Boise Filmmakers

10 August 2011

2011-08-10T23:15:00.000-06:00

Been awhile. Updating the world as to my progress climbing this mud-hill called indie filmmaking.

- Showed Thirty Proof Coil to an entheusiastic crowd on 9 July 2011. Calico Cooper and her friend Tiffany Lowe came into town and proceeded to raise hell, anarchy, and hemlines.

- Received two negative reviews about TPC; one by some asshole that thinks Ernest Saves The World is the best movie ever. Go fuck yourself Eric Scott Morrison. You have the time and energy to run down my modest $4K movie, let's see what you've ever created and sent out into the world, douchebag. Seriously. GO. FUCK. YOURSELF.

- Got a little bitter about some douchebag's review. I'll get over it eventually.

- Landed a gig editing a documentary for a company that has told me they can't pay me. Aweseome. I've got plenty of my own free projects I can work on, thanks.

- Speaking of gigs, Andrew Ellis and I are the soon-to-be receipients of an Idaho Film Grant, which will help us fund the shooting of our new film Honor Among Thieves. Which I should be revising instead of updating this blog.

- My daughter took tenth place in the nation for her National History Day project junior division documentary. How many other projects were involved? Around 20,000. Way to go, Roo!

- I have scripts laying on the table waiting to be transcribed into the computer. I really need an agent. Go figure, I've been saying this since I was seventeen. Perhaps that writing on the wall won't get any clearer.

- Bagel Shop Bebop has been a resounding success for a webisode; I should be editing the latest editions instead of updating this blog.

- My "Best Ever Albums" book of reviews is almost half completed. Yay!

- My script The Troupe is in local production with an estimated budget of HOLY SHIT! Yeah, I can't talk about it, but it's more than ten bucks.

- I will be a judge for the H48 - the adult, Halloween version of I48. That's right, blame me.

- I have since started watching Netflix streaming, and have decided it's like crack cocaine for filmmakers.

- We had a cheap BluRay player for almost a month before actually watching a BluRay disc on it. What was it? The special features for Blade Runner, of course.

- Feeling anxious; ready to shoot Honor Among Thieves in four weeks. Did I mention I need to finish the script re-write?

Best of luck to all area filmmakers, and remember: when Eric Scott Morrison disses your film, TELL HIM TO GO FUCK HIMSELF!!!

2010 is in the Archives, Baby.

2011-01-01T23:21:00.003-07:00

This is what I worked on in 2010:

- Finished Vagabond Lane and showed it to a modest crowd.

- Wrote a script called Despair, ID - which would end up being a movie called Thirty Proof Coil.

- Blind emailed Calico Cooper a pitch to play the lead - sight unseen - in Thirty Proof Coil. She accepted and my jaw hit the floor.

- Participated in i48 2010, not being very excited about the whole thing. I don't know if I'll be playing in 2011, but then again...

- Spent a week in New Plymouth, Idaho directing Thirty Proof Coil with some really cool people.

- Edited Thirty Proof Coil for four months. It's a dang good movie, if I say so myself.

- Wrote two feature scripts in October and November: The Nihilists (Part One) - which is a story about how two people are going to change the world in spite of itself; and Coffee Shop Bebop - the episodic tale of a Coffee Shop and the stories that occur therein. The nice thing about Coffee Shop Bebop is that it marks the first time I've collaborated with my fourteen-year-old daughter, Ashley. She's a fine writer - just ask Andrew Ellis, who is going to produce/direct the series over the first third of 2011.

- Produced the Idaho Short Film Program KURZE HOSEN 2010 - a collection of Idaho short films by Idaho filmmakers. We played at The Flicks to a modest crowd that ensured we'd think about doing a 2011 version... perhaps.

- Wrote the SPF 2 Directors Challenges - which are all about directors being challenged. Clam City Pictures has won twice in a row.

- Started a neo-noir crime story that I'm almost finished writing.

Things we lost in the fire-sale of 2010:

- the Idaho International Film Festival is dead.

- Silverdraft Studios never really got off the ground and - by all accounts - is dead.

- a number of film making acquaintances have left me feeling a bit like Charlie Brown on Valentine's Day, but I suppose that's the nature of all things. I have made new friends, and don't lament not being invited to certain parties anymore. Much.

- Walking to Jungo was going to be shot in August of 2010, but Thirty Proof Coil demanded too much looking after, so that massive undertaking has been put on indefinite hold for the time being.

That's that, I suppose. I'll try and post more often in 2011. Who knows... perhaps someone might read this as well... =)

Will

VAGABOND LANE 2010

2010-03-09T04:57:00.005-07:00

This last Saturday - 6 March 2010 - marked the end of a long road for me and Lana; the local public screening of our film Vagabond Lane. With the help of Andrew Ellis, we screened the film two times that night at the Egyptian Theater in downtown Boise. We had media support prior to the film: a Twitter blitz, constant Facebook updates, mentions in the Idaho Statesman's Scene section, an e-interview with local NBC affiliate reporter Maggie O'Mara, plugs on the radio and even an NPR interview. It's safe to say that - insofar as the press is concerned - we hit it pretty well. Certainly, it could have been better - major coverage on the television would have been nice, full-page ads in the paper would have been nice, lengthy articles with photographs would have been nice, but yeah... what we could get for free, we got a lot of it.

And it still didn't help.

Out of a possible 1,540 seats in the Egyptian Theater, we sold... 178. I would almost guarantee that everyone in that theater is less than two degrees of separation from me.

Insofar as covering the costs of leasing out the theater, we were good - we lost six bucks. Insofar as this was a fundraiser for Vagabond Lane's festival run, well... not so good.

Am I irritated? Absolutely. Not only was it ludicrous that we couldn't sell 300 seats, but it's ludicrous what this says about the residents of Boise. Let's do some math.

The greater metro area around Boise in 2008 had a population of 587,689 people. Let's say that it's gone up a bit since then, which is true - I just don't know the exact figure. BUT... I can say without a doubt that the population of the area isn't any less than the 2008 numbers show. That means that we reached .0003 % of Boise's metro area population with our film.

Three ten-thousandths of a percent.

The number's only slightly better when you look at Boise's city population of 2008, which was 205,314. That means we reached a whopping .000866 % of the population. Eight-point-five ten-thousandths of a percent. Wow.

Greg Bayne tried to teach me; I didn't listen. "Boise," he said, preparing for his documentary about Jens Pulver, "is not a film town." Clearly it isn't. Clearly the masses of Boise voted with their wallets and chose to stay home, rather than see an Idaho film that represents a point in Idaho culture. Hell, even the price was right for movie watching: we only charged a general admission price of six bucks. Six bucks to sit in a grand old theater, watch members of your community perform something that is (if I say so myself) of higher quality than your standard "good" community theater presentation (which, of course, costs twice as much to attend)? At that price, I'd attend every screening of every local film - and I'd bring friends.

But Boise isn't a film town.

Certainly, I can be as guilty of this as the next person. I haven't seen every local film presented, and I feel some guilt over that - but I also feel that, at $10 a ticket and when you're as broke as I am... nope. Can't do it. I suppose, then, I was projecting a little when I set the ticket prices for Vagabond Lane at $6. I was empathizing with the community -especially since I'm in an economic vise-grip as well.

But that's aside from the point. The point is this: if people in Boise actually valued local independent cinema, then they would have been at the film (films, actually - I'm not the only indie filmmaker in this city), regardless of the price. As it is, it appears that only .000866 % of the population of Boise has any interest at all in developing a culture of local cinema and film making.

Which brings me to my real-for-reals big cheesed off epiphany. Of the individuals in town that present themselves as some kind of gear in the machine that is local film making - actors, directors, editors, producers, musicians, sound people, costumers, etc. - very few came to the film. Certainly, there were the actors and the like that I have relationships with that land somewhere between "friends" and "acquaintances". Those people showed up. But those self-important pseudo-professionals that live in the community and wave their "Look! I lived in Los Angeles for two years! I know what I'm talking about!" metaphysical resumes in the faces of anyone who might listen and/or benefit them in some way - those people didn't show up.

Fine. Clearly if the Boise film making community doesn't get its act together and start supporting one another, then it is doomed to crumble upon itself. That means the members of that community - regardless of personal feelings - need to quit playing silly reindeer games and foster support for one another. That doesn't mean we all work on each others' movies; that doesn't mean we have the floating $100 bill that goes to fund one project after another, but is really just the same $100 bill changing hands every six months; and that doesn't mean we have to BELIEVE in the projects or the contents of the projects themselves, but merely in the idea that developing a film community in Boise is good for Boise and our culture. Until that time comes, we're just a bunch of egotistical self-righteous children with entitlement issues.

As a final note, I had a small number of cast and crew members that didn't come to Vagabond Lane because they were actively trying to sabotage the screening. For some reason, they think they are in competition with me. I understand. I am their scapegoat, their despised tyrant, their nemesis. All I can say to their behavior is that it is childish, short-sighted, and they will not benefit in any way by acting as such. While I will continue to support Boise filmmakers and the grand ideal of fostering a culture of Boise independent film, I cannot support these individuals, because they have behaved despicably. They are beneath me, and are a cancer that needs to be carved away so that the host body may survive. This is the last I will write of this issue.

Vagabond Lane is finished, and now makes its way onto the festival circuit where - most likely - it will die the death of most independent films. That saddens me, but the realization that this is the likely result of four years of hard work does not discourage me - rather, the opposite. I have made projects before (and during) Vagabond Lane; I shall make many more after.

Here's to Boise film making.

Will

9 March 2010.

The Gods of Technology Have Won This Round...

2009-06-26T04:11:00.000-06:00

Sigh.

I've put off writing this because it's just... yeah.

For the last three years, off and on, I've been working on my indie movie, "Vagabond Lane" - a film that has cost upwards of $60,000 to complete. Three weeks ago I finally hit a video lock, and I was two weeks from finishing the whole damn thing, only needing to add the dialogue replacement that I needed to record for two scenes.

The light at the end of the tunnel was not only visible, it was bright and brilliant and shiny and all those things that one can find at the end of a My Pretty Pony or Care Bears cartoon. I, as they say, was pretty damn happy.

Until last week.

Last week my car had to go into the shop, my Panasonic DVX100-B died, and the computer I was editing VL on decided to play shy. It sorta went like this:

FADE UP on WILL sitting in his living room, preparing to edit VL for one of the last times. He's all sorts of happy, and can imagine an angelic choir singing above him. He boots up his trusty iMac.

A frown crosses Will's face as a GRAY SCREEN OF UNHAPPINESS appears on the iMac monitor. It reads: YOU NEED TO REBOOT YOUR IMAC (along with a bunch of other stuff). Will frowns, holds down the power button and waits, then reboots his computer. Will's frown is joined by wide eyes as a GRAY SCREEN OF UNHAPPINESS appears again on the iMac monitor. It reads: YOU NEED TO REBOOT YOUR IMAC (along with a bunch of other stuff).

Crap.

Now, at this point, I'm as calm as I can be - after all, I've saved finished and rendered files to my externals, so... no problem, right?

Wrong.

Somewhere in the last three weeks of editing and saving and rendering and all that crap, my nicely processed scenes had turned into blocky and ugly crap - somewhere FCP had decided to re-render them out at the lowest possible quality and...

