Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Finalized Shooting and Equipment Schedule
Shooting Schedule:
February 10 – Noon; B-Roll of workers, new additions (bus and office), graveyard and sets
February 17 – Midmorning; B-Roll of bus/ new additions
February 24 – Midmorning; Junkyard tour, B-Roll
March 9-18 – Midmorning; Film inside of Dales house, Junkyard pick-ups, B-roll
April 13 – Late afternoon;
April 14 – Midmorning; formal/ sit-down/ "sticky" interview
April 20 – Time TBA; Final shoot/make-up/catch-up shoot.
**Note: the exact meeting time will be discussed on a weekly basis, however, we have a general time of day that we will be heading there each visit.
Equipment :
February 10, - T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat
February 17- T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat
February 24 - T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat
March 9-18 - T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat, Arri Fresnel Light Kits
April 13 - AF100 (w matte box-for interviews), T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat, Arri Fresnel Light Kits
April 14 - AF100 (w matte box-for interviews), T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat,
April 20 - T2i (w Follow Focus), Tripod (with baseplate), H4N, XLR Cable, Boom mic, Shotgun mic, Wireless Lav, Headphones, Lens Cleaner and Tissues, Highhat, Arri Fresnel Light Kits (depending on if we need more interview footage/house pick-ups)
Devotional Cinema Response
By Maryosha
Nathaniel Dorsky’s Devotional Cinema is a very interesting book! I really loved his description of his first experience of seeing a film and how he felt after the theater. The soda stains and popcorn pieces on the deco pattern carpet that your eye graze over as you leave the theater because your head is so full of emotion and shock after seeing a film in a pitch black theater that you cannot even hold it up, much less look others in the eyes. That sense of quiet followed by the parking lot conversation of “so what did you think of the film” and a world that seems completely different after sitting in a theater are all feelings that we have all experienced, however, I personally have become so accustomed to them that I do not think about them in the way that Dorsky so beautifully describes.
Another thing that Dorsky mentions that really stuck with me was a very simple face of matter that I had never even had the slightest of though about before. In the section titled Intermittence he states, “On close examination, even our vision appears to be intermittent, which explains why, in film, pans ofter feel artificial or forced. This stems from the fact that one never pans in real life. In truth, when we turn our heads we don’t actually see a graceful continuum but a series of tiny jump cuts, little stills joined, perhaps, by infinitesimal dissolves” (pg. 30). When reading this, and thinking about my own documentary that I am currently in the production stage, it makes me reconsider some of my own decisions. I do, however, think one or two nice pans that reveals space in a graceful way that calls attention to the technique and art within a shot is perfectly acceptable. But if the pan is just a graceful or smooth “look” to the right or left of a character within a narrative then it is completely unrealistic and takes viewers out of the story.
Dorsky then continues the Intermittence section with montages which I have always found to be a little cheesy because I personally associate them with Hollywood dramas that have a scene of ‘making oneself better’ or ‘striving to accomplish the dream’ etc. But Dorsky brings up a really great point that when we look back on our lives, our day, or even that last task that was accomplished we remember it in a montage format. Look at the cliché “life flashing before your eyes” right before you die or have a close encounter, your entire life “flashes” before your eyes like a montage in a movie.
