Summer Reading

As I mentioned in my last post, I have been doing a lot of reading on film this summer.

The first one was Shot by Shot by Steven Katz which is an excellent text on planning a shoot and the key considerations in taking things from page to frame. Mostly it focuses on the basics of camera technique, but is outstanding in explaining storyboarding. It shows various ways of planning a dolly move or the types of cranes you might run into. This book is beyond practical and highly recommended for anyone who thinks they can make a movie. My favorite part was when he points out that Citizen Kane itself breaks the "rule" that a low angle makes your character seem big. The book is lavish with graphics to make the points clear. I'm very glad I read it before school. Not only because I'll probably have an easier time trying to shoot than if I hadn't read it, but also because it solidified my choice to focus on cinematography. Katz's description of the difference in lenses will be nothing compared to the familiarity using them will provide, and the better I can communicate with a camera person, the quicker things can get done.

Making A Good Script Great by Linda Seger was slightly less useful than it was infuriating. She made some good points about certain story devices and it includes very helpful questions at the end of each chapter that can prod you in the right direction during a rewrite. However her axiomatic approach to what you can and can't do to a story made me really mad. For weeks I watched foreign films for the sake of proving the structure theory wrong. This also helped to make up for her revolting suggestions of good "watch and learn" movies. Both widely popular and generally unoffensive, Cocoon and Witness were two of the most boring and confounding films I had ever seen (thanks to Seger's suggestion), and worst of all, they don't even truly fit the mold that the book claims they do. If anyone reads this book trying to come up with an idea for a story, the best that they will end up with is a formulaic made for TV movie. Although, given the commercial approach of the book, some readers might not find this a problem.

In reaction to this, I read a couple scripts by Jean Cocteau. If there ever were scripts to prove there is no formula for scripts, it's these. Although a lot of people will say "you never put camera angles in a script" or "never write in direction unless it's important", I would have to say this advice is mostly applicable to people looking to sell the screenplay they write. For Cocteau, the scripts were for him alone, and they offer some beautiful insight into his thought process. Although for Testament of Orpheus, penetrating the dialogue of the late middle still seems to be a task that eludes me.

I then attempted to read Cocteau's most famous book The Difficulty of Being, but every page was as devastatingly poetic as the aforementioned dialogue. It was like trying to read another language or trying to read Scandinavian skaldic poetry. It's in English prose, but is so dense with meaning, connotation, and intention that is mostly serves to make your head feel like it's underwater. Although I felt like I was scratching the surface of his words, I did not feel ready to read the next 100 pages. To be continued.

Next I read How To Read A Film by James Monaco. Like Shot by Shot, the book is dense with images, but also with information of a widely varying nature. It gives a very comprehensive history of just about everything you can think of. To give a history of film, he starts with Daguerreotypes. To give a history of media he starts with the printing press. Although this might seem excessive, for the most part it is helpful in giving some context, at least for the film aspect. The book makes some very interesting comparisons and connections that I was delighted to consider. In addition, it shows a vast knowledge of film from all countries and in general provides a rough equivalent of a first year film student's education. He even tackles the large (and, in my opinion, irrelevant) topic of film theory in a way that is very helpful. The chapter is organized chronologically with competing theories (expressionism vs. realism) grouped together. It lays out the names of theorists and the gist of important theories in a straightforward manner without applying one or the other to any other part of the book. Much appreciated. The sections on media are rather outdated in the 3rd edition, but a 4th edition just came out this year. From my skimmings, it seems that Monaco has become even more cantankerous and embittered about the state of films since the 3rd edition. Poor guy. All in all, a very good read.

The last thing I read was Fifty Years of Serial Thrills by Roy Kinnard. Although not really a book about filmmaking, I am working on an idea for a serial-inspired short film about a turbaned mystic. The book was a delight giving plot and production summaries for the most notable serials, be they good or bad. At times hilarious, it was fascinating to learn about the turmoil of the Tarzan property and the psychotically economic ways in which studios filmed these things. It also provided an astonishingly complete index of serials; a real treasure considering how few of these films are left. It was a great read, clocking in under 200 pages. I read it all in one day. It also has wonderful interviews with the stars of Flash Gordon, one of whom died shortly before the book was printed. Highly recommended for people who have a hard on for the '30s and things that suck.

I like to think this has been a productive summer.

Shameful Neglect and A New Chapter

I'm pretty pathetic when it comes to updating.

Since the last time I've posted, I have been trying to fill some of the holes in my film knowledge. The New Wave, on either side of the Atlantic, has been pretty neglected, so I dug into that and others. I don't think it's possible to really document the volumes of films I've watched, but I can rattle off some big ones that I had not already seen.

Bonnie and Clyde
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
Serpico
The 400 Blows
nearly all of Jean-Pierre Melville's catalog (Le Samourai being the most outstanding)
nearly all of Terry Gilliam's catalog (Brazil and 12 Monkeys being the ones not to avoid entirely)
about 7 or 8 Ingmar Bergman films
Cocteau's Orphic Trilogy
Late Spring
Le Bete Humaine


I'll spare you a recitation of my Netflix account history, and I will probably make separate entries for the ones that affected me most deeply.

I also saw some bad movies, Public Enemies, and Christopher Nolan's first film Following come to mind. Perhaps they deserve their own entries as well.

I have also been reading up on different facets of filmmaking. I think for the interest of cohesion, I will give that its own post also. Who would have thought all these posts! But as I enter into my first year of film school (next week) I think it will be beneficial to keep a record of my thoughts on films and other things. I will be seeing a lot of films and be given a lot of information. Perhaps I can use this newfangled blog thing to keep my head straight.

