Indie Film LA - Directors

"Polk County" - Directed by Kenny Vathauer

2008-04-07T14:38:00.000-07:00

"Polk County" is an independent horror film currently in production, directed by Kenny Vathauer.

Shot in Florida and North Carolina, Polk County is a full length horror flick taking place in the backwoods of America. It centers around a group of townies and their quest to find the American dream on a weekend getaway trip.

Watch the TEASER TRAILER for Polk Country here

Featuring
Tim Hicks
Chris Evans
Frank DiGiovanna
Andria Kluckman
Tim Benedix
Paul Futo
Eric Base
Kyle Harris

Directed by Kenny Vathauer

Contact: vat21@bellsouth.net
Website: http://polkcountymovie.tripod.com

Avoid Rookie Directing Mistakes

2008-03-10T05:57:00.000-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

On many indie films I've worked on, I've felt and heard the groans and moans of an experienced cast and crew being led by a first-time director. It's frustrating to have more knowledge, wisdom, and experience than your leader, especially when he's clearly in over his head. Some people even refuse to work with a first-timer. The veteran actor, Michael Caine, has said in interviews that he will never be in someone's first film.

Rookie directing usually takes time to iron out. After a few shorts and especially a feature (directing a feature is worth more than 10 years in any film school), you learn and grow and develop a rhythm. You actually start to know what you're doing!

But it doesn't have to take so long. By avoiding a few basic first-timer mistakes, you can get a head start on running a professional set, and your people will have the utmost confidence in you and your vision.

KNOW WHAT YOU WANT

This is the first and perhaps biggest mistake greenhorn directors make. I can't count how many times I've heard a D.P. or a sound mixer mutter the dreaded words, "The guy doesn't know what he #@&! wants."

Even when there is a shot list, a shot plot, and detailed storyboards, many new directors second guess themselves with each scene. Resist the temptation to take time-outs to rethink your shots. A couple of times here and there, no problem, but if you're not careful, you'll spend way too much time on scenes that you had nailed in your head the night before. Remember your vision and stick to it. But, at the same time...

BE OPEN TO INPUT

Don't be so in love with that perfect shot that you miss golden opportunities that can, and will, appear right in front of you. No matter how perfect you designed a scene, there's something about being there, on set, with your actors ready, that can make magic. It can be something unique at the location, suggestions from your department heads, or insight on a character from the actor portraying him. Keep your ears and your mind open.

DON'T MICRO-DIRECT

It's painful to watch someone direct their actors as if they were robots. Respect them as artists. Avoid telling them to "Enter the room slowly, turn right at the sofa, and keep your head low, so it's in frame." The actor should only be concerned with their performance, not whether or not the boom just above them at Position Two. Let your crew worry about those kinds of things.

Direct your actors through their characters and their motivations. Instead of telling them to "Walk five steps, pause, and look angry," remind them why their character is here in the first place. Relate to them through the story, and then allow their training as an actor to shine through. Certain key lines must be adhered to, of course, but overall, you want natural delivery over precise dictation.

Bruce Willis is known to slightly alter his dialogue constantly. He's also famous for being able to convincingly delivery any line in any situation, even in otherwise over-the-top scenarios. This is a gift that the director must not squash. Which brings us to...

ALLOW ACTORS THEIR FREEDOM

First, give them freedom of movement on camera. You'll want to give them marks and rehearse blocking, but don't clue them in on where the frame starts and ends, or how the dolly can't track them if they walk too fast. Let them perform in however manner they see it best, and then tweak it afterward. This is especially helpful during a quick rehearsal right before rolling camera.

Second, allow them the freedom to use whatever methods they're comfortable with. I've directed actors that use opposite acting techniques. One will be emotional, he will "feel" his role by relating it to something in his own life, while the other may be a strict craftsman, who has five different "angers" and four different "sads." To force one actor to comply with the other's method is to invite wooden, flubbed performances. Let them breathe as they've been trained, and you will see magic happen. To go with that...

BE POSITIVE WITH YOUR TALENT

When tweaking the actors' performances, say things like, "That was good, but let's try it this way," or "I liked your entrance, now let's talk about your exit." You want to cushion your critique with a little praise.

Don't ever blurt out, "That was horrible!" (not even as a joke, you will come to learn). To do so would be to take their all their preparation and shove it in the toilet. Their perception of the story and their character will be shot, leaving them back at Square One. Veteran actors will suddenly shut down and phone in their performance, while younger actors will suddenly be all over the map with their delivery, trying hard to please you (and not doing so).

Critique them through positive reinforcement. Tweak what's there, instead of erasing it and starting from scratch, while the camera rolls. And whatever your gripes may be...

DON'T VENT TO THE CAST OR CREW

People make mistakes. Actors will stumble with their dialogue. Caterers will be late. One of your Grips will turn out to have no prior experience. Sometimes people just don't get along. When you find that someone is not quite working out, keep that news limited to yourself and your 1st A.D.

I've seen it happen many times: Everyone is optimistic, ready to make this film as best they can (it always starts that way). Then a rookie director starts bad-mouthing an actor, or venting about how the producer is a jerk, or ranting about how the D.P. is difficult. What happpens? The crew suddenly starts to talk trash about their own frustrations. Disaster is imminent.

Know that everyone working on your film takes their level of professionalism directly from you. If you care 50%, that's precisely how much they will care. If you have no problem gossiping about the lead actress, they will have no problem gossiping about you. Keep it pro. Save the angry outbursts and ranting for later. Better still, flush them away for good.

CHOOSE A GOOD 1ST A.D. AND TRUST HIM

Once production starts, the director should only be concerned with the actors and their performances. Ideally, everything else should be completely planned out and laid in the hands of your Assistant Director. It's his or her job to order PA's around, to nag the D.P. about the time, to worry about whether craft services is late, and to make last-minute decisions when a crisis pops up. If you let yourself be distracted by such petty things, you are cheating yourself, your cast, and ultimately your movie.

Hire a good (i.e. experienced) 1st A.D. and delegate all non-creative tasks to him. He, in turn, will make sure that the crew all perform their respective jobs. His 2nd A.D. will ensure that the cast is provided for, that they are prepped for the following day, and that they are in make-up in time for their scenes.

SHOOT FOR FILM - EVEN IF IT'S VIDEO

Finally, keep your take ratio and daily page count as low as possible. I know what you're thinking, this is indie film land, and you're planning on shooting video. Forget that you're shooting HD and videotape is cheap. Direct your movie as if your were burning expensive 35mm film with every shot. Not only will this reinforce that you know what you want, but it will help keep you on time and under budget, and prepare you for the day you do decide to go with film.

Many new directors, armed with an HD camera, will shoot and shoot and shoot each set-up into the ground, often with dozens of set-ups for each scene. This may work for David Fincher, who famously shoots infinite takes, or Robert Rodriguez, who never cuts until the camera rolls out, but you are a new indie filmmaker working on your first feature. Use discipline. Keep your ratio to around five takes per set-up. If the shot is simple (two actors talking a page over coffee), make it two or three takes tops.

Page count is also critical, no matter what media you're shooting on. Try to keep it to around five pages a day, max. If you're shooting more than that, you are increasing the odds that you will fall behind schedule. For most, it means shots get lost, days get added and, in extreme cases, entire scenes get slashed.

There are countless books on directing, and I recommend grabbing a couple for study. However, if you only follow the above advice, you'll already be ahead of most people attempting to make their directorial debut, and no one need know that you are just starting out.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

Robert Rodriguez's 10-Minute Film School

2008-02-27T10:07:00.001-08:00

A famous film-maker a while back said something about "Everything you need to know about film you can learn in a week." He was being generous. You can learn it in 10 minutes...

