Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Production: In Which We Shoot A Pilot

Today was again fairly slow for the production office. I sat around a lot, I talked to people, I sent some emails. I did a little bit of work. There were a few runs, one script delivery, I made sides and copied call sheets. I dropped stuff off for accounting at Entertainment Partners here in Burbank.

This all sounds terribly exciting, doesn't it?

Looking at the bigger picture though, today was great. We made our day, we wrapped on time. People were happy. That's a good thing. Being that this is such a tight schedule not making our days is a bit of a problem. If we don't shoot a scene on the day that it's scheduled... well, there's not really anywhere else to put it. That's why we ended up going so late last night. We had to make up for the scenes we missed on Monday.

But now we're all caught up. Hopefully tomorrow and Friday will go well. And then we'll be done. Shooting at least. And next week the production office will be done. And all that will be left will be post.

This is so fast. Really.

I still don't have another job lined up yet. But there are possibilities now and I'm talking to people who can possibly employ me at some point in the near future. So I'm stressed out but not freaking out. Yet. We'll see what comes up. Ideally I'll find a feature to work on. I really am ready to get back on a film. TV is okay, working is great, but film is what I love.



To get completely off topic for a second, my roommate and I adopted two kittens last weekend and they finally came home from the vet today. They are adorable and I absolutely love having them here. It's fabulous having pets again. I know, nothing to do with film. But kitties are cute! So there.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Production: DIY Filmmaking, Strike Anywhere, And Exhaustion


DIY - Do It Yourself. Low budget, guerrilla, all about the art. At least, that's the ideal. DIY
is a movement, sort of, of indie filmmakers who are bypassing the traditional Hollywood system, taking advantage of affordable technologies, and just getting their movies made. In the best examples it's honest, real, uncompromised, art. In the worst examples, it's a bunch of hacks taking advantage of their friends. For the most part, it's amazing.

Strike Anywhere Films - An indie production company specializing in ultra low budget DIY
productions. I worked with them last fall (they happen to be personal friends of mine) on a feature in San Francisco. It was an absolutely amazing experience. I would do anything to help these guys out and that's what makes it work. For Strike Anywhere, it's not about the
profit, it's about bringing the unique visions of their filmmakers to life. I worked with them on City On A Hill, Amy Seimetz's original story of love and revolution. Currently, they are working on a feature directed by Barry Jenkins (who I've heard much about but have yet to
meet) called Medicine For Melancholy. If that title sounds familiar, you might just be a fan of Ray Bradbury.

Either way, you should really check these guys out. They can be found at Strike Anywhere
Films
. And if you like what you see, you should help them out with their DIY odyssey and buy a shirt.

Exhaustion - My current state. And it's only the second day of shooting. Oi. While today was long, it was actually fairly uneventful for me. A couple of little runs, some sides making, locking the door at the end of the night. That was more or less it. We have three more shooting days and then a week of wrap and then we're done. Pilots really are fast.

Of course, since this is such a fast show, I now have to look for more work. Again. Have I mentioned that this is the worst part of working in this industry? The constant job searching. I enjoy the randomness but a little security and stabilitly would be nice every once in a while. Knowing that I'll be able to pay all my bills... Ya know.

For now though, I'm just going to finish this post and grab some sleep. While my morning isn't as early as most of the crew's (I have the late shift in the office) it's still pretty early. And my days are just as long as everyone else's.

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Review: Double Jeopardy

Originally posted at
Epinions



A word of advice: If you ever find yourself trapped in a confined space, wasting oxygen with your lighter may not be the best plan.

That being said, if you find yourself sitting on the couch on a Sunday morning with no particular plans for the day, there are worse things you could do than watch Double Jeopardy.

The 1999 thriller starring Ashley Judd and Tommy Lee Jones isn’t incredible but it’s not terrible either. Libby Parsons (Judd) is sent to prison after being accused of murdering her husband Nicholas (Bruce Greenwood). While serving her time she realizes that her husband is, in fact, alive. This sets her off on a six-year plan to track him down and find her son, Matty. When she skips out on her parole, her parole officer Travis Lehman (Jones) chases her cross-country in an attempt to bring her back. This eventually leads them all to a big show down in New Orleans.

Realism is not this movie’s strong point. While I’m not a lawyer, I’m going to go ahead and guess that the movie’s premise isn’t quite how the law works. The whole plot of the movie is built around the title idea of Double Jeopardy, which states that a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Which is true. However, I’m not convinced Libby would get away with murdering her husband a “second” time. Technically, it wouldn’t be the same crime.

