your eyes and still follow the story, then it isn't visual enough. I agree, but I also think that if you can cover your ears and still follow the story, then it's possibly too visual. Unlike radio, which is exclusively sound, film has both visuals and sound, and it should use both. And, unlike theatre, film and TV can reach much wider audiences, and are far more diverse in their ability to tell a story. That's why stage adaptations are okay - they may not be visually driven, but if it's a good story, told well, then the film will reach a much wider audience than the play could.

Since I'm more interested in writing for TV than film, this applies even more. A show like House is driven entirely by its dialogue. You'll have visual moments, but the show depends on the interaction of the characters, and the result of such interaction is dialogue. I'm currently looking forward to watching In Treatment after having it recommended by several different parties, and from what I've heard, this is even more like a play. One location, two characters, all dialogue. But that's okay. As I've said, TV can reach a much wider audience. And In Treatment seems to have been well received, proving that there is a place for such work.

To further my comparison of the two mediums, I'd add that both film and TV seem limited to Stanislavski's approach to theatre - realism. I don't think I've ever seen a film where it tries to remind you it's a work of fiction, or draw attention to the artifice, much like the theatre of Brecht. I've not seen it, but I think Dogville may be an example of this. But this approach doesn't seem to work in our industry. It can come across as cheap, and doesn't fit in with the escapism attached to film and TV.

Anyway, that was quite probably a long post which lost its way, but I hope some sense is presented. I may return to these thoughts to clarify them at some point, particularly because I don't want to be seen to oppose visual film-making. I'm merely trying to acknowledge that it's not actually as common in mainstream work as we may think.

"Hi Honey - it's Thursday night!"

2009-10-25T15:24:00.013Z

In an attempt to stay on top of blogging, here's my post about the past week - the week beginning the 19th of October.

On Monday we played party games with Andy, as we dove into discussion about sound design. I'm surprised to see that it was such a recent development - talkies were introduced in the late 1920's, production design in the 1930's, but yet sound design took until the 1970's. It would have required necessary technological advancements to fully realise the potential, I suppose, and other such advancements (such as colour grading) have only been possible lately due to technology. Nonetheless, it was a very important step.

Monday afternoon was spent with Richard, as we explored more ideas regarding film structure. An assignment to write a story that was stronger because is disobeyed the structure was seemingly less important than I had assumed it would be. I thought we would exchange the ideas in groups, and then try to work out why they didn't work. Nope. We handed them in. Since my idea wasn't great, I'm guessing it will be a brief point of discussion in a tutorial, and then we'll go straight back to my other continuing work.

On Tuesday, Andy taught us how to deal with interviews and surveys, with some top-tips from his own experiences. I loved the story about Liza Minnelli. That's the most exciting name-drop we've heard so far! Well, for me at least! Again, a lot of the Factual Programme classes on research cover things I have done before, but at least I'm considerably more interested in them in a filmmaking context, and it's good to hear it from the perspective of someone who has conducted many interviews.

After a delightful day off on Wednesday, we had an all-day session with Gav. I must give him credit - he has taught me more about AVID in 6 hours than I have ever learnt when using it before. I used to claim I hated AVID (purely because it makes less sense than Final Cut Pro, or the similar Premiere Pro), but now that I understand it better, I'm looking forward to using it properly. I also must credit this class, along with Andy's class on editing, for making me seriously consider editing as a specialism. Currently, I'm loving screenwriting, the core of which is storytelling. None of the specialisms, apart from editing, really focus on this. I'll just stay open to all the options at the moment, and see what takes me.

On Friday we continued with Adam, looking at shared themes in popular TV shows. I did a similar thing once in Higher Drama, where we tried to find the common themes in Contemporary Scottish Plays. If I remember rightly, sexism and poverty were the two most common. But at least now it's about exciting TV drama which appeals to me (like Life on Mars and Shameless) - though there will always be a place in my heart for The Steamie, and Men Should Weep. I've never thought about the themes of my work before, really. Obviously I mean "theme" in the Adam-sense of a topic, not in the Richard-sense of what a film is trying to say. I have a tendency to write about outsiders, and I often have strong female protagonists, but I really should try to actively incorporate themes that appeal to me, and ones that would be successful with an audience.

The week ended with a screening of Twelve Angry Men, which I have decided deserves its own post later in the week. Until then, stay shiny.

"... Top Right."

2009-10-25T15:10:00.001Z

The weekend is upon us, and that means blogging. So here is my post about the week beginning 12th of October!

On Monday we started with a class about editing with Andy, which followed on from the screening of Strike. The class looked at the theories of Sergei Eisenstein and Walter Murch, and I really enjoyed learning about the different theologies behind a cut. Their shared philosophy that the cut between two images creates a new idea is one I quite agree with. Additionally, we discussed how editing links with blinking. Strangely enough, I had been reading about why people blink the evening before, in a chapter of Derren Brown's book (which I wish I could find time to finish). What I found most interesting about this idea was that I was once mentored by a man who had the catchphrase, "Never cut on a blink," whilst editing. I don't think he is wrong. A cut on a character blinking may seem jarring. The cut should synchronise with where the audience might blink, in response to a piece of information.

Tuesday saw us in class with Zam for a full day. First, we read one another's treatments out loud. This was an interesting idea, as a huge part of directing is communicating your vision to a group of people who then have to recreate it. As other people have noted, it was strange hearing the words of one class-member coming from the mouth of another. But this perfectly illustrated Zam's point that you must be clear and understandable in a treatment. The treatments themselves were really good. They varied from being about the style and tone of the scene, to technical aspects of production, to the emotional impact necessary. Following this, Zam went over the structure of storytelling. As I had said after our session with John Yorke, though we have done this many times with Richard, it is great to have it rearticulated and explained in a new way. It is important, after all.

After a day off on Wednesday, we had our first lesson with Cammy on Thursday. I missed the first few hours of the lesson (thanks, NHS24) but Cammy had only been going over everything we should have learnt the previous year. My retention of the knowledge has been okay, and I took notes from Cammy's class to hopefully help me fill in any gaps in my knowledge. It's fair enough to say that I won't probably be specialising in sound, but I still want to know as much as I can. After this class, a few of us were fortunate enough to go and see the TPA pyrotechnics display. I must remember to pitch a film with explosions...

I've already reviewed Friday's screening of The Conversation, so I think that's this week covered!

Return of the Mini-Reviews

2009-10-13T23:28:00.012+01:00

This has been a slightly hard post to write, just because I've been struggling to find the right words to describe my thoughts about a few of these. So instead of finding the right words, I've just written some other ones. Enjoy.

Fame - Not as bad as I thought it was going to be, as I had worried that it was only going to be bearable. It was above bearable, certainly watchable, and was actually nearing enjoyable. The songs were a bit rubbish, the best ones being songs from the original film with a little rapping thrown in. The story of the film was, urm, slightly non-existent, and I was disappointed to see that it was all very friendly and suitable for kids. Whilst I have not seen the original, I hear that it had themes which were slightly more mature, and I think that’s what was missing from this. Additionally, I wouldn't actually class this as a musical, as it wasn't set in a "musical-world" where people burst into spontaneous songs. A lot of praise is deserved for the dancing, though, which was pretty impressive.

Strike - Okay, this one was slightly off the bottom of my scale, below bearable. As much as I appreciate Eisenstein's contributions to editing, I wanted to hang myself like one of those cats. This film did nothing for me. Looking back at a previous review, it appears that Eisenstein also failed to enthral me with Battleship Pokémon. I know that these films are very old and were made with a particular audience in mind, but I just wish they were a little more accessible to a modern audience. The only redeeming feature of Strike was the completely-unintentional hilarity that we found in the scenes with the firemen soaking the people, and the young child being thrown from the balcony. This came just as I was giving up on life, because of the crazy narrative, and cheered me up a little.

UP - Awesome, brilliant, heart-warming, and most importantly, enjoyable... Marry me, Pixar! And even though I don't think anyone would have bet against me liking this, I'm still going to rave about it for a bit. It's up there with Wall-E and Finding Nemo, for me. I thought the opening ten-minutes were perfect, and I really loved the story. I had slight problems with the "baddie" - which felt more Classic-Disney than Pixar - and I wasn't in love with the music, but I loved the characters, the visuals, and almost everything else. Particularly Dug. If you haven’t already (in fact, even in you have), go and see it!

The Conversation - This was at least bearable, and for the most part I could follow what was going on, but near the end I just lost the plot – literally! Was someone actually murdered? Was he there? Did he witness it? Or did he only see the aftermath? Or was it all in his head? Plus, why was someone tapping him? I just couldn't follow... The one thing I did like, however, was the clever play with the phrase "He'd kill us if he got the chance." Nothing terribly amazing, but a simple misinterpretation changing the entire meaning was clever. I look forward to finding out more about the sound-design of The Conversation, and its importance to field.

Kinky Boots - On the advice of Richard, I decided to watch this film. It has similar ideas and themes to an idea that I am working on, and it felt necessary to see it. I found myself a little worried at the very beginning, as there was a flashback not too dissimilar from one I was planning on writing, but after that it was all very different. I really enjoyed the film, but it didn’t feel hugely original. I think it was slightly formulaic, and it was very similar in tone to Billy Elliot, with a lot of the same themes. I really enjoyed Chiwetel Ejiofor’s performance, however, which was both touching and hilarious. Thankfully, I am now far less worried about comparisons. So long as I stay true to the central idea of my script, then I think comparisons will be limited to the fact that both are about shoes. But shoes were never really central in the story of Kinky Boots; it was about a drag queen being accepted in a conservative village. In my idea, the shoes are central - a whole other character in fact – and it’s about the shoes fitting into that world, not the person in them. Hopefully, having now seen Kinky Boots, I can try to purposefully avoid any more similarities. But I think comparisons will still be unavoidable.

"Oh my gosh, Nemo's swimming out to sea!"

2009-10-13T23:07:00.010+01:00

Oh my, blogging twice a week is already becoming slightly troublesome, it would appear. I think I need to get into a routine.

On Monday morning of last week, we had a class with Andy about Production Design, which followed on from watching Metropolis. This was a very interesting class, and whilst I've never been big on production design myself, I appreciate the value it adds, and I understand its importance. I do hope we get the chance to work on more films in which the production design plays a big part. Little Clown was a great experience, and I'd love to do something with more design challenges.