Overall, Devotional Cinema is a beautifully written poetic journey through film. Nathaniel Dorsky has wonderful ideas and opinions on how to get the most out of films, making and viewing them. He concludes the book with a fabulous sentence, “the more film expresses itself in a manner intrinsic to its own true nature, the more it can reveal for us.” So I take away the overall mentality of stressing the importance of capturing the true essence of the story and sculpting my light in time.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Gaby's Devotional Cinema Response
There are several ways I might apply the ideas that Dorsky spoke about in the book to inspire my own filmmaking, especially on the current documentary project. He stresses several times the importance of meaning and how to create new meanings in different ways, which I took to mean that one must not sacrifice meaning and emotion for the aesthetics of a film. Film has a way of moving people emotionally and is one of the reasons I found myself drawn to it in the first place. Documentary films allow you to tell stories that engage the audience and can even move them to action. As I would like to start my filmmaking career in social documentaries, I find this advice to be particularly useful. One has to be able to show the realities of your subject without alienating the audience and therefore evoke an emotional response within them. Dorsky mentions how some film has just become “mere wallpaper in support of spoken information” (29.) This can be readily applied to documentary filmmaking as many docs tend to only be informative without engaging the audience emotionally, and in turn tend to look as if they were news clips. Documentary films weren’t meant to be visual newspapers (with the exception of propaganda). Therefore, we should allow the film to take on a more poetic sense and find meaning through themes that would be explored in the film, without being constrained to them. To do that, I would use Dorsky’s idea of intermittence using techniques such as montage or moments where there is not much action or information. Though it is difficult for me to move away from wall-to-wall information, so I would need to be more selective in the information I want presented in my documentary that would be most effective and meaningful to allow for the moments of intermittence. This way, the audience doesn’t become too aware of the fact that they are watching a film with lots of information, causing an information overload for them and perhaps evoke a negative feeling towards the documentary as a result. Dorsky also explained how the use of the self-symbol could bring more meaning to the film without having the film explicitly state the meaning. In my current documentary project, we intend to use the juxtaposition of Dale’s life in prison and the constrictions of life in the junkyard.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Devotional Cinema by Nathaniel Dorsky
Response by Bethany Day
Reading this book was an enlightening experience. A lot of what Dorsky talked about I had an idea of, or could relate to somehow, but he expertly articulated his thoughts and backed up his arguments with historical references. I like the structure of his book, and how he started out with the idea that “there was a concordance between film and our human metabolism… We are both appreciators and victims of material existence” (Dorsky, 17). Dorsky makes a good point especially when he talks about film being a form of alchemy, a way to relieve repressed emotions and transform your way of thinking. I thought it was especially interesting how he kept returning to historical references, including the reference to facts about Greek theories of medicine and how “it was taught that illness came from a dreamlike absorption, a state of imbalance” (Dorsky, 21). I also thought it was interesting that in order to correct this imbalance, the sanctuary of Epidaurus was built in order for people to have “temple sleep” (long periods of relaxation) after performances. This reference to the past is definitely applicable to the future and the effect films can have on their audiences. I also found it enlightening that the author believes that in order to lay the foundation for devotion, the film must draw attention to the medium itself, it “must obey its own , materiality” (Dorsky, 23).
Reading this book was an enlightening experience. A lot of what Dorsky talked about I had an idea of, or could relate to somehow, but he expertly articulated his thoughts and backed up his arguments with historical references. I like the structure of his book, and how he started out with the idea that “there was a concordance between film and our human metabolism… We are both appreciators and victims of material existence” (Dorsky, 17). Dorsky makes a good point especially when he talks about film being a form of alchemy, a way to relieve repressed emotions and transform your way of thinking. I thought it was especially interesting how he kept returning to historical references, including the reference to facts about Greek theories of medicine and how “it was taught that illness came from a dreamlike absorption, a state of imbalance” (Dorsky, 21). I also thought it was interesting that in order to correct this imbalance, the sanctuary of Epidaurus was built in order for people to have “temple sleep” (long periods of relaxation) after performances. This reference to the past is definitely applicable to the future and the effect films can have on their audiences. I also found it enlightening that the author believes that in order to lay the foundation for devotion, the film must draw attention to the medium itself, it “must obey its own , materiality” (Dorsky, 23).
I loved his continued references to different art forms throughout history. His references made it easy to understand his argument about how people’s view of the world has become more objective over time. I am glad he talked about imbalances, bringing up that a film needs to have an “awareness of the formal dignity of existence” (Dorsky, 26). Single-mindedness is the other side of the imbalance. These ideas made me think about myself as a filmmaker, and how I want to achieve a connection with my audience; allow them to see what I see and make them feel what I feel. I want my audience to have a good experience. One of my favorite lines is when he says that “concepts or spoken language are ornaments in the context of visual space” (Dorsky, 27). It reiterates the fact that as a filmmaker you need to show the story visually, not just tell it through language and dialogue. I agreed with his arguments about intermittence and how “allowing intermittence into a film activates the viewer’s mind” (Dorsky, 29). I identified with relinquishing all control, and suddenly being enlightened by everything around you. The world is ever-moving, ever-changing, and full of poetic images and language that one could only hope to translate or transform successfully through film. The ideas presented by Dorsky in his book definitely made me look closer at myself as a filmmaker, and how I want to achieve the effects he mentioned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)