But Travis is a lawyer and he says it would work. So it must be true.

Plot is also not this movie’s strong point. It’s filled with formulas and clichés, not too mention holes. And I’m pretty sure we’ve seen Tommy Lee Jones in this role before. Perhaps in a little film called The Fugitive? The plot is not terribly original, it’s pretty contrived, and you more or less know what’s going to happen when you watch the trailer.

Why should you watch this movie then? Well, if you’re looking for something thought provoking and intelligent you might want to skip it. But if what you want is entertaining filler for a lazy morning, Double Jeopardy works. Sure it’s silly but it’s also fun. With a little suspension of disbelief you’ll be okay.

What really makes it work are the performances, especially Ashley Judd’s. I really like her and she’s once again solid as Libby Parsons. She brings the right mix of vulnerability and strength to the role. Her transformation from the wife she starts as to the ex-convict she ends as is believable (even if the prison segment is not). Also good is Tommy Lee Jones. His character isn’t incredibly interesting and, like I’ve already mentioned, not a far departure from the character he played in The Fugitive. Jones is fine though. I think he’s a great actor and he is always at least watchable. Even when he isn’t given much to work with.

As silly as the plot is, it is still fun to watch Judd and see what her character is going to do next. How exactly will she track down Nick and Matty? Once she gets to New Orleans, how will she make her way into the glittering upper-crust world Nick now inhabits? What will she say to get that skeazy guy in the library to stop hitting on her?

Fun and entertaining are the key words for this film. It’s not great but it’s not completely awful either. There’s some action, there’s some suspense, and the main characters are at least likeable. This might be a movie that appeals more to a female audience than a male one, with the whole lead character being a woman and the motherhood thing and all that, but I think it has enough action that men won’t be completely bored.

Hey guys, at least it’s not Dirty Dancing again. This movie has guns!

I might be inclined to go with a two and half star rating if that was possible. As it is I’ll go ahead and bump it up to three. I’m in a giving mood today.

I wasn’t watching the DVD but from what I know about it, I don’t believe there is all that much in the way of special features or anything. I think it’s one of those things that if you like the movie, the DVD is cheap enough for the buying. Personally, it’s one I would pass on.

Friday, August 24, 2007

Production: Life of an Office PA

On a run in my car Holly. I spend a lot of time with my Holly.


I am an office PA. At least, at the moment I am. Being freelance my job title is subject to change on a regular basis. For example, on my last job I was the Production Secretary.

But here, now, at this moment, I am a PA. PA. What does that even mean?

Production Assistant.

Office Production Assistant. To be precise. There's a difference between an Office PA and a Set PA. Or any other type of PA for that matter.

PAs are at the bottom of the food chain in the world of production (or almost, there are always interns after all). We basically do whatever needs to be done. Depending on the project and the department and a million other variables, our job can entail a wide variety of responsibilities. Or lack there of.

That's all generally speaking. I want to go a little more specific than that. Dive a little deeper if you will. Tell you what it's like being an Office PA. Not any other kind.

In film and television production, jobs differ greatly from department to department. Each has it's own responsibilities, requires its own skill sets, basically has its own things going on.

And the Production Office is where it all comes together. Every other department comes to us for their needs, we solve their problems, we make sure everything that needs doing gets done. We order equipment, we distribute paperwork, we handle insurance and travel and housing. All of the little details, they come to us.

As an Office PA, I'm part of the production team. I'm here to do whatever random thing may need doing. What kind of things are those? Let's make a list, shall we?

1) Runs - I drive around, I pick stuff up, I drop things off. I get the actor from his hotel and bring him to set. I take him back to his hotel. I drive sixty miles to deliver scripts to Executives homes. Runs kind of suck.

2) Phones - Answering them. Fast. On the first ring. Everytime. And taking good, detailed messages. Every time.

3) Copies - Scripts, call sheets, crew lists, travel movements, deal memos, petty cash reciepts, production reports, etc. The list goes on forever. I fight with copy machines, a lot. I also get to know the service guys very well. And how many times have I found myself covered in toner? Too many.

4) Distribution - Everybody needs to get everything. Or maybe not exactly, but it is incredibly important that people get all of the things that need to get to them. It can be a pain in the ass, but bad distro creates havoc. Better to just get it right the first time.

5) General office duties - these vary by office but can include things like keeping office supplies well stocked, shopping for craft service, making coffee, taking out trash, whatever else needs to be done.

6) Whatever else. There are so many random things that come up on a day to day basis. I can't even begin to cover it all.