... and yeah.

So here I am. My car is on life support, my camera is still awaiting a guts transplant, and I'm working on a borrowed computer and knowing that the borrowed time I've spent editing this movie was spent six months ago, and I have to QUITE LITERALLY re-edit and re-capture all the video footage for the movie.

The positives of this whole thing are that it gives me a chance to make an even better movie, and at least the audio mix is still intact. Still, I feel as if I'm reaching into the dark grey storm clouds to grasp a few tentative silver linings. I feel as if I've let everyone involved in the project down, everyone I've EVER KNOWN down, and proven myself to be an abject failure at this whole "movie thing."

So yeah.

Yeah.

The God's of Technology hate me, and the only thing I can do is pick my ass up out of the dirt, pick up the pieces and carry on towards the finish line that was dangled in front of my outstretched hands and then yanked away by that evil bastard Fate and his or her cohorts. The last week has sucked; every time I thought of the movie, I just wanted to put my head in the blender. But time heals blah blah blah and I'm getting back into my skull with some sense of perspective and a few ideas that I can still do this. It's just a real bitch, and to all of you that have supported me in this project, all I can say is "thank you" and "please be patient with me."

Will

Suspended animation in the blogosphere.

2009-06-08T15:20:00.002-06:00

I've got a plate-full of things I need to get done, and the Internet sucks up a lot of my time. So... I'll be back later.

Thanks,

Will

Render time fill: David Lynch

2009-03-31T01:52:00.003-07:00

So I've moved on to the next three minutes of editing happy happy joy joy hurry-up-and-wait; while not doing audio (which requires lots of headphone wearing), I get to have something rolling on the tv in the background for those joyful 30 minute stretches when the Mac is rendering all the color correction and manipulation I'm doing. This week: David Lynch.

I started off with Twin Peaks: The Complete Second Season, having watched the first season a week ago. While I fully accept my membership as a former "Peaks Freak" from back in the day (ah, college...), it's been a bit of a disappointment watching these episodes for the first time in 17-18 years. While the first season was damn near brilliant, season two jumps the shark with the solving of the murder of Laura Palmer. Every episode after the culmination of the mystery is a pale imitation of what Twin Peaks was supposed to be. Not that there weren't some great moments: Billy Zane's star was created in season two, looking like a young Marlon Brando. David Duchovny plays a DEA agent in drag (and more animated than that FBI agent he would embody two years later), and Lynch's directing and writing of the "bite me, you ABC fools!" finally was an inspired flipping of the bird to network brass. But, for the most part, Twin Peaks' second season (post Laura Palmer) was sad because it became that which it had mocked so well: a crappy soap opera.

Next I watched Inland Empire. Three hours of a barely-scripted Lynchian universe where Laura Dern goes from normal to absurist puppet in... hunh. Not as fast as the viewer would like, actually. Inland Empire has moments of brilliance draped in curtains of tediousness. I can't tell if it's Lynch dipping back into the experimental nature of film, or if it's Lynch dipping back into the well of his already well-known bag of tricks. Dern is unfortunately miscast in this piece; while she undoubtedly knows the short hand needed to work with a director like Lynch, she too seems to be re-hashing her acting crutches (most notably her ability to cringe. Don't get me wrong, cringing is a tough thing to sell on film. However, we've seen that from Dern, like... a thousand and two times). There's a lot going on with Inland Empire, but most of it seems to be coming from Lynch's discovery of a new toy to play with: the digital camera. Not my favorite Lynch movie, but fine enough to have playing in the background while waiting for FCP to finish rendering.

Finally, I let spin the latest release of Eraserhead, Lynch's first feature-length film. It took Lynch almost 6 years to get this sucker finished (which makes me look speedy by comparison), and it's still as convoluted, confusing, and brilliant today as it was back in the '70's (or '90's, when I first saw it on a bunk VHS). A GREAT film, a testament to the use of absurdism in film. Salvador Dali would have been proud of Eraserhead, as it is the legitimate offspring of his Un Chien Andalou.

Whoops. Render is done. More next time.

Will

Update While I Wait For Rendering...

2009-03-20T02:42:00.002-07:00

So I've been sinking three weeks into the same 3.5 minute scene on Vagabond Lane, and I notice that I've been sitting with my head in the box for roughly 8 hours tonight, and I notice that I have to be up in two hours, so... yeah. Figured I'd blog about stuff while I wait for my latest stab at compositing multiple images to render.

It seems that the unemployed discover the public library about 2 years into their unemployment - depending upon the financial support they get from their significant other and whether or not they have cable/satellite TV. At least, that's the boat I'm in, as I've found joy and treasure at the branches of the Boise and Nampa public libraries. Specifically: DVD collections that most video rental stores don't have. And Redbox? Convenient as heck, but don't try to watch anything more than six months old... However, the DVD's at the local library do leave some things to be desired: anything "popular" has a good shot at being scratched. No biggie for me, since most all the movies in the library are quite old (non-fiction titles being the exception). BUT! Foreign films are generally in pristine condition, and there's a sizable number of titles. Just this week I've enjoyed Run Lola Run, Stalker, The Red Shoes, and Dark Water (Japanese Version) - with no skipping or annoyances (other than a lot of reading going on). If you're a fan of the foreign film and don't like waiting for the Netflix queue to catch up with that Lars von Trier flick, go hit the library.

Speaking of Stalker, I'd watched this movie years ago on a bunk VHS copy, and I must say that digital makes all the difference. At just under three hours in length, Stalker is a test for the viewer - but one that pays off in spades. I'd forgotten how much this film influenced me in subtle little ways. Nice bit of film school, this Soviet-era flick is.

I'm eagerly anticipating the filming of the next A 'n' W production. Andrew calls it my, "European art film" - which is as good as any description, I suppose. Working title is Sunyata: The Space Between Leaves which - if you have any Buddhist inclinations - you'd understand completely. However, since most people reading this blog are more than likely poorly versed in their Buddhist philosophy (myself included), I'll throw down a brief definition:

"Sunyata, meaning "Emptiness" or "Voidness", is a characteristic of phenomena arising from the fact (as observed and taught by the Buddha) that the impermanent nature of form means that nothing possesses essential, enduring identity. In the Buddha's spiritual teaching, insight into the emptiness of phenomena is an aspect of the cultivation of insight that leads to wisdom and inner peace."

So... yeah. I'm dipping my camera into the void on this one.

Click. The clock just turned 4.00 am, and my render is complete. More blog later.

Will

"I wish the kaiser were back..."

2009-03-11T23:48:00.002-07:00

Sorry, but the title was the last line of dialogue I heard coming out of the television set. Today I checked out four movies from the Nampa Public Library: Run Lola Run, Key Largo, Dark Water (Japanese version), and Cabaret. First thing I think of while watching Cabaret is, "Hmm. Yep. Bob Fosse did direct this," followed quickly by, "Liza Minnelli. What the hell happened to her..."

Well duh.

But, I mean... aside from the alcohol, drugs, partying, sex, over-eating, and rampant debauchery, I mean... jeez.

What the hell happened to Liza?

Other stuff: Vagabond Lane is kicking my ass yet again. How much? Well, as my daughter and I figured it today, yesterday I spent 14 hours compositing flames into a flame-less scene. A flame-less three second scene. I'm starting to understand why the SFX guys on Lord of the Rings were sleeping at the studio during those last thirty days or so...

The Oscars happened a couple weeks ago, and I thought it was a great broadcast. Liked the five previous winners doing the introductions for the actor categories, liked Hugh Jackman (although he seemed to disappear for long periods of time, making me wonder, "Hmm... do the Oscars really need a host after all?"), hated the Baz Luhrman directed music montage of confusion and weirdness (although Beyonce looked dang good), missed Jack, and really, really thought it sucked that Sean Penn won Best Actor over Mickey Rourke - and then thought Mr. Penn was very classy about the whole thing.

Speaking of The Wrestler, I think Darren Aronofsky is one of the lead dogs on the sled team, along with Fincher and Boyle - all-in-all, it's a great time to watch movies.

...but there's still a bunch of Beverly Hills Chihuahua's being made out there, and for crying out loud... REALLY? I know five people that could make brilliant movies IN BOISE for 1/100th the amount of cash Hollywood spent on the animators for BHC, and yet they can't get anyone to look at them because... because...

Because 1) they live in Boise; 2) they didn't go to a California film school to schmooze with the other filmmakers; 3)they didn't come from a rich family; 4)they don't have an agent; 5)they don't have a manager to help them get an agent;6) they don't have a chance.

Depressed now.

Vagabond Lane is pretty good. I hope to finish it soon.

Will

Microbudget Filmmaking: The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

2008-12-20T08:16:00.005-07:00

I'm listening to the soundtrack to Darren Aronofsky's 2006 film The Fountain as I write this; you might go and find a copy of that excellent soundtrack for yourself.

A lot of people ask me, "so, how's that movie you've been working on going?" Now, I've worked on two other movies in the last couple years, but we all know what they're asking about: Vagabond Lane. Even last night while visiting with my mother, she asked me how it was coming. Apparently, people are getting tired of waiting.

Which is funny, because they were tired of waiting six months after principle photography was done, so... yeah.

In 1962 some filmmakers in England made a movie called The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner. I remember about 18 years ago I saw a print of this in a film class I was taking at U of I, and - for some reason - it stuck.

Why? Because it was so, "good?" Not to my mind at that time (but I'm sure it deserves a further viewing; I was a film idiot back then); I slept through half of it. And yet... almost 20 years later it has still claimed it's small bit of grey matter in my mind. Maybe it's the title, and all the things that are associated with the connotations that the phrase, "long distance runner" imply.

For my purposes here, I'll attempt to make a parallel between microbudget filmmaking and long distance running.

About three months ago I witnessed an epic fail at a local film festival. I don't think anyone involved with the train wreck that occurred would debate whether or not the event in question was an epic fail or not, but just to be nice, I won't mention any names. In a nutshell, a locally produced microbudget film missed it's deadline for the festival and had to show a bunk rough edit off a lo-res DVD. Needless to say, it was painful watching this flick, a pain that was only overshadowed by the pain I felt watching those filmmakers I liked that had worked on this project squirm with embarrassment. However, with every failure comes a moment where one can choose to learn something - even when that moment happens to someone else.

The thing I learned was that, as a filmmaker with limited resources and no money to my name, I'd better take the approach that this is a metaphorical marathon that I'm running, not a sprint. Since I'm overseeing every aspect of Vagabond Lane - a movie that has missed a number of self-set deadlines already - I'm stuck with a couple realities:

Since I have no money, all I have is time.

And there you have it. By it's own definition, a microbudget film has no funds, thus forcing the question, "how does one make a quality film with no money?"

Answer: Take the time to make sure everything in the film is a good as it possibly can be.

My daughter - she's 12 now - and I were discussing this very thing between hands of Uno at our favorite coffee shop. She asked me what I had been working on the night before, and we ended up in a conversation about compositing for film.

(Yeah, she has a pretty developed idea about what goes on in movies; in her notebook she carries a Behind-The-Scenes book about the production of one of the Narnia movies, and she's always showing it to her friends between discussions of Twilight plot lines...)