Following this, we had a class with Richard, which was a nice screenwriting-refresher. Having been in screenwriting tutorials for the past while, it was good to find ourselves in the class environment again. Whilst having one-on-one time is great for individual stories and troubleshooting particular scripts, it is nice to have discussions about themes and issues, and to fabricate examples purely so that we can then deconstruct them. This can be useful, as sometimes you can be so close to a story or an idea that you can't see what is wrong with it, but working on a very simple outline of something else can make you realise.

On Tuesday we watched the first episode of Teachers as we started on our mission to come up with ideas that could be the perfect thing for Channel 4's comedy-drama slot. I do find the brief funny, however. They want a "young-skewing" comedy-drama, like Teachers or Shameless, which wouldn't look out of place on HBO. That's a very specific brief, and I think that if people focus too much on that, then they may miss out on some amazingly original and challenging ideas, which is exactly what Channel 4 really need.

On Tuesday afternoon, we continued with Zam. It was good to see the remaining film scenes that people had chosen, and to then start on some work for the next lesson; writing a treatment for the scene as the director. I really thought it was a good assignment, and I was happy that I had chosen such an enjoyable scene!

On Wednesday we had a short class about the Internet. Having had to do a lot of research for my dissertation in Advanced Higher Modern Studies, I've been through all the Wikipedia-warnings and the "how to get good search results" stuff before, but Andy was a lot more honest and fair about it, particularly with respect to Wikipedia. Generally it is a good idea to check the sources listed on Wikipedia, and they can often lead you to more specialised information anyway. Oh, and just a random fact I know: Andy explained the various internet suffixes (.com = commercial, .org = organisation), and a few years ago there was a big push for there to be a new extension for the porn industry, ".xxx", which would have allowed better regulation of the web, particularly in helping to protect minors. It never came to fruition, but it was an interesting idea.

On Thursday we had a full day with Ray, which started with a little Moodle-madness, and a short quiz. I found that a few of the questions were quite tricky (mostly about things we were never taught), but I think I remembered the most important and relevant work from last year. I'm looking forward to the feedback, just to confirm that's actually true. In the afternoon, we broke out the tripods and new heads, and then some lamps. I can't help but feel slightly responsible for the fact we now have gloves, as I was the one who reported Paul's accident officially. However, I was only doing what I was being assessed on: carrying out my work with due respect to the Official Health and Safety guidelines of the Academy. And as that rule still exists, and always will, we should use the gloves.

And concluding the week, we had our screening of Strike, which I will discuss in my next post, and then I had a tutorial with Richard. It was fun, and I'm far happier with where my ideas are at the moment. I'm trying to keep more time aside for writing, and so far it's been working out, but we're getting a lot of small assignments at the moment, so I'll need to carefully balance everything.

"If I were a milkshake..."

2009-10-03T12:21:00.011+01:00

And so we returned. And to welcome us, we had a School of Drama [and Dance] assembly, in which people were typically enthusiastic about the year to come and the exciting creative lives we have ahead of us. Following this we had a full DFTV meeting, in which we would find out about the year to come. Adam's emphasis on keeping free from stress sounds good, if not entirely fictional at the Academy, but I will do my best to try and be a little more chilled this year. I've always been a little over-conscientious, which has had a tendency to make me worry about getting things done. Though Adam's suggestion that we might not be making many films this year wasn't the most inspiring news. I understand that things do get out of hand when too many shoots are going ahead - and I suppose to create a stress-free work environment for the lecturers, less shoots is better - but a lot of learning goes on on-set.

Following this re-introductory morning, we had a class with Andy, and were sent out on a mission to find out all we can about him. As other people have blogged, this personal touch was really clever to make us interested. What can we discover about Andy Dougan in half-an-hour? Quite a fun task, and I hope that nothing that was "reported" was too intrusive. Following the lesson, I had an interesting thought: Andy said that works of art are good primary sources. However, you can only draw conclusions from artwork by interpreting it, and that interpretation is a secondary source. If an artist used red-paint, then the statement "The red paint shows his anger at this stage in his life" is a secondary source interpretation, based on the art. The only primary source conclusion that can be made is "He used red paint".

On Wednesday we had our first class with Zam Salim, which was good fun. When watching clips from our most influential films, Zam was very good at articulating what he thought, and would often pin-point exactly what made the scene strong or what let it down. I think these lessons will prove really useful with the new emphasis on performance in our films, something which I agree could be stronger. I blame a mix of inexperience of the actors in working for screen, and our own inexperience in directing actors. Thankfully this class addresses the latter!

Thursday was a day off, and so that leaves Friday's screening of Metropolis. I found myself surprised at the strong narrative, which others have pointed out as being incredibly clear. This is particularly impressive given the missing reels. As Andy noted, some more footage has been discovered; apparently it was mislabelled on purpose to prevent people from destroying it during the Second World War. But I do wonder how much footage will be lost digitally over time. No one could ever back-up all the content on YouTube, but the problem doesn't end there. I read that 20% of the original Toy Story animation files were corrupted when they went to make the 10th Anniversary DVD. Obviously they restored them somehow, but it proves that digital storage isn't a viable option for preserving film. Anyway, I digress. Metropolis was a really good film, and it had a clear look for the future. The strong production design really has shaped our vision of the future, at least in media. To quote Charlotte, looking at the city-scape, "It's like Futurama!"

Yes, Charlotte. Yes it is.

A Summer of Stuff

2009-10-01T13:40:00.014+01:00

Wowzers. It's October now. That's weird. Weird and annoying. That means we're already three quarters of the way into 2009. That's just bizarre.

The good news is that it's great to be back. This is the first time after any summer break when I've wanted to get back to work. At both primary school and high school, you never wanted the summer to end. And last year I was just so nervous about moving away from home, and starting on what was essentially a "new" course, that I again wanted more time to prepare. But this year, knowing that being away from home ain't too shabby, and knowing that the course is awesome, I was excited. Plus, there were all the lovely people I couldn't wait to see again.

Now, given that we've only had two classes so far, I think I'll leave discussion of Academy things for my next post. Why? Well, because I know you're all super-desperate to know what I did in my summer!

Just days after moving out of halls, I found myself on a train to London to attend an event known as Talent Matters. A community film company I've worked with before selected my friend Jen and I to represent Scotland's young film-makers at this event. Quite why they had that power is beyond me. Various different young "talented" groups across the whole of the UK were going: athletes, chefs, future-politicians, dancers, musicians, entrepreneurs. So Jen and I, along with some friendly chaps from Liverpool, and four nice folk from Wales, had to represent young film-makers of the UK. I also had the added responsibility to ensure I didn't impersonate either the Liverpudlian or Welsh accent. Well, at least not in their presence.

To skip a ridiculously long explanation of just how tedious the event was, I shall summarise briefly. The event was all about praising talent, not nurturing it as I had expected. Therefore, the event consisted of the people in charge talking at us about how talented we all are. It was one big day of massaging egos and patting each other on the back. Thing is, other events were about helping people discover their talents - but all the people there were selected because of their known talents in a particular field! The worst part was when listening to a questionable political journalist, and I looked around to see so many of the young people listening attentively, hanging on his every word. A particularly racist statement about the Chinese left many of us shocked, and went entirely unchallenged. Bastard.

The only good thing about the event was that I got a free trip to London! And with two nights paid for, Jen and I made use of the time to go and see Sister Act The Musical (pretty good), and Derren Brown's live stage-show, ENIGMA (awesome!). As you may recall, I have a lot of admiration and respect for Derren Brown, and I love what he does. Following this truly amazing show, I finally purchased his book, and I've been reading it over the summer. It's really interesting and impressive stuff. A lot of it builds on my prior knowledge of hypnosis and psychology, and I'm really passionate about using some of his techniques in film sometime. And just to make the summer even more Derren-Brown-centric, his new show started on Channel 4. I love him too much to be objective, but I do admit that this show seems to be an attempt at more commercial entertainment, which is shifting his audience from those interested in psychology to those who want to be entertained. He has also taken some major risks with this show, which I think would have paid-off more had there been no format change.

I also started work on a webseries this summer, called Me & My Fairy. It's a silly, formulaic sitcom in mini, 5-minute episodes. So far we've filmed two episodes, but we want to complete a series of six before we start uploading them. So don't expect to see any online until next year. But I did use one of the completed episodes as an example of my screenwriting in a BBC Blast/BAFTA competition that I've entered. The prize is a bursary to create a new piece of work with either the BBC or an external production company. If I'm successful, I may get even more free trips to London! I should find out if I'm selected in two weeks time, so just ignore me then if I seem distant.

The rest of my summer included a trip to Alton Towers, an awful lot of flat-hunting, a Lord-of-the-Rings-athon, designing a website for a restaurant, and seeing various shows in the Fringe. So, all-in-all, a pretty good summer. But it's exciting to be back, and I can't wait to see what we'll be getting up to!

EIFF

2009-07-01T16:39:00.010+01:00

All the recently reviews for Antichrist reminded me that I didn't hit the publish button on this post! So here, rather delayed, is my summary of what we saw at the EIFF.

Adventureland

Quite a humorous film, and I was particularly impressed with the performances. I was less sure about the story - another of those "coming-of-age" stories. I was also concerned that it's about the fifth film in the past year from the guys that brought us Superbad, but this proved to be unfounded. They're not quite out of steam. But at this rate, they will be soon!

London Film Academy: Breaking Down a Scene

At first I thought the London Film Academy sounded like a more advanced training institute than the RSAMD, potentially for post-grad courses. As it turns out, I think they're more like a foundation course, with courses equivalent to college. But the session was interesting. The director just rehearsed a scene with actors, and then shot it. Watching the rehearsal process, in-which they blocked out the scene and discussed the characters, was really useful. Then, however, it was locked-off as soon as they did their first take, and then the process of doing different angles and multiple takes became laborious and boring to watch.

International Shorts: Animation 2

An interesting mix of animations; some 2D, some hand-drawn, some stop-motion, and some 3D. I was really fond of a few of them. There were some really nice, simple stories in there - and generally these were the ones with strogner animation. Several of these were foreign language, but given the very visual story-telling often seen in animation there wasn't a lot of subtitling.

Running in Traffic

I was one of the people who thought that it would be good to see Running in Traffic, as not only would it count as our British Film, but it was also produced by Abigail. I did find that it was a rather complicated story to follow, and it doesn't help the reputation of Scottish films as depressing, cold and drug-themed. However, it does prove a point about the Scottish film industry - it is possible to produce a feature. Now we just need to do the same again with stronger script.

Outrage
I thoroughly enjoyed this documentary, which was about closeted politicians who vote against gay rights in order to cover up their secret lives. It was really well-made, and it's a very appropriate time for such an exposé, given the current shenanigans in the US (particularly the retraction of civil-partnership rights in LA). I found it interesting that they didn't try to make you hate the politicians involved, but in some cases feel sympathetic for them.

