And now we begin.

Week 2 is the first week that our group has the camera to actually film something. So Sam and I go film a bunch of stuff after we sign in. The film we get is actually really funny material. Out on this sweet cliff, perfect scenery, we have some sweet wide-shots. We film close to 30 minutes of improv and other shots. and then go meet up with the girls to get some more stuff done.

Unfortunately..................

There's no sound on the 30 minutes we just filmed. CRAP!
So we all get really pissed and are frustrated. we need to do something to get everyting done... soo... NEW PLAN for the film! This frustrates everyone. As it should.

The group starts to become split between guys and girls. I try to be a mediator. im not completely successful. We leave the group with a plan to film everything during the "make-up shot" time. Everyone is frustrated, but at least somewhat ok with the plan of things....

Our group is dysfunctional. haha. We are good at coming up with new plans on the whim though.

Week One of FILMING!!!

Week one. we find out that we have the genre "COMEDY". Crap.. comedy... in my eyes this is the hardest genre to pull off. There are so many things that i think are hilarious and other people think that i am dumb for laughing at stuff like it. We began in my group to brainstorm what ideas we wanted to do.

We thought about funny movies... will ferrell... superbad... pineapple express... etc... there are a lot of different movies to model our film off of (to some extent). There are a lot of ideas that we came up with...

First one was hangover themed. We love that movie!!! but we don't want to do something that has already been done...
Another idea: a film about the first days of college. With mom's and dad's running around... SOS people being annoying.. awkward moments with roommates... and mom and dad's speeches as they say goodbye to their baby. This film could be good. we all like this idea, it seems feasible to pull it off with no money and no time.

We leave all in good moods, as we feel like we know what we are doing.

Now we wait for the camera... muahahahaha

Adaptation

What a freaking weird slash good movie. Adaptation, featuring Nick Cage. An adaptation of a screen play.

It was a good movie that talked about how a book could never be formed into a movie because it lacked action and intensity. The movie was good though, it kept me watching throughout the movie.

I particularly liked how Nicholas Cage's character was going crazy trying to get it all to work and eventually ended up following his brother's advice and seeing a screenplay guru. When he finally starts writing everything he ended up changing everything from the original to make it into something viewable. Which was against everything he planned on doing at the beginning. He eventually went against everything he planned on doing. Instead of keeping the film of the book as it was written, he had to add action and everything to make it into a film people would go watch.

The poor writer had her book completely demolished. The sex and everything that started to creep into the movie also symbolizes how the book was changed. The action made the movie good though!!! at least in my book! A movie about flowers would suck. no doubt in my mind it would suck. But a movie about sex and affairs and deaths is always entertaining.

There should be more movies like this... o wait.

Commercial

Spring break has felt like a small commercial in my dramatic movie of a life.

But the last class we had, we started off by watching the film "The Last Summer" which was a thesis movie by Cory Womack. The film by Cory shed a little light on how much work goes into a small movie. He said that he has spent the past semester just on editing. I heard that and stepped back (figuratively). That was much more time than i actually expected that he put into it. I thought, only 16 minutes and it took a semester of editing??

In any case, if that was a lot of time (seeing how it is his thesis) it was still a little eye opening to see a peer go through everything.

After the short film, we looked into the effect that editing has on a movie. We watched videos on youtube that took a horror film and a family film and switched the genres completely in the trailer. "The Shining" a horror film, which i have watched in one sitting, is a terrifying movie. To turn this into a family film is a stretch, but the editing turned it to a believable family film. When someone next to me asked, "Is "The Shining" a scary movie?" I laughed, but then realized how effective the "happy trailer" actually was. I knew that editing was important, but it can make a film much scarier if it is a horror film.

To finish the class off, we split into our groups and talked about of film project. I won't go into detail here, so that it can be fresh when people actually view it, but i will say that our film has changed quite a bit from our first idea. We plan on having a small number of people actually on set during the filming as group 2 gave us advice on the amount of people that actually need to be present.

As the filming process of our short film project is getting closer, i am gaining confidence on how it is going to come together. Hopefully people will think that it is funnier than we try to make it and find something especially funny in it.

Until next week. Same website, same webtime, same yea...

This spring break really did go by fast too.

Iceland Schmiceland

"The Player" is the movie we watched in the Appreciating Film class this week. A movie about a screen-writer who has to judge every script that he sees on whether it is good enough to be one of the 12 movies his studio can do. The problem is that he is very rude most of the time, and for the thousands that he discards, the original writers are not happy. As the movie proceeds through, he slowly loses control of himself, and plunges into a kind of insanity.

