Saturday, 20 July 2013
Wednesday, 19 June 2013
Sheffield Documentary Festival Reflections
Having just spent the best part of this year making our documentary 'Cyber Crime' I jumped at the opportunity to visit the much renowned documentary film festival in Sheffield. I was ready to have my eyes opened by the films on show and was ready to welcome the insightful experiences of the film makers themselves.
Working on my own documentary I quickly discovered just how important documentary films can be to a fiction film maker like myself. I'd like to think the real life stories documented in these films can help inform my fiction writing, giving a much needed authenticity to the characters and events I create.
The best example I can think of comes in the form of 'Drill Baby Drill' an interesting documentary about the fracking in Poland and Pennsylvania, USA. The events taking place in America are stranger than fiction, what we see are these rather horrific scenes of public rivers and countryside being poisoned by these energy corporations. In one moment in the film we're introduced to a local guy who shows the film maker a bottle of polluted water that he's just taken from his tap in his own home. He states that this problem is not going away, that this problem is no longer a problem in the eyes of the authorities, that this polluted water is actually rather safe to drink!
It's an absolute horrific situation and the film only highlights a very small percentage of the problem, but what struck me is that these types of films are wells of information that I can tap into, I can take these real life events and turn them into fiction, perhaps to raise awareness of the problem further or to even help develop a back story for a particular character. I understand that this process may appear cynical to some but I genuinely believe that my fiction film making from now on will be a lot better for having been exposed to documentaries.
I also just want to comment on the terrific interview with 'Passion Pictures' producer John Battsek that I was glad to sit in on. During my university year I produced both the documentary and a short drama piece and had my eyes opened to some of the pitfalls of film making in general. It was really pleasing to find out that the problems I encountered in my student films are not going to go away once I take the step into 'professional' film making. It was humorous listening to John explain why he disliked working on fiction and why he much prefers documentary. I think the point he made that I related to most was that in documentary you really do collaborate more with your colleagues than in fiction. In fiction you have to respect this hierarchy that drives him mad (myself included) but in documentary the teams are much smaller and everyone just works on the film the best way they can, it's encouraging to be relating to someone in the industry, it helps evaporate the illusion that the industry is this thing that we're all striving to get into, we're all already part of it I guess.
Just speaking from a fanboy's perspective it was really great to get to see Jarvis Cocker's live music show about Sheffield and I was delighted to see Micheal Palin of 'Monty Python'.
I'll definitely be going again next year, I thoroughly enjoyed the few days I spent in Sheffield and I'll certainly be looking for more film festivals in the future to visit!
Working on my own documentary I quickly discovered just how important documentary films can be to a fiction film maker like myself. I'd like to think the real life stories documented in these films can help inform my fiction writing, giving a much needed authenticity to the characters and events I create.
The best example I can think of comes in the form of 'Drill Baby Drill' an interesting documentary about the fracking in Poland and Pennsylvania, USA. The events taking place in America are stranger than fiction, what we see are these rather horrific scenes of public rivers and countryside being poisoned by these energy corporations. In one moment in the film we're introduced to a local guy who shows the film maker a bottle of polluted water that he's just taken from his tap in his own home. He states that this problem is not going away, that this problem is no longer a problem in the eyes of the authorities, that this polluted water is actually rather safe to drink!
It's an absolute horrific situation and the film only highlights a very small percentage of the problem, but what struck me is that these types of films are wells of information that I can tap into, I can take these real life events and turn them into fiction, perhaps to raise awareness of the problem further or to even help develop a back story for a particular character. I understand that this process may appear cynical to some but I genuinely believe that my fiction film making from now on will be a lot better for having been exposed to documentaries.
I also just want to comment on the terrific interview with 'Passion Pictures' producer John Battsek that I was glad to sit in on. During my university year I produced both the documentary and a short drama piece and had my eyes opened to some of the pitfalls of film making in general. It was really pleasing to find out that the problems I encountered in my student films are not going to go away once I take the step into 'professional' film making. It was humorous listening to John explain why he disliked working on fiction and why he much prefers documentary. I think the point he made that I related to most was that in documentary you really do collaborate more with your colleagues than in fiction. In fiction you have to respect this hierarchy that drives him mad (myself included) but in documentary the teams are much smaller and everyone just works on the film the best way they can, it's encouraging to be relating to someone in the industry, it helps evaporate the illusion that the industry is this thing that we're all striving to get into, we're all already part of it I guess.
Just speaking from a fanboy's perspective it was really great to get to see Jarvis Cocker's live music show about Sheffield and I was delighted to see Micheal Palin of 'Monty Python'.
I'll definitely be going again next year, I thoroughly enjoyed the few days I spent in Sheffield and I'll certainly be looking for more film festivals in the future to visit!
Wednesday, 8 May 2013
Sunday, 5 May 2013
Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne
Below are just some notes from the Film Craft Directors book I've been reading -
- They talk/discuss among themselves for months, batting out the structure of their story, a blend of real life and fiction. Once a draft is complete Jean-Pierre will begin work on the screenplay. He'd then send it to his brother to work on then he'd send it back. They do this until they're on their 7th or 8th version of the script.