Vinyan
I didn't really enjoy this film. It was well-made, but it was very slow and not hugely engaging. I couldn't really see anything unique about it. The characters were hard to like, the story was hard to engage with, and I just didn't enjoy it. Plus, rushing to see it meant that we missed a Q&A with the director of Outrage - which I think would have been far more interesting.

The Girlfriend Experience
I think that the ITV2 series The Secret Diary of a Call Girl did a better job at this story; essentially showing the life of a high-class call-girl, and their extravagant life, whilst dealing with their own personal relationships too. I didn't like the style it was shot in though, and I didn't really see a story.

Antichrist

Another film about dealing with the loss of a child which ends with a shocking scene "exposing the depths of the human condition". Well, that's what some people say. In reality, I think it was an excuse to create one of the most visually explicit and disturbing scenes in cinematic history. I'm not particularly squeamish or disturbed by blood (unless I know that it's genuine), but I did feel that - given the reaction of the audience - it may have been a step too far. People always say less is more; the Jaws-technique of not actually showing everything and letting the audiences' imaginations create something scarier than could actually be shown. Antichrist, however, showed everything in those moments, and I think this is far more effective than what the audience could imagine. They're faced with a real image, undeniably a part of the film's world. I think that's worse. In fact, I now know that's worse... The one good thing about Antichrist is how it's allowed critics to become far more inventive and humorous in their attempts to tell people not to see it. Some of them have been quite amusing!

Little Clown, Big Post

2009-06-24T20:58:00.011+01:00

Oh my. Where to start? Again, it's been too long since I last blogged. Once a week is just impossible when you're in production. I clear my calendar when I'm in production; no social-life, no Academy-life, no other-projects. Just production. No time to dilly-dally online!

Pre Pre-Production

I had decided that I would not be a Producer on either of the two films that we would be making at the end of term. I had other projects in my head, and I really wanted a lighter-role. Perhaps Editing. It was only when we found out that we would be making one single film, with double the budget, a bigger crew, and full-support from above that I impulsively changed my mind. The main factor was the strength of Charlotte's script, coupled with the wondrous production nightmares it presented. I knew that it was a big challenge, and I wanted to be a part of the team that met that challenge head-on!

Pre-Production

Moments after the announcement of the film, and an initial read-through, off we went. Murdo sourced break-down sheets, Galina broke the script down into eighths, and I started to look at the bigger picture: "What do we prioritise?" "Where do we start?" "Who will be responsible for each aspect of the production?"

Looking back at the first production-day update, it's amazing how much we started doing. I think, in retrospect, focusing on one thing and completing it - rather than jumping between loads of different tasks - might be a better idea. We started looking at locations, child-licensing laws, casting through agencies, prices for kit to hire-in, the need for a costume designer and make-up artists all within the first few hours. A little mental.

As classes began to wind down we had solid production-time in which we were really able to get to work. Our production classes with Abigail were useful in pushing us in the right direction and helping us with any issues. They were normally attended by the whole class, though with a notable lack of enthusiasm. It seemed that people felt it was all irrelevant to them. Which, on this production, it may be - but who's to say that you won't be made to produce at some stage? I think that a compulsory swapping of roles may benefit our own development and prevent any narrow-mindedness... but considering how well we slipped into our roles this time, I would worry what the final product of this experiment would be.

In general, the pre-production of the film went really well. Given our lack of knowledge of even some of the more simple things (like Call Sheets, or the Academy's Van Booking system) it's quite impressive that we were able to deal with some of the more unique issues. Particularly because we worked on mobiles and those stand-up internet terminals, as the Production Office was never free for our use. Too many films, too few desks/computers/phones/chairs. It's all a balance: bigger kit room = smaller production office. But my phone-bill for that month was considerably higher than previous months...

And, in the last moments we could really still class as Pre-Production, Paul decided it was about time I was introduced to the Accident Report Form. Which I dealt with, as promptly as one can when away from the building. Following this, however, I was asked to fill-out an accident investigation form. I thought this to be standard practice, but Adam remained unsure. For such a minor accident as a cut to a finger, the accident investigation form could unfairly implicate a number of people (simply depending on which of the many-applicable boxes is ticked). Adam said he would investigate the investigation to find out why it was thought necessary.

Post Pre-Production (AKA, Pre Post-Production... or just "Production")

My on-set job was far less important than those of pretty much everyone else, but I do think that it was useful having someone to deal with the welfare of the cast, make-up artist and chaperone (and, sometimes, the crew too). Mostly making teas and coffees, preparing meals, and such. I was also monitoring Robert's workload to ensure that we were functioning within the law, and I could also be found working on the schedule for the next day. It wasn't the hardest job, but I was on-hand to deal with any issues, had there been any!

I do have to say, though, that I was very impressed by everyone's effort on-set. A couple of times in Pre-Production I was concerned by a lack of progress (and in fairness, the lack of preparation did show at times) but everyone settled into their roles very quickly, and we started working like a well-oiled train. Charlotte set the destination, Galina shouted orders, the Crew got to work, and I wandered around with a trolley; "Tea? Coffee? Any refreshments?"

Of course, not everything went as we had hoped. We did have a small issue with Blu-Tak removing a section of paint from the wall. As this issue is still being dealt with, however, I will refrain from saying how insanely out-of-hand I feel it is getting. However, I appreciate the help from above in dealing with it.

Post-Production

Okay, whilst the editing is still on-going, my role as a producer has began to wind down. I dealt with the receipts shortly after returning from the Edinburgh Film Festival, and I've only a little petty cash left to claim to repay some small expenses. Galina, Murdo and myself have nearly finished compiling the production folder. It contains all our unique paperwork now, and simply needs a few print outs added. Other than that, there's very little we need to do.

Having said that, there are still the two floating issues: the accident investigation and the paint-issue. Both are currently out of our hands, and I'm hoping that they are resolved shortly.

So, here we are. 39 days ago we were told 'Little Clown' was going to be made. 208 emails later (for me, at least) and we're almost there. I saw the first rough-cut today, and I'm really excited to see where it goes. It's looking good, and whilst there's very limited time left until we screen it, I have every faith that Michael and Phil will be able to make it even better!

One Tardis Please

2009-05-25T20:07:00.004+01:00

Time. There isn't enough of it. Or perhaps there is, and I just have an unreasonable number of things to do. Not that I'm complaining - I do enjoy a busy period every now and then - but I'm afraid that it has left my blogging at a less-than-satisfactory level. I'll try to rectify this, but even now I can think of numerous things that my time might be better spent on. Like finishing the music video, preparing script outlines for Richard, working on Adam's online-content idea, working on Andy's 1970's film assignment, or working on Little Clown's numerous production challenges, to name but a few. With all this going on, I'm sure you can't blame me for not thinking straight. Not that I ever really think straight...

So, with my moaning out the road, I'm going to take a stroll through some of my more interesting thoughts over the past while. No point in trying to go back several weeks and remember everything from classes. Right now I can't even remember what I had for dinner... 20 minutes ago!

I like structure. Not just in my day-to-day life (though sometimes a change is welcome), but in screenwriting. The lesson with John Yorke was of particular use to me. Not only did it articulate really well with work we have covered with Richard, but it also clarified areas which I have struggled to grasp (particularly creating a compelling 2nd-act). The use of archetypal examples and the supplementary information on the history of the theories just cemented to me the importance of understanding and learning the structure. Right now I'm still weary of "painting by numbers" when writing, but it's always good to remember that creativity comes first, and the structure is there to support it!

Another issue I'm finding is my annoyingly producer-minded brain. Okay, it's great for producing, but I'm finding it a hindrance when it comes to writing. For instance, if I decide to set a scene in a new location, or introduce something perhaps a little complicated, I'll always ask first if it would be too much hassle for the production-team and decide based on that. I really need to force myself to ignore that and write what's best for the story. For instance, I would never have been able to write Little Clown. It's a brilliant script, but the producer-side of me would have had a heat-attack, with juggling children and what-not. (And, in fairness, that same side is having a heart-attack now that it's being made! But challenges are always good.) I need to fully separate my creative-side from my producing-side when writing, but have them both work together when producing. Electrolysis, anyone?

Something else... let's see... Oh yes, a while back Andy asked us to mention what we are currently reading on our blogs. Well, in truth, I'm not a very well-read person. It's perhaps one of my own tragic-flaws. I've never read a novel through my own choice; only when it has been compulsory for school. I do read, just not fiction. I read Russell T Davies' The Writer's Tale (a book about writing Doctor Who) near the end of last year, which I really enjoyed. Along the exact same lines, I'm still working my way through Graeme Harper's Calling the Shots (a book about directing Doctor Who). And, with regards to publications, I'm also a fond reader of the Doctor Who Magazine. Hmm, I think I've just uncovered a slightly larger tragic-flaw. And the worst thing? I'm 5 issues behind on reading the magazine because I've just been so busy! However, I am planning on getting a copy of Save The Cat by Blake Snyder, following John Yorke's recommendation. I'm also going to force myself to getting into the habit of reading fiction during the summer. Any suggestions? (Maybe I should start from a kids book, and work my way up?) I did actually go through a massive stage of listening to fiction audio books, which I really did enjoy. I could go down that route again, perhaps. Y'know, to kick-start me!

I am, however, also really interested in getting some books by Derren Brown (the well-known psychological illusionist). Not only am I interested in his work, but I'm also interested in seeing if there's any way to use similar techniques in film to - for example - make the audience know the next line of dialogue before it's spoken, or make them really emotionally invest in the story. I imagine there could be a question of legality, particularly with regards to subliminal messaging. Not that I think flash-frames would be wise. Really using psychology to make the audience go on a journey, not just the characters. I suppose all film-making is about that, really. But I'm talking about going beyond using certain colours to play with emotion. I do need to read about it to learn what these other techniques could be, but it's certainly something I want to explore. I would just hope I'm not burnt at the stake for witchcraft.

Anyway, that's enough rubbish. Here's some important news: I like Nutri-Grain Elevenses. Tell your friends.

Paradise Now

2009-05-06T10:59:00.004+01:00

Here's my post for today's assignment on representation in Paradise Now.

Going into the film I was under the impression that suicide-bombing attacks were often directly a result of religious beliefs. Whilst this was a part of the reason in Paradise Now, the attacks were more clearly a form of retaliation (or, I suppose, revenge). That by no means makes these attacks more justified, but it certainly opened up the oppression that they feel - including the pressure from their own side to make a sacrifice for their cause.