Yet I digress. The point of our conversation was that I was working on THIS SCENE in my movie that was taking A LOT OF TIME - which was frustrating - but I DEALT WITH IT because I DIDN'T WANT MY MOVIE LOOKING LIKE CRAP.

Here, I'll show you what we discussed.

In Vagabond Lane, our heroine - Carrie - ends up in a Hell-like place where she is forced to dig potato-ish things called woobles. In this place she meets an innocent named Simon (played by Ben Kemper with an unbelievable sincerity), and they talk in the shed where the child slaves of the bad guy get to spend their remaining days like so much cattle. Now, aside from the fact that my camera operators shot the scene on two cameras at different frame rates (an issue I'm still fighting to resolve, but a light is shining on that issue and I think I've defeated it), my set designer failed me miserably. That this woman still has a head attached to her upper torso is testament to either the fact that I have incredible self-control over my own anger, or that her head was so far lodged up her nether-regions that I couldn't find it to tear it from her shoulders.

So here's the shot: Carrie (played by Chelsea Sheets) is in the open-faced shed next to one of the interior walls. Slide one shows the raw footage.

Not a bad shot; the lighting's good, there's a nice sense of light/dark symbolism in the composition, and you can't tell from the shot that there's a jet plane flying directly overhead every 45 minutes. However, there's a problem: if you look to the wall behind Carrie's head, my set designer obviously didn't take into consideration that this shed was supposed to look like a weathered cattle shelter, not like something recently bought from Home Depot, with MADE IN CANADA stamps all over the darn press-board.

Now, in the mythology of the film, I can get away with this, because there's this "magical realism" aspect to the film where it makes perfect sense in the confines of the story that this old P.O.S. shed actually did have parts bought at the Home Depot at the Nexus of the Universe, but ... really? Do I really want that crap in my film? Hmm...

In the edit of the film, I have to do some serious filter work, and in slide two is that same shot of the shed wall, and now those damn ink stamps are coming out of Carrie's left-hand ear:

Hunh. That looks like crap. Really bad crap. Crap crap crap. Maybe the set "designer" should have spent more than a week working on this stuff...

So, yeah. Since we didn't have time to fix this problem at the shoot, I've had to relegate it to post-production work, which is a pain in the tuckus. So what do I do? Well, for starters, I try to blend in/remove the wood-stamps as best I can, to no avail. Ultimately, I decide that I have to just make it a bit less conspicuous, and the best way to do that is to tart up the place with even more graffiti. To do this, I first have to mask off the offending area, as in Slide Three:

Notice that the dark masked area doesn't cover the entire wall; the reason for this is that Carrie's head AND THE CAMERA are also moving in the scene, and I can't have her head drifting in and out of the dead zone of the masked area. Since this is a short scene, I feel I can get away with a "general fix", as opposed to a "detailed fix" - which would take me considerably more time, and is always an option down the road, should I feel that this shot is too distracting.

Anyway, I've got the masked area, now I need something to fill it with that's gonna make the wall look less like it came from the local lumberyard. Off to trusty ol' Photoshop I go, and put together a plate of random graffiti that I think looks kinda' cool:

This gets slapped behind the masked shot of Carrie and...

Hey! That doesn't look bad at all! I can buy into the idea that these kids have been drawing for generations on this stupid shelter, it doesn't look like INDUSTRIAL WOOD STAMP coming out of Carrie's ear, and it's only distracting if it's being looked for.

So yeah... phew! Crisis averted, right? Not quite. Remember how I said that the camera and Carrie are moving in this scene? Yeah. That means that the plate I put behind the original plate needs to sync up and move in the same directions and speed as the "real" wall. Now, there's lots of ways to screw this up, but the only sure-fire way to deal with it is one frame at a time, and that kind of sucks. How much does that suck? Well, this particular shot is three seconds long. At 24 frames per second, that comes down to 78 frames that I have to painstakingly adjust - or else the illusion is broken, and the person who plopped down his 10 bucks in the theater feels robbed.

So, bottom line: how long did that three second shot take me to do?

Roughly 40 hours.

Yeah, this microbudget filmmaking stuff isn't really a sprint now, is it...

Lesson learned: if you have no money, then make sure you spend time instead. And if you do neither... well, yeah. We won't go there, since I've already made enough of those movies.

Will

Vagabond Lane News

2008-10-08T04:59:00.003-06:00

Ouch.

So, apparently there's something to this whole, "be careful when you update your software" - type thing.

Long and short of it: an important project file for Vagabond Lane up and became corrupted on me this week. It's not an Extinction Level Event for the film by any means, but it does make a longer trip out of a short one. Fortunately, the video lock is A-OK. Unfortunately, the audio build-up that was in that project file is DOA.

End result? All the audio tracks have to be rebuilt, and I better hope I'm happy with the video edit I have, 'cuz changes will mean a complete re-build.

*sigh*

At least I have enough of the film locked and saved in different files that this isn't going to be too much of a set-back (as if it already wasn't a year late and several dollars short...), but still... I was hoping to be done with this darn thing this month.

Will

Vagabond Lane News

2008-10-08T04:59:00.000-06:00

Ouch.

So, apparently there's something to this whole, "be careful when you update your software" - type thing.

Long and short of it: an important project file for Vagabond Lane up and became corrupted on me this week. It's not an Extinction Level Event for the film by any means, but it does make a longer trip out of a short one. Fortunately, the video lock is A-OK. Unfortunately, the audio build-up that was in that project file is DOA.

End result? All the audio tracks have to be rebuilt, and I better hope I'm happy with the video edit I have, 'cuz changes will mean a complete re-build.

*sigh*

At least I have enough of the film locked and saved in different files that this isn't going to be too much of a set-back (as if it already wasn't a year late and several dollars short...), but still... I was hoping to be done with this darn thing this month.

Will

South Park Leads to Cultureal Appreciation; in Related News, Hell Freezes Over.

2008-10-03T01:23:00.004-06:00

Leave it to South Park to force some culture down my throat by accident. Y'see, I'm catching up on all the SP episodes I've never seen (quite a few), and I happen to watch Quintuplets (original air date 4.26.00), an episode wherein Kenny McCormick has to learn how to sing better so the boys can have a "successful" circus (or whatever). Kenny pops in a "singing for dummies" - type tape, and lesson #3 is: Sing Con te Partiro. The tune hits a note (pun intended) with me, and I spend the next fifteen minutes hunting down the song by Andrea Bocelli.

South Park leads to opera appreciation. And people say nothing good ever came of South Park. Go figure.

The Highly Contested Election For Adams County Sheriff

2008-09-30T23:22:00.002-06:00

Poster I made for use in the film; not the film poster itself. But... Hmm. Maybe it could be with some tweaking...

Jungo

2008-09-15T14:45:00.004-06:00

Started looking around the world on Googlemaps the other day and relived my "lost in Nevada" trip to Burning Man 1998. A fine three days were spent there (wish it had been more), and with the price of BM tickets any more ($250!? Are you kidding?) as well as gas and everything else, I probably won't be going back there any time soon without sponsorship...

Yet, I digress.

On that trip in a large, fully-loaded 12 person van weighed down with a functioning 12-foot high trebuchet (!), while the Angry Hippie / Bi-sexual / Feminazi played the role of Copernicus; while Theo ground out of reality on a couple of psylocybin caps; while I mentally disappeared into the vistas of the desert as they passed, I, speaking into my mini-cassette tape recorder (suddenly I realize where that device had disappeared to, as the Feminazi took umbrage to a number of my recorded comments; alas, the recorder was destined to fall off the earth, wasn't it...) sagebrush, sagebrush, sagebrush... ; and while the Disgruntled Stoner Yet Horny Hippie Who Would Fail In Landing The Feminazi rode shotgun and roasted in the 100 degree sun and talked about all things inaccessible, if only to get into the hairy leggings of the Feminazi; as the sun was setting only an hour after taking the Untravelled Shortcut out of Winnimuca, why oh why did the shadow not fall behind us as we headed west toward desert craziness, but to our port side?

Alas, Copernicus Bi-sexualius Angrius took a wrong left at the Q-shapped sagebrush bush, delaying our arrival at the Black Rock Desert by five hours.

Re-living that journey, I took the opportunity to view the desert from the spy satellite view and see just where we went wrong when I came across JUNGO:

Interested, I Googled some more and came across this Wiki: http://www.blackrockfriends.org/wiki/index.php/Jungo

Which houses this pic:

And now I know what to do for the current script I've been sweating bullets over for the last month when I should have been editing that two-year-old movie of mine...

Will

When Current Projects and Vanishing Point collide.

2008-09-05T03:01:00.003-06:00

When I first saw Vanishing Point on the telly, it was subjected to all the bastardizations that network television enjoys fostering on those things that might be considered, "possibly offensive." What I remember is a lot of car stuff, but I really remember the naked chick tooling around on her motorcycle in the desert. Hey, I was a kid, and you didn't see naked - even conservatively cropped naked - every day on the tube.

Fast forward to twenty-some years later and my roommate at the time has picked up the recently (at the time) released DVD version of Vanishing Point. Only upon watching this version did I realize what those network bastards had done to put VP on the television: not only did they crop, cut, dub and edit at nausem, but they had broadcast degenerated crap version of the movie to boot. How do I know this? Well, my memories of Ms. Naked Biker Girl are clearly of her riding around the desert at late sunset - an image which caused her to be in a bit of a haze and difficult to see (go figure).

In the movie as it was intended to be seen, however, this is clearly not the case, as Ms. Naked Biker is plainly grooving to the vibrations of her desert bike during the mid-afternoon at the latest.

Crazy.

I bring all this up because I think that those late-night broadcasts of these "cult" movies didn't do them any service: many people probably have similar memories of VP as I do - kinda' fun, but really just a movie that aspires to B-movie status.

Thank goodness for DVD. Not only do we get to see the movie as it was ment to be, but we can view it with an eye towards analysis without fear of - literally - not getting the whole picture.

I'll continue this later (I feel an essay coming on...), but I'll leave with this: on a metaphysical level, just exactly what does happen between 10:02 and 10:04 am Sunday morning in this movie?

I've got my theories; maybe you have yours.

In any event, I'm watching VP because I'm doing an homage piece to it in a current script I'm writing - homage in the sense that VP captures the emotional and philosophical aspects of the film I want to make. Am I writing a remake? No. They did that in 1997, and - from what I've read - it wasn't that good. The curious thing is that Viggo Mortensen was in the "Kowalski" role in the remake, and he's exactly the cat I'd like to cast in this script, so... yeah. A little weird serendipity going on here.

Hmm. What other news... Vagabond Lane is coming along with a schedule to be finished by the end of the month (sans potential voice overs. Yes, it IS that difficult to edit...); I've shot a few project with Andrew since then, and been all-in-all working on getting distribution for our early movies.

More sometime down the road. Film hard.

Will

VAGABOND LANE LIVES.

2008-07-22T05:41:00.004-06:00

Been awhile since I've blogged, so here's the skinny:

End of June / Start of July I played Sound Guy / Grip / Actor on the Ellis - Cosho production of The Highly Contested Election for Payette County Sheriff. Came home and had to go into "filmmaking decompression" - something about being on location for 5 days that is annoying as hell: just enough time to get used to working on a film, just enough time to get to know everyone, just enough time to ... well, yeah.