- The don't like actors improvising on set. Once the dialogue is written it's not open for change. They have one or two months of rehearsals before the shoot so any changes, if needed, are made then. Not on the shoot itself.
- They shoot in continuity, they start with scene one and work from there. They preserve the sets/locations just in case things have to change along the way. Some films are exactly like the screenplay and others will change.
- They say their camera work is their writing tool. It's not done in random fashion. They try to use movement to create tension, announce in literally using camera work.
- They use a lot of long shots, things stay hidden within the frame and then reveal themselves. The world exists around the characters the characters are there in the scene but the scene does not exist for the characters. They say it's mise-en-scene in disguise and comes from their background in documentaries.
- They try to help their actors 'action orientated'. They're not putting on an attitude or posing for the camera the actors are actually doing what you see them to be doing on screen. During rehearsals the two brothers will remove the camera and allow the actors to perform the scene, they will then decide where best to position the camera based on the actors performance and where they are on set.
- For their actors spontaneity is wishful thinking, the performance is worked on during rehearsals, fine tuned. When the actors are on set they know exactly what to do and they perform automatically. They are aiming for 'not acting' acting with this technique. (Makes sense to me!)
Saturday, 4 May 2013
Point Of View
It's interesting that I now feel we started looking at social media and online crime from the wrong perspective at the start of production. I think without realizing it we've pushed with the notion that online crime is really very bad and a very serious problem, something that could be a serious threat to national security and our private lives.
When interviewing Cliffe, of the Leeds Met Computer Forensics department, he sort of took offence to a question I asked. I was saying how the papers were constantly reporting events involving hacking etc. His response was that the media will report something because it's 'not' happening all the time, if it was then the media would look past it. He went on to warn us not to sensationalize the documentary and look to scare people with the film because in his opinion, though hacking is happening a lot, it's not about to bring down the planet and start the end of the world.
He also made it very clear that the vision of online crime/hacking portrayed in the movies is a very stylized and embellished version of the truth. So, right now, what I'm thinking is that we, as filmmakers, have perhaps jumped at this topic because of what we see and hear in the media, but if you just scratch at the surface it's not really that big of an issue. I think social media as a subject has a lot to offer but online crime is perhaps a weak topic, looking back it's a shame we went down this route.
When interviewing Cliffe, of the Leeds Met Computer Forensics department, he sort of took offence to a question I asked. I was saying how the papers were constantly reporting events involving hacking etc. His response was that the media will report something because it's 'not' happening all the time, if it was then the media would look past it. He went on to warn us not to sensationalize the documentary and look to scare people with the film because in his opinion, though hacking is happening a lot, it's not about to bring down the planet and start the end of the world.
He also made it very clear that the vision of online crime/hacking portrayed in the movies is a very stylized and embellished version of the truth. So, right now, what I'm thinking is that we, as filmmakers, have perhaps jumped at this topic because of what we see and hear in the media, but if you just scratch at the surface it's not really that big of an issue. I think social media as a subject has a lot to offer but online crime is perhaps a weak topic, looking back it's a shame we went down this route.
Importance Of Meeting Your Contributors
Just reflecting back on some possible reasons our film has not come together quite like we had imagined I noticed that we never really met our contributors before we had our interviews.
This was mostly because we simply couldn't do it, Gemma Wilson is a very busy person, the Met lecturers are also busy people. I did converse with them over the phone and via email but maybe a one to one meeting would have helped our interviews a great deal. The only person we managed to speak to before the interview was Mark Bottomley and its no surprise that he gave the best interview, we got the answers we needed.
It's just something I should keep in mind next time I'm working on a documentary or preparing interviews, in a way the meeting before the interview is needed to help set up the interview, to install an element of control during the Q&A.
This was mostly because we simply couldn't do it, Gemma Wilson is a very busy person, the Met lecturers are also busy people. I did converse with them over the phone and via email but maybe a one to one meeting would have helped our interviews a great deal. The only person we managed to speak to before the interview was Mark Bottomley and its no surprise that he gave the best interview, we got the answers we needed.
It's just something I should keep in mind next time I'm working on a documentary or preparing interviews, in a way the meeting before the interview is needed to help set up the interview, to install an element of control during the Q&A.
Documentaries For The Future
Now that we've nearly finished our Social Media Documentary, or whatever its focus now is, I'm now thinking about other potential documentaries I'd like to make in the future.
To be honest I've not really enjoyed the making of our film, being producer has been the least creative role I've ever had and the film hasn't really developed in the way we would have liked so I'm not rattling with anticipation to start my next documentary project. Having said that however, I think to make a really good documentary you need to have some passion or curiosity about the subject, it's what will drive you to keep going and keep searching for information and contributors. I think plucking an idea out of thin air and having to develop it is a dangerous method, especially when your coming from a background of fiction where your in control of everything going into the film/story.
A lot of other documentary groups seem to be having the same problem as ours, the idea is very concept driven, there is no actual physical substance to the film, whereas the documentary groups who are out filming real people, with real stories seem to have put together well made, well rounded films. I don't think any of the films that will be submitted will be a true reflection of the filmmakers who made them, I think at the end of the day whoever managed to uncover the most interesting subjects will ultimately make the best films.