The movie gave me completely mixed feelings... It is a noir film so that there isn't really a happy ending, but the ending just gave me the weirdest feeling. The woman i fell in love with, but the man... i wasn't very happy with. The man was a d-bag. Thats basically exactly how i feel about him. I feel like the woman has done nothing wrong, but the man is an aweful person. The contrast of the two love birds is the biggest reason as to why i feel that i am happy and upset at the same time with the ending. It is very wrong that he got away with the murder, and even though he wasn't married to his secretary girl - he still treated her like a dog.

I believe that he got worked up over the death threats...(((((SPPOILLLERRR))))) i wonder what happened to the real writer of the death threats... I wouldn't have gotten as crazy as he became. I would freak out a little bit, but i would not go nuts. One thing i would like to say is that i thought the detective that was spying on him was actually the crazy writer who wanted to kill the script writer who discarded his story.

I would like to say again, that i love the icelandic goddess in this movie.
The plot line was very good through the movie, kept me very interested throughout. Quite a few turns to keep me focused. I would watch it again, not just to see my icelandic goddess, but to catch small things that i feel i missed. The house at the end was pretty awesome by the way

Is the movie business really heartless? (SPOILER!)

I am thinking about the final scene of the movie we watched this week. The movie was "Blow Out" and the scream that was used for making a movie was the controversial subject. I don't think that it was heartless for using the woman's scream in the movie after what happened to her. He obviously showed that he cared about her by his expression when watching the scene involving the scream play through. I don't exactly know what i would do if i were in his shoes, but i don't think that people should immediately say that he is heartless and wrong for using her scream in the film he was working on. Is it completely permissable to use her scream? no. Is it completely heartless? depends on his use of it, and his mindset when using it.

To the plotline. The basic theme for this movie (SPOILER!!!!) is about political corruption. The lengths that people go through to ruin a man's attempt at becoming a public official are gigantic. People also using other people to get what they want (money 99% of the time) is something chimed on throughout the movie. There are definitely heartless people out there in the world (and some mindless psychos). I would like to believe the world is a great and faultless place, but it's impossible to be that way with the way people think and act. Selfishness. That is the main catalyst for the actions of people who perform these type of acts... If people were not selfish, the world would be an amazing place. It's kind of depressing. People are selfish, but I don't think we should jump to assume that people are heartless. Selfishness and heartlessness (to me) are two different things. Selfishness comes first, but there is a gap between the two. Heartlessness is much worse than just being selfish, not to say that being selfish is ok by any means. This is getting me upset. I am gonna take a 15 min break to relax.

Ok i'm back. Selfishness is the root of the actions of almost every actor in the movie (part from John Travolta and the woman whose name is alluding me at the moment). This movie (Blow Out) does shine a light on how selfish people can be. Not only selfishness but also how naive people can be. People were walking 10 feet from a woman getting pushed around by a creepy man, yet didn't notice it.

I liked this movie. I get to the point where i can't focus on the worksheet in front of me, and get too into the plot and action of a movie to do the work and see the transitions and techniques used throughout the movie. One scene that i did take notice of, was when the main woman was being forced upon by what was her friend who was also her partner. The camera kept rolling from being eye level, to moving to be directly overhead the two actors, which then zoomed out to reveal the whole scene. I thought that the scene was really creative and i wouldn't mind trying to use that type of technique in our short film.


That's that. Peace people.

p.s. Don't be selfish. seriously, it's not cool.

I bet i can make you laugh

So here we go! We have officially been introduced to our short movie project. I have been assigned to a group that consists of four other people. Our project must be somewhere between three to five minutes long. We have also been assigned to do the genre "Comedy". I have offered to be the camera man for the film, which does not mean that i only do the camera but i also get to do acting and contribute to many other factors.

Personally i think comedy may be the hardest genre to pull off successfully. Suspense, romance, action, those are all easy to do with the right story. Comedy just feels different. Not everyone enjoys every comedy out there. I love Dumb and Dumber. I love any movie by Will Ferrell. but other people don't. I feel like these other people are in our class too.

When ideas were being thrown around the group, i unfortunately was outside playing with the camera. So now i am going to brainstorm on here, and hopefully some of my ideas can still be considered :). I think comedy and i think of stupid stuff. Seth Rogen is the first name that i think of. Followed by adam sandler. will ferrell also makes that list. I think that people who enjoy comedy are intereseted in vulgar and stupid scenes. For a major plot line, I think that we will have to do something towards a romantic comedy. As much as i don't know if that is something that i want to lean towards, i think it may be the only thing completely attainable. I think that the people that we have, 3 girls and 2 guys, the two guys have to act like fools for most of the movie, and the girls have to be completely out of the reach of the guys. I don't know how easy this will be, probably not easy at all. With comedy, its really easy to do things that aren't funny. Looking at different movies outtakes, improvisation is the biggest factor in making a movie hilarious. It will be hard to write a script that is funny.