Last, but not least, I have been watching tons and tons of anime. There are some very strange trends in anime right now. Definitely my current favorite is Fight Ippatsu! Juuden-Chan!! It's a bizzare parody that borders on pornagraphic but with the most biting humor I've ever seen. It plays on expectations ("Maybe it's because Mom's watching over me from above. Just kidding!") and gives gratuitous fan-service, and still manages to dish out one of the most compelling plots a short series has offered in a long time. Not recommended for people unfamiliar with anime stereotypes or without a working knowledge of Sailor Moon or La Blue Girl. Ohhhh man, I can't wait til next week.

The Mummy Trilogy/corrections

Okay, first things first, someone was confused about my review of IZO.

I am not a fan of Takashi Miike. I think that as a filmmaker, he makes a LOT of mistakes, and is one of the most disappointing filmmakers to come out of Japan. That's not to say I didn't like Gozu. That was a very good movie, but Miike is not anyone I would get excited over. I would agree with comparisons to Tarantino. He makes movies that are interesting to look at, but they put into their films a particular voice (much like a piece of writing), and it is a voice I do not like. While, they can make successful films, I will never be able to overlook the voice screaming at me from the screen.


Now that that's out of the way...

I have always loved The Mummy. I'm not kidding. HUGE fan. I wasn't as much of a fan of The Mummy Returns.

However.

Stu hadn't seen them so we rented the new special edition DVDs, and then saw the new one.

Oh Man. As three movies together they work SO well. Each sequel builds on character traits that are present in the previous film. My only complaint is that Rachel Weisz wasn't in the 3rd one. Bummer, but the movie wouldn't have made sense if they had written her character out. And a different storyline wouldn't have been as good.

Also, the plot silliness is the second one is okay, since it gets ignored in the 3rd film.

As for the DVD release, the special features are great, especially the ones showing the CGI compositing. The animation in the first Mummy was a lot more impressive than you think. There were scenes where what they were doing was imperceptible, and this was 9 years ago. In fact, I think some of the effects in the most recent one looked worse.

Go figure.

As far as the DVDs go, having watched all the features, I think I'll wait for the boxed set before I purchase any.

Now people are welcome to disagree with me, but as a die hard fan of these movies I found the most recent installment much better than I expected, and a great way to round out the franchise.

Plus, it was soooo cool.

Recommendations:
The Mummy
The Mummy Returns

Se7en

***SPOILERS***

Okay, we've all seen this movie at least once, but I watched it again this week because Chloe hadn't seen it. Last time I watched this was when I showed it to Stu, and his big problem with it was the scene in the bar when the idea of the movie is kind of laid out. But seeing it again, I feel like that scene is perfect. In fact, I felt affirmation that that movie is perfect. The script is solid, well paced, and in no place lacking. The direction is impeccable. The camerawork is interesting, but not invasive. All of the performances are strong and believable. The sound design is the only place the movie falls short, and it's because of a couple instances where things that shouldn't have had sound effects did. So upon the 5th viewing, and being nitpicky, 98% A.

As far as the direction goes, it is strongest during Lust. Up til that point, you see a lot of blood, but the point of the movie is not to be gory. By showing the picture of the leather harness blade thing instead of the mutilated body, it is up to the audience to create their own horror.

To get back to the bar scene, it is important because it sets up the scene when they are driving with John Doe. If Detective Somerset hadn't been able to explain more thoroughly his idea that the world was suffering from apathy, the scene in the car would have had less impact. As it was, Somerset had to listen to John Doe say the same things he believed.

I could go on, and analyze the quality of this movie shot by shot, but would that really be interesting? Instead, just go out and rent this movie. Watch it at least once more, because this is a movie worth appreciating.

Recommendations:
Zodiac
From Hell

IZO

Takashi Miike is in rare form, whatever that means. I liked the story, although it was a little sprawling (but it's an epic, what are you going to do). I liked how casually the movie switched back and forth between settings. I feel, though, that Miike has both an incredible sense of subtlety, and no subtlety at all. There seems to be philosophy here besides the stuff that is stated directly by characters in a setting created so they could state these things. However, it gets lost. Too subtle? The same cannot be said of his characteristic violence. I wish he could learn to use metaphor to replace shooting someone in the eye with arrows. Beat Takashi is hot, though.

Recommendations:
anything else by Miike

Gozu

Now, while I'm not a fan of Takashi Miike, this movie is very good. However it's not as good as a David Lynch film. It was similar, with distorted internal logic and surreal things happening with no indication that they haven't happened. But it falls victim again to Miike's “LOOK GUYS, LOOK HOW SUBTLE I'M BEING.”

Watching this with Maher and Chloe, they immediately were all over this movie's obvious subtlety, saying it was a giant thematic metaphor of birth and gender identity and all of these other things that are pretty easy to find after the fact. However what was on the screen was a Lynchian simple story accented by weirdness.

I absolutely despise scrutinizing a movie in an attempt to dredge philosophy out of it. Just because an event on the screen does not follow real world or even internal logic does not mean that you can write is off saying, “That didn't really happen, it was a metaphor.” This is a cop out. Also you can't criticize a film the same way you can a piece of literature. They are drastically different mediums, and while Stu tells me that this does not need to be said, I have found that an unreasonable amount of people seem to think this is the correct course of action.

Now, don't get me wrong. I liked this movie very much, and would recommend it. I just wouldn't recommend watching it with someone who thinks Miike is the best filmmaker in history, because he is far from it.

Recommendations:
The Exterminating Angel
Twin Peaks

The American Astronaut

This movie would be the perfect double feature with Forbidden Zone. It was described to me as “a space-opera western” and that's just about how it is. A renegade spacer tries to collect a reward through a series of very silly trades. My only complaint was the end seemed a little loose. I would have gladly watched another hour of this movie if they wanted to wrap it up better. Still, that was not enough to make me dislike it in any way. Score!

Recommendations:
Forbidden Zone