Daniel Powter - Bad Day

dir: marc webber.

horrible, horrible song. But one of the nicest, fuzziest videos I've seen in a while.

A strong story with a gorgeous mural in the subway being the interplay between two characters who live similar lives but who never meet.

(Yes, I made my film even before I was aware of this clip. Jung's collective unconscious to blame again.)

Brilliant piece of narrative for a less-than-average song. Compare with previous two.

Counting Crows - American Girls

dir: marc webber

case in point (see previous post)

Very beautifully shot with very beautiful people that serves the purpose of the song, but doesn't do much more than that. Can't argue with the snappy editing and stylish visuals. And the pretty women. Great direction and choreography. And the pretty women.

No wonder this became a coke ad soon after.

Compare with previous and next post.

P.S. Universal has limited video embedding for this song, so if it says the video's unavailable, just go straight to youtube at this address: www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfBshRZcrXU

Weezer - Perfect Situation

dir: Marc Webber

Marc Webber makes expensive music videos for expensive people and often (not always) rises above the cookie-cutter moulds by telling an empathetic narrative.

The very lovely Elisha Cuthbert stars as the faux ex-lead vocalise of 'Weeze'

5 cans of 16mm film.

I checked my fridge and realised that I still have several cans of 16mm film leftover from last year's film.

My options are to sell the film, or write something quick and fast, and shoot that for november or december's film.

why not? it's my last year in melbourne. if i don't do it now, i'd probably regret it.

struggling with the third film.

it's already May and I'm still struggling with the last film of the '3films' trilogy that is scheduled to shoot in August, September, and October.

I know what it's about, and I know how it'll look, and I know what themes I want to tackle, but I still haven't got a narrative.

It's one of those things where I know I just need to keep doing other stuff and BE INSPIRED but it's hard when the clock's ticking away at the back of my head.

anyway, back to work. May's film is shooting this week. A documentary about designers. Meeting with my production manager tomorrow.

(And Elise has passed me a link to this, which might be useful.
http://www.ranterstheatre.com/productions.html)

Future of film school

Fom Crikey, Tuesday, 29 April 2008
A Canberra arts watcher writes:

The 2020 summit had one group thinking up big creative ideas to build a big creative Australia.

"Aim to double creative output by 2020" they said, and "link the creative arts and education".

A PowerPoint prepared for summiteers beforehand includes a graph showing a massive rise in spending on Australian feature films but notes "consistent success has not accompanied this growth". It's a coy way of saying the box office has been tragic, and most of us have been unimpressed and uninterested in Australian films.

Having twice as much to be disappointed in doesn't seem such a big, clever idea. Instead we should rethink the value we attach to feature films and the expensive machinery we use to train people and to make them. For example, some easy money for arts education in schools can be found at the Australian Film Television and Radio School (AFTRS).

It has an annual budget of $20 million and a yearly student intake of little more than 50. The costs are easy to see. We're spending nearly $400,000 each on a tiny clique. What is hard to see is real benefit for taxpayers.

Maybe the School was relevant when films needed equipment beyond the reach of an ordinary punter. The world has changed but the school has not. Now there are many ways to learn to tell stories with pictures. Equipment is cheap and accessible. Avenues like Tropfest and YouTube can start careers, even aiming at feature film, without a government-funded short film.

Australian feature films are a cost to the wider economy, impossible without subsidy, and make a relatively small contribution to contemporary Australian culture. A dispassionate cost-benefit analysis would reallocate most money spent on them to cultural activities with more impact. Make television. Give some more to the ABC. Double the budget for performing arts. If it's really worth $20million a year to have a special school for visual story telling, put the priority on television, where the business is, or on digital.

The future lies with digital technology, the interactive and the adventurous, with games and stories told using modern tools. LonelyGirl15 was a watershed as much as Pamela was.

AFTRS sits like Miss Haversham with the windows closed, rereading 1950s issues of Cahiers du Cinema, dreaming of auteurs that might have been. It has a few digerati who struggle to open the curtains, but at its core the School is still a shrine to the idea of the art house feature film. There are departments for producing, directing, editing, cinematography, screenwriting, design and sound. Then there's just one for television, and one for "digital media".

It has always been a place where idealist film-makers turned teachers passed on to captive acolytes not only their craft skills but also the true faiths of their guilds, replaying among themselves obscure disputes over the rights of directors, the limits of a producer's authority, and whether documentary actually is really important.

Now it's a horse and carriage school after the Model T.