And then it ends and we have to come back to reality.

So... twelve-hour days and I can't wait to go back and do it again. But not so fast, not so fast.

At the beginning of the year when I came down with type II diabetes, I made it a priority to start getting all my accumulated projects completed. That started with A Season For Brooding (soon to be playing at festival(s) near you), and has now moved onto Vagabond Lane - and in that order because we started Season... six months prior to VL.

Anyway, last year at this time I was still working on the first rough edit of VL - and hating every minute of it. I'd walk by the computer and it was like the damn thing was taunting me:

"Will... come edit. COOOOMMMMEEE EEEEEEEDDDIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTT!"

*shudder*

About that time I ran into Josie at the Flicks and she asked me about VL; I told her it was coming along one frame at a time. Unbeknownst to her, she gave me some great advice, something along the lines of, "hey, man, it's your project, it's your movie - do it your way."

So I took about ten months off from the damn thing. Let it percolate, let it simmer in the box (so to speak), and gave myself some perspective on the whole thing.

It's a whole new edit now, and a whole new movie as far as I'm concerned. Sure, the story's the same, but I'm back to "playing" - instead of digging in the dirt for a damn wooble.

About 1/4 done - and I mean "locked"-type done, I expect to be finished in about three-to-four weeks.

Yay for me.

Will

2008-03-22T13:09:00.005-07:00

Since getting on the medication, I've been going nuts working on projects: three videos, one sound editing gig, two commercials, and more in the last three weeks. Man, everyone should be on metformin; get that metabolized energy where it's supposed to go...

My next project is a short film called all us misfits. starring Carly Latimore, Lana Roberts, and a TBD male in his late 30's early 40's. Shooting is to commence on April 19th and end on ...uhm.. April 19th (weather permitting). http://allusmisfits.blogspot.com/

Hunh. It's amazing what a person can accomplish when they feel really, really good.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Buzz Buzz!

2008-03-16T15:17:00.001-07:00

It's flashback day, and here's the winning video from the 2004 i48 film competition. A little... inspiration/motivation for this year's competition, perhaps. Ah, 2004... how far away you seem to me now....

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists

lana in life

2008-03-12T03:36:00.003-07:00

Episode One of "Lana in Life" is up on YouTube.com, but you can check it out here.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Tag! I'm it!

2008-03-11T22:21:00.005-07:00

Target Acquired

So, yeah... fun for me as two weeks ago I get the diagnosis that I have type II diabetes. What clued me in that maybe I have a problem? Perhaps it was the constant whizzing. Perhaps it was the desire for constant soda beverages going into my system. Perhaps it was the 32 pound weight drop in a month. Perhaps it was the cuts that refused to heal. Perhaps it was the two days of numbness in my left hand, the four months of numbness in my right leg, or the sudden amazing cramps in my calves. Perhaps it was the kidneys kicking me in the back every other day, or perhaps it was the six days that I lost the ability to focus in my right eye.

And they STILL had to talk me into seeing a doctor.

Now I'm on metformin, exercising, eating better and damn... I feel as close to great as I have for a real long time.

Diabetes. Just one of the helpful hints from God that you're still human and might want to get busy living.

Here's a link for those of you that seek more information.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Oscars tonite.

2008-02-24T15:54:00.003-07:00

This movie was not nominated for Best Picture. Go figure.

Dunno what's going to happen at the Oscars ceremony tonight; pretty sure my life isn't hanging in the balance of it all...

Oh, and it seems to me that The Coen Brothers'll probably win the Best Director statue(s), and it's a toss up between No Country For Old Men and There Will Be Blood for Best Picture.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Flashback: The Hotel New Hampshire

2008-02-21T02:57:00.005-07:00

The Hotel New Hampshire came out in 1984 - far later than I thought it had just prior to writing this - and stared young, hip actors: Rob Lowe, Jodie Foster, Nastassja Kinski, Joely Richardson, Matthew Modine, Amanda Plummer, a ten-year-old Seth Green, and psuedo-icons (well, that might be a stretch for some - yet they are/were talented actors) Wallace Shawn, Wilford Brimley, Anita Morris, and Beau Bridges as some sort of father figure. I remember this film being either (a) broadcast on cable a lot in 1985, or: (b) the trailer having been on a movie I'd watched a lot on VHS in 1985. I can't remember which, but since I didn't have cable in 1985, I'm betting (b).

(This all comes about, btw, because I just finished watching the 2007 Jodie Foster flick, The Brave One, and it sent me on an IMDB quest and... yeah. You get the idea.)

Anyway, my memories of The Hotel New Hampshire - if any of you even remember the movie - was that it was advertised as a comedy. Seriously. Check out the (wordy) tagline:

"If you experienced "The World According To Garp" and found it witty, delightful and totally unpredictable, then be happily surprised all over again when you join the fun and games that go on at the...Hotel New Hampshire"

Yep. Sounds like a comedy. Even looks like one; check out the trailer here.

So why do I remember this as being one of the most vile movies I've seen? Must have something to do with, well... here's a snippet from the 1 January 1984 Variety review that might give you an idea: "Among the unusual family members is Jodie Foster, who must endure a punishing gang rape and a prolonged fascination with the young man who did it..."

Aside from the fact that Jodie Foster seems to have made more than her share of movies in her career about being abused by men (The Brave One, Panic Room, Nell, The Silence of the Lambs, The Accused, Taxi Driver -among others in addition to THNH), my feelings about THNH are always ones of repulsion: here is a film that was marketed by (one might imagine) MBA's in their convertables speaking on cell-phones - but back when cell-phones weighed two pounds and had that curly pig-tail cord coming out the bottom and connecting to their cars.

Where in any description of "punishing gang rape" do the ideas of "witty" and "delightful" even exist? This is the kind of pop-culture caveat emptor that has led to the belief in many people that things like what occured at Abu Ghraib are, "kinda funny."

*sigh*

I haven't seen THNH since the first time in the mid-eighties. Perhaps I need to again; perhaps not. And I hope no one gets the idea that I think it's the reason people think that Inquisition-style torture is a-ok (stupid politicians are the reason for that). But damn...

...you'd think someone might have questioned the whole concept that maybe this wasn't a laffs-a-minute comedy.

And yeah, I know it's based on the John Irving book, and I know Irving is an absurdist and realist (and deep down, aren't those the same things?), and I know that the filmmakers were trying (poorly, judging by reviews) to capture the spirit of the novel, and blah blah blah. I don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is that I was expecting "vanilla with a marichino cherry", and once I'd licked away the surface, encountered "rotting pork and raw liver."

There's more here, I'm sure.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Oscar Predicitons

2008-02-05T14:12:00.000-07:00

Every year I watch the Oscar broadcast with near religious fervor; it's more enjoyable to me than the Super Bowl. Here's my predictions of who's gonna win. BTW... the only category in which I've seen all the films is "Best Animated Short Film", so... yeah.

Best Picture: There Will Be Blood

Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis

Best Actress: Julie Christie

Best Supp. Actor: Javier Bardem

Best Supp. Actress: Cate Blanchett

Best Director: Paul Thomas Anderson

Best Original Screenplay: Juno

Best Adapted Screenplay: There Will Be Blood

Best Cinematography: There Will Be Blood

Best Editing: No Country For Old Men

Best Art Direction: There Will Be Blood

Best Costume Design: Atonement

Best Makeup: La Mome

Best Music Score: 3.10 to Yuma

Best Music Song: Once

Best Sound: 3.10 to Yuma

Best Sound Editing: Transformers

Best Visual effects: Transformers

Best Animated Feature: Ratatouille

Best Foreign Film: 12

Best Documentary Feature: Sicko

Best Documentary Short: Freeheld

Best Animated Short: Madame Tutli-Putli

Best Short Live Action: Om natten

Season For Brooding

2008-02-05T02:11:00.000-07:00

Background: Two years ago, Andrew Ellis and I sponsored a project that was supposed to be a lot like Le Divan Vert - give local indie filmmakers the opportunity to shoot a short film that would be woven into a feature film via the use of a "frame tale." This isn't anything new: back in the day this was done often, with films like Creepshow and Cat's Eye.

We figured, "heck, let's do the formula again and see what happens."

Of course, we both happened to forget that Le Divan Vert ended up falling (mostly) in our own hands, due to a number of the directors/producers we'd approached choosing to pull out of the project. Which, upon reflection, might have left us better off on this project.

Without naming names, three of the directors ended up bailing on the project for various reasons. That's not so good, considering that we only had four directors for the project, and the fourth was Andrew and I, directing the frame tale that would encompass three, "tales of horror and terror."

*sigh*

Well, after two years and bruised egos all around, Andrew and I are finally finishing this albatross. We've added another short film - Rasalom - (written by Yours Truly; directed by Andrew Ellis; shot by noted cinematographer C. Thomas Lewis (whom I've been working with on I Am Henry); staring Tate S. McCullough and Lana Roberts) and shot the frame tale in a whopping seven hours - including a break for Chinese food at the wonderful Twin Dragon in downtown Boise.
What a pain in the tuckus, but it should be interesting to see - after all this time has passed - what we ended up with. As Vagabond Lane has been my personal albatross film, so too has Season For Brooding (a title lifted from a Hungry Ghost tune) hung around Andrew's neck.

Photos from last weekend's shoot courtesy of Jim Van Dam.

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Behind the scenes of "I Am Henry"

2008-01-24T02:23:00.000-07:00

Hey, I'm the screenwriter, so I don't get wet. Often. Check out the pics and their coolness.

Tate's first leap into the pool. Thomas Lewis records underwater; Tyler Neissinger assists; Marlow snaps picks.

While it does look like Tate's doing a line of measuring tape up his nose, the reality is that, since there is no video assist with the underwater camera package, Thomas and Tyler have to measure the distance of each shot, set the appropriate settings on the camera, and then shoot blind.
This leads to much planning, many takes, and a lot of time in the water. Fortunately, Thomas' pool is heated by the 160 degree geothermal underground river that runs through Boise.

Shooting underwater has more problems than one might think of in pre-production, and you never really know what to expect until you try it. For example, notice in the above pic: Tyler has to weigh down Thomas, keep Thomas from floating away (Tate's swiming causes waves; bodies like to drift on waves), AND keep Thomas' snorkel from dipping underwater. Tate's wardrobe suffered as well: notice it billowing up around him under the water.

Every time Tate hit the water, it put stress on the blue shirt. After discussion, we decided that Lana should saftey pin the shirt to his pants, but that only prevented a big air-bubble from escaping, causing a 12-inch tear in the back of the shirt. Oops.

(notice Thomas floating face down in the background. He's a little tired by this time...)

Marlow was cook for the day. People were hungry. Food was eaten. Yay.

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

AMERICAN DIONYSUS FILMS

2008-01-02T08:12:00.000-07:00

American Dionysus Films
Mission Statement
2 January 2008

According to myth and legend, Dionysus:
- represents not only the intoxicating power of wine, but also its social and beneficial influences.
- was also known as Bacchus and the frenzy he induces.
- is the patron deity of agriculture and the theater.
- also known as the Liberator, the freeing one from one's normal self by: madness, ecstasy, or wine.
- the divine mission of Dionysus was to bring an end to care and worry.
- presided over communication between the living and the dead.