And on that note, I need to go. Things in the office just got busy.

On the agenda for tonight:
-make copies of the script
-make sides
-distro the script

Only three things and yet. It's going to be a long night.

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Thoughts: Close Encounters of the Third Kind



I came home from work today to find my roommate watching Close Encounters. Naturally I sat down to join her. It's one of those movies that I've watched a million times and will happily watch a million more. Can I call it a feel good adventure story? Perhaps.

There's a reason that Stephen Spielberg is considered great and it's not War of the Worlds. His older works are still my favorites, probably always will be. And while Close Encounters doesn't quite beat out Jaws, it's near the top of my list.

Richard Dreyfuss is fantastic. I adore him. Especially in his earlier films. But I'll still watch him, it's true. And he's great in this. If you actually take a minute to look at his character, Roy really isn't always a great guy. He is overcome by his obsession, he abandons his family, runs off with another woman... Oi. But Dreyfuss makes him loveable anyway. A true hero.

Close Encounters is a classic in the science fiction genre. And it's something that you can sit down and watch with the family. Even if the hero's family is a bit broken by the end... Really though, it's a well done film, it's got great music, it's Speilberg when he was at his best.

And it's a great way to end a long and tiring day.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Review: The Covenant

Originally posted at Epinions



Okay, I’ll admit it; I wanted to see The Covenant. I knew it was supposed to be terrible and I really wasn’t expecting much. I was looking forward to maybe a few flashy visuals and hopefully a couple of tight abs. Eye Candy. I was also suspecting that The Covenant could be a brilliant execution of camp; it could have been one of those awful films that are just so bad that you have to love them.

Unfortunately for me, my suspicion was wrong. There is absolutely nothing to love about The Covenant. Not even the abs (although they were nice, they just couldn’t make up for the awfulness of the rest of the movie).

The Covenant does have a somewhat fun premise for those of us who love horror and witches and all things dark and scary. Four boys, descendents of four powerful lines of witches, are faced with a fifth descendent, the odd boy out who has been driven mad by abuse of his supernatural power. The oldest of the four must face off against this outsider in order to protect the ones he loves and vanquish the forces of evil, thus restoring balance and order to the universe.

The only name attached to this film that might be recognizable is director Renny Harlin. Harlin has a long list of credits including quite a few recognizable titles: Mindhunters, Driven, Deep Blue Sea, Cliffhanger, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Die Hard 2 (while it was the worst in the series, it’s still a Die Hard move). Unfortunately for him, the longer he makes movies the worse his movies seem to get. The Covenant is just proof of the trend.

The story combines elements that we’ve seen before and a couple of original twists that could have almost been promising. But they weren’t. The film never takes advantage of any of the things that would have made this if not a good then a fun film. In fact, it is so flawed I’m not sure I’ll be able to cover all of the things wrong with it.

But you can bet I’m going to try.

For starters, let’s discuss the story. An interesting premise is just your start when you’re in the process of creating a film. In fact, an interesting premise happens so early in the development game that it should be a crime for a film to make it to theaters with nothing more than its premise to recommend it. In the case of The Covenant, the store never really goes anywhere. There is no interesting development, no exploration of the film’s intriguing back-story. The pacing is so horrible that three quarters of the way through I was left wondering when something was going to start happening. You know what, I don’t actually think it was a pacing problem. The thing is, there wasn’t anything there to be paced.

Moving past the lack of story, we come to the characters and the actors playing them. As far as character development goes, it’s pretty much right there with the story development in that there is none. We’re told all that we are going to be told about these characters as soon as they are introduced. It never goes any farther than that. The actors themselves, who are these kids? I have no idea. My lack of knowledge, it’s for a good reason. Steven Strait, Laura Ramsey, Sebastian Stan, et al; they’re terrible. Every last one of them. Some of the scenes were so abominably acted that I just wanted to cry. Even if the dialogue had been well written (it wasn’t), the delivery would have killed it. As much as I like abs and scantily clad men, nothing could make up for the dull performances.

I’m also not really sure whom this film was meant to appeal to. I guess adolescent boys? Girls? While it’s apparent that every actor in this film was cast for his or her looks, there are too many males in small bathing suits for this to be a boys’ film and absolutely nothing else to make this a girls’ film. The world of The Covenant is a completely male centric universe, the lead female character is nothing more than a pretty face and a hot body, and the conflict is so firmly wedged between two alpha males that no woman in her right mind would ever give a rat’s backside as to what happens.