I couldn't say if the two main characters, Said and Khaled, were fairly representative in the film. They were, however, very human characters and very believable, which is an important step in accurately portraying any group. The film did a good job of making their oppression and circumstances become apparent, and you whilst you might not have agreed with the actions eventually taken by Said, you could understand why he thought he had to do it. The film gave a perspective on suicide-bombers which I hadn't seen before. It gave them a conscience, including questioning if their actions were for the greater-good. In that sense, I felt sympathetic for them, which I suppose has changed my opinion somewhat: I now recognise that there are greater motivations for these attacks. Not ones that I agree warrant these extreme responses, but ones I can understand better.

It Died...

2009-05-04T14:51:00.003+01:00

Okay, I've learned my lesson. Whilst video-blogging was fun, I'm finding it impossible to find the time to sit down and do it. Given that I've not posted in far too long, and that I'm rather busy at the moment, I'm returning to the good old written blog.

Monday started with a tutorial with Richard. I wasn't too surprised by the premises Richard was less fond of, but I'll admit that Richard's favourite was one I was less keen on. However, we discussed it, and I'm now more confident in the idea, and I'll certainly try developing it. Richard also had a lot of helpful comments for the others that he liked, or thought had potential. It did become apparent that often the core idea, normally my starting-point, was stronger than the premise that went with it. So I'm rethinking several from that initial point. I've also been thinking of a few new ones, but so far I don't think there's anything spectacular.

Following this, we reviewed the rushes with Gav in the DTU. It was a shame that we had already seen an edit of Love, Mugs & Stickmen, as it would have been nice to see the footage out of context first. Then we moved onto the tapes for Melissa's Mail. I kept feeling the need to speak out and justify each shot, or at least acknowledge the imperfections so that people knew I was aware of them. But I tried not to, if I could resist.

Gav continued with us on Tuesday with a simple Logging and Capturing assessment. John and I had already logged all of the footage for Melissa's Mail, so I was confident I knew what to do. Then Paul and I, along with Graeme who we found in a booth, went to see In The Loop. Following a pause for food, we went to see an advanced screening of Coraline, courtesy of Paul and his free tickets.

On Wednesday morning, Paul and I continued on our quest to sit in every seat in Cineworld by going to see Wolverine. Following this we had a screening with Andy, in which we watched In the Heat of the Night. Both of these will appear when I finally return to writing my reviews, I promise.

The themes raised in In the Heat of the Night continued in Andy's first class on Thursday, which was on representation. I couldn't help but feel that it was a little ironic that after we had discussed the objectification of women the slides were rolled back to show Megan Fox again - but it proves it's a more common issue than some would care to admit. We then discussed the representation of race in films, which proved rather interesting. I find the change in attitudes over the past few decades to be very inspiring, and I hope that these attitudes continue growing into other areas of acceptance, as there is still a ridiculous amount of discrimination out there. I'm looking forward to see who will be represented in our next class on representation.

On Friday morning, Adam explained what many familiar acronyms actually stood for, as we discussed Mobile and Web content. I'm really interested in web-content, particularly the different attempts at creating a working business-model, which doesn't seem to be going too well. I'm currently working on a web-series which I'm planning to make with my friends in Edinburgh over the Summer, and so I'm hoping to pick-up useful information from the remaining mobile-content classes!

On Friday afternoon, Andy and Adam kindly agreed to let me attend a meeting in Edinburgh for a new film-making organisation, and so I missed Abigail's class. I'll be getting the notes and finding out what is to be done soon, so that I can catch up and get it done for Friday.

It's Still Alive!

2009-03-09T17:22:00.002Z

Second video post. Do enjoy!

It's Alive!

2009-03-02T12:43:00.002Z

The internet was down at the halls for a bit, but now that it's back I can post this; my first video blog!

I'm not sure that I'll make a habit of this, though making this didn't take any longer than my standard written post. But, since this blog is actually used for assessment, I suppose that written is probably prefered. I may just do the odd video special!

Sound Sandwhich

2009-02-08T20:52:00.004Z

Since returning after Christmas the course has yet to return to its previous balance of classes per week. We used to have several full-days each week and lots going on. Whilst there's still a lot going on, with the next two weeks being quite busy with deadlines (Richard's script, Andy's Moodle assignment, The Arches music video and the incoming assignment from Barbara and Kim), I'm quite ready to have a busy week: I use my time better when there's less of it. Weird, innit?

But last week wasn't too bad. Sound was a little repetitive - in that it was a repetition of previous lessons and we had it twice in the same week. But this helped me. I'm not great with the sound stuff, so a little repetition helps. It's just getting used to setting it up. I think I'll need to take it out at some point to practice before the assessment, though.

I missed Richard's class on Tuesday as I was at the Arches with Charlotte and Benoit watching music videos. Not the most constructive use of time, but the bit where we discussed what the project is was useful. I think what Charlotte and I are discussing will work for our song. But it's long and quite repetitive, and we've got to create interesting content for it. A bit challenging, but that's always good. And that evening Paul updated us on what we missed in Richard's class, and I was a little worried to hear that we only had two weeks to write our next 3-min script. But again, challenging is always good.

Andy's classes were insightful, as usual. I realise that sounds like I'm sucking up, because Andy is no doubt [amongst my readers/my only reader], but I genuinely do gain insight from them. I was a little shocked to realise that I follow [a lot/all] of the shows that Andy used as examples of US Network Shows. But, then again, with the volume that I follow it would be hard not to touch on a few. The documentary on The Wire has reignited my interest in watching that show, but I'm seriously so far behind with some shows at the moment that I'm better saving it until the dry-spell which comes in US TV during the summer. That way I'll have something worth watching.

Oh, and my Back to the Future review is coming soon.

Fin.

Mini-Reviews: Oscar Special

2009-02-04T18:09:00.000Z

These past weeks I've tried to see as many of the big Oscar Nominated films as possible, and here are my thoughts:

Slumdog Millionaire - Don't get me wrong, this was a really good film, but to me it just isn't quite the big-deal that people seem to be making it out to be. It's certainly a very compelling story, and I really liked the narrative, particularly when it stops being flashback and becomes present. The acting was great and it was well-directed. I don't have any major criticisms that I can throw at it (beyond it's unimpressive advertising) - I connected with the film well - it's just that I've seen better films that I've enjoyed far more. It wasn't quite my bottle-of-Ribena.

The Wrestler - Mickey Rourke was awesome, certainly, as was Marisa Tomei, and again it was a really strong story. There were aspects which I wasn't so happy about, particularly the ending. I know a lot of people love it, and I'm not wanting a happier ending, just one with a little more closure for the other characters. Okay, it was about The Ram's life, and you know what probably happens to the other characters after... It's just that I would have liked to see it.

Frost/Nixon - I liked this film more than I thought I might. The strength of the acting is one reason, but the actual story was also really interesting. I still know little about the Watergate Scandal, because there was very little exposition, and being a child of the 90's I don't really know exactly what happened. But that didn't hinder the film, really, as it was about seeing these characters go head-to-head. I was slightly annoyed that everything just worked-out for Frost without him working particularly hard for it, so it felt anyway, but it may be an accurate retelling of the events.

The Reader - I saw this with an audience of OAPs. I thought it was awkward when the STDs/Use-a-condom advert came on... then the film started. I'm not afraid of nudity in cinema, but it was uncomfortable when I was the only one younger than 60, and the scenes involve a character who is 16 with an older woman. Getting over that, which I had to do fast due to the volume of nudity, I enjoyed the film. I really liked the twist (well, not a twist, but the revelation), and how the story changed dramatically twice, leaping over periods of time. Winslet was very strong, as was the younger actor, David Kross.

Milk - When film like Changeling can make me angry about injustice, you'd think that a film like Milk would be able to achieve that no-problem. But it didn't. And that annoyed me. I thought the acting was fine - and I do think that Josh Brolin is good competition for Heath Ledger for Best-Supporting Actor - and it was really well written. I'd heard Milk's story previously, but the ending was far more tense than I thought it would be when I knew what would happen. Perhaps I wasn't angry because Milk's murder wasn't really a hate-crime but an act of revenge. But still, the whole Proposition 6 issue in the movie has been mirrored recently, with Proposition 8 recently re-banning gay marriage in California. Surely, when it's dealing with an on-going issue, it could have made a bigger point.

Of the Best-Picture nominated films I've still to see The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which is out this coming Friday. I'll try and catch it... but Bolt is also opening, and I do love me some Disney - particularly in Disney Digital 3D. Which is the same as any other 3D, it's just that Disney love to brand things. Like Disney DVDs, which (apart from being of Disney films) are no different from your standard DVD.

Morte Vampir Luminarium

2009-01-27T20:50:00.004Z

Lighting on Monday last week was good. I've known the principles of three-point lighting, but this is the first time I've had a chance to see the difference it can make and play around with it. Slightly annoying that we had limited kit to play with, but I got a lot from the lesson none-the-less.

The less said about the Screenwriting stories on Tuesday perhaps the better. Some worked out, whilst others fell apart like the Frankensteined stories they were. The sheet that we used for this exercise, though, is very useful to me in trying to understand the structure better. I think I may use that format when I'm planning scripts.

Wednesday's class on Coronation Street was interesting. From my time at The Network I am surprisingly well-informed by the inner-workings of soaps; particularly Corrie and Hollyoaks. So I was aware about the tedious planning and storylining that goes on. Still, there was plenty that was fresh to me. I'm becoming aware that I'd actually happily work on a soap. I'd probably enjoy it, and it's certainly a place to be seen in the industry. I know that a lot of my own favourite television writers and producers started out on soaps. Soaps, or Children's TV; which would also be awesome. I do hope that we get an assignment to go and watch CBBC at some point.

Thursday's lesson carried on from our viewing of Battleship Pokemon, and it was fun to look at a scene for a second time. I think that it was necessary, certainly, to look at it more objectively. For instance, there's not much I could say about the way in which Nosferatu was put together without rewatching a scene or two, as I was too involved with the film's story whilst watching it the first time.

Speaking of Nosferatu, that's what we watched on Friday morning. But I've spoken about that before. After that we had a Production class, which I really enjoyed. It was nice that Abigail recognised that the first lesson was very management-and-responsibilities heavy, and so hit us with the creative side of producing. Producing is certainly on the cards for me, as I've always been the sort to do both creative things and the logic-based things. I'm one of those people who is both left and right brained, and - to keep myself sane - I need to have a bit of both in my life. And I'm certainly getting both from this course!