Why do I make films? It’s obviously not for the money; Any money I’ve made making movies has been offset by the costs of filmmaking. It’s not for the grand social circles in which I get to walk; living in Boise precludes such behavior, and any such circles in this town smack of pomposity and ego. And it can’t be for the vast amounts of recognition I get as a filmmaker, either. Pushing low-budget independent micro-cinema has assured me a place as a public figure, certainly, but with fame only slightly greater than that of the local mail delivery person (and that’s on a good day).

So why do I make films?

In the last two years, I’ve been asking this question of myself quite a bit. I’ve been asking this question because the community of filmmakers in which I started has transformed into something… vulgar? I don’t know, but it seems that ego and the ability to find the red RECORD button on a cheap camera has taken the place of having technical skill, a sense of cinematic history and theory, and any storytelling or writing capacity whatsoever. Instead, this new wave of local filmmakers has sustained itself upon hype and arrogance, crassness and infantilism. I don’t even know if they’re filmmakers, and I don’t want to be associated with these fame-chasers and ego-mongers. I don’t want to be known as, “that film asshole.” And yet, curiously enough, there are more people than I’d like to admit that see me as such. So be it.

When Small Pond Films was put to rest in the late fall of 2007, it forced me to reflect even more upon why I became a filmmaker, and it wasn’t until recently I discovered that - as with many things - the answer could be found in the strata and recollections of my earliest (and worst) films: While I couldn’t light a room to save my soul, couldn’t get clean location sound , and rarely thought like a cinematographer (much less a low-rent camera operator), I was having fun. Andrew Ellis and I would grab a camera, a cheap work light, cobble together a script, and go out and learn what worked and what didn’t and - heaven forbid - we had fun.

That all changed with the 2004 Pizza Man vs. The Dude. Suddenly monies were involved, and that changes everything, beginning with the transformation of my being a hobbyist into a serious attempt at being a filmmaker. Since that time four years ago, I have worked towards the goal of being a “real” filmmaker, but the reality is that, while I no longer am a film hobbyist, nor am I a serious filmmaker; my position is somewhere in the middle ground between those two identities.

Upon reflection and giving it that ol’ college try, I’ve come to what I knew from the beginning: if I am to be successful in the film industry, then my success will come from being a writer. As a filmmaker, however, I can only do one thing: try to serve the joy of making the film.

Which is where American Dionysus Films makes its appearance. The idea is simple, and came from looking at a picture of a dog chasing a Frisbee: there is nothing better than purity of purpose, the joy of play. After some research, Dionysus seemed to be the appropriate representation of this ideal, tempered with what might well be considered the American ideals of tenacity, capitalism, democracy, and invention. No longer will my films be constrained by formulaic thought. No longer will my films be limited to what may or may not be “commercial”. No longer will I second guess or over-analyze my films. This is not to say that I am throwing professionalism to the wind; my intention is to perfect my craft to the best of my abilities and create films to distribute to the masses. But -first and foremost- these films must satisfy the joy of the artist, for if they have no soul, then they won’t be worth watching in the first place.

For the purity of purpose and the joy of play, I present American Dionysus Films.

Will Schmeckpeper
2 January 2008

A New Year, A New Look.

2008-01-02T06:50:00.000-07:00

My new production company name. Why a new name? Well, it's sorta' like this:

- Independent Classics has left a bad taste in my mouth, what with the production of Vagabond Lane being what it is/was.
- North End Films is dead, so... yeah.
- There's a power in the naming of things; saying I'm a filmmaker without a production company name is like being a German without an accent.

Also, over the last two years I've had the opportunity to discover what it is I really want as a filmmaker - which I'm not quite ready to put to words yet - and with American Dionysus Films I hope to follow that desire and achieve those goals. Clarification, as they say, makes the task of success a hell of a lot easier.

More later.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

I Am Henry.

2007-12-16T20:37:00.000-07:00

Photos from current collaboration between Thomas Lewis and I, I Am Henry.

Cast: Tate S. McCullough and Erin Van Engelen

Crew: C. Thomas Lewis, Brad Smith, Tyler Neisinger, Kim Barker, Drew Wattles, Annie Cosho, Andrew Ellis, Nathan Snyder, Lana Roberts, Jim Van Dam, Will Schmeckpeper.
Synopsis: I Am Henry tells the story of a man who has spent the last two years of his life in relative isolation, recalling his past relationship with Mary, his one true love. Set in a dystopian near-future America, Henry's isolation and his obsession over his relationship with Mary cause him to project his imaginings into the media that permeate his life: radio, television, mail, and even foreign language lessons on tape. Ultimately, Henry confronts the likely fate of Mary. All the while, Henry is observed by unseen helicopters, a ghost with a smile, and a goldfish named Hubert. Directed by C. Thomas Lewis. Written by Will Schmeckpeper and C. Thomas Lewis. Starring Tate S. McCullough and Erin Van Engelen. Running time: 29 minutes (est.).

The Sin of Nora Moran

2007-12-14T04:09:00.000-07:00

Retro poster I made with review from 1933. I like doing posters.

Boise Filmmakers group on Facebook

2007-12-07T19:22:00.000-07:00

So, Brandon Freeman here, frequent reader, not-so-frequent poster. Just wanted to let folks know that I've created a Boise Filmmakers group (unthinkingly giving it the same name as this blog) on Facebook. It's open, you don't have to be connected to any network. But, if anybody acts "unfilmingly", you'll get booted. :)

So, if you're not on Facebook, get on, if you are, sign in and search for "Boise Filmmakers".

It in no way is in competition with the new Boise Micro-Cinema site, is just another avenue that I figure is a little unique in the fact that it's a networking group within a networking website. Thus, no posting of phone numbers or even e-mails are required -- just post where you're interested in helping out, or where you've got a project you want help with, and anyone who sees it will already be on Facebook, thus they just click your name, pull up your page, and send you a message or write on your wall.

If you're interested...I'd love to have you. You can also upload videos and pictures -- it's pretty sweet.

Notes on Old Whittier Theater

2007-11-29T16:08:00.001-07:00

Old Whittier Theater

2007-11-29T16:03:00.001-07:00

Message Board Removed

2007-11-06T00:14:00.000-07:00

Yeah. Big shock there.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Ratatouille available on DVD today

2007-11-06T00:03:00.000-07:00

One of the best reviewed movies of 2007 comes out on DVD today. Do yourself a favor and pick one up; Ratatouille is film school in a box... provided you have the analytical skills to use it.

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Women in Film

2007-10-15T23:09:00.001-06:00

Originally intended to post this at SMALLPONDFILMS.ORG, but the code on the message board turned it into one long paragraph; figured I'd post it here so it was at least readable...

Took a film class in college all those years ago, and one of the lectures was about the "role of the female" in film, or something like that. Now, granted, this was back in 1989, and things HAVE changed, but not all that much. Here's the basic idea of that particular day's worth of discussion:
In American cinema, Women play one of two roles: either that of the "traditional" woman, or that of a woman struggling to exist in a world defined by men. That's it. Nothing in-between. Either women in film served as wife/mom/secretary/daughter / teacher/maid/nanny/etc, or they were some sort of "Norma Rae" - type character. And the percentage of "traditional" to "Non-traditional" was seriously wacky, like 80% to 20%. The double-seriously wacky thing is that an argument can be made that the 20% of "non-traditional" female roles are - in fact - "traditional", simply because these women struggling to exist in a male-dominated world are forced to embrace an "outlaw" position because (and here's the rub) of the rules that are dictated by men. Thus, a "non-traditional" female playing the "outlaw/survivor in a man's world" is, in fact, playing a traditional role. These roles have further been broken down, as the following bit STOLEN FROM http://www.geocities.com/albanystudent/wif.html seems to reflect:

" In order to examine popular culture and its reflection of American society, we must look at America’s most beloved form of media, film. Film historians and researchers have found out that men play a disproportionate amount of leads and heroes. They were also depicted as employed professionals, as opposed to the percentage of women who were depicted as unemployed housewives. In a study of 100 films released in 1941 and 1942, “eighty percent of films focusing on the love/hate problems of a man had a good bad girl as the main female character. In 50 percent of the films, the good bad girl successfully opposed a bad girl,” (Butler, 141). In a study of the films from the 1930s to 1970s, historians have categorized four dominant types of roles that women played. The first one is the “Pillar of Virtue” types played by Doris Day or Julie Andrews. This category also features mothers and mammies such as Hattie McDaniel’s character in “Gone with the Wind.” The “Glamour Girl” range from sex goddesses such as Marilyn Monroe in “Bus Stop” to femme fatales such as Marlene Dietrich in “Blonde Venus.” The “Emotive Woman” is the sexually frustrated Rosalind Russell in “Picnic” and the seductive Elizabeth Taylor in “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.” Thus, the last category, the “Independent” woman or the Katharine Hepburn type, is Barbara Streisand in “Funny Girl,” or Jane Fonda in “Klute,” the liberated woman. Throughout much of film history, women have been depicted as manipulative, sexually repressed, or sexually overt. There was also a lack of sisterhood and films with women interacting with other women in a positive light. In the 1950s, especially, we witnessed an era of “reaffirming male dominance and female subservience; movies showed women as breasts and buttocks, again idealizing women who were ‘pretty, amusing, and childish,’” (Butler, 145). Much of this female contempt has endured and remained, although it may not be as obvious as the previous decades. Nowadays, we see more sensationalized sexual roles for women as the trend began in the 70s. Women now are also shown as waifs similar to the 60s trend, which was a severe contrast to the idea image of the 50s. All in all, women are becoming an endangered species in films and taking increasingly less leading roles.

Ever since the 1960s, the women’s movement has been concerned with media portrayal of women. Major studies of the most pervasive medium, television, and particularly its commercials revealed the same subordination of women we saw in film. In commercials, most voice-overs were done by men and overall, men were featured more often than women. The women who were featured were limited to family roles. Women were shown doing housework and men were the beneficiaries of their work. On the other hand, men were employed, had careers, and were doing something outside the home. More significantly, even though the age of the female population is bit higher than the male, commercials featured a disproportionate number of young women as opposed to men. “In commercials during children’s programming, women and girls were seen less than men and boys,” (Butler, 93). In television programs, such as soap operas, quiz shows, prime-time dramatic shows, and public-affairs programs, we saw similar trends as well. Once again, “men are more often employed than women and have higher status jobs. Also, the woman’s marital status is known more often,” (Butler, 93-94). She is marked by her relationship with men.