Come on boys, we all know what this is about, just whip ‘em out already and have done with it. When all that testosterone is out of your system, then you can come talk to us again. Ramsey is lucky her character spends the climax of the film under an enchantment, it saves her from having to bare witness to the lame, macho, homoerotic chest beating that we’re subjected to.

Oh wait, that’s who this movie was made for: adolescent gay males. Those poor boys.

It does make sense though. The “sons of Ipswich”, as the four young men are flippantly referred to as, does sound like it could be the name of a boy band. They do look like a boy band.

Are they a boy band?

In one rare, brief moment of lucidity and self-awareness, the film even makes a joke of itself to that extent.

In the end, I’m still really not sure what this film was going for. I don’t think it knew what it wanted to be and that’s the crux of the problem. Instead of taking advantage of the things it had going for, all the makings of a successful camp film were there, it just floundered around aimlessly and ended up going nowhere.

Even the visuals were tired and boring.

I can’t get myself worked up about this movie in any way, positive or negative. When I finally hit the stop button on my remote the only feeling I was left with was one of indifference. I didn’t care enough to be mad about wasting my time but there was nothing redeeming about this film either.

So all I can say is: skip it. There’s no reason for anything else.

The DVD is fine. Not much to say about it either. There's some commentary, a few trailers. I think that was about it. Not that you would want to spend any of your time on more extra features with this movie anyway. A case of less is more.

Monday, August 06, 2007

Review: When A Woman Ascends The Stairs

Originally posted at Epinions



There are times when the academic in me comes out and I really want to talk about a film in the context of something greater than itself. That context may be the director’s body of work, a genre, a time period, or possibly a national cinema. Mikio Naruse’s When A Woman Ascends the Stairs is one of those films.

Why do I want to discuss it in relation to other films? Perhaps it’s the assertion that Naruse is one of Japan’s great directors; it is not unthinkable for his name to come up alongside the names of Ozu and Mizoguchi. He also has an extensive body of work spanning the decades from the early thirties to the late sixties. And while his work has been discussed in terms of his early experimental period and his later
post-war work, the themes have remained consistent throughout.

These are the reasons I would like to talk about When A Woman Ascends the Stairs beyond the experience of a single viewing.

However, there is one very good reason why I cannot. Simply, I’ve never seen another Naruse film. What I know about him, I know from reading. Ozu, Mizoguchi, Kurosawa, these directors I know, I love, and I’ve seen a number of their films. There is a lot that I can talk about. Why is Naruse different? One reason: his films are not widely available in the west. Occasionally there will be a screening, a retrospective, something of that sort, but for the most part our choices are limited. In the US we
have access to all of one of his films, When A Woman Ascends the Stairs, on DVD. If you’re lucky you may be able to find another film, Lady Chrysanthemums, on VHS. Your choices are slightly less limited in Europe but not by much.

I can’t tell you why Naruse’s films are so hard to see in the West but I can tell you that it is a shame. This is another point where I would like to discuss him in the context of his contemporaries. Since I can’t I will skip all of that and discuss When A Woman Ascends the Stairs in more limited terms.

The story of When A Woman follows Keiko, an aging bar hostess working in the Ginza district. She has reached a point in her life where she must decide between her options of marriage and the opening of her own place.Keiko is a unique woman in her world of liquor, men, geisha, family responsibility, and, those ideas that are always just out of reach, love and happiness. She tries to stay above the world around her, she never gives in to the men, but in the end, how long can a woman hold out when all of the tides are against her? And when her choice is between virtue and love, can we really blame her for giving in to either option?

When A Woman Ascends the Stairs is a melodrama. It is a sensitive exploration of the choices given to women trapped in Japan’s class system. The choices become a matter of survival. But even death does not bring freedom.Keiko is never given the option of making the right decision. Whatever path she follows, it will be wrong for someone and she has obligations to all.

While the visuals of When A Woman never moved me as much as, for example, those found in an Ozu film and while I never felt quite as invested in the fate of Keiko as I did in Mizoguchi’s heroine of Osaka Elegy, When A Woman touched me. Naruse’s Keiko becomes a sympathetic character and the themes he explores are just as important and relevant as anything found in any of our other favorite Japanese films.Naruse shows his social consciousness. We care about Keiko. There is a point to be made and by the end of the film, we get it.

Keiko is trapped in her life by the demands and social strictures of the world she lives in. Repeatedly she performs the action described by the title of the film, but her ascension is not one to be envied. She is not ascending to something greater, she finds at the top of her stairs the dead end that she can never hope to escape. Her climb is an exercise in futility. She will continue to travel up and up, finding at
the end only the same dingy bars and the same groping men.