And that cheesy-line, dear friends, is the end of this post.

Coronation Street Party Madness

2009-01-26T22:22:00.006Z

Well, I certainly enjoyed our little Corrie-Shindig. Different; and I like that. Here follows my version of events.

Two Synopsises. Or synopsi. No, synopsises:

7.30 Episode

Sally tries to fix things with Sophie, and help her get along with Rosie.
Audrey asks Maria not to return to work for a while. Maria, offended, argues with her and then throws her out.
Blanche tells Leanne that Peter is returning that day with Ken.
Anna is suspicious that Eddie and Gary had something to do with the robbery from the building site, and warns them that she had better not find out they were involved.
Ad-Break Hook: Carla has called the police about Maria attacking Tony.
Maria goes to the Police Station about Tony, and asks to speak to the relevant officer.
Ken returns without Peter, and reveals to Leanne that Peter is in rehab.
Gail confronts Eddie and Anna in the street.
It is revealed to Maria that Carla had called the police on her. She is taken out of the station.
In the car, Maria sees a happy family and breaks down crying.
At the pub, Gary and Len believe that their robbery was a success.
End-of-Episode Hook: Maria hits Tony with her car, and then crashes into a wall.

8.30 Episode

The reaction to the crash, as people rush out onto the street to see if Tony and Maria are okay.
Carla tells the police that Maria had deliberately driven at Tony, and that she should be locked-up.
Gary tells Tina that David has set him up because he's jealous that Tina likes him.
Ad-Break Hook: Ken's dog falls into the canal, but is rescued by Martha. He is invited onto her boat.
Ken and Martha "eat soup"...
Audrey and Kirk encounter Tony at the hospital, who wants to hear how Maria is doing. He finds out that her baby will be okay.
Ken and Martha "drink wine"... and Ken reveals his family issues, but not that he is remarried.
Kevin tells Sophie that they can talk openly, if she ever needs to.
Ken returns home, and - not revealing that he's been on Martha's boat - has to have some of Deirdre's bland soup, to cover-up where he's been.
David overhears Tina say that she think Gary might be innocent.
End-of-Episode Hook: Maria is told that she could be charged for attempted murder.

Character statuses. Or stati. No, statuses:
Sally: Mother
Rosie: Mean sister and a little bit promiscuous
Sophie: Sweet girl, single (but with a love-interest)
Audrey: Whilst Maria's boss, she appeals to her as a friend
Maria: "Implacable Avenger" (thanks Andy)
Tony: Murderer, Respected boss
Carla: Tony's partner, defender
Eddie: Dodgy Geezer
Gary: Young Dodgy Geezer and Manipulative to boot
Anna: Suspicious mother/wife
Ken: Unhappily married
Martha: Unhappily lonely

The others had too little screen time to define their status, in my opinion. But, if I'm wrong, I'll happily add those others!

A Not-So-Mini Mini-Reviews

2009-01-26T11:33:00.001Z

Right, this has sat unfinished in my blog-writing-bit for far too long! I've added in the two recent films from History of Cinema, just so I don't fall too behind with my blogging.

Twilight - I didn't know what to expect with this. I had heard there were complaints about it from people who adore the books, just as there were complaints that the book sucked, therefore the film will also suck. But, for what it's worth, there was little that sucked - apart from the vampires. In fairness to the team behind the film, it was quite a sweet romance. I did find that I hated the two main characters for the first two minutes of their respective introductions, but then I really liked them: perhaps a statement about books and covers? Oh, and there was clever use of dramatic-irony, playing on the fact that we know he's a vampire, so they needn't explain it to us. Again, a film which felt very non-commercial for all the franchise-exploitation that accompanies it.

LOTR Extended - Okay, so I did need to give this another chance. So much happens in the films and I wasn't even a teenager when the first came out: there was quite a lot that flew over my head! Even now, there's a lot of Kings, rings and things to make sense of. But with the confusion removed, and the extra footage added, I can really appreciate this trilogy properly now. I watched it in 6-parts, as that is how the film is split onto discs (with a change in the middle of each), and I think that worked out for the best. I know I would get bored if I watched any of them all in one go.

Merlin - I really, really enjoyed this series. Okay, argue that Guienivere isn't meant to be black; argue that the castle is from the from century; argue that Merlin should be much older than Arthur; but two things: (1) It's fiction. (2) There's a dragon. A talking dragon. Colin Morgan stands out as a very gifted young actor, but the rest of the cast is strong too. I did find that the plots became very formulaic in the middle of the series, and the CGI was often mis-used. I look forward to the Second Series, though, because it became quite good in its final episodes (excluding the slight cop-out in the last episode, which annoyed me greatly).

Survivors - For a show that royally pee'd me off with it's first episode (by killing off two characters played by actors I like when I was led to believe they would be in the entire series) it actually turned itself around. For a start, I really disliked the main character - Aby Grant. Over time, however, I did become attached to her. I also really like Nikki Amuka-Bird who played Samantha Willis. I've seen her in Torchwood and The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency (which is coming back as a series!) and I've been really impressed with her. Not so much in Survivors, but hopefully she can shine in the Second Series.

The Diary of Anne Frank - Not the sort of show I normally watch, but the casting of Tasmin Greig and Lesley Sharp intrigued me enough. I really enjoyed the series. I've read the play before - in fact, I remember reading in as Peter Van Daan - but this version made Anne less of a hero and more of the teenager she actually was. What made this version particularly touching was the very distanced relationship between Anne and her mother. Her mother tried so hard, and yet Anne still treated her appallingly. A very visual show, and it was a wise choice to play it out over a single week.

The Battleship Potemkin - I enjoyed seeing this from a film-maker viewpoint, but not so much as an audience member. It was very unique, and it did establish some brilliant things for Cinema. The construction of scenes was very impressive, but occasionally things didn't feel right to me. But it's unfair to look at this film in the same way one look's at the latest Oscar contenders. It would have been a very powerful film at its time, and I can see its importance.

Nosferatu - This I did enjoy. Whilst I'm not a big fan of scary movies (not because I'm scared of them, but because they often fail to scare me) I did find moments in this creepy, which is impressive. Count Orlok was rather intimidating, particularly when he just stood still, watching. I found this harder to deconstruct as we went along because I was more involved with watching it. I look forward to the discussion that will no doubt ensue this week.

Corr, Blimey

2009-01-19T21:34:00.000Z

Here's my synopsis of the 20:30 episode of Coronation Street broadcast on 19th of January, 2009:

After finding out Joe is staying with Gail, Audrey tells Gail that he is a labourer. Gail asks him about it, and he gets mad and leaves.

Steve claims to have left Michelle for Becky, but she says she is committed to Jason.

Gary and his Uncle Len plan to steal from the building site. They do, and are later seen driving away by David.

John has been sentenced to two years in prison. Fiz is somewhat upset, whilst Rosie celebrates with her family.

Tara and Amber try to convince Dev to let Amber learn to drive.

A Rousing Return

2009-01-19T09:54:00.006Z

Wow. This past week has been pretty good. Really good, in fact. Lots of enjoyable classes, and certainly a really nice way to return after a holiday. There's always that slight dreading about going back - less so now than those times at High School - but it was completely unjustified!

Firstly, on Tuesday we had a Technical Class with Ray in which we moved onto lighting. It was an enjoyable class for me. Some of the terms which are also used in theatrical lighting were familiar, and a lot of the "how-they-work" I've covered in Physics. After that, playing with manual white-balance with the lighting was quite interesting. I agree with Ray that when something is perfectly white-balanced it doesn't always look right, so it can be an idea to adjust it to where you like it's look.

Next on Tuesday was Richard's screenwriting class. This was actually more tiring in the afternoon than first thing on Monday morning. Strange, huh? But it was a good lesson. I'm now far less happy with my script because I felt we covered some things which helped me realise where I could improve it. But I quite like the assignment of confidentially sharing our secrets. Some people have claimed to have no secrets. Okay, maybe you have nothing that you've never told anyone, but there must be something. Everyone has something.

Wednesday. Squeee. Wednesday was fun, because not only do I have a potentially-unhealthy obsession with Doctor Who, but the area of TV I'm most interested in is that BBC1 Saturday 7pm Drama slot. I'd love to work on Doctor Who, or Merlin, or maybe even the new Sherlock Holmes (which I think is going for that slot). I really like those types of show. So this lesson was nice and relevant in every way.

Thursday's class was good, too. I quite enjoy the history of cinema. The inventing, and then the evolution of a new art form are both really interesting. It's particularly strange looking at the original ways that film-reels were shown.

I'll cover The Battleship Potemkin in the next post, so I'll talk about Friday's second class - Introduction to Production. Abigail was really nice and she was particularly clear in setting out the role of a Producer, and the producerly things they do. That's a tough job, because the role of a producer is not only hard to define, but it can differ for each production, depending on what is required. I'm still open towards producing - the big list didn't scare me off - but I'll need to see how I feel after a few more classes!

I certainly hope that we have a few more weeks like this in our time here!

Bigger is Better

2009-01-05T13:41:00.001Z

A belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to y'all! Like nearly everyone else, I've taken a little break from blogging to do... well, very little indeed, myself. Okay, I've watched a lot of films and TV as one would expect, and that's been particularly good for one very silly reason. Christmas is a time for excess, so I got my dad to borrow a projector from work over the holidays and watched all manner of things on a massive white wall in my room. The novelty wore off after a while, but it was still fun having my own little cinema.

Now, because I've not been particularly busy post-Christmas, I've found that I've had too much to blog about. Probably because not doing much gives me too much time to think, and then I want to express those thoughts on 'ere. More for my own benefit, I think, than really to share them with you, because it helps me clarify it all in my own head.

But none of that for now, because I'm going to do a slightly less formal post about Christmas and New Year, and then get back onto topic with a large set of Mini-Reviews later in the week. Crazy. Oh, and I'm saving all the big Doctor Who stuff for its own post - 'cause I can, and you can't stop me!

Santa was good this year, as along with money and chocolate I got the following DVDs: Wall-E, The Austin Powers Boxset, Coupling Series Boxset, The Arrested Development Boxsets, and the Extended Lord of the Rings Boxset. The last one was partly given to me because I once said something along the lines of "I'm beginning to think I don't like LOTR any more", and I believe that person may have wanted me to take that back. Okay; I take it back. And 'cause I didn't get The Dark Knight, I went and bought it for myself.