Some new discourse has been generated to the negative media portrayals of women as well. Let’s take the film noir genre for example. “These were thrillers made in the 40s and 50s, usually shot in dramatic black and white, with sensual stars who would use their attractiveness to manipulate luckless men,” (Root, 17). Film noirs such as “Double Indemnity” and “Sunset Boulevard” are such examples where the characters of Barbara Stanwyck and Gloria Swanson trap men into their evil ploys. “The women usually die too, however, punished for their relentless attempt to satisfy their own desires and the threat that they represent to the stable world of marriage, family and female submissiveness,” (Root, 18). However, of late, feminists have begun to have a new view of film noirs, suggesting that these films show women who are outside their standard role of femininity. Although they use their sexuality, they derive power from it and use their intellect to get what they want. They represent strong, active women and these virtues override the male-centered moral it is to enforce upon the audience. Another alternate approach to this is understanding some of the dynamics of the rock video, which embodies the opposite of the male gaze. Rather than omitting the possibility of voyeurism for the female audience, it almost works as a gender blind construct. “The rock star body, and in alliance with videos, is always coded to be looked at whether male or female,” (Brown, 105). For one thing, rock videos contain “performance, a direct address, which produces a different kind of gaze than those that pertain in film, and fantasy, in relation to dominant cultural definitions of pleasure and desire,” (Brown, 10). Although some videos highly objectify women, these are examples of studying oppression to draw new conclusions and findings.

-STUPOR"

Interesting. Note that, even though this article expands the female roles into four categories, three of those categories would fall distinctly into that of the traditional female role.“Pillar of Virtue” “Glamour Girl” “Emotive Woman” all are traditional, AMERICAN, perceptions of woman-ness. The “Independent Woman", however, is a much rarer creature in American popular culture (indeed, one can look at underground and/or so-called "art" films and find a more greater percentage of liberated female characters... but not as many as one might expect...). The intriguing thing is that this is changing - albeit slowly - as we become older as a country and the world "shrinks" through the availability of European and Asian films, thus exposing "US" to "THEIR" attitudes towards women (both liberal and conservative).

Bringing us to the Quentin Tarantino/Robert Rodriguez film GRINDHOUSE, and (specifically) Tarantino's segment, DEATH PROOF. Instead of retyping it, I'll just quote myself from awhile back on Small Pond...

"Adam once wrote: "No audience can become invested in characters when the first set is abruptly killed off as victims of the same incident halfway through, and the second set does nothing more but spit dialogue serving no purpose to progress the film, and is accompanied by the stereotypical sassy, black, female, character to serve as the rude and crude comic relief."

Ah, but here's where you're potentially mistaken. First off, the concept of audience being invested in characters is one sold by screenwriting hacks that sell formula books over the Internet. Much more interesting is the character that can die at any time, become evil/good at any time, disappear at any time during the movie. The craptastic H'wood formula of, "Introduce characters/challenge characters/have characters find love-honor-redemption-success" bores the hell out of me; even I'm getting tired of the 1,001 rip-offs of Joseph Cambpell's work. The joyful thing about "Death Proof" is that the characters DO become roadkill - but well after we've ALREADY invested in them as characters that are at least interesting enough for our attentions. The days of audiences needing people in black hats and white hats are far from over, but I get the feeling that audiences are more sophisticated than that now, and we have to allow our characters to be (gulp) human. Ironically enough, QT creates very ... uhm... "Tarantinoesque" characters that resemble humans in their behavior, but then again twists them into iconic inversions of what our lizard brains expect.

And if we missed it, QT gave us all a single, brilliant moment in the movie when - out of the blue - he has Kurt Russell (a star of enough 70's/80's shlock that "Grindhouse" might have been a trip down memory lane for him...) suddenly break the fourth wall and look knowingly into the camera at the audience to deliver a smile of beatific proportions. Not a SADISTIC smile. Nope. Not a CRAZY smile, or a GOOFY smile, or even a SLIGHTLY OFF KEY smile, but rather, the kind of smile that Mr. Russell would happily (one might assume) wear on his face for his 30th family reunion, had he grown up to be a "Regular Joe", rather than "Kurt Russell". It is at this moment that Tarantino - working with his tools of film and actor - inform the audience of: "Okay, enough of this standard fare. Let the cinematic games begin."

And lo and behold, but from that point and beyond, "Death Proof" becomes more than just an homage piece ala "Terror Planet" (which was excellent on so many levels) and "Pizza Man vs. The Dude" (which was not excellent on so many levels... *sigh*...). Instead, with "Death Proof" Tarantino somehow manages to connect the "B" movies of the 70's to the "A" movies of the new 21st century, blurring the lines between both by drawing attention to the pre-conceived lines between both and saying, "hey, remember how these cool old flicks broke all the damn rules? Isn't it awesome that - in the spirit of these cool old flicks - we can continue to break all the damn rules, even the rules that were made breaking traditional rules?"

In short, Tarantino performs some drastically needed shock-therapy on the genre by continuing its evolution, rather than embracing the constraints that the genre pieces imposed upon themselves (ironically enough) by breaking the constraints of previous film theory and economic barriers. For example, "Evil Dead" and "Halloween" - staples of late-night viewing in downtown theaters in the early eighties. After those movies, it seemed that EVERY DAMN HORROR MOVIE had to have a litany of the following things: MASSIVE GORE CONTENT, NUDITY, HAND-HELD CAMERA WORK, FASTER EDITS, and A SOUNDTRACK THAT MADE PEOPLE JUMP (mostly because loud sounds do that to us...).
And after all those "B" and "C" grade slasher flicks went the way of "Wham!" and Eddie Murphy's singing career, what were we left with? The death of the horror film for quite some time (or until Hollywood started spoofing itself and/or stealing stories from Asia...) in this country.

Same thing with Heavy Metal music (which, curiously enough, paralleled the grindhouse era...): did we really need another hairspray band in 1990? Do we really miss "Poison"? Not so much. Why? Because most of those bands failed to evolve beyond the three chords they knew how to play whilst popping the top off a can of Aqua Net...

I saw "Grindhouse" for the second time tonight, and I've gotta admit that it was better upon second viewing than the first. And while Tarantino may be accidentally doing everything that I write that he's doing, does it really matter as long as he is, in fact, doing it?

In any event, this extended essay began as a questioning of Adam's claim that the female characters of "Death Proof" are stereotypical and (I infer here) shallow, to which I say thee NAY! Let us analyze them briefly:
"Death Proof" is unconventional in that it serves itself up in two halves, each half following a group of women during their day/night out. Both groups are stalked by Kurt Russell, a homicidal stuntman with a kick-ass Chevy Nova. A bit shocking is that 45 minutes or so into this 90 minute piece, the first set of women (five in total) are whacked, upsetting whatever traditional training we have as audience members of this type of film - apparently, the good guys have all been killed, which is a bit strange for us when the movie is only half over. This causes us to subconsciously field the question of, "Hmm. The good guys can't all die at the end of the story, so therefore Stuntman Mike must be the good guy because he's the only one left alive at the end of this story-unit." Which is A DEVIOUS BASTARD THING THAT TARANTINO DOES. Why? Because he's poking us in the psyche; these feelings don't quite sit well with us, do they. The mass-murderer CAN'T be the hero.

Or can he?

Did we go see all those "Friday the 13th" movies for the unknown and crappy actors in them, or did we go see them because we wanted to see how Jason was going to whack the next round of dope-smoking teens?
The nice thing is that Tarantino doesn't jump up on a soapbox to preach about how misogynistic the male psyche was/is. He just gives us - in the first half of "Death Proof"- what old skool exploitation movies gave us in spades: the perception that the male will always be dominant, as represented by the metaphor of the toys we make, the dietary choices we have, and the sophistication of our ability to talk circles around, "wimin-folk."

And then "Death Proof" launches itself into the 21st century where grrl power is not only evident, but far more interesting than seeing Freddy Krueger and his knives. No longer is the male the dominant critter on the block; here Stuntman Mike has chosen to take on four women of professional status, three of whom are substantially self-actualized. These women can walk the walk and talk the talk. They deal with sexual, physical, and power issues as equals to men. Example: the conversation in the yellow Mustang (Mustang?) about, "which ladies are getting dick." The message is clear - no longer are women subjected to the rules of "proper" (read: male determined) society in regards to sex. Women - at least these women - deal with sex in almost the same manner that men do: they want it when they want it, and if they don't want it, they have damn good reasons for not having it. Compare to the first half of "Death Proof", where a similar conversation occurs, but is completely different: the early women used sex as a device to manipulate and control. The women in the latter half of "Death Proof" don't see it that way; rather, they see it as an equal part of a relationship with men, one that women can enjoy in the same ways as men, and without the social stigma that is still present in some of the more... "provincial" parts of this country. Note also that the more "empowered" (I hate the term, but it will suffice for now) the woman in the latter story is, the more control she has over her own sex life. It is not an accident that Tarantino makes the Rosario Dawson character a woman whom has a child (albeit off-screen), who also has somewhat fuzzy logic in her dealings with sexual dynamics. Only when she chooses to "play with the cool kids" does she come into being, and only does she do so fully when she chooses to join the hunt for Kurt Russell's character. Curiously, SHE declares that Stuntman Mike needs to be killed (while the others stop at, "kicking his ass"), and - at the end of the movie, SHE is the one whose boot crushes Mike's skull.

Also in "Death Proof" are diner scenes: one with the objectified women that end up being roadkill; and one with the modern woman that end up NOT being roadkill. Notice that in the early scene there is mainly discourse about how women can manipulate social scenarios to gain male attention, while in the latter scene the discourse is about everything and anything BUT gaining male attention; rather, it deals with being a "smart" female without being an "objectified" female. One of the characters carries a gun. Why? Simple: it's a tough world out there, and people need to protect themselves - especially without bowing to conventions of a bygone era such as "not doing laundry at midnight" in the basement of the apartment building. These, Tarantino seems to be pointing out, are the actions of an era where women are victims, rather than this "new" era where women are tired of putting up with the shit men heap upon them. However, it is worth noting that one of the four women in the second story is a "traditional" female character from the exploitation genre: he even goes so far as to put her in a cheerleader outfit, for crying out loud. Symbolically, this shows that, while Tarantino recognizes this "new sexual order" that seems to be developing in America (and if you haven't noticed the newly sexually predatory nature of teenage girls of the last five years, go hang out at the mall for a Saturday afternoon and listen to their conversations...) has not only gained a hefty toe-hold and is potentially the driving force behind a new, 21st century sexual revolution, it HAS NOT permeated society (re: female society and female psychological perceptions of self), NOR shall it for some time. And, of course, what will be the last demographic of female society to fully embrace the new and truly equal woman (as opposed to the fascist Nazi-esque feminists of the '70's, of whom even Gloria Steinham said, "We took it a bit too far...")?

That of the dumb, caucasian female, who (figuratively and literally) will be left behind to deal with the cro-magnon males that choose not to advance and evolve with the rest of society, while the cool kids go out, break all the rules, protect themselves, and kick some serious ass.

Sheesh.

I could go on and on about how MUCH sociological gold Tarantino has stuffed into "Death Proof" with his use and inversion (near perversion) of iconic characters and the manipulation of traditional movie schemata (things I feel compelled to mention are the use of PARALLEL EDITING, PARALLEL STORY STRUCTURE, and the fact that - if'n you watch closely - the closer "Death Proof" gets to current modern (re: enlightened?) perceptions of sexual power dynamics in society, the fewer "artistic" scratches and intended technical glitches occur, until (finally) the last five minutes of the film are as clear as anything currently on the market...), but it's late at I need a smoke. Let me end, however, with this: there is a WHOLE LOTTA SHAKIN' GOIN' ON in "Death Proof" - much which needs to be looked at with a critical eye before being dismissed out of hand. Granted, it might not be your cup of tea (entertainment wise, that is); on that level I must say things along the lines of "beauty" and "eyes" and "beholders." But I think one would be hard pressed to say that there wasn't some serious sociological positions being either a) stated; or b) reflected upon by Tarantino in this movie."