Perhaps one day I will be able to tell you more about Naruse and his films. Until that point comes, all I can say is When A Woman Ascends the Stairs is worth your time. It’s a sad, poignant story that is still relevant for today’s audience. It may not be the greatest Japanese film I’ve ever seen but I am glad that I have seen it. And I look forward to the opportunity to discover more of Mikio Naruse.

A hint for those of you who are curious: it’s available on Netflix.

When A Woman Ascends the Stairs
1960
Japanese with English Subtitles
111 minute

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Review: Driving Lessons

Originally posted at Epinions



When considering Driving Lessons, two questions come immediately to mind. First, will Rupert Grint be able to escape the world of Potter? Second, do I really need another indie coming of age story?

The answers: Yes. And No.

Driving Lessons is writer Jeremy Brock’s (The Last King of Scotland; Her Majesty, Mrs. Brown) first directorial effort. Supposedly inspired by events and memories of his childhood, Brock tells the story of Ben Marshall. Marshall is the seventeen and a half year old son of a preacher and an evangelical. His father is frustrated, his mother is insane. After she decides to take in the troubled Mr. Fincham, Ben is tasked with finding a job to help pay for Mr. Fincham’s recovery. All in the name of being a good Christian. The job Ben finds is an assistant position with the aging actress Dame Evie Walton. Through his experiences with Dame Evie, Ben discovers a bit about the world and more about himself.

It’s incredibly easy to compare this movie to many others (Harold and Maude for a start) and it never does venture far into the world of originality. It also follows closely the conventions of “Independent Cinema”. It falls comfortably into a group of films including such recent examples as Garden State and Squid and the Whale. All coming of age dramas about male protagonists with complicated family lives. And that’s not to say that any of these are bad films or that there is something wrong with fitting into this category. That’s just what it is. Personally, I like a little more spice in my diet.

Driving Lessons does step away somewhat in that it is never completely over run by the cynicism that other films affect. There is always an air of innocence and repeatedly I found myself thinking of the movie as being “sweet.” A large part of that is a credit to Rupert Grint.

Grint’s Ben and Julie Walters’ Evie are two characters who are meant to be together. While the relationship occasionally flirts with the idea of romance, for the most part it sits solidly in the realm of friendship. Evie is outlandish and Ben is stoic. Their personalities clash but compliment at the same time. One of my favorite scenes is one between the two of them in Evie’s garden. They recite Shakespeare and Ben moves from reluctant partner to enthusiastic participant. Again, it’s “sweet” but it’s also engaging and Grint is given a moment to really perform.

It’s another trap of the “indie” film that Brock falls into with his directing. For some reason, it seems a prerequisite to include a lot of shots of the protagonist staring blankly ahead. I think it’s supposed to convey a sense of frustration? Disillusionment? Disenchantment? Disappointment? Depression? More words beginning with a “D”? Impotence? Yes, I’m sure that staring straight ahead requires a vast amount of acting skill. Lets see that shot again please. Thank you.

Grint does manage to show promise as a young actor, he has some truly fine moments, but over all I don’t think that Driving Lessons ever fully takes advantage of whatever talent may be lurking behind his quiet exterior.

And while the directing in Driving Lessons is never bad, it’s nothing incredibly fantastic either. Technically, it’s a well done film. There are some excellent compositions, the editing is solid, the story’s pacing worked for me, there are good performances. It just never moves beyond competent.

It’s not a bad choice for a rainy afternoon, if you have nothing else you particularly wanting to see, or if, like me, you’re curious to see what Harry Potter’s young stars can do in a different venue. Just don’t expect the film of the year.

In addition to Grint and Walters, the cast is rounded out with Laura Linney as Ben’s mother, Nicholas Farrell as Ben’s father, Jim Norton as Mr. Finch, and Michelle Duncan as the cute and seductive Bryony.

About This Thing

This blog is about film and life in the wonderful world of LA. I'm a filmmaker just getting started; I'm navigating my way through the industry, trying to find work, and sometimes even managing to make a living.

I've worked across the country on projects big and small. Everything from an indie in PA shot during the dead of winter to one of the bigger reality shows involving Models and the things they do.

I also just love doing things*. I'm a writer, aspiring director, wannabe photographer and cook. I waste too much time on the internet and sometimes all I want to do is hang out with my dog.

Stick around and chances are you'll catch me writing about it all.

*I use the word "thing" a lot. An inappropriate amount. I can't help it. There are just so many different things to talk about. And I just kind of like it.