In-between all the visual-indulgence that fits the season, I've used this opportunity to meet up with all my Edinburgh friends to its full extent. This included visiting Woolworths on its last day and getting myself 12 Terry's Chocolate Oranges for £3. Well, not just for me; I shared them. But when everything is 90% off, one just goes mad. One of my friends got Futurama Series Three for £3.50 instead of £35!

Okay, time for something relevant: Richard's Assignment. I've been trying out different things to get myself writing, and it's certainly proving a little bit of a challenge for me. Not the actual writing, but coming up with the missing elements. In my one-on-one, Richard and I discussed the main issue with my script: it had no 2nd-Act. No middle. It went Equilibrium > Inciting Incident > Dénouement. I think this could be because it had a sort of punch-line quality, and we both noted this isn't too strange in short short-films, but the exercise is to try writing in the structure we've been talking about. So I'm still developing it, in honesty, but I'm confident that the more effort I put into working it all out before I write it means that there will be less to iron-out once I've written it. My self-enforced deadline of tomorrow evening should help, too.

Well, that's enough nonsense for now. Expect more soon!

Mini-Reviews

2008-12-11T18:40:00.001Z

A week with too few films to fill a post, so I'm throwing in one other art-form: panto!

The Gold Rush - A really enjoyable Chaplin film, much like The Kid. The narration was a bit much at times, and it would have worked better without it. You'd need some title-cards, but they're quite charming in these films. I liked the story, but I still struggle to think that the ending was in any way satisfactory. He likes her, she doesn't like him, she plays tricks on him, he becomes rich, she likes him, they end up together. Lovely message. Almost as bad as Grease.

Sherlock Jr. - Whilst it lacked the character of a Chaplin film (referring literally to Chaplin's Tramp character) it was very enjoyable. A different type of humour. Sometimes you want a long, clever and brilliant gag, and sometimes you want a pie-in-the-face. Technically it was really good, too, with some really cleverly-shot moments. And whilst not a part of the original film, I liked the music. Okay, wrong style for the period, but I thought it suited the visuals.

Lakeview Terrace - A very thought-provoking film about a black cop in LA who has a problem with the interracial couple who move in next door. Surprisingly dramatic and suspenseful, and quite exciting because of this. I really thought, based on discussions we have had in Richard's classes, that there would be a twist of some sort. But it played out as you would think, with both style and tension. As I said to Paul whilst descending on the escalators, sometimes the biggest twist is no twist at all! Probably because audiences have come to expect twists these days.

Mother Goose - The RSAMD's panto this year, and all I can say was it was ruddy brilliant. The cast were fantastic, as you'd have to expect, with Mother Goose, Fairy Fortune, and Diavalo all really standing out. On the TPA-side of things the show was on-par with most major productions, and better in some cases. It was well written too - because panto has a tendency to cater to the kids and adults separately, but here the adults were laughing at the kids' jokes too, shouting along with no inhibitions! I think I can say with some certainty that this is the best panto I've ever seen! Tip top.

The Day the Earth Stood Still - I had such low expectations for this film that it was almost impossible for it not to impress me. It was by no means a great film, but I enjoyed it whilst I was watching it. It was a very simple, very commercial attempt at a remake of a classic. Whilst I've not seen the original, I do imagine there was more to it than there was in this version. There must be, as it's clearly stood the test of time!

Assessing Jamaica Street's Snowman

2008-12-11T17:38:00.000Z

I've held off this post about the events of the past week for one simple reason: I can't remember much happening! So, half waiting to remember, half waiting for other things to happen that I can talk about, I didn't have much to say. And I don't really right now, either. But I'll try.

What did we do last Thursday? Seriously, I can't recall ... Okay, checked my emails to remind myself - we watched the Mitchell and Kenyon films! Of course. I don't know why I had forgotten. Certainly not a comment on the class or its content, which I enjoyed! Each clip was very individual, from the very real shots on Glasgow's Jamaica Street, to the staged events at the school. But they all had a great deal to say about that period in history.

Sound on Friday was good. Not much to say, really, other than I think we're slowly getting the hang of it. I feel we all need more time with the mixers, as they're quite complicated. But we'll get there.

Then came Monday. Well, technically Saturday and Sunday came first. But in terms of lessons, then came Monday. Richard's class was quite enjoyable, as they've all been so far. We handed in our outlines and I'm pretty happy with mine. There are a few things which I already know I want to change, but I'll wait and see what Richard thinks. The discussion about characters and little details about their lives was quite fun too, though I wasn't as happy with the ideas I came up with on my own; possibly because I was tired. As I said, Saturday and Sunday came first.

The confusion about Tuesday was a large mix of communication and lack-of-communication on all parts. The clash on the timetable and the assumption that we were to be assessed individually made us confused, and by not double checking whilst in on Monday just complicated matters. The assessment itself wasn't much better. It was quite a hectic day. I think we got too focused on making the films than letting the people who were doing camera and sound do a good job by themselves. Ach weel. We'll soon hear how it went.

On Wednesday we watched Sherlock Jr, but I'm about to do a second post with my mini-reviews. Yes, a dual-post-day - or a "DPD". That'll fit in nicely with those other acronyms: PATs, PDPs, VLEs, RPJs, etc.

And, finally, today's class - with toys! - was really fun. I've spoken of my fondness for Physics before, and I knew a lot of the science behind moving pictures from two topics in Standard Grade: Physics in Medicine (in which we studied how the eye works) and Electronics (which covered TV). Also, having done animation, I'm familiar with Persistence of Vision - just not that terminology! And, since I'm in such a crazy mood, here's a recreation of our zoetrope:

That was fun.

Two and a Half Panopticons of Sound

2008-12-03T23:53:00.003Z

As ever, I've a lot I feel I should cover in this post, so keep hold of your hats!

Last week's pitching of ideas (both the premises in Richard's class, and the Drama series in Adam's) went pretty well. I was slightly annoyed at the wording of one of my premises, making it sound a bit rubbish... But I've sorted it now, and I'm currently outlining it in its new-and-improved-goodness.

The excitement - and the cold - of the Panopticon hit us on Thursday. I loved that place. The atmosphere reminded me of an episode of Torchwood (Captain Jack Harkness, S01E12). In the episode they travel from the present-day wreck of a building through time to it's past, to see it in its glory. It was interesting, because the parts that were still to be restored felt like "present-day", but the main part of the room - with flags and posters - felt very much like the "past". And, of course, I can't forget to mention that Judith Bowers was brilliant. She really knew what she was talking about and was really engaging! Had it not been so ruddy cold, I'd have happily listened to her insightful stories for a good while longer.

Sound on Friday was good. We covered the very basics, but that'll do me for now. I knew most of the theory, but it was good to see it in practice with the equipment we use. Plus, Simon's drawings took me back to my days of Higher Physics. I loved Physics. Had Advanced Higher Drama not clashed with Advanced Higher Physics, I'd have taken both! Stoopid High Schools.

Following this, we had a class on sitcoms! Hooray! I've loved I Love Lucy ever since a neighbour let me watch it whilst babysitting me when I was young. Only two episodes, but it was great. So I enjoyed watching both this and The Dick van Dyke Show. Followed by these two classics was a third; The Simpsons. I can understand the dilemma that Andy must have faced when picking an episode! This was a good choice, though. Both for festive reasons, but also because it shows the origins of the show, which was relevant to the subject matter of the class. I've seen the episode many times, but it is a good'un! Finally, we watched an episode of Two and a Half Men. It's quite enjoyable, and I've seen the occasional episode before, but I probably won't make a point of watching it. Though, if ever I'm channel-hopping, it may get one more viewer!

Now, some Gavin-endorsed sitcoms: Arrested Development, Coupling, Frasier, The IT Crowd, The Big Bang Theory, Blackadder, and 3rd Rock from the Sun. With the exception of Frasier, I've seen every single broadcast episode of each of these series. That includes all 139 of 3rd Rock. No wonder I've never any spare time!

The start of this week saw me opening a few new doors. Firstly, my advent calendar. Secondly, Richard had asked us to dig deep and have a heart-to-heart in class. We each shared three things about ourselves that we would change, and then discussed related themes we could explore. It was a surprisingly successful process in terms of helping me think about what I want my scripts to really say. Couple a strong premise with a good theme, and off you go!

Watching short-films and shorter-films with Adam was fun. I really liked Divine. I need to look at getting it for myself! I was also surprised by the films made at Napier Uni in Edinburgh, as they were more impressive than I'd have assumed. They were shot very nicely, but one might expect such when the course involves such a lot of photography. I myself applied to their course in Photography and Film, but withdrew my application when, at the open day, they seemed so narrow-mindedly focused on Photography, to the extent that they asked applicants to submit a portfolio of photographs but nothing film-related. Boo them! And I know that makes me sound bad - but I was looking for the perfect film course. Good news: I found it, and I'm now on it! But don't confuse this with me saying "photography has no importance in film". Of course it does! But major kudos to those film-makers who not only filmed underwater, but filmed underwater with a baby! The stress that day would have killed me.

I enjoyed the lesson on gameshows yesterday. Not half as bad as Andy seemed to think. I suppose our lack of response was because it's hard to be critical of a gameshow in the way we are of other formats, not because we were uninterested. Trust me, that class was far better than any lesson in Advanced Higher Maths last year. Apart from one at Christmas, when we did some silly "fun" maths things, like singing about Differential Equations to the tune of Jingle Bells. Though Andy's Christmas lesson with toys may possibly top this!

Anyhoo, today's screening of Goldrush will be covered in this week's Mini-Reviews. So it's good night from me, and it's good night from him!

Mini-Reviews

2008-11-29T09:23:00.003Z

I've decided that, since I keep seeing many films in a week and never really speaking about them at all, I may try doing a set of mini-reviews at the end of the week. Worry not, however, as I shall keep up with my current ways of blogging too.

Mama Mia - An enjoyable and entertaining film which, as I've heard from pretty much everyone, has little technical merit. In terms of musicals, it still suffers from an awkwardness when songs begin. I have a theory about a better way of doing this on film, so I may need to experiment. But I certainly think that it must be a fantastic stage show!

HSM3 - Yes. I saw it again. But you can refer to my dissertation below if you want to hear my thoughts on this. But, for the record, HSM3 > Mama Mia.

Dogma - A very enjoyable film, with a really strong cast. Alan Rickman is always great, and I really liked the way it dealt with religion and beliefs. Whilst one may not realise this, Kevin Smith actually made the film about his own his Catholic beliefs. He makes some very good points about religion that I agree with, even though I'm not religous myself, and I'd recommend this if you ain't seen it!

May Payne - Ugh.