"Hmm..." sez I. Things ARE changing, which brings us back to Brandon's question about writing roles for WOMEN, and the difficulty many (most?) male writers have in doing so. Ultimately, I can only come to one conclusion:

We have had it culturally ingrained into our collective psyches that women MUST play the "traditional" role. Thus, more often than not, when WOMEN talk on-screen, MEN tune out of the conversation. I'm not trying to make a point about sexism here; American culture has already proven beyond a doubt that it is predominantly sexist.

The point I'm trying to make is that - even when provided with a stunning example of the independent woman in film, as in the latter half of DEATH PROOF, MALES (generally speaking) will not be as willing to sit and listen to the chatty conversation as they would were the conversation be done by males.

Thus exposing the double-standard of our culture: we value what men have to say, we belittle what women have to say. From a writing standpoint, this can be a very difficult hurdle to clear, because, what if - what if we're going through life thinking that we are open-minded, clear-thinking individuals, only to discover (upon reflection) that we don't pay attention to, "the fairer sex?"

To conclude, Kip kinda' has it right: men ain't women, so's men don't know what women's be thinking. Hopefully, the above goes into the depth of WHY that is...

Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Idaho International Film Festival Part One

2007-10-07T00:45:00.000-06:00

I2F2 Programming Guru Bruce Fletcher.

Reprinting the words of Michael Guillen from his VERY IMPRESSIVE BLOG, The Evening Class

2007 IIFF—Praising Regionality & Local Heroes

What distinguishes the Idaho International Film Festival (which just wrapped up yesterday evening) is precisely its regionality. Sure, programmer Bruce Fletcher brought Boise some choice films—the U.S. premiere of The Walker, S.F. audience favorite Rolling, vintage ‘70s O, Lucky Man! and the Cannes-acclaimed Ten Canoes from Down Under, but it was the platform he provided independent filmmakers from Idaho and surrounding Oregon and Washington states that characterized the spirit of IIFF’s mission: to encourage local filmmakers with the incentive of exhibition. Motivated by a variety of visions and ambitions, the regional line-up was admittedly a mixed bag of efforts, but here’s a selection of the titles that caught my eye and/or ear.

At each of its screenings, Drew Wattle’s five-minute short Miller Time provoked ire and outrage among its audience, some of who vociferously demanded a refund. This kinky scenario, interpreted by Wattle from writer Will Schmeckpeper’s otherwise innocent script, positions a diorama that ingeniously combines DeWalt power tools, a dildo, and some S&M-tinged revenge wafting in the air. The short’s sardonic humor clearly catapulted over its Boise audience even though it will probably cause a San Francisco audience to cheer gleefully when it (hopefully) arrives Bayside. Wattle and Schmeckpeper interpret the outrage as a “badge of honor”; as well they should.

Inversely, a regional darling at the festival given prime coverage in the Idaho Statesman was Brandon Freeman’s The Broken Quiet, which initially made me want to hurl a few epithets or both of my boots at the screen for its Christian anti-abortionist stance. But as I settled into the screening, I found myself respecting the film if not liking it much. I suspect The Broken Quiet would be booed off the stage of San Francisco’s exhibition venues, which demands some consideration of who the film is for and how it will find its appropriate audience? My respect increased when I discovered this first feature was made for $700! And when it gradually dawned on me that it’s a film that will not completely satisfy Christians because of its strong language and because it somewhat downplays the issue of abortion to focus on the effect such a powerful issue has upon the film’s characters. Which shifts it out of the realm of simpleminded proselytization and brings it down to the work of a single visionary with a story to tell and some notable talent and potential to tell it. That’s not to downplay the film’s position, which I confirmed with Freeman. He is definitely an anti-abortionist, no bones about it. As he explained to Erin Ryan at the Idaho Statesman: “Everything I do, in the end, my motivation is to glorify God, not to preach or evangelize, but to do the best I can for Him.” Conflating prayer with a punching bag, Freeman makes clear this will be a lifelong fight.

So just as the woman in Miller Time’s audience protested that the short had no business being in an international film festival; a comparable argument could be levied at The Broken Quiet. And yet these two examples of regional filmmaking balanced against each other somehow demonstrate the appropriateness of both, and cancel out the crisscrossing objections. Film is meant not only to entertain but to challenge and agitate, no matter which side of an issue you’re on, and perhaps even more importantly, no matter what you’re intending to do with the film. Perhaps precisely because of his short’s acquired status as IIFF's lightning rod, Drew Wattles might push Miller Time out into the world, now that he knows he can get such a rise out of it. It doesn’t sound like that was his original intention; but, his festival experience has provided the insight. Likewise, Brandon Freeman didn’t make his film to solicit a Hollywood deal but because he felt compelled to by the dictates of his faith. As Bruce Fletcher recognized, “[Brandon’s film is] fiercely non-commercial. He made the film to tell a story; he didn’t make it as a calling card to get a job as a director.”

The Broken Quiet’s best scene, however, is when the aborted fetus returns as the vision of the grown man he could have been. Chills ran up my arms as I thought, “Oh my God, this is becoming an effective horror piece based upon Christian principles!” But it was only a tease. Freeman then returned to a more traditional narrative trajectory when he could have yanked open one of the doors to Hell. Regret has rarely been rendered so ominously and it would be interesting to see what Freeman could accomplish combining his faith and the horror genre.I wish both filmmakers luck navigating the rocky waters of protest.

I’m not quite sure why Mack Lewis’s 1991 short Double Crossing has taken so long to be shown. But better late than never, especially with this clever homage to the classic police procedurals of the ‘50s and ‘60s. Filmed entirely in Boise in atmospheric black and white, Double Crossing delivers its script with tongue frequently in cheek.

John Jensen’s Land of the Free is a well-produced dystopian vision of the not-too-distant future where fighting Homeland Security becomes the second American Revolution. Marred only by the fact that it’s meant to be a calling card to solicit funding for a larger project, it frustrates for introducing elements it never develops. Here’s hoping Jensen finds the money to burnish, let alone finish, his vision.

300 Pounds by Ron Torres is an admittedly silly spoof of Zack Snyder’s 300. Torres, who appeared on stage mohawked and happy knows who he is, what he’s created, and how he wants to distribute it, reminding that DYI can be fun. I loved the Spartan helmets that looked like they were made with cardboard, masking tape and bronze spraypaint.

Preview Screening for GUNS rocks the Flicks.

2007-09-11T15:46:00.000-06:00

Granted, the audience was stacked with friends, family, cast, and crew. Granted, the theater was 80% full. Granted the preview trailer for the non-film "Spitwater" set the audience up for the right state of movie-watching mind.

But still, the reaction to the preview screening - hosted by the Flicks on Sept. 8 to an invite-only crowd - was more than expected.

A forgiving audience? You betcha'. Sitting there I cringed as my mental count of things I'd like to fix in the film neared the century mark. But still, the audience obviously liked the movie, reacting in all the right spots... and a few unexpected ones. Case in point: during a poker-playing scene, "Keith" (played by Jerry L. Snodgrass) elaborates on an anecdote that, in a long set-up and reveal, ultimately garnered a huge laugh, due to the nature of the fictional scandal and the "timely" occurrence of the Sen. Larry Craig scandal of this summer. Now, having wrote that scene, I thought it was a humorous gag and all, but nothing could have prepared me for the audience reaction to it. Thank you Larry Craig for, "trying to pick up a piece of paper" in that airport bathroom.

Post-preview discussion lasted well into the night; my favorite quotes came from Thomas Lewis who mentioned that Guns... was, "too good of a script to only spend six days on," and that Guns... could definitely play the festival circuit. Why do I care what Mr. Lewis says? Probably 'cuz he's got experience in this sort of thing - much more than either Ellis or I have. So... next stop: The Rotterdam Film Festival... web site. Hey, we haven't even applied yet.

But it looks like we're gonna. Stay tuned for more news about the surprise hit of the Boise underground film market.

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Guns of Jericho

2007-08-28T17:07:00.000-06:00

Confirmed Idaho International Film Festival dates are as follows:

Friday, September 28th at 12 pm at BODO

Sunday, September 30th at 4.30 at The Egyptian Theater.

Both screenings will play with Drew Wattles' short film "Miller Time", based on one of my scripts as well. Go figure.

Honestly, I'm suprised to see us playing at the Egyptian; that's a big theater usually reserved for "big name" films in the festival. Apparently the directors of I2F2 think the movie's strong enough to have a full house. And, by cracky, it just might be. After all, it's all about the pliers, baby.

Went through the I2F2 archieves and realized a couple things: 1) that this fest is in it's fifth year (whoa!), and 2) Ellis and I HAVEN'T had involvement in every year. Our break down of works turns out to be as follows:

2003 - Pizza Man vs. The Dude short film in Coldgrain 1.5

2004 - Pizza Man vs. The Dude feature + Half Ass Jig

2005 - Nada. Nothing. Zilch.
2006 - That's No Baloney - Drew Wattles Dir. (I have a bit acting part and did some camera/dolly work)

So, I suppose it's time that we got back into the festival with a gun-slinging comedy. Yay for us.
What's the next step for Guns of Jericho? Maybe a little on-line distribution...

... but more on that later.

2007-07-19T01:59:00.000-06:00

Been awhile since I've written/posted anything about my movie, Vagabond Lane, currently under construction as we speak.

First off, a lot of people are wondering what the deal is; why is it taking so darn long for this movie to get done?

Answer: I'm slow.

There's other answers as well, but that's the truth of the matter. SOME people think I'm not even done with the rough cut, however. That just isn't true. Granted, some scenes are incomplete and have yet to be fleshed out, but let's face it: ain't too exciting editing them action sequences when it gets right down to it. HOWEVER... I'm well into the audio work now, and I can even see a time when this movie will be done.

The best advice I've gotten about the film has been from TJ Johnson, however, whom has been assisting me on the edit:

"Will, all those other people? Those haters? They can all go to hell."

Oh yeah.

Yes, Vagabond Lane will be completed. Sooner than people might think. But it will be done when I (a) say it's done; and (b) am ready to release it.

-Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Filmaka Competition.

2007-07-03T16:22:00.000-06:00

Just got this in my email:

Via email: aard7arkwill@cableone.net

Dear Sir/Madam,

Filmaka’s aim is to encourage and inspire filmmakers (a.k.a. filmakas) from all around the globe with its upcoming July competition.

Our new theme is “Lost And Found”. Following the incredible response to our first seven competitions, we are excited to see how filmakas explore this new challenge.

The deadline for all uploads is midnight (PST) 30th of July. Film entries must run between 1-3 minutes in length and can be in any language (English subtitles are encouraged).