The Poor Man's Steadicam

2008-02-27T09:45:00.000-08:00

Johnny Chung Lee shows you how to build your own Steadicam for $14. You can also pay him to make one for you. Good for small consumer camcorders (smaller than a Canon XL). IndieFilmLA has tried this homemade design, and it really does work well... [continue]

CloseUp: Ron White

2007-10-20T15:02:00.000-07:00

- Graduating NYU film student

- First student film was licensed for international broadcast by Mini Movie

- Second film "Hipsters" is in the final stages of post

- In pre production for thesis film which will be a feature. (finished first draft) shooting in April

"I think that writing a feature is harder than anything else I've done so far as a writer/director. I've written a handful of shorts and those were hard and extremely delicate pages to work with. But filling in 90 pages is not the same. You still write dialogue that you think is good and you constantly analyze it and have doubts and what not, but story is the key to a feature. Shorts have the ability to just have a good hook or a great scene that lasts long enough to have a beginning, middle, and end, but a feature is story with so many more levels of texture and structure that it's a lonely road to take even with all the support and feedback from ones you trust.

See more of Ron's work at his filmmaking website http://web.mac.com/rcw232.

Interview with '300' director Zack Snyder

2007-08-28T22:39:00.000-07:00

Is director Zack Snyder the next Bryan Singer? Will he become the new go-to guy for megabudget comic book adaptations?

Warner Bros. is so excited about 300, Snyder's adaptation of Frank Miller's Greek-history-as-superhero tale, that they handed him the keys to Alan Moore's Watchmen, another sacred text for comics fans... [continue]

Discussion: The Career of Mel Gibson

2007-07-24T22:44:00.002-07:00

Mort and Richard discuss the filmmaking career of Mel Gibson. Clip from "Cinema Scene Discussions," Episode 64.

Basic Lighting Techniques for Low-Budgets Films

2007-07-24T22:44:00.001-07:00

Derek Cole discusses basic lighting techniques for low-budget feature or short films. From CRC Entertainment.

Blocking a Scene

2007-07-24T22:43:00.000-07:00

By Peter D. Marshall

When I was a Second AD (many, many years ago) I learned a valuable lesson from a dolly grip on how a film set works. Very simply, every film shoot is divided into four parts:

1) Block - determining where the actors will be on the set and the first camera position
2) Light - time for the DOP to light the set and position the camera for the first shot
3) Rehearse - camera rehearsal of the first set-up with the actors and crew
4) Shoot - shooting the first scene (then repeat the process)

Blocking is the first, and most crucial, aspect of this 4-part sequence. When you first start directing, blocking a scene can be one of the hardest - and most embarrassing - parts of your job. Get it wrong here, and you could waste valuable shooting time trying to get out of the mess you created!

a) Director Prep - Before you step onto any film set, you need to first do your homework on Script and Character Analysis. In the last two articles, we talked about Understanding the Script (what the story is about; the themes; the story points) and Character Development and Analysis (the development and objectives of the characters).

b) Blocking a Dramatic Scene - The first thing I do when the actors arrive for a blocking is to get them in a group and read the scene: no moving, no "acting" - just reading the scene through. This makes sure everyone is on the "same page". (Sometimes actors do not have revisions and this is a good time to find that out.) Also, by reading together, the actors start to feed off each other - and you get to watch the process.

After the actors read the scene, I ask them to show me what they want to do. I just step back and let them go for it. If it is a set no one has been in before, I take a few moments to discuss the physical lay out of the room - the door an actor will come through; a window they can walk up to; which desk they can sit at etc.

The actors then begin their first walk through - they read the scene and walk around the set to get a feel of what they want to do and where they want to be. During this initial blocking, I try not to make any suggestions to the actors - it is important that they show me what they have in mind. Remember, this is the first time the actors have been together on the set and they need their time to explore. As you watch the actors, you get a feel for what they want to do, where they want to go and how they are relating to each other.

On the next blocking, you begin to make your changes. Maybe you want an actor to sit in a chair by the window instead of on the couch; you ask an actor if it would be okay to pace beside an actor and not in front of him so you can save a set-up; you make a suggestion to an actor to move across the room instead of standing by the door etc.

Once you have discussed the scene, and everyone agrees with the suggestions, the actors do it again. This time, you begin to figure out your camera placement based on their movement and what you first had in mind. As the actors go through the scene, you walk around them looking at all your camera positions. Usually the DOP is with you to discuss camera set-ups and positions. This is also a time where you can stop-and-start the actors - move them around to get a better background. During this blocking, a camera assistant will place marks on the floor whenever the actors stop.

When everyone is satisfied, the actors leave and you discuss the first set-up in more detail with the DOP and the camera operator. When the DOP begins to light, you go over all your set-ups with the First AD and the Script Supervisor.

c) Blocking Tips - having a shot list will help you during the blocking process. The shot list is like a map: it gives you a path to your destination but you don't always have to follow it - let the actors show you what they want to do first, then, when you make a suggestion, it is based on something you have already seen - in Television, speed is essential, so try and block some scenes so that your action takes place in one direction (to avoid turning the camera around for reverses)

[Peter D. Marshall has worked in the Film and TV Industry for over 32 years. In 2000 he created www.ActionCutPrint.com as an online resource center for Filmmakers where you will find filmmaking tips, articles and directing workshops. Peter also publishes the free monthly ezine, "The Director's Chair." Contact pdm@actioncutprint.com.]

Rehearsing on the Set

2007-07-24T22:42:00.000-07:00

By Peter D. Marshall

In the last article, I discussed Blocking - the first part of a four stage process of shooting any scene:

1) Blocking - determining where the actors will be on the set and the first camera position
2) Lighting - time for the DOP to light the set and position the camera for the first shot
3) Rehearsing - camera rehearsal of the first set-up with the actors and crew
4) Shooting - shooting the first scene (then repeat the process)

In this article, we will discuss the Rehearsal process.

When the DOP has finished lighting, the 1st AD calls the actors back to the set for the rehearsal. This is when all the elements of the scene are rehearsed together - actors, camera, sound, stunts, effects etc.

When the actors arrive, it is important to tell them of any changes that have happened since the blocking. For example: in the blocking, an actor might have stopped on the left side of the window and turned around for his line. But during lighting, the DOP had to move his mark to the right side of the window.

Because the rehearsal process is for both cast and crew, the first rehearsal will sometimes be a stop-and-start rehearsal: a technical run-through with the actors (especially if there are complicated camera moves.) The actors should walk through their positions and let the Camera Operator stop them to adjust their end marks or let the Sound Man find a better position for his mic. Once the crew is happy about positions and lighting, begin a full rehearsal.

During this first full rehearsal, watch the camera movement and the placement of the actors in the frame. Are you getting what you had imagined? Should you tighten up the lens? Should you delay the dolly in? Should you change the actors positions slightly?

Once you are happy with this rehearsal and the crew have made their adjustments, begin another rehearsal - and watch the performances. If this is a TV Series, this will probably be your last rehearsal, so concentrate on the actors and make your notes.

Unless there is a technical problem, I like to shoot after the second rehearsal. (I hate great rehearsals - why didn't we shoot it!) I usually don't give notes to actors during the rehearsal stage unless it is about movement because cast and crew will only give 100% once the camera starts rolling - and that is the only time you will see if the shot really works.

The 1st Ad calls for Finals and the "pretty department" goes to work on the actors. This is also the time any technical adjustments are made: the camera crew gets final focus marks and the DOP adjusts his lighting.