A lot of what I've learned this year seems to be related to how not to make a film, I think the don'ts far out weigh the do's. I don't mind that because I feel like I'm much more in control of the production, I'm not just aimlessly shooting things, my decision making is based from a well of ever growing experience.
So whats in store for future projects...
I'm not sure, I'd love to do a documentary regarding the state of my football club, we seem to have gone from being one of the best run clubs in the country to a national laughing stock in the space of 3 years. The club has been the media's whipping boy for a majority of that time and only now have they began to take pity on the fans (we don't want or need any!). But, to my surprise a documentary has already been made and is going to be screen on national television this month I think, someone has already beaten me to it! I guess that's just the nature of documentary film-making, getting out there and starting something early and you never know what might happen.
Other than that I'm not really in a position to try anything else, I'd like to do something interesting, something that I can get excited about but it will take a bloody good idea to sway me to make a documentary rather than a fiction film. Its strange really because I am interested in the real world, I read biographies, watch documentaries yet I have very little passion to make my own, I guess the reality helps me inform my fiction and I don't think that process will change any time soon.
To be honest I've not really enjoyed the making of our film, being producer has been the least creative role I've ever had and the film hasn't really developed in the way we would have liked so I'm not rattling with anticipation to start my next documentary project. Having said that however, I think to make a really good documentary you need to have some passion or curiosity about the subject, it's what will drive you to keep going and keep searching for information and contributors. I think plucking an idea out of thin air and having to develop it is a dangerous method, especially when your coming from a background of fiction where your in control of everything going into the film/story.
A lot of other documentary groups seem to be having the same problem as ours, the idea is very concept driven, there is no actual physical substance to the film, whereas the documentary groups who are out filming real people, with real stories seem to have put together well made, well rounded films. I don't think any of the films that will be submitted will be a true reflection of the filmmakers who made them, I think at the end of the day whoever managed to uncover the most interesting subjects will ultimately make the best films.
A lot of what I've learned this year seems to be related to how not to make a film, I think the don'ts far out weigh the do's. I don't mind that because I feel like I'm much more in control of the production, I'm not just aimlessly shooting things, my decision making is based from a well of ever growing experience.
So whats in store for future projects...
I'm not sure, I'd love to do a documentary regarding the state of my football club, we seem to have gone from being one of the best run clubs in the country to a national laughing stock in the space of 3 years. The club has been the media's whipping boy for a majority of that time and only now have they began to take pity on the fans (we don't want or need any!). But, to my surprise a documentary has already been made and is going to be screen on national television this month I think, someone has already beaten me to it! I guess that's just the nature of documentary film-making, getting out there and starting something early and you never know what might happen.
Other than that I'm not really in a position to try anything else, I'd like to do something interesting, something that I can get excited about but it will take a bloody good idea to sway me to make a documentary rather than a fiction film. Its strange really because I am interested in the real world, I read biographies, watch documentaries yet I have very little passion to make my own, I guess the reality helps me inform my fiction and I don't think that process will change any time soon.
Friday, 3 May 2013
Unauthorized
This documentary was very much in the vein of what I would have considered to be your standard model for a documentary before we began studying this type of film making.
The film follows the success of Harvey Weinstein and his production company Miramax. It uses all the traditional forms of documentary film making, interviews, archive footage, B-roll footage, voice overs. It uses all the techniques available to create this interesting tale of one man and his ego.
Having said that though, the film feels a little like a straight to TV documentary, whereas all the other documentaries I've seen recently have a certain style or point of view that helps create a cinematic scope, this I think lacks that same scope, its just a plain and simple bio pick. To be fair I do think the gloves are off with this film ,they don't attempt to flower up his career or his personality, its very raw and honest. I always respect that, a lot can be said about being honest. Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction and Harvey feels like a character from one of his movies.
Bowling For Columbine
Even though a lot of people seem to say that Micheal Moore is biased and one sided I still really enjoy his feature documentaries. It's pretty clear what side of the fence Moore sits on and what his views are regarding guns in the US, so I wont get into that, far to political, but I just want to comment on his interviewing and how brave he is when asking his questions.
Now that we've shot nearly 80% of our film I can say interviewing is a hard technique to learn, there are so many variables when planning an interview it seems almost impossible to actually see your plan through and get the kind of information you need for your film. It must be twice as hard extracting that information when all of your contributors are directly linked to such horrific events such as public shootings. However Moore seems to develop such a rapport with his contributors that they seem so willing to reveal such personal information, but when, for example, he speaks to someone like Charlton Heston of the NRA he isn't afraid to ask serious questions and put the interviewee under the spotlight. Its a technique that seems to have created a bit of debate whether his tactics are morally correct or not but again that's to be discussed another time.
I think this kind of documentary film making requires a special something from it's creator and the subject does need to be a very personal issue. These kinds of films would not be so interesting if the presenter was passive, or simply being educated by what the contributors present throughout the film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)