Filmmaking Career Path

I am reading Mike Curtis at HD for Indies flipping out (via Kent Nichols) right now. It is long, and, well, ranty. But his 'anecdote' regarding career development piqued my interest:

"Anecdote - it used to be that the hot new movie directing talent came up through commercials and music videos - think David Fincher. McG is, I think, the last name I can think of that came up that route that has achieved commercial success. Anybody else? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? There was a list of top 50 hot talent something or other. Nobody under 30. Where’s the new talent coming from? Not from music videos anymore - there’s barely a market, and certainly no real money, in that anymore."

The reason this jumped out at me is because I had just seen another one of those "win a marginal amount of money for creating our viral ad campaign for us" contests. I have been generally down on this type of thing in the past, mainly because you really are guaranteed to forfeit all ownership and rights to your work upon submission, with only a small chance of any compensation. Further, most of said contest yield so much garbage, even the lucky winner.

However, with the supposed decline of one development path for filmmaking talent, and no end in sight for theses contests, could the latter serve as a possible replacement for the former, at least in a very small way? Probably not, but if a young/student filmmaker were to scour the web for contests that suited his interests, deconstructed the judging criteria, product in question and marketing strategies, and use these elements as real world exercises for honing their craft, it might pay off. Call it the Lazlo Hollyfeld film school.

More »

Horror As a Model for Indie Film

Some people theorize (citation needed...) that the horror genre gives us an embodiment and outlet for our amorphous and repressed fears. There are corollaries about the rise of horror revenues during times of socioeconomic tumult and war. Horror, the theories go, allows us to release these emotions vicariously, in small doses, and within the safe confines of genre. Cinema has an arc, a structure, and most importantly a resolution. We do not have to explore our own psychological demons introspectively, without a net. Instead, we can sit back, blow off some steam and know that in 90 minutes all will be right in the world again. It grants catharsis and control to the conscious, and spear points to keep the darkest recesses of our minds at bay.

Bias warning: I personally am not a fan of the horror genre. I have a variety of personality traits that prevent me from getting much enjoyment horror movies. Mostly I prefer to be in control of as much as possible at all times. Perhaps I am just not able to let go of this, and thus the idea of impending doom actually creates more anxiety for me rather than releasing it. Regardless, my general ambivalence to the genre has prevented me from studying it too closely. However, the above theories are very intriguing to me as a filmmaker.
It seems there are hundreds, if not more, awful horror flicks made each year. Most of the movies made by my casual acquaintances and friends of friends are horror movies. These movies are poorly written and made, but never seem to lack for cast or crew, or strangely audience. Perhaps the genre itself is able to ignite enough passion to perpetuate itself, even in spite of the fact that so many works lack the quality that other films and filmmakers strive for.

If this is true, and also, if there is any merit to the theories of vicarious catharsis, horror might serve as a perfect case study for what indie filmmaking can achieve. Horror tackles deep psychological ailments of the masses. It has a built-in audience (though this is a characteristic of all genres), and it is able to inspire people to sweat the unglamorous parts of production with little to no hope of money or recognition. If a filmmaker were to explore complex and universal elements of the human psyche and to write and produce to pre-existing communities united by a common passion, they might be able to repackage the success of the horror genre to further their own unique point-of-view. I am not advocating using the horror genre as a veil for any theme that may inspire you. But, if you were to truly study why horror works and deconstruct it, you might be able to harness the potential that keeps Hollywood churning out slasher films. Further, the tumultuous times within which horror thrives, times like the one I am writing in, present ample opportunity for art to raise a voice. Whether by tackling political issues (Frost|Nixon, Good Night and Good Luck) or the precious and precarious balance of security and justice/freedom (Bourne Ultimatum, The Dark Knight), indie filmmakers can couple the unique contexts of their time and space with the lessons of the horror genre, and perhaps carve a place for themselves in the public consciousness.


More »

Polymathism and Indie Film

On one hand, some of the most important intellectual work of our civilization was done by great, creative thinkers not bound to one area of specialization. Da Vinci was "a scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, painter, sculptor, architect, botanist, musician and writer"; Newton a "physicist, mathematician, astronomer, theologian, natural philosopher". Modern society is built upon work by polymaths.

On the other hand, one of the most oft cited (and very valid) criticisms to auteur theory is that filmmaking is a collaborative process. However, I have already discussed how current economic conditions now allow for the entire industrial side of filmmaking to be executed by teams as small as one. So how could a creative, intelligent individual perfectly execute every step in the filmmaking workflow to create a film of unified vision, high art and quality?
Yes, filmmaking is a very industrial process. It has many integral parts that must be executed at a high level to achieve a certain amount of quality. Writing, directing, editing are just some of the more sexy rolls that must be strong to make a movie good, but there is many subtle things that must happen in between too. I believe if one was creative, talented and systematic enough, they could hone skills across the filmmaking workflow and create a tight, cohesive and quality movie worthy of auteur study.

Shane Carruth and Robert Rodriguez may one day achieve this modern day Renaissance Man/Auteur/indie status. Carruth's very first movie won two awards at Sundance. Rodriguez's first picked up one prize at Sundance. Not bad for ~$10K in productions costs, combined.

Carruth reversed engineered the process of filmmaking, keeping costs down by doing as much himself as possible (writer, director, producer, actor, editor, composer. Does this list remind you of anything?). Rodriguez has spent most of his life honing every facet of production. If one day either of these filmmakers has the body of work to study in the context of auteur theory, it would be interesting to see what the effects of the "one man crew" method might have on the subject. Additionally, the free/powerful animation tool Blender, putting Pixar (circa 1994) power in the hands of every potential auteur, making possible things like this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUPcimeiqLE

and this:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUPcimeiqLE

In the mean time, I believe this approach to filmmaking could produce some of the most original work in decades, and would be the perfect laboratory for developing a modern day auteur school.

More »