The Kid - Awesome. Much more gripping and exciting than Max Payne! And it was made more than 85 years earlier! Chaplin = Great. Coogan = Great. Chaplin + Coogan = Much Greatness. A really nice story, with a strong narrative, which had me laughing quite a lot.

Big Fish - Whilst a very enjoyable film, it didn't quite feel like it was Tim Burton's. It didn't have the visual style we're used to from Burton. It was a very visual film, but it lacked something. But I did enjoy it - particularly seeing Albert Finney (from Erin Brockovich) in another film. I really liked his performance.

Changeling - Go and see this film. It's a really gripping drama, and I can't even think of it critically because of my strong emotional response (see, I have been learning!). The film made me angry - angrier than I think any other film has made me. And, as has been reported, Angelina Jolie is astounding. Go and see this film.

That's it for this week. Stay tuned for more Mini Reviews!

Mad Week = Mad, Weak

2008-11-24T22:28:00.000Z

Just as I had foretold, the past week was mad. Very mad in fact. But I'm not half as exhausted as I feel I should be. If I just force myself to have a reasonably early night tonight then I'll hopefully be fine for the rest of the week!

So, firstly, let's talk Attenborough. That was a truly inspiring masterclass with an incredibly lovely and respectable man. It had crossed my mind that he may not be quite as nice as his characters in Jurassic Park and Miracle on 34th Street - but he was Hammond, Santa, and much, much more! To comment a little more on the structure of the masterclass, it was brilliant that Andy had such a nice chemistry with Attenborough. I've been at an "in-conversation" masterclass with Sharon Osbourne which was being conducted by the ruddy editor of Heat! Of course Sharon was tight-lipped and awkward! This man has no doubt spread all sorts of rumours about her family, and could quote her on anything as an exclusive! Nice to see that Attenborough was clearly comfortable. Also, well done to Andy for not only dismissing that strange-man's pitch, but also turning it into a question that was a little more appropriate!

As if one star wasn't enough, we then had the chance to sit-in on a workshop between actors and DFTV4s, at which James McAvoy was present. James' presence was nice, but he was by no means essential to the class. Whilst it was only covering the basics, it is important to keep in mind that this was only for the benefit of the actors. I hope that the democratic way that they had input into each shot has not made them think that they have the same creative power on an actual film. I don't mean that in a nasty way at all, but I just hope that they don't bounce onto a set and tell the DoP how to shoot them, cause that's what he'll do: shoot them. But I think that James clarified this himself. It was just to let them understand why such decisions are made - not how to make them!

That brings me to the shoot at the weekend, which is really hard to summarise. I was asked by a Young-Person film-making group that I used to attend in Edinburgh to direct their latest script. I had been around for some of the conception, and I agreed on the basis that I was only directing the filming, but am not really the "director" of the entire film. The pre-production and post-production duties are all democratic and theirs to deal with. I've learnt several things from this shoot, however:

I don't like commuting from Edinburgh every day. (Thank god I moved!)
When working 8 - 12 hour days, I need more nutrition than just crisps, peanuts and jam sandwiches. Also, I need plenty of water.
I don't mind 12 hour days, but not when they have so much to be filmed in them.
I like shouting "reset". Makes everyone move.
I don't like working on scenes with loads of people in them - particularly extras. I found it rather stressful, and completely hit a wall when we had quite a few people (friends of the cast) who don't really know how a film set is run... or how to be quiet between takes.
HDV is pointless if it's not 3CCD.
You can make a salad dressing out of pumpkin seeds.

Whilst this list consists mostly of bad things, I did have fun shooting it. But I've no idea if what we shot was any good. Whilst I won't be around for the repercussions, my name will still be attached in some way, so I have a bit of an investment here.

That's all for now. As a reward for my work over the weekend, I've the latest Doctor Who Magazine to get reading!

A Day of Melting and Crushing

2008-11-18T21:28:00.004Z

The title? No, I didn't have a terrible assessment with Ray - that actually went pretty well - I am of course referring to the film that myself, Murdo, Paul, Phil and Charlotte made over the weekend for the Stanford Innovation competition. Thanks to you guys for the efforts you made, by the way. It was loads of fun! Anyway, you can see the film below if you haven't already seen it!

This experience was exactly what I needed. Not that I felt anything was wrong before-hand, but the making of this film reminded me of why I'm on this course. It was the least stressful shoot I've ever been on, and the editing was far simpler than it should have been. We had quite a lot of crazy random happenstances that worked out perfectly for us, giving us more time for tweaking and animation. But I really enjoyed the whole time doing it. Maybe I'm too fond of the final film, but making it was the first time that I've felt at home in Glasgow... or perhaps more like I have a purpose in Glasgow. I know that sounds strange, but that's how it felt! You see the actors acting, the musicians music-ing, the TPA people TPA-ing, so it was great to finally be DFTV-ing! And I will never forget my favourite moment so far whilst here - Vasso running up and down Buchanan Street, shouting about bottles in front of the public. It was priceless. I've watched the full recording so many times, and it's so very, very funny having been there when she did it. She was fantastic! This clip is a part of the out-takes that I've put on YouTube. As to not clog this blog with too many embedded-videos, you can click here to see it. (It has some bad language, but who gives a f**k?).

Sorry, that was tasteless.

Anyway, we talk so much about films - both in and out of class - that what we want to do (the actual film-making) can seem almost forgotten. What we do in class is essential, of course, and we have to remember that we are working towards the practical. But if patience is a virtue then I'm not particularly virtuous! It just felt great to make something! It was also nice to see everyone enthused more about film-making than films on Monday, with those who didn't enter the competition planning a potential film-making scheme... Is it a scheme? Or a project? Well, no need to be so specific; it's a thingy. Yes, much better. A film-making thingy. I think maybe a YouTube channel would be a good idea if it all goes ahead. But we'd need a name! I quite like "Rogue Directors"... and a quick google (in the verb-sense) shows that it's not already taken, on YouTube or otherwise.

So, what was this particular post about then? Well, there is no real point to this one. A bit of reflection, a bit more of my personal thoughts. I'm just trying to encourage myself to post more often, as I'm really into this whole blog thing but I'm so terribly busy that I've barely posted about things in class, let alone my own thoughts! So I'm just letting myself type what I feel like, rather than my normal way of doing things, where I slave away over the whole thing! Unfortunately, this week is my busiest yet; I've got to be in Glasgow during the day on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, but in Edinburgh in the evenings!! So most day's I'll be leaving straight from the Academy to a bus or train (depending on where in Edinburgh I'm to be, and how fast I need to get there), and coming back in the mornings. Expect a very tired Gavin.

Also, do you think I can ask Richard Attenborough if his brother was jealous that he got to work with dinosaurs? Though I've read rumours that he may be reprising his role in Jurassic Park IV. That'd be great, if the script was right! That way he could get his brother a cameo! The Attenbrothers! Ba-doom.

PS - Sorry for the long post and lack of pictures. Just google (verb, again) something relevant yourself!

Choke

2008-11-17T12:12:00.003Z

Choke is one of those films that defies expectations. For those easily offended, it is the most explicitly disgusting film of the year. For those who are not, much like myself, it can be an enjoyable film.

I found myself laughing at times, but still being caught up in the story. I admit that it had a rather confusing string of flashbacks – but these scenes gave the film some depth. It became about the mother-son relationship, and the progression of this over the years. The memory-loss of the mother was moving, but it also reached a great climax of comedy and tragedy coupled together. Angelica Houston was well cast, and I really enjoyed watching her scenes.

Unfortunately the style of the film meant that you questioned if a scene was real, or if it was a dream – the first scene in the church stands out particularly. Additionally, there is a twist that is not prepared for, and has a few plot-holes.

But, whilst it had its problems, it’s an entertaining film – though I can’t help thinking that the trailer is targeted at an audience who expect a comedy with sexy scenes, when it is really a drama with un-erotic sex.

Week-in-a-blog!

2008-11-10T16:58:00.004Z

I've yet to post anything about the past week - it's been a bit busy - so I'll just reflect on the most important matters since my last post.

Tuesday morning was the technical assessment with Ray. Whilst I did everything properly, I wasn't as good with answering his questions as I perhaps should have been. I didn't anticipate that as much, but I guess I should have read all the notes, not just my notes on how to set things up. But I think it went okay. Editing with Gavin saw us learning how to log clips and organise our projects. I didn't find it as boring as I probably should have, but having edited on projects that lack structure (not my own, I hasten to add!) it's really good to see the correct way. It's much more efficient, and will certainly save time and preserve sanity.

Wednesday was fun. I woke to hear that Obama had been voted President - hooray! - and I had two screenings to look forward to. The first was the elective screening of Chaplin, which I really enjoyed. Robert Downey Jr.'s performance was really good, and I was overall impressed with the direction from Lord Attenborough. The second screening of the day was Donnie Darko. As I've said before, I first saw this when I was 11, so back then there was a lot I didn't understand. Whilst there's still a lot that lacks explanation, it made more sense than before. I think it did appeal to me more now, and I don't mind it's lack of explanation. I didn't realise how similar it was to The Butterfly Effect, but I think they're both really good. I'm a sucker for a bit of time-travel (as my yet-to-be-posted review of Back to the Future will tell you), and they're also very similar in terms of tone.

I enjoyed revisiting our favourite films on Thursday morning. Interesting to hear people trying to sell their choice to the rest of us! There are a few I'll need to add to my to-view list. Whilst our voting system didn't make perfect sense, it's true that there is no better system for creating a top list of films. It's entirely subjective. Following this class we watched The King of Comedy, which was quite a strange film. It was a comedy, and yet it wasn't really funny until the last half an hour. Until that point it had just been rather uncomfortable viewing. The ending was just as uncomfortable, but it was also funny - as if the ending were the punchline of the film. Extra points to Sandra Bernhard for an impressive performance! I know her from something else, I'm sure...

Friday was the School of Drama open-day, so not a lot worth saying - though I did realise that I'm still rather unfamiliar with parts of the building whilst helping with a tour. Nice to see where TPA lives.

So that's this week in a blog. I'm off to watch something now. Not sure what yet, as I'm a little spoilt for choice!

Progress So Far

2008-11-03T22:04:00.004Z

I'm aware that I've not really reviewed my own progress in classes yet, and so I've decided to do just that.

I was happy with the premises I had come up with for today's screenwriting class, and people seemed to respond well. I guess people like superstition, divorce and incest. All is right with the world! But seriously, I was very impressed by the levels of creativity and originality amongst the class. It was also good to get some feedback from Richard on our short-stories. I agreed with his main point for my own development, which was about the lack of character. Richard's theory that perhaps I knew about the character and just didn't describe him enough is quite true in hindsight, and I'll look at how I can avoid this in the future.