During the first take, you watch everything - camera movement, performances and background action. Does the shot feel right? are the actors making the right choices? does the dolly move come at the right time? Very rarely does the first take get printed - this is your first true rehearsal with cast and crew.

After the first take, make any technical adjustments and talk to ALL the actors. This is the first time you have seen them working up-to-speed and it is important that you give them all some feedback.

Talk with the DOP and the Camera Operator if you have any concerns about the camera moves or the framing. (The DOP usually watches the monitor with you and if he sees anything wrong he will deal with it after each take.) Discuss the extras with the 1st AD or any line changes with the script supervisor.

If things are going well, the second take will be your first print. Make a note of where you want changes and focus on those areas for the third take. If you are shooting a "oner", get at least two prints for safety. If you are shooting coverage, concentrate only on the parts of the scene you want corrections.

Once you are happy with the shot, and you have at least 2 prints, move on to the next shot. Tell the script supervisor what takes you like or what portions of several takes you like for the editor.

And the four-part process begins all over again!

[Peter D. Marshall has worked in the Film and TV Industry for over 32 years. In 2000 he created www.ActionCutPrint.com as an online resource center for Filmmakers where you will find filmmaking tips, articles and directing workshops. Peter also publishes the free monthly ezine, "The Director's Chair." Contact pdm@actioncutprint.com.]

Directing An Audition

2007-07-24T22:38:00.002-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

Auditions are all about hope. The director (normally the casting director, in bigger budget films) hopes that the next actor that walks through the door is The One. After months of fruitless searching, if you look carefully, you may even see some form of prayer in their eyes. Nothing is more of a relief than finally finding that perfect actor for the perfect role.

The actor clearly has hope, too. As he walks through the door, he hopes that the people running the audition are decent human beings that will just give him a chance, dammit! He hopes they'll recognize his talent and that he's absolutely perfect for the part (it's never a question of whether he has talent in the first place!)

Unlike how it's depicted in movies (about movies), an audition does not have to be a lifeless droning exercise, where the actor recites three lines over and over to an underwhelmed director. An audition can, and should, be fun. It's an opportunity to not only meet fellow artists, but to see their talents showcased.

The following is my personal model for an audition. It's helped me assemble rich, eclectic ensembles. Plus, they're a blast.

First of all, don't just sit in a chair with a "show me" attitude. Get up, meet them at the door, shake hands, smile, make your actors feel relaxed. A laid back vibe makes them more comfortable with you, and in turn, makes them more confident. It's this confidence that will allow them to give you their best performance. Whether that best performance is good or bad is a different matter entirely!

Every actor should come prepared with at least one monologue. I advise actors to have two ready, but expect at least one. (To the actors reading this: most auditions will not call for a monologue, but do you want to be unprepared for that one that does?) Allow them to perform their chosen piece. It's usually something they feel strongly about, something they believe showcases their strengths. This should be 2-5 minutes in length.

During this time, pay attention and react (laugh if it's funny, etc.) and give them your time. Do not answer the phone or do paperwork or engage in conversation while they're pouring their heart out for you. Not only is it cruel, but you may be blinding yourself to an amazing talent standing a few feet away.

Next come the sides (excerpts from your script). You should have a 1-2 page side ready for each role you're looking to fill. Give the actor at least 10 minutes to familiarize themselves with the material. Screen one actor while another is going over his side.

Every director is different, but I would advise to not demand they memorize every line and every word that day. Be grateful if they at least get the theme of the scene and feel of the character. Anyone can memorize a side, but only a gifted actor can so quickly take a character and setting and make it their own.

If you have a good feeling about an actor, but want to see a little more from them, you have a few choices. You can ask them if they have another monologue prepared. If they don't, you can give them the sides for another role in your movie.

Another option, one that I've used and feel truly reveals an actor's talent and desire, is a simple improv exercise. You can randomly create a scene for them on the spot, or spin the side they just performed.

For example, in the side, if they played a waiter dealing with a rude customer, turn your actor into the rude customer. If they played a father scolding his teenage son for sneaking out of the house after dark, make them the rebel son, or the cop that caught him, or the girlfriend that he met in the backyard, etc. To give them someone to bounce of, bring along an actor friend to help out.

This is all advice from my own personal experience. You can follow it word-for-word, or you can come up with your own method, so long as you and your actors are comfortable and giving all you can. If someone's tense, scared, or holding back even a little bit, it goes against the idea of an open audition in the first place, which is the notion of artists meeting and seeing if they can make something good, even great, together.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

CloseUp: Skye Borgman

2007-07-24T22:38:00.001-07:00

Skye received her M.F.A. in film production from the University of Southern California and her B.F.A. from Cornish College of the Arts in 1994. She spent the majority of her 20's traveling the world. Living in Bulgaria, Korea, Japan, Indonesia and China and traveling to over 60 different countries Skye began to see in a different way. She bought her first camera in Tokyo and started painting with light through the lens. She returned to the states with the understanding that experiences in life create richness in art - and has been expanding her understanding of cinematography ever since. She received the Jeffrey Jones screenwriting award in 2002, was a finalist for the Carol Fielding Grant, and received the Fotokem grant for "Pebbles." To see Skye's cinematography work visit www.skyeborgman.com or the site for her short film, "Pebbles".

CloseUp: JP Perry

2007-07-24T22:37:00.002-07:00

JP Perry is a Los Angeles based director of photography and camera operator. He shoots film and HD. In 2005, JP's work was honored by the American Society of Cinematographers and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. JP's camera work can be seen on MTV, ABC, NBC, CBS, and at film festivals around the world. If you require a reliable cinematographer, camera operator, or videographer for your next project, give JP Perry a call.

For more infomation, and a look at JP's reel and short films, visit www.jpperry.net

Tips On Selecting A Film School

2007-07-24T22:37:00.001-07:00

By John Morris

Filmmaking is not only an interesting, enjoyable and fulfilling career but very lucrative as well. Unfortunately, realizing the big Hollywood dream entails hard work, commitment and great amount of skill, right attitude, guts and some luck, too. While it is true that you're not in full control of your fate, the initial steps toward being a successful filmmaker depend on you. Choosing the right or the best film school where you would hone your talents, develop more interest and learn more knowledge in filmmaking is your first step.

Your decision to choose a particular film school is very crucial to your success as a filmmaker since that film school shall equip you with or shall help you gain more knowledge, skills, techniques and experiences, which are essential to a filmmaker. Those are his tools in filmmaking that cannot be bought but are earned and cultivated through time.

1. Know What You Want

First of all, you have to know what you want. Ask yourself what realm of filmmaking do you want to venture in or what kind of films do you want to work on in the future? Do you want to be an independent filmmaker or a simple film artist? There are so many film schools in the country as well as in other parts of the globe and each has its own expertise. Knowing what you want in the first place would allow you to focus your research and thus refine your choices for good film schools. Also, this would help you save time and effort in searching for schools as you have already eliminated those that may not fit your interest and criteria.

2. What Are Your Considerations?

After deciding on what area you want to concentrate, you should also identify your major considerations in choosing a particular film school.

- the affordability of film courses - the facilities of the film school - the accessibility and proximity of the school - the film school's reputation and quality of education

3. Don't Skimp On Your Education

Remember that a good film education is really expensive so do not just choose a film school that offers the cheapest film courses. It is important to consider the quality of education and the reputation of the school above all else. Remember that with that school, you are building a career that is supposed to be a life-long profession. Short-term film courses, say a 2-yr filmmaking course may be a lot cheaper than a 4-yr course and is quite helpful as most provide hands on training and a lot of project work. If you want to really excel in this field, however, you might opt for a longer course as it is more comprehensive.