Each month the top 15-20 filmakas win cash prizes and the chance show their filmmaking talent to our award-winning jury. We are honoured to have industry professionals such as Colin Firth, Werner Herzog, Neil LaBute, John Madden, Paul Shrader and Wim Wenders as part of our jury. They have been very impressed by the quality of the work they have judged thus far.

Our jury picks three winners every month. There are more prizes and all three are allowed to compete in our ‘Filmaka of the Year’ contest at the end of 2007, where one Director wins a feature film deal.

Entry is free to all students. Simply email us from a valid school/university email address at - collegeregistration@filmaka.com

Please visit http://www.filmaka.com for further information. If you have any other questions, don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Best regards,
Filmaka Team

Dunno. Maybe someone out there in our neck of the woods is interested.

-Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

online video might pay?

2007-06-23T11:52:00.000-06:00

Found this over at craigslist.com:

"tv360 is a creator and service provider of Internet TV Channels, Internet TV Programming and Internet TV Applications. tv360 owns and operates two Internet TV Channels (realhealth.tv and realmeals.tv), which were launched in January 2007 and are syndicated to media companies, portals, websites, blogs, cable stations and other video-centric outlets. By year-end, tv360 plans to own and operate a total of twenty (20) Internet TV Channels. Each "real channel" consists of hi-quality, entertaining videos which are produced by people like you. tv360's Freelance Video Maker Network ("FN") is growing rapidly. It consists of a worldwide database of part and full time professional filmmakers, amateur / hobby video makers, and production companies. No matter where you live, whether your prior videos have premiered on primetime TV or YouTube, being a part of the tv360 FN offers an opportunity for you to earn money making videos. In addition, we provide a showcase for your videos to be viewed by the producers, directors and executives at major TV networks like ABC, and media companies like AOL. Since our launch, tv360 has paid over two hundred thousand dollars to the makers of our videos. Because of the demand for our content, the expansion of our channels, and the success of our brand, we expect that number to scale into the many millions. If you are talented, eager, and would like us to pay you for your videos to been seen on TV, cable and web outlets, then submit an application to join our network of freelance filmmakers. You will then be given all the documentation you need in order to get started. That are no hidden costs, phantom advertising splits, or long term contracts to sign. It's simple. You make short videos. tv360 pays you for them. NOTE: Because of the high-volume of applicants, tv360 cannot accept resumes or video reels via email. To handle the high-volume of applicants, we have constructed an online application form. YOUR INFORMATION WILL NOT BE SHARED. YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE SPAM FROM US. tv360 Freelancer Application can be accessed at http://208.72.2.252/reg/register.aspx "

Got me to thinking that there is a whole bunch of content in the Boise area...

-Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Go Drew!!

2007-06-19T11:09:00.000-06:00

Drew... keep up the great work!! I think you and I have spoken (briefly at least) about our shared interest in sci-fi... Drew if you've got a sci-fi going and you need/want assistance... you know I would love to help!! and don't forget about the myriad of post production and prop possibilities I bring to the table either!!! Good luck Drew!! and keep in touch Bryan.

Drew Wattles is a Rock Star

2007-06-17T02:20:00.000-06:00

Vincent Sanchez and Drew Wattles.

Last Sunday I worked all day as camera op for a short sci-fi piece that Drew Wattles is directing and producing. Now, Drew kicks ass as a person, and since he's always busted his ass for me on any of my shoots, it's only fair that I return the favor should he need it. Add into the equation that a number of people that Drew's worked with lately have given him the short shrift (as though they went above and beyond the call of TAKING ADVANTAGE of Drew), and I'm a bit upset with a number of people in Boise's "film community" - Ayn Rand called these people, "looters", and I'm not sure I disagree with her. But aside from the social evil that has infected some people around here, this is a post about why Drew's a rock star:

Drew's a rock star because he's dumping everything we shot on Sunday in the trash bin in order to re-shoot and get the footage, performance, etc., that he wants. Too many people around here are 80% people - people who give 80% (or less) and tell everyone else they're giving 100%.

I HATE 80%-ers. Now, that's not to say I'm perfect; we all have our 80% moments. But on a film project, 80%-ers drive me up the wall.

Drew ain't no 80%-er.

-Will

Boise Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Boise Filmmakers Blog Construction

2007-06-09T07:53:00.000-06:00

So, if you haven't noticed, I've been playing the, "monitor and adjust" game with this blog, trying to get it's functionality down the way I'd like it. One of the things I didn't like was how the blog didn't serve well as a message board, but is a nice place to put content and "bigger" announcements for the film community. SO... I've added a few things to make it feel more like home, specifically:

- a message board link. It's up there on the left. I'll be moderating the board, and as long as I know who you are, I don't care what name you use. No anonymous posting, however; don't be a tourist.

- some links for filmmakers (I won't change these often)

- some links for tourists (I'll change these often)

- hey, there's a game at the very bottom of the blog in case you're bored!

Occassionally, if there's something I want to support, I'll throw a banner ad up at the top (like I did with The Host) but that won't happen very often.

Okay. Play well; make movies.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

The Host / Ocean's 13

2007-06-09T04:25:00.001-06:00

So Thursday I've got some tix burning a hole in my pocket and I go see The Host, a really kick ass $10 million film from South Korea, and Ocean's 13, a really slick $100+ million film from Hollywood. Guess which one's most likely to earn it's money back?

Ocean's 13 probably will simply because - unlike the rest of the "threequels" scheduled for this summer, Ocean's 13 is really quite good. The acting is, well... the same as in the previous two Ocean's movies - you can tell these guys had a hell of a good time shooting this movie (I swear there were at least two scenes where Brad Pitt breaks character and is laughing at what's going on, but it works because his character is kinda' chuckley that way...), and that this is how they see themselves when they see themselves as, "movie stars." The only person I didn't think was very good in the movie was (holy crap!) Al Pacino, who - while playing the "evil" character, plays it very... quietly. Anyway, great editing, a fast-paced flick with improbability written all over the plot lines, it's a fun ride with characters we've grown comfortable with.

As for The Host, it's already made it's coin back (see below). The Host is a great ride with characters we've never met, but come to love by the end of this Godzilla-style monster movie. Not really a horror flick, The Host rolls like a great old "B" movie, but with a better script and better sub-plots. The SFX were done by a company called, "The Orphanage" out of San Francisco, and - while not up to ILM standards - they serve their purpose incredibly well (with the exception of a scene where something is on fire), and - unlike most other monster movies, the SFX don't get in the way of a rather compelling story about family and what it means to stick together through thick and thin. Like all monster/sci-fi movies, I'd recommend seeing it on the big screen, if for no other reason then to see the monster the way it's meant to be seen: drooling in your popcorn.

Will The Host do well, financially? Well, 20% of all people that live in South Korea have seen the movie (not an exaggeration), plus it's already pulled in another $2 million here in the states, adding up to a more than respectable $88 million - a pretty damn good return on investment.

Which brings me to the question, where does that leave the Boise film community? As I see it, we're probably not going to produce a $1 billion franchise like the Ocean's... series. However, we DO have the capability to harness and develop a SFX community here (what with Boise being home to both HP and Micron...), which (in turn) allows us to develop films along the same lines of The Host - a quality genre piece with a good script and good SFX. Why is this a preferable plan? 1) Making money making movies is all about getting distribution. Most distributors choose to distribute films based on which actors' names are on the poster or DVD box. 2) Genre movies have the best chance of success in lieu of having name actors in them. Why? Because we watch them for the MONSTERS/KILLING/SEX/QUIRKY WEIRDNESS /RELIGION, not for the acting. The Host is meeting success and great reviews worldwide, and most people watching the movie have to read the damn thing's subtitles, which tells me there's something to be said for the genre market - provided we develop quality films within that market.

- Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Boise activity in the last 12 months.

2007-06-05T17:01:00.001-06:00

One of the things I really dig about living in Boise is the active amateur film community. Just in the last 12 months there have been nearly 100 short films shot (mostly for i48, but still... that's a lot of content), as well as the feature films The Broken Quiet, Vagabond Lane, Guns of Jericho, Norman Waiting, Ibid, and The Sanguinarian. As I write this, Drew Wattles is in production of a short sci-fi film with Dan Epp, The Muse Building residents Iron Circle Pictures/Appaloosa Pictures are working with Boise uber-director Michael Hoffman on a documentary of the 2006 Fiesta Bowl winning Boise State University football team, Autumn Angel director Mike Gough is in Wyoming shooting a marching band documentary, and I'm STILL editing my damn movie.

Here's a pic from i48 2007. Left to right it's TJ Johnson, Jim Van Dam, Pete Iverson and me. This was taken around 4.25 pm at Pete's house. It was such a tough shoot...

As for the i48 2007 judging, I think Jim's wife Chris sums it up best...

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Who and What Do You Read?

2007-05-31T18:03:00.001-06:00

*I posted this at Small Pond, but included it here to hopefully ensure that it will have some kind of life*

I've never been much of a critical reader. I'd read something, enjoy it (or not), and then let it go. Occasionally going back and reading it again. But never with an eye on what's going on below the surface. What choices the writer is making, how the words are leading the reader, or informing the characters. This is no different than watching a film and dissecting the mechanical/technical aspects of the mise-en-scene, editing, or acting. If you're going to call yourself a writer (which I still don't; getting closer but not yet), you should be reading scripts and tearing them apart and seeing how they work. Like you would with a clock.

I've amassed a little stockpile of published scripts and text files over the years. I read a few of them, but I only started to read them with that critical eye I keep mentioning. Making notes in the margins, all that jazz. I'm curious to see if anybody else is doing the same thing, and if so, what you're reading?

I'm working my way through Requiem for a Dream at the moment. It's interesting to see how things changed from the page to the screen. For example, in the script the scene when Harry decides to get his ma a TV takes place in an arcade, they're playing skeeball. In the finished film, he and Marion are at the beach (presumably not far from the boardwalk and an arcade). The scene plays the same on the page, but placing it on the beach makes it a little more tranquil, whereas if it was in the arcade, there would be a lot of noise and lights and such. Chaos slowly builds as the film progresses, culminating in one of the most visceral third acts in cinema, so putting them in the chaotic environment of the arcade for a relatively simple scene could have thrown a kink in the overall feeling of the film.

On tap for future reading is a couple Tarantino scripts (Death Proof & his original version of Natural Born Killers), a few of Harmony Korine's, maybe a Paul Schrader (probably Taxi Driver), and most definitely some Coen brothers (Miller's Crossing being the most likely candidate). Mark Protosevich's unproduced adaptation of I Am Legend is probably next. It's supposed to be one of the great unproduced scripts around.

Bruce Campbell is the Patron Saint of Indie Filmmaking.

2007-05-31T01:54:00.000-06:00

Bruce enjoying some quality reading.

Since starting this whole... film thing... five or so years ago with Ellis, there have been a few icons that rose to the top of the reading and video pile time and again:

Robert Rodriguez

Quentin Tarantino

Sam Raimi

Roger Corman

Russ Meyer

Lloyd Kaufman

But none of them keep resurfacing as often as Bruce Campbell. Having loved reading his first book, If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B Actor, one of the things that's always irked me is the serious lack of interview material the guy does (and he does a lot, just not enough for me to milk for hours on end...). But now, thanks to http://www.youtube.com/, tons of his stuff is available (copyright be