I'm enjoying the technical classes. I'm very happy with the pace at which we are learning - there's no point in rushing into anything - and I think I'm really understanding everything. I've been reading over my own notes in preparation for tomorrow's evaluation with Ray, and I think that it'll go swimmingly. I also really enjoyed the editing that we did in Gavin's class last week. I've used Final Cut Pro before (a few years back), and I'm very familiar with Premiere Pro, which is pretty similar. The footage we had to work with was really nice: stunning scenery, very high quality, and incredibly well shot I thought. A very good choice for our first editing session.

In both the classes with Andy and those with Adam I'm happy with my contribution to discussions. I feel comfortable enough to express my opinion and discuss the issues. I'm really enjoying the topics in these classes, too. I've been fascinated with massively over-blown and ever-escalating media-scandals since the Celebrity Big Brother Racism Row in 2007, and there have been many since then that I've made an effort to follow, including the Phone-in Scandals, Rigging Scandals, and Crown-gate. Discussing Manuel-gate (as I've heard it's now known) was therefore really interesting for me. Additionally, in these classes I've really loved discussing the strange and curious ways in which TV programmes are made, scheduled and broadcast. This Industry is just so very bizarre in many ways, which helps keep things interesting!

Dead Set

2008-11-02T16:36:00.004Z

I put off talking about Dead Set until I had been a zombie myself. Now that I've had that experience, at a Halloween party this weekend, I can properly delve into Charlie Brooker's latest TV show. And, just because Andy got to name-drop earlier in the week, I'll just casually point out that I met Charlie Brooker earlier this year. Whilst at the time I knew very little about any of his work, he was a very funny guy.

Whilst I've seen very little horror, perhaps because I'm not really scared very easily by films, I quite enjoyed Dead Set. I agree with those who think that it didn't quite work as a mini-series. It felt like it was a film that had been chopped up rather uncomfortably (like any film on ITV when they need to squeeze in the ads!). There was probably just over one-episode's worth of unnecessary rubbish, and if they'd got rid of that and played it over fewer nights it would have been a little more special.

I thought Davina's cameo was fantastic. She's always up for a little fun, and she doesn't take herself too seriously. I also admire that Endemol didn't have any problems with doing it. Their biggest show, and yet they don't mind people within their own company using it to make a point about reality TV. Though had it been a fictional Big Brother-like show it wouldn't have been half as effective as them using the real Big Brother.

I loved the role the Producer played, too; particularly when he abused the Big Brother control room (flashing lights, putting down the shutters and sounding annoying alarms) to get those in the house to come and save him. And the character's demise was, as I had speculated, a satisfyingly-gory mauling by a herd of zombies.

"Rude and Not Ginger"

2008-10-29T23:16:00.004Z

Like I promised, this'll be a short post!

David Tennant just announced that he'll be stepping down as the Doctor at the end of the 2009 Doctor Who Specials, and that when the show returns for the fifth series in 2010 (under the brilliant mind of Steven Moffat) it will be with a new Doctor.

I'm upset. David Tennant is brilliant, and I'd have loved to see the Tenth Doctor have a whole 13 episodes of Steven Moffat's brilliant stories! But I'm equally excited about the specials in which Tennant will bow out, as it will also be the last of Russell T Davies' era, so it's bound to be huge! Plus, a new Doctor written by Moffat? Awesomely exciting! The show depends on change and updating its image, and this'll be the first proper time that's happened since the show returned in 2005!

High School Musical 3

2008-10-29T18:24:00.005Z

I think I may be alone in the opinions I'm about to express amongst our male-dominated class, but I don't care. If I like something it's important that I'm open about it. So, yes, I will write a positive review about High School Musical 3: Senior Year!

This is the first to play in cinemas, and I have to say that I was nervous about sitting in one of the many sold-out screenings with hundreds of children and teenagers! But similarly to when I saw The Rocky Horror Show, being in with the crazed fans improved the experience. And, just like Rocky Horror, there was audience-participation. People clapped-along, cheered, wolf-whistled, and sang. It didn't ruin the experience - it added to it!

It's also the first of the films to actually feature a high school musical. In doing so they could feature truly theatrical songs and actually cut to the stage-musical which the film was building towards without taking itself too seriously. The songs themselves were good. Different enough from the previous films to feel fresh, but not so different as to sound like they belong elsewhere. One thing that struck me in this one was the struggle to start songs. On a few occasions it felt awkward when someone, mid-conversation, bursted into song.

Most musicals struggle in getting the audience to suspend their disbelief. In real life people don't burst into spontaneous musical numbers. I'd argue that that's more a problem with reality than musicals. But when you see a film like this you surrender your right to complain about that. And because the audience accept it, musicals can often do other unrealistic things. With HSM3, though, I felt that they abused this right when the roof of a treehouse magically opened up during a song for no reason! Poetic, yes, but it brings you out of it! They made up for this, however, when two characters rolled under a car and came out the other side as themselves, aged-7, and carried on the song - dancing and all. It was brilliant and hilarious. Those are the sort of shenanigans that you can only pull in a musical!

But it's not just a camp, light-hearted musical. There are serious issues about leaving high school, choosing a college, peer pressure, and - to some extent - relationships at a young age. Though, as expected, it does Disney-up high schools; no drinking, smoking, drugs, sex, teenage-pregnancies, etc. But surely we want kids to retain their innocence as long as possible!

I think that the main cast are really talented, and it's good to see long-serving supporting-characters rewarded too. I've read some reviews which criticise the film for under-using Lucas Grabeel's character, Ryan. Personally I disagree. They remained faithful to his character, and allowed the audience to see how his confidence has grown since the second one. Yes, character development! I think that's more important than screentime, even if he is a good actor.

The main reason that I like this film, however, is that it remains true to its roots. What made the first so good was that it was just a small, made-for-TV musical which nobody expected to do well. In that sense, it deserved all the attention it got. There wasn't a huge marketing campaign to begin with and it doesn't feel commercially driven. It has a unique quality that is hard to describe, but resulted in this huge phenomenon. This quality it present in HSM3 too - probably because it's the same people making it, just with a bigger budget. But I'd still argue that the film's plot is not commercially driven. The fact that it was made was, but the film itself is a loyal continuation of the series. We live in a world of franchises now, sadly, but I think that this one deserves everything it got because it was made by people who loved what they were making. You can always tell, and it's worth a lot more than production values! And when you couple the two, you end up with something huge.

Okay, next post will be short. I promise.

The Story Thus Far

2008-10-28T17:32:00.002Z

My Back to the Future post will have to wait, saved as a draft for now (a very useful function!), as I've decided that I'll catch up on all the events so far. I thought it may be too long a post, but Paul's posts have been pretty long too, so that makes it okay! Doesn't it?

I enjoyed Creative Beginnings. I'm always better at socialising if I'm working on something with people - like as part of a film crew. Creative Beginnings made up for Freshers' Week in terms of getting to know people, particularly from the other courses. The Derive is what, like many, I would say was the high-point of the fortnight. It really worked for our group! And then making an instillation afterwards was a great chance to be creative together, which was nice. Equally, the improvisation day was a great bonding session for everyone. Even though we were in our derive groups, all the new students were united in creating those performances. Those dark, warped performances.

I do agree that some of Creative Beginnings was boring, and it could have potentially been done over a single week, but the housekeeping was important. We need to have a Diversity and Equality talk, we need to talk about PDPs, and we need the ability to define beauty. Okay, not the last one, but the majority of it was necessary.

The course itself has been great so far. Every expectation surpassed all round, so I'm pretty excited to be here! We've watched a lot of films and a bit of TV so far, and whilst in the future I will reflect on as much as I watch as possible, there are just too many films so far to catch-up on: Thelma and Louise, Citizen Kane, Burn After Reading, City of Ember, Shawshank Redemption, Inside Man, The Truman Show, Broadcast News, Stone of Destiny. Below are some of the most important things I want to say about a few of them.

Broadcast News featured two very familiar voices. I later discovered, through the magic of IMDB, that Holly Hunter (who played Jane Craig) was the voice of Elastigirl in The Incredibles, and Albert Brooks (Aaron Altman) vocied Marlin in Finding Nemo, along with numerous characters in The Simpsons.
Both Geena Davis and Susan Sarandon were fantastic in Thelma and Louise. I've seen them both previously and liked their work, but they worked even better as a pair! I also loved the way that the story built up. If I remember correctly, Louise compares their escalating situation to a rolling snowball, and I couldn't agree more.
When watching Citizen Kane I found myself thinking "that shot feels really 3D". Not 3D-glasses '3D', but I felt there was a lot of depth. Andy explained afterward that Gregg Toland pioneered deep-focus which created the great feeling of depth, and I really like it. It worked really well on tracking shots. And, as an audience member, I do find my eye straying onto something in the background sometimes, and so having everything in focus allowed me to do that easier.
Following the above point, I watched Shawshank Redemption again and noticed that it used deep-focus a lot. There's a great shot where the camera flies over the prison building, and then sweeps over the prison yard, with prisoners in it. Everything was really sharp, and the motion, again, created a great feeling of depth. Plus, it's a really good film in other ways too!

That'll do for now, I think. I'll soon blog about High School Musical 3: Senior Year. I bet ya' can't wait!

What is in a name?

2008-10-25T00:49:00.006+01:00

Well, here it begins. The trouble with this blog, however, was coming up with a name. It needed to sum up what this blog is all about. I quite like what I've got now. It was between that and the rather similar G. Laing's Blog of Cinematic Sorcery. When I saw that 'Wonderment' fitted perfectly beneath 'Motion Picture', however, it sealed the deal. Well, in the loosest meaning of that phrase. I can always rename it!

Then came designing a logo; I always do that first. Whenever I venture into anything that could use a logo, I find myself making one. It helps me establish the feeling of whatever it is I'm working on. Though this logo ended up classier than I thought it might. It makes it look as though this blog takes its title seriously. Perhaps I should have used Comic Sans...

Anyway, this post has hopefully exemplified the type of reflection that shall take place here. Though I vow to be more serious with it when I'm reflecting on important things. Like films. I watched Back to the Future this evening - I'll write about that soon. Though so much has happened over the past four weeks that I should reflect on! I may, in a similar way to Paul's first blog, catch up with everything that's go on. That'll take a good while. I may need to do it over a few posts to retain my sanity whilst writing it, and yours whilst reading it. Not that you have to read it! The true purpose of these blogs is for the benefit of the writer themself, really.