Improvisation. I think it makes any movie great. The funniest actors don't just act funny, they have to be funny people outside of the movie screen. With our group we will have to improvisate (is that the word?) -do improvisation- a lot. It will come together eventually, and it will be either hilarious to everyone, hilarious to only our group, or embarrassing to watch.

In the end, i just want people to laugh at our movie while we still implement as many of the techniques we have learned in class over the past couple weeks. I think we have got this in the bag.

I can hang on a lamppost too!

"An oldie but a goodie"

We watched "Singing in the Rain". For those of you like me, its a musical created in the 1950s based on the 1920s. The main theme is about the movie business in the wake of the shift from silent films to sound. The main actor is Gene Kelly, sweet name. Gene is a BIG POPULAR silent film actor, Don Lockwood who is slowly able to make the shift to sound, while his on-screen love, off-screen nuisance, Lina Lamont (Debbie Reynolds) is having a lot of trouble making the transition to sound. Kathy is the female protagonist who is a dancer trying to make it big on the theater stage, who becomes a big role in the film.

Enough of background, lets get into the movie. Being a musical it is extremely cheesey throughout, but what musical isn't?! The main feature in all musicals is of course the sound. The sound was pretty great throughout the film, and i did not notice a spot where there was a mess-up. There were scenes where the tap-dancers would be dancing and the tapping noise would have to be pre-recorded because it would be impossible to catch the sound of the taps in the middle of the acting and singing. The songs and dances were creative and fun to watch (entertaining!). Of course the infamous "singing in the rain" scene was amazing to say the least. The creation of a street so that the water will pool in one spot so that Gene may jump into the puddle in the middle of his dance scene is pretty big attention to detail. Also, being told that the street was created at a half circle around the camera is pretty impressive, because i did not notice that it was curved throughout the entire dance number.

Let's begin to speak about the breakthrough from silent to sound. As portrayed in the movie of course!
Kathy's line "if you have scene one, you have seen them all" is perfect. The whole scene where she bashes the silent movie business and actors is actually exactly what i would think (but never say to someone especially if they were a silent film star). Films from that period of time were all just changing an expression on their face, and having words go on the screen, BORING! Sound though, wow. i like sound. It was a huge innovation, the scene with the man showcasing the new type of film where he is speaking to the party, and the woman says "come out from behind the screen!" I think it shows how shocking it was for people who had never heard a film. The sound did make silent films look completely obsolete, and also pretty dull.

The movie as a whole was pretty good, i am not a big fan of musicals, but it did keep me interested for the most part.
Milk in the rain? That is innovative for that time, but come on... i dont want half and half raining on me.

Rule of thirds? Triumvirant?!

As there is snow all around, everything is bright. I need my stunna shades any time i go outside. Makes me think about lighting. I think that lighting effects are the most attainable techniques that we talked about. Lighting is definitely a huge factor as to how a movie is felt by the viewer. Dark movies obviously create a more scary of a movie, while bright movies with a lot of color give a happier tone. Most of the effects, backlighting, key light, are much easier to handle when compared to tricks with a camera. After all, lights are the easiest tool to get when it comes to making a small extremely low budget film.

The camera tricks, will most likely take a little bit more practice to fully understand when and where to use them. The "holy trinity of film" has tremendous power in how the film comes together. The aperture, shutter speed, and ISO all add a different effect to a scene, and using them all together in the appropriate way is a task in itself, but can be a defining factor in how great a film looks. The aperture is what allows the constant light in, by constant i mean that it does not shut or close. The wider the aperture is, the more light can get to the sensor chip inside the camera. The shutter speed closes a rapid number of times per second, the smaller the number, the more light is allowed in, the more it shuts in a second, the less light. finally, ISO controls how sensitive the camera is to light that is allowed in. These three factors all contribute a great deal to the look of the film, while two factors could be spot on, if one is off, the film may look out of focus or a little too bright or dark.

The different shots (wide, close up, long) all i believe are able to be done, and i would like to put as many different shots in our film as possible without making it too cluttered. I particularly liked the scenes in Citizen Kane where three different depths of shot were all still in focus. As far as the rule of thirds is concerned, i want to stretch it a little. Maybe go outside the rule a little, not too much, i don't want to crush the rule, but more of bend it. Nose room and head room i would like to stretch a little also now that i think about it. OOO my favorite shot that i saw in class is when from a film where a woman walks away from the conversation to answer the phone, and instead of the camera following her to the room, we watch her walk down the hall, sit on the bed and answer the phone. The only thing is, we don't see the front half of her body, and the first instinct is to lean to the right to see around the door frame. Such an amazing shot!!! If i could have a shot half as amazing as that one, then i think i wil be happy with the whole film!

On a different note. How about those super bowl commercials! and the saints too i guess!

My favorite super bowl commercial of all time is the one second commercial that a beer company did last year. Miller light i think. Great commercial.

Peace people, enjoy the snow while its still around here in C-way

HERE WE GO!

First of all, the movie was very interesting. I thought the woman was creepy. enough about that.

Now, I want to talk about whether or not to tell the woman that she is past her prime. I believe that it is a friend's duty to tell someone the truth. Norma Desmond may have been a famous actress, but people have to face the facts at some point. If i were a close enough friend to Norma, i would have told her the deal. Her life was centered around the fact that she is the center of attention, when she simply is not all she thinks she is. It's pitiful. I don't blame the director for not busting her bubble, but i blame Max for almost everything. 

Joe, should have told her, was put in a horrible spot. He picked the WORST house to hide out in. That sucks to get stuck there. I think that he did actually get trapped, Norma "toy'ed" with his emotions and coerced him into staying. Poor guy. Ended up losing his life. I would like to say that Norma is a great shot with a pistol. Three shots. All of them hit. Not to mention she held the gun with her left hand. Better than i could do. Norma is crazy though. 

All of this could have been avoided a long time ago, just by simply telling Norma that she is past her prime. Joe should have gone with Betty, because she is a better person. Even if she is engaged with a different guy, she is still better than Norma. 

I was overall frustrated with the movie, well, more of just the story-line. Movie was good. The scene looking up from the bottom of the pool was a great picture. 

Blip Blip

Watching the clips about editing in the LotR and Star Wars gives me a whole new perspective to the extent of work that goes into making these huge movies. I used to think as to why on earth it took so long to make movies. Now I know. Seeing how many different groups of people there are on a staff that spend all of their time editing and doing things behind the scenes its amazing how much wok they put into everything and how many things need to be done by other people.

I loved how the boom stick guy talked about how his arms would go numb from holding the boom for so long. The behind the scenes portion about the sound effects was great, and i liked how they go through so many different sounds to get the perfect one. Some of the sounds they got i wasn't prepared to hear about, but it made a ferocious sound in the end.

To the camera angles. The movies today have become very creative in getting the best view possible. A lot of it has to do with the amount of money they are able to put into everything, but directors are thinking about every little detail to make it perfect. Being able to do everything in front of a green screen and know that in the end it will look realistic is completely amazing. The technology and skills of the people behind it is astonishing.

Lastly, the extent of work that the director and editors go through together was new to me. I had always assumed that directors just did on set stuff and other than that nothing. There's a lot of stuff that a director actually goes through to make a movie. I like the storyboards that the directors make to visualize what they want to see in the film. Even if they are not exactly what is going to end up in the scene, the director is still able to get bigger and better ideas.

On a different note, i heard that the black circle that shows up on the screen for half a second at movie theaters during movies is because of editing. Maybe it is just putting everything together .... idk. just thought someone would know

As the first day of Film Class goes. I am starting to get the sense of how much a movie amateur i really am. I always enjoyed movies, always watched movies. I never really appreciated the movies though. Looking where we came from, with the moving horse, to the day in the life of a fireman. There's a lot of room in between where movies have changed. The fact that a woman ran out of the theater made me laugh, and i only wondered what she would have done if 3d movies came out back then. Thinking about why it makes me laugh, is why i feel like i am naive to the concept of appreciating movies. I never knew what the first movies were like, besides the lack of color.

Seeing the older clips and the scenes that revolutionized the theory behind the theater was a different approach to the subject. Learning about the magic trick way to shoot a clip, as simple as it sounds today i never fully thought about how crazy it was for the time. It really is humbling to find out how much I am going to actually learn in a class that i thought i knew quite a bit about in the first place.

It never clicked in my head what it was like before camera angles were taken into full usage. How the simple view change, altered movie making and theater completely. It really goes to show how most people see movies as pure entertainment, when all they see is the movie and themes, when there is so much detail put into everything that is shown on the screen. Watching Avatar the first time, i loved the plot and action. Watching it the second time, I could focus on some of the smaller things that i was unable to notice the first. Like how realistic the plants looked when he hit it and it shrunk to a miniscule size. How in depth the scenes were, even if it is green screen at times. Speaking of.. the green screen is an amazing piece of work in itself. But back on topic, the details that you dont think about the first time, and slowly begin to notice as you watch more and more, are some things that I have been oblivious to when watching most movies, and usually have taken it all for granted.

This being my first blog and first ever film class of any sort, i am excited to see what i learn.