The feature film clergy, both inside the school and outside, have welcomed the appointment of Sandra Levy as the new director like Catholics celebrating the accession of Queen Mary. But broader forces of change cannot be resisted forever. Like the Elizabethans, a fresh vision and a golden age may be only around the corner.

Getting rid of the clergy and doing something smarter with the $20 million might bring it closer.

My off-the-cuff, didn't think before i spoke, reply (that probably needs some editing but i'm too lazy):

can't disagree nor agree entirely.

most (arguably) esteemed/olde-and-renowned film schools anywhere on this planet need to rethink filmmaking for the future, not just AFTRS. TV isn't the future (in fact, it's also arguable that there are less local programmes that make it overseas thann local films.) - the internet's probably our best bet.

but it's not just that. for the perceived 'international success' that the writer seems to be rooting for, i'd argue that 'filmmaking' need to be approached far more holistically than the way it is taught now. there are clear cross-disciplinary approaches to motion-picture storytelling that encompasses animation, video-gaming narratives, and user-created-content-internet-youtube-shite.

i'm frustrated with how lines are constantly being drawn in the industry between TV studio production, film production, and animation; and how storytelling in video-games are structurally similar to conventional 'cinema', but no one seems to like acknowledging that.

the problem isn't that we're spending money on expensive equipment - it's on the education of how stories are told. the fundamentals. across all them disciplines. it doesn't matter if we give more money to the ABC or to TV if 'filmschool' graduates still have lecturers who quote from the french cahiers and champion 'the idea of the art house feature film'

so what film schools should do, in my humble opinion, is to make every potential storyteller go through FUNDAMENTAL storytelling core subjects, the same way design cores are taught to potential designers in design schools - before they choose to specialise in a field (or choose to be inter-disciplinary, if they so desire).

and at the same time, employ sessional educators from across the industry. i agree that there shouldn't be inside, stodgy lecturer-cliques in film schools - they age in thinking along with the school. sure, we need someone to teach us film literacy... but what about art literacy? animation literacy? video-game literacy? literary literacy?

it's a changing world. film is just a means to an end.

April's film.

Was supposed to be an animation, for which i've some conceptual work prepared for.

The dicky thing is that I'm already so far behind some of my other work, and it's already mid april so i'm not sure whether or not i've the time to prepare something in two weeks, whilst juggling my other commitments.

(stupid wisdom teeth removal threw me into a daze for two weeks.)

So the big question is, should I revisit my 16mm film from last year, and finish the thing once and for all? (am i emotionally and mentally prepared to trough through the olde thing again? after all, the actors are waiting for a final print.)

or should i still make that animation? whilst juggling two freelance assignments, preparation for May's film, and preparation for October/November's film? (alongside finishing my movie-watching quota of the month, and practising the guitar so that i can remix the NIN ghosts songs.)

or, as my housemate said, should i work on a short 30s TVC with the two weeks that i have left; or spend time preparing for it now while juggling my olde film?

Decisions.

The Genesis.

It began with an idea for five short films based around the 5 human senses. That was an exercise I started end of last year when I wanted to delve a little more into very-short narrative fiction. I was also in a little funk, and a quite burnt out from a huge project last year. 

I'd realised a great deal of my time last year was spent in development, and too little in production. For a person who was about to graduate from film school, there really wasn't alot under my belt. All you film school grads can probably attest to this - you'd be lucky if you came out of film school with 2 -3 films shot on 16mm. 

Maybe it's just me, but if I dedicate myself to just one project, I'd spend more time neurotising over it than actually developing it. I realise that the longer I spend on one project, the more over-developed it gets, and the more passion I lose for it.

My journal at that point was full of scrambled little ideas that were more 'moments' than 'stories' - but there were five that could thematically be wrapped around the five senses. It seemed to fit nicely and I was in a mood where I wanted to get films out quickly and practice my directing chops, than to spend too much time in development.

At the end of three weeks, I walked away with 2 x 2min films. ('Taste', and 'Smell', both tentatively named.) They were both successful in varying degrees, but it proved to be a much more enjoyable experience than directing one large short-film. And it brought confidence back in my work and convinced me that the exercise was worthwhile.

I'd realised that the less precious I were about my ideas, the less I obsessed over them, and the more fun I have on set and in post. Sure, most of these films might not win awards at festivals, but I know that I will have walked away from this, at the very least, a well-practised storyteller.

That was last year.

I've taken a break in Jan and Feb, given myself a sabbatical where I did nothing but watch films and be inspired. (one of my resolutions for this year is to watch 200 films. I'm up to 50 now.)

It's now March, and the third film is almost wrapped. So far so good.