3. Identify Where You Want To Study

Knowing where you want to cultivate your skills and intensify your interest in filmmaking is essential in selecting the right film school for you. This would refine your search as well since you would have to concentrate in looking for film schools only in one particular area or locality. New York is one of the best places to study film. It has the most developed art scenes for film and a number of reputable film schools. If affordability of the film course is one of your major considerations, you can choose a film school in Chicago and Milwaukee, which are known for having the most affordable film schools in the country. If you want to make it to Hollywood, better start your search for the best film school there in Los Angeles and nearby cities. There are lots of renowned film schools there that offer short and long term film courses.

4. Explore Colleges and Universities

Now that you have refined your criteria: the area in filmmaking you want to concentrate in, your major considerations such as the affordability of the courses, the school's reputation and the place, you can now do some research. As you explore your options, consider the things you have identified earlier. It would be better if you list down every film school's advantages and disadvantages so you can easily compare and contrast them. Also, as you examine the school's film courses and their special attributes, you can add some more considerations to your list and see which of the film schools you have considered meet the most of your requirements.

5. Narrow Your List

After going through several colleges and universities, narrow now your list by eliminating those that do not meet your criteria. With your short but well researched list of the best film schools, you can be more confident now of making a right decision. But before you finally select the film school, seek for other people's advice and recommendations, especially those who are well familiar with filmmaking.

For more great Film Schools related articles and resources check out www.onlyfilmschools.com.

[John Morris]

10 Steps to Your Dream Job in Film Special Effects

2007-07-24T22:36:00.001-07:00

By Sean Blakeley

Getting a break in film special effects is hard, but not as hard as you may think. The following ten things will go a long way to help you achieve your dream job.

1) Understand the Industry

If you want to work in special effects, it's important not just to know the difference between a Stag (stagehand) and a Director, but know how special effects itself is divided up. Long gone are the days when Ray Harryhausen (Jason and the Argonauts) would lock himself in a shed with a small team of people and do all the special effects himself. Now, everything is spread across different teams and departments. So, if you're interested in sculpting sets and large monsters, you want to work as a film sculptor; if you'd prefer smaller more technical projects you'd be better off choosing the model unit.

2) Be a Realist

Working in the creative industry and particularly the film industry is not easy. You'll often be faced with challenging projects and demanding deadlines and there'll be dozens of different people waiting for you to finish so they can complete their own jobs. You'll have to strike a balance between the time allowed and quality of what you produce; you can't get too precious about your work. Not only that, you've got to promote yourself - all special effects artists are freelance and you've got to hunt down the jobs out there.

3) Study Art

Whether you're self-taught or went to Art College, it is vital you have a keen interest in Art to work in special effects. If someone asks you to sculpt a life-size Roman-style Statute or an Egyptian sarcophagus it's invaluable to have a point of reference in your own mind. But more important than this, it'll make the job more enjoyable. You may be flicking through an art book over the weekend, and on Monday morning you're asked to recreate one of the pieces you've been admiring.

4) Drawing

In the film industry all technical drawings are done by draughtsmen in the Art Department. So is this just padding to reach the magic '10' steps? No. If you want to create any 3D object, particularly the human form, it is vital to learn to draw and keep practicing. Sculptors regularly liken sculpting to drawing their subjects in clay from various angles. The key to good sculpture, like drawing, is defining the lines and shadows.

5) Practice

This is obvious but it's also vitally important. If you practice creating and sculpting things in your spare time, you will improve. It is also very valuable to recreate a film working experience - so limit yourself to reference photographs (rather than a life model) and give yourself a challenging deadline for the job. A little more difficult, but just as valuable, is to try different mediums. You may be an expert in steel construction and welding, but unless you join the engineering side of special effects or metal work team, these skills are useless. The materials of choice in the films tend to be low-grade potter's clay and polystyrene.

6) Approachable

Almost everyone in the film industry is self-employed and so they understand the only way to get work is to promote yourself. This doesn't mean you should go around to a potential employer's house or create wacky self-marketing campaigns; it means most people in the industry are approachable. If you cold call a relevant Head of Department (HOD) and show commitment and desire to learn they'll often agreed to meet you for 5-10 minutes to look over your portfolio.

7) Persistence

When you do finally meet the man or woman you're hoping to be your future boss, don't stop there. They'll take your details but it might be 18 months before they have a suitable project and give you a call. You need to make sure you meet as many future employers as possible, and stop and have a chat with other people in the department if you feel brave enough. Try and leave a card or better still, copies of your favourite 1 or 2 pieces of work with your contact details on (and ideally your online portfolio address if you have one). Then, give them a quick catch-up call every 6 months or so - even if they can't offer you a job, it's amazing how much information you'll get about different opportunities.

8) Portfolio

Vital. In a word. The key rules to a good portfolio are simple:

> Diversity - show different types of work you may have done - you may be proud of the series of 18 statutes you've done, but don't show them all. Also, you may not think that 30ft polystyrene snow drift shows you're finesse as a sculptor, but it shows your versatility so put it in.

> Honesty - it should go without saying but it doesn't. Only one thing gets a HOD's back-up more than seeing a large piece of work with someone claiming to have created it single-handedly, and that's seeing a piece of their own work being claimed by someone else. Believe me, it does happen. So, be honest. If you did the left foot of a giant, then say so and don't be ambiguous about it.

> Concise - use your opportunity wisely. 10-12 photos are definitely enough to show a range of your work and skills.

> Best Foot Forward - most people will make a decision about your work within 2-3 examples so put your best work at the very front.

> Presentation - try not to have scraps of paper tumbling out of your moth-eaten portfolio. Invest in an easy to carry A4 portfolio and use plastic binders. If you have any Photoshop skills to improve the presentation of your work then use them. Don't feel the need to take in an example of your sculpture - you will be showing your work to professionals who are very used to assessing work through photographs.

> Information - you may have produced a full-scale replica of Michelangelo's David, but if it took you three years it's no good to the film industry. Make sure you note down the scale of each example of your work, what material you used and how long it took. These simple pieces of information are important for HODs and will be appreciated.

> Online Portfolio - if you can, get an online portfolio designed and make sure any contact details contain the address. Ideally, try and get the HOD's email address so you can send them the link. Any time you update the contents of the portfolio, it's a good excuse to contact the HOD with another link to your work.

9) Networking

Networking can feel a bit uncomfortable and embarrassing at times, but it is important to get to know what jobs are out there. After you've worked on a job or two you'll get the phone numbers of a few fellow workers - make sure you give them a ring. But be warned, if you're first to hear about the new James Bond film and then tell everyone, you'll find yourself joining the queue to show your portfolio. This doesn't mean you shouldn't share information you may have about up coming jobs, it means you should bear in mind that everyone is trying to get employment. It's also a good idea to keep an eye on movie news websites.

10) Watching Films

A great perk for those times when you're not in work - you can watch films and claim it's research. Obviously, it's a great feeling to see your own work on the big screen, but it's also exhilarating to see the work and names of people you know. After your first job or 2 you'll very quickly start to feel part of the industry and start recognising names and faces. Also, for those jobs you missed out on, you can go and have a good grumble about how you would have done it better!

Working in the film industry is not for everyone; but if you're keen and develop you're skills and knowledge, then you're likely to get an opportunity to show what you can do. Best of luck!

[Sean Blakeley is the Creative Director of idigit design, the Brighton based web site design and special effects company. Sean has worked on a number of Hollywood blockbusters including Die Another Day, Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban and Batman Begins. Visit www.idigitdesign.com or his blog at www.seanblakeley.blogspot.com.]

Shooting Your Own Music Video

2007-07-24T22:35:00.000-07:00

By Robert D. Brooks

Music videos can be expensive items. It hurts spending thirty, fifty or even a hundred grand of your hard-earned money on something you - basically - give away for free!

So, it can be very tempting to save some money by shooting your own music video. I mean, video cameras come on cell phones nowadays, and HDTV is becoming less expensive. Cameras are everywhere. They're ubiquitous. And, deep down, everyone really fancies themselves a director - sorry, an auteur, don't they?...

So, should you consider going it alone and shooting your own music video?

The short answer: NO.

Directors, producers, cinematographers and production designers are all artisans. It takes years of study and work experience to become a decent film-maker. You wouldn't leave your cd layout to some guy you passed on the street, would you? So why even consider doing something as important as your first music video all by yourself? It may look like simple work, but believe me, producing and directing ain't easy!

Can you tell the difference between a lower budget independent movie and a Hollywood summer blockbuster? Of course you can! That's exactly the difference between shooting the video yourself and hiring a professional. You don't know how to make the movie look that glossy and perfect - but the professionals do! The best you could hope for is a decent indie flick. Sure, every once in a while a home-made music video comes along and does well. But, can you even think of one (and, no, Fatboy Slim's "Praise You" was NOT an indie video, the budget was actually massive). So, stick with the professionals. Let them do it all for you.

However, the single biggest reason I would dissuade you from shooting your own music video is probably not one you would have guessed:

Insurance!

Film crews often contain twenty, thirty, or even hundreds of people. There's typically massive amounts of power being run through thick cables (often submerged in puddles) up to precariously hung lights with a virtual windmill of large, exposed, sharp metal edges (and all this at about 600 degrees celcius). A film set is literally an accident waiting to happen.

Plus, adding to the inherent dangers of a film set, music video shoots tend to be even more dangerous (music video productions don't tend to have very much money for things like saftey experts and safety harnesses). Maverick directors love to put their subjects into harm's way. And, on low-budget shoots, you can often hear things like: "We don't need an expensive car-mount - let's just throw the cameraman on the hood! Don't worry, we'll tie him down..."

So, if you do decide to shoot your video yourself, just make sure no one trips over a light stand! It could cost you your life savings.

Legitimate production companies will have production insurance that covers the workplace (this insurance would cost you around one or two thousand dollars - just for the one music video).

Professional producers and production managers will have access to much better crew members than you will. If you only have a thousand dollars to hire a director of photography (cinematographer), I guarantee you I'll be able to hire a MUCH better DoP than you will! So, unless you have contacts in the industry, you should probably consider hiring a production company to do all the producing for you. You'll get a much higher quality crew that way.

And, one final note...

If you're shooting on 35mm film (which I strongly recommend, unless there's a VERY good reason not to - and some channels like MTV and Muchmusic may not even accept music videos that weren't shot on film), you'll need to rent a camera that's worth around half a million bucks! And, that camera doesn't come with any lenses (or tripods, or dollies, or film magazines, etc...). You'll have to rent all that separately. So, unless you have a VERY high limit on your credit card, the camera house might not even be willing to rent to you. You might even have to mortgage your house to cover the deposit!

Established production companies rent camera packages all the time (a decent music video package will be at least one or two thousand dollars a day), and often receive significant discounts from the rental house that you wouldn't be able to get. So, by going with an established production company, you'll actually be getting a considerably better equipment package than if you had done it yourself (producers also know how to get film at about a quarter the price you'd be able to).

So, overall, you'll get a much better bang-for-your-buck by hiring a professional producer or production company to shoot your music video for you. It will also save you an unbelievable amount of time and effort. And, in the end, isn't that what you want for your first video: The abolute best music video possible?

[Robert D. Brooks is a professional music video director from Vancouver, BC, Canada. For music video production, Bob is represented by music video production company Triton Films Inc.]

Script Breakdown - Character Analysis

2007-07-24T22:31:00.000-07:00

By Peter D. Marshall

In the last article, I talked about the first, and most important, part of a Director's job - understanding the script: what the story is about; the themes; the story points; and the characters. In this article, I will focus on Character Development and Analysis.

After reading the script and working through the script structure and scene analysis, it's time to figure out the development and objectives of the characters.

1) Character Functions

Each character has at least one function (or role) in any story, such as:

a) protagonist
b) antagonist
c) best friend
d) love interest
e) confidante
f) partner
g) catalyst
h) mentor
i) comic relief

There are many more, but this is a basic list for you to start with.

2) Character Emotions

Here are the three main character emotions:

a) Sympathy - the audience IDENTIFIES with the character's problems and triumphs
b) Empathy - the audience UNDERSTANDS the emotions that drive the character
c) Antipathy - the audience wants the character to "GET WHAT THEY DESERVE"

3) Character Components

These are the Internal and External factors that shape each character:

a) Interior - form character
b) Exterior - reveal character

4) Character Background

a) where is the character from (background)
b) what was he doing just before this scene
c) what does the writer say about this character
d) what do others say about this character
e) what does the character say about himself

5) Character Objectives (Most Important!)

These are the main needs and wants of a character (what people want out of life)

a) SUPER OBJECTIVE (example: "Power over People")
- what is the primal motivation of the character
- what are the main needs of the character

b) OBJECTIVES (example: "Wants to Dominate Character A")
- what does the character want (motives)
- what are the active choices to achieve the Super Objective

c) MAIN ACTIONS (example: "What they DO to Character A")
- what the character DOES...
- to get what he WANTS...
- to fulfill his NEEDS

NOTES ON OBJECTIVES:

a) there can only be one objective per character - per scene
b) the simpler the objective, the easier it is for an actor to play it
c) objectives rise out of the character's needs and feelings
d) objectives help actors react to each other - rather than just "say the lines"
e) an objective should be an active choice for an actor
f) an actor should always play their objective in every scene

When coming up with character objectives, ask yourself: what does each Character want in this story - in this scene?

a) look at the character's behavior (what he does)
b) look at what the character talks about (what he says)
c) remember: Motive (inner life ) Determines Behavior (outer life)!

6) Character Breakdown

Go through your script and write down all the characters. You should list the main characters first and the secondary characters last and then assign them a function. Your first character should be the main character - or the protagonist.

NOTE: if you are doing a TV Series, the main characters will already be established for you. They are usually numbered "1,2,3..." on any call sheet.

7) Script Breakdown (Per Character)

Answer these question about how each character fits in the story:

a) what is the story function of this Character
b) what is their Super-Objective
c) what is their Main Objective (in the story)

8) Scene Breakdown (Per Character)

Answer these questions about how each character fits in every scene:

a) what is the character objective in this scene
b) what are the character's main actions in this scene
c) what are the results of their actions in this scene

9) Character Dialogue

I am a firm believer in the rule " Less is more!" As the Director, it is your responsibility to take a written document (The Script) and translate it into a visual format (Film or Video). This means that we can sometimes use visuals instead of dialogue to make a story point or to show what an actor is thinking.

After you have done all your homework on Script, Scene and Character Analysis, make another pass at the script to see what dialogue can be omitted by using visuals to get the point across. It is always better to SHOW the audience what a character is thinking, than have them talk about it. (Motion Pictures!)

WARNING: on a TV series, the producers are usually the writers and they are, for the most part, very hesitant to have any dialogue removed. If you have done your homework (Scene and Character Breakdowns) and can show them that your idea will make the scene better, go for it - they can only say no.

[Peter D. Marshall has worked in the Film and TV Industry for over 32 years. In 2000 he created www.ActionCutPrint.com as an online resource center for Filmmakers where you will find filmmaking tips, articles and directing workshops. Peter also publishes the free monthly ezine, "The Director's Chair."]

The Importance of Camera Movment

2007-07-24T22:29:00.000-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

A man sits in a booth in a pizza parlor, eating a slice. His friend enters and joins him at the booth, where they have a brief conversation about their old rivalry.

Simple scene. The question I pose is: How do you direct it?

Of course, there's no one way to direct any scene, but it's these simple scenarios that can help form your directing style. It's also these simple scenarios that often prove the hardest to direct.

A woman holding a gun chases a man down back alleys, trying to kill him. That's an easy scene to direct, because no matter how you do it, chances are, it will be suspenseful, exciting, maybe even scary. If the man is a beloved character, and is shot, the scene can be heartbreaking.

Now, back to the pizza guys. This scene is harder to direct, because it can easily become boring. The dialogue may be sizzling, their history may be sordid, but in the hands of an unskilled director, it will boil down to just two guys in a booth in a pizza joint.

There's a saying in stage directing: "If the characters sit down, the scene sits down." This is why stage actors rarely sit down! It seems that no matter what a stage actor is doing, he's roaming around the stage, projecting his voice across the audience.

But film is a different animal than stage. Yes, there will be scenes where characters are simply sitting or sleeping or doing something else mundane. This is a challenge, because the number one rule is filmmaking is to not bore the audience.

Depending on the script, the Director may elect to have the two men rise from the booth during emotional moments, pound their fists to the table, shift awkwardly in place, fling pizza at each other, anything to introduce some movement! But film has one advantage over stage, and that is the ability to move the camera.

Many filmmakers rarely use a tripod. The camera always has some movement, even if subtle. Take a look at any Robert Zemekis film and you'll see that the camera never stays still. There is always some tiny movement. Watch any Michael Bay film and you'll see that not only is the camera always moving, but it's usually moving in a swish pan and zoom in, and there's a cut every two or three seconds! He's using camera movement to underline the action that's usually in every single scene (it's impossible for a character to even eat a peanut butter sandwich in a Michael Bay film without some immediate peril).

Before I continue, let me disclaim that I am not an anti-sticks director, as many of my colleagues seem to be in their infatuations with cranes and jibs and dollies and condors and Steadicams. These tools are fun and make for some great shots, but I feel you should not be afraid of the tripod. Don't leave it in the grip truck or reduce it to simply holding the camera between set-ups. It's a tool like anything else. You need only know when and how to use it. Now back to camera movement.

There are many ways to move a camera, some of which I touched on in the above paragraph. Don't concern yourself with what tools to use, as they can all be used in many ways. What you need to ask yourself is whether you want smooth booming sweeping movement, tiny subtle movement, or gritty, voyeuristic movement.

Smooth sweeping movement is accomplished with dollies, jibs, and cranes. These tools give your film production value, makes it feel more like a "real movie," a big-budget movie. Dolly and crane shots are associated with big studio movies because they're often filled with them. Not so for indie films.

This is because dollies, cranes, and jibs take time to set up, and their shots take time to choreograph and rehearse, time that the indie film production often doesn't have. It will be impossible for you to continually use these fancy shots in your independent feature. You simply won't have enough time. The challenge is to use them for key scenes through the film.

The rest of the time you'll use tiny, subtle movement. This can be accomplished with a steady hand, or better still, grab the sticks from the grip truck. Mount that camera onto the tripod and make use of it's fluid head. Pan, tilt, use canted angles. These small movements can turn that pizza conversation into something more, subtly underlining the emotion and meaning in the dialogue.

A third way of moving the camera, often used in trendy fashion, is simply hand-held. A skilled camera operator can take a hand-held shot from Steadicam-smooth to POV jerky at will. Usually, hand-held camera is used to indicate a raising of the stakes, a documentary/emergency feel, but don't fall into the trap of resorting to hand-held every time you want to make a scene more exciting or alarming.

One of the differences between old zombie movies and modern zombie movies is the above technique. No one shot hand-held back in the day of George Romero's original "Night of the Living Dead." Compare that to Danny Boyle's "28 Days Later" which switched to hand-held every time a zombie appeared on screen. It worked, considering his version of the undead ran around instead of lumbering about, but it's easy to see the pattern.

To conclude, keep in mind that you have a full director's toolset at your disposal when it comes to deciding on that next shot. Whether you swoop down on the pizza guys with a crane, or pan slowly from one man to the other with the tripod head, remember that camera movement can accent any scene in any way you wish. With a static camera, you're crossing your fingers and hoping that all the other elements, the acting, the event, and the dialogue, fall perfectly into place.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

Love Every Character - Love Every Scene

2007-07-24T22:25:00.002-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

Ever watch a movie and instantly latch onto some characters, while you couldn't care less about others? Sure, the screenplay has been engineered so that you root for the Hero and despise the Villain, but that's not quite what I'm getting at. Hating a character is actually a good thing. Any emotion is a good thing.

It's indifference that's a killer.

In virtually every movie, there are main characters with unique traits and agendas, accompanied by cliché or bland supporting characters, quickly forgotten. Some sets are striking and memorable, while others are plain ol' living rooms. Why this imbalance?

If you pay attention, observing the movement of the actors and the delivery of their dialogue, you can tell which characters are adored by the Director, and which ones are not. You can tell which settings are important to the Director, and which ones are generic.

Pick up a copy of any script and you'll see some scene headings read INT. SHADY'S SMOKEHOUSE GRILL while others read INT. BAR. That might give you a clue.

Take a look at any script of Robert Rodriguez's early work. You'll see some characters with exotic names and lengthy intro descriptions. In "Desperado," the purpose of the elaborate first scene was to reintroduce the legendary El Mariachi. Turn a few pages and you'll see a character named "Shrug" because all he does is shrug to his boss. You'll also see a boy named "Niño" (boy), a priest named "Priest," and a bartender named "Short Bartender."

Keep in mind, these aren't bit parts, these generic characters have significant screen time. Rodriguez gets away with shallow characters by choosing solid actors and directing with an over-the-top style. It seems to work for him, but my advice to the struggling indie filmmaker is to sharpen your tools at the screenplay level, and not depend on happenstance to make up for a lacking script.

My advice is to love your characters. Same goes for settings.

In Pulp Fiction, who can forget Jack Rabbit Slim's? It's a one-of-a-kind set (it's not a real restaurant as legend would have you believe), populated with colorful backgrounds, extras, sounds, and events. You get the feeling that if you could get into Quentin Tarantino's head, his vision of that set materialized perfectly.

In fact, it's this love for every shot, character, and scene, that gives Tarantino, and any good director, his style. It's what makes him an "auteur." Something as simple as two guys talking over coffee turns into a memorable scene, not just because of the dialogue and acting, but because every nook and cranny of the scene was thought about, cared for, loved.

On some level, when directing a film, you must have some sort of love for everything that will appear on screen. If you don't care about your supporting character, "Freddy," chances are, neither will the actor portraying him, not to mention your audience. If you don't care if the restaurant scene is in a Denny's or a McDonald's or a five-star bistro, the audience may not care, either. Worse, they might be confused, because it's not consistent with Freddy's personality to confront his wife in a Denny's. (Imagine, instead of Jack Rabbit Slim's, Vincent took Mia to a hot dog stand. It would be inconsistent with Mia's personality, and make for a much less memorable scene.)

Whereas Tarantino is an example of a director that loves every tiny bit of his films, Tim Burton is an example of one that does not. He plays favorites in his films, resulting in the audience saying, "I really liked that one scene, and that other scene, but that's all."

Burton loves the surreal, the dark, the fantastic, the scary. For this, I like his work. However, he doesn't care about anything based remotely in reality. It would appear that reality bores him. This is why in "Big Fish," all the fantasy "tall tale" scenes are a marvel to look at. The actors have fun in them. The Production Designer went to town creating them using Burton's input.

The scenes in "reality" fall flat. Notice I use the word "flat." This is because some may argue that he intended to create a stark contrast between the two different realities, the colorful, lively tall tales and the grim, drab real world. But I'd argue that it's possible to direct a simple scene with old Ed Bloom lying in bed and still give it some spark, some unique quality. (For crying out loud, that's Albert Finney lying there!) Instead, those scenes fall flat.

In Burton's remake of "Planet Of The Apes," the ape characters were astounding, not just in their appearance, but in their mannerisms, their depth of character, their personal agendas. The human characters? What's that you say? You don't remember any human characters? I barely do myself.

Even the main character, Leo, played by Mark Wahlberg, had no distinguishing characteristics, other than he was the Hero. This is because he was human. Had he been an ape, he would have had more of Burton's attention, more of his love.

Before this turns into a full-blown film review, let's summarize...

Love your characters. Love your settings. Love every scene, every shot. This all shows in the end product which is, after all, your film. Anything you're not investing your time and heart into, you're taking for granted, and hoping that happenstance makes up for it. That equals lazy filmmaking.

For the struggling indie filmmaker working on his first feature, that might also equal the end of a brief career.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

Directing With Storyboards

2007-07-24T22:25:00.001-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

To storyboard or not to storyboard? Hmmmm. Storyboards look cool. Everyone likes to see them and compare them to the finished film. You may be asking yourself, "Can I draw?" If you can't draw, "Do I know someone that can draw?" Or maybe, "Should I buy a storyboard program?"

These questions don't matter. What matters is whether or not your project warrants storyboards, and that depends on your directing style, the screenplay, and the size of your camera crew.

Let's start with the basics. There are three schools of thought on whether or not to use storyboards...

1) Use 'em.
2) Don't use 'em.
3) Use 'em, but only for elaborate scenes.

The purpose of storyboards is communication. It's to help the Director communicate to the D.P. (Cinematographer) what a shot or scene entails. The D.P. can then use these boards to communicate with his camera crew. If the setting is unique, the boards can be useful to the Production Designer and his crew. If it's a period piece, for example, Wardrobe may want to use them, too.

Storyboards are for communication with your Keys (Dept. Heads).

That's it.

Okay, yes, storyboards do find their way into DVD extras and press kits and making-of books, but that's fluff stuff. For the sake of this article, we'll focus on functionality. The independent filmmaker is concerned with getting the film done first, the fluff stuff later.

Years ago, back in my guerrilla filmmaking days, I shot my first DV feature. I wrote a simple drama, bought one of the first Canon XL-1's on the market, made a boom pole out of an extendable mop handle, used a car windshield reflector for outdoor lighting, and went to work with a group of local actors.

I started by storyboarding every scene. I figured, hey, I can draw, I'll create storyboards. That's what you do, right? On the first day of shooting, I realized it had been a waste of time. On indie shoots, you're often forced to wear many hats, and it was certainly true on that shoot. I was the Director, D.P., and Camera Operator. There was no one to communicate my shots to! I felt stupid.

Also, the simple scenes and limited days didn't warrant storyboards. I shot at over a dozen commercial locations for free (not in L.A.) by promising the business owners that I'd be out of there fast. This meant I'd be shooting a simple, minimal scene at each location: two guys talking over coffee, two girls sitting on a bench, etc. Needless to say, the boards I spent weeks drawing, shading, and refining were never touched.

However, if you actually have a D.P. and a camera crew, and the screenplay is full of elaborate fight/effects/fancy-shot sequences, perhaps boards are the way to go. So, let's say you want to create storyboards...

You can hire someone to do it, but it won't be a matter of giving them a copy of the script and letting them do what they will. As Director, you'll have to spend long sessions with the artist, detailing the shots and scenes. You'll be spending time explaining to someone else (someone you're paying) how you want your film to be shot. Wait! I thought storyboards were supposed to take care of that communication thing! If I'm going to explain my shots to anyone, it might as well be my crew!

To save time and stress, you can draw them yourself. Who cares if you can't draw? Even if you can, you may find yourself doodling stick figures and arrows, the bare minimum needed to convey your scenes. I can draw, but I don't have the patience to illustrate a feature-length script. What I've found that works is creating stick figure boards as fast as I can, then handing them to a friend to fully illustrates them for me. In the L.A. indie film scene, nearly everyone you meet is artist.

There are also storyboard programs like Storyboard Artist, Storyboard Quick, and Frame Forge 3D Studio. These are awesome programs, but they're not cheap. Something else to consider is that these programs may help you make impressive boards, but don't really save you time.

Quick! Sketch a man in a car! Add some rain! Now launch a 3D program, find the right model man, the right model car, and place them in the right environment, and then add raining weather effects. Unless you're a whiz at the program, I imagine sketching is quicker. Take the above comparison and multiply it by 500. Suddenly, you're thinking the $900.00 you spent on that program could have gone elsewhere in the production.

Another alternative is to drop a 2GB memory card in a digital camera, gather a small group of actors, maybe a couple of guys, a couple of girls, and shoot photos photos photos. If you're remotely adept at Photoshop or a similar program, you can make boards with real people. You can even get a little fancy and shoot the actors in front of a green blanket hung on the wall for a makeshift green screen studio. Then, in Photoshop, drop in a photo of the location.

Of course, this is all assuming you've even decided to use storyboards. It's a personal decision, based on everything we've discussed above.

In our world of independent film, my advice is to board the more complex scenes, and shot plot the rest. A shot plot can be created very quickly, and does a good job of communicating. Its really only useful to the D.P. and camera crew, but on a low- or micro-budget film, that just may be enough.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

The Modern Auteur

2007-07-24T22:24:00.000-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

What the heck is an auteur? The term is thrown around a lot in film school classrooms, film buff discussions, and art house movie reviews. Don't feel dumb if you don't quite know what it is. Most people that use the word regularly don't exactly know, either. All everyone seems to know for sure is that it's a fancy ten-cent word used to try to impress folks and make them think you're a true film connoisseur (a lot of French words seem to be used for that purpose).

That sounds too cynical. Let me start again.

During the French New Wave movement of the 1940's, Francois Truffault coined the term "auteur" to describe a more involved, more visionary type of director. Since then, its definition has been argued, due to its somewhat vague nature and controversial implications.

In its classic sense, an auteur is a director whose complete control over every aspect of a production contributes to his overall style, giving the movie a specific feel that is associated with the director. Examples of directors considered auteurs are Charlie Chaplin, Woody Allen, Federico Fellini, David Cronenberg, Robert Altman, Terry Gilliam, Luc Besson, Tim Burton, Michel Gondry, Orson Welles, John Waters, Quentin Tarantino, George Lucas, Stanley Kubrick, and Alfred Hitchcock.

It comes down to this: There's no mistaking a Tim Burton film. There's no mistaking a Charlie Chaplin film. There's no mistaking a Terry Gilliam film. These directors weave themselves, their vision of the story, into every frame of each of their films.

"Control freak" you say? That's a shortcut to thinking. Most directors are controlling on some level. They have to be. That's what makes them directors. There are plenty of control freaks directing the D-level straight-to-Blockbuster gems. Control is not enough.

"Involved" is a better word. A director that is in love with the script, in love with the characters, in love with the settings, he cares about every tiny part of the story. This means that, yes, he'll choose the right actors and work with them to nail their roles, but it also means paying attention to everything else, putting his hand in every pie.

Quentin Tarantino went so far as to design all the elaborate fight sequences in "Kill Bill" himself. He hired a professional fight choreographer to execute the fights and coach the actors, but Tarantino is the one that watched countless classic (and not so classic) kung-fu movies to put together his sequences. When asked why he didn't just let the fight choreographer design the fights, as is usually the case, he replied "I'm not gonna sit back and let someone else direct my movie!"

The result is that he takes ownership of every nook and cranny of the movie that we see on the screen. However, it's this very thinking that makes the auteur theory also controversial.

Film is a truly unique form of art, because it's the combination of many arts: Writing. Cinematography. Acting. Music. Costumes. In some movies, add Dance and Singing.

Unlike other forms of art, filmmaking is not a one-man show. It takes a team of professionals (or amateurs striving to be professional) to make a movie. Even Robert Rodriguez, the "one-man film crew," can't do it alone. His name may appear all over the credits, from directing to cinematography to composing to editing, but he still has plenty of good people helping him.

At the independent level, "auteur" takes a slightly different meaning. By it's very nature, an independent film production forces the director to wear many hats, forced to be an auteur. The next low-budget film you see will most likely be directed by, co-produced by, and written by the same person. On micro-budget films, add "edited by," "cinematography by," and often "starring..."

A more modern definition of an auteur seems to be a writer/director, which most of us are in the independent world. If someone directs a script that they have written, the vision of the story is more close to heart. The writer/director just spent several months creating the screenplay. You can bet that he has played out every scene in his head over and over, and can picture each character as if they were real people.

What I'm getting at is, in the world of independent film, you have no choice... you are an auteur.

Just don't put that on your business cards. Please.

What can we learn from the Auteur Theory? Whether or not you choose to use this term, the lesson is to take ownership of your production. Yes, you need to trust your crew, but at the same time, care about every detail. Don't phone your performance in as a director. Be involved, have open communications with all the keys.

Whether your film comes out magnificently brilliant or horribly awful, whether you're considered an auteur or not, the greatest praise you can get is hearing someone say "There's no mistaking a (insert your name here) film!"

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]

TV Shows vs. Movies (or "Why TV Sucks")

2007-07-18T23:09:00.000-07:00

By Lynn Harrod

Network (free) TV sucks. It certainly sucks much more often than not. I'm sure many of you fellow indie filmmakers agree, but I wonder about it. It's something that's been nagging me for a while.

To the TV fans out there, yes, there are a few quality network shows, but even they rarely compare to good movies or cable shows. Think about it. Take the hottest, best written, best acted show on TV right now. Then imagine reading on the cover of Variety that "they're making a movie." That's when people's ears perk up. "That'll be good!" the fans all say. "Can you imagine??"

So why are movies held in higher regard than TV shows? Because movies are (more often) better made than TV shows. It's that simple.

Is it because there's too much censorship on network TV? I don't buy it, because you can make a great movie or show without necessarily being edgy. Is it because movies have bigger budgets, and therefore, better production value? No, because there are a ton of cheap indie films (our world) that blow away TV shows with multi-million dollar weekly budgets.

The difference is in the directing.

Let me offer an example. The other night, I watched "Crossing Jordan" on TV. First of all, the show is terrible. A forensics lab run by the hottest staff ever. Model-caliber women, that look like they just stepped out of a hair salon, examine rotted corpses while wearing low-cut sweaters and full jewelry. I know there's supposed to be suspension of disbelief, but this insults my intelligence. My cousin worked in labs for nearly 20 years, and just to analyze water samples she was wrapped in a lab coat, goggles, and a hair net!

Back to "Jordan." Besides being hot, the characters were way too emotional and too involved in their cases. A forensic investigator with years of experience does not, at the drop of a hat, burst into tears and hysterics when she arrives at a murder scene. These elements may have been in the script, but ultimately, how the actors look and perform is in the hands of the Director.

So, the story, characters, and realism of the show is watered down... dumbed down... for its audience. That surely contributes to television's suckiness.

Beyond that, I noticed that every time an actor spoke a line of dialogue, they were moving, walking across the room, putting stuff on a shelf, etc.

This is not new. I've even written a separate post about directing with movement. Stage and TV directors often use motion to help keep a scene "active." But man, it really stood out in this show.

In one early scene, the entire cast (eight or so) was gathered in a small room. Each of them had a line or two of dialogue, and when each of them delivered their line, they crossed the room. It felt awkward, because the room was small, and thus crowded, and they were just talking and drinking coffee, so no one had any reason to cross the room. The show was full of scenes like this.

It made me think of other shows that employ this technique. Watch two minutes of any soap opera and you'll see it in action. Even quality shows, like "Law & Order," are notorious for this. Whenever the cops are questioning someone at their home or job, they're always working, putting stuff away, helping customers. They're always distracted, as if too busy to be bothered by a couple of homicide detectives.

I don't know about you, but if two cops were asking me about a murder, I would drop whatever the hell I was doing and give them my attention.

So, directing with motion gives a scene more punch. Got it. It's cheap, but it works.

I was still thinking in terms of TV versus movies. Movies can get away with a scene with no motion. Some of my favorite scenes in films are of a character delivering dialogue without moving an inch, or a couple of characters engaged in a heated debate while simply sitting at a dining table. Is it because films have better dialogue, and thus, need not be afraid of a still actor?

I came up with a couple of reasons why movies can keep an actor in place while TV shows cannot. First, film directors often have the camera moving instead of the actors. Some directors are known for always moving the camera, even if only slightly. This involves dolly/crane/jib set-ups, something TV shows can't do much of because of their hectic shooting schedules.

Second, and this is the biggie, TV is geared toward A.D.D.America. You see, when people fork over nine bucks for a movie, you bet they're gonna stay and watch it. When they rent a DVD, again, chances are they're gonna watch it. TV shows, however, are constantly in danger of being clicked off. Someone channel surfing holds on a show for a moment, godammit, there better be some motion! If not... CLICK.

This is the dumbing down of the American film audience, or rather, TV show audience. And it's strictly a network TV thing.

To compare, take a look at a cable show, like "The Sopranos." The directors of that show are not afraid to shoot a scene where Tony and Uncle Junior are sitting on an old couch, just talking. And we're riveted. Even though we can easily switch channels just like with network TV, HBO is not concerned, because they've already got our monthly payment.

But NBC is worried, because if we click to another channel, they lose ratings, which in turn concerns their advertisers. So the solution is to dumb down their shows, if only subliminally. This is the same reason why sitcoms must have a laugh every 10 seconds. If you're watching a sitcom, and a minute passes without a laugh, you'll probably switch channels, probably to cable. This A.D.D. syndrome is also why everyone is hot hot hot. Channel surfers tend to stop when they see a split-second of boobs or abs, even if they happened to be attached to a forensics investigator.

To sum up, network TV sucks because it kinda has to. They gotta keep the wandering attention of channel surfers. So long as network television is free, it will always be inferior to quality films and cable shows.

Free television then is reduced to being the fast food of entertainment, and its directors are the short order cooks.

[Lynn Harrod is a filmmaker, a seasoned screenwriter of twelve years. His work has placed in the Nicholl Screenwriting Fellowship, the Writers' Network Screenplay Competition, the FadeIn Awards, and the Nevada Film Office Screenwriting Competition. Lynn is a staff writer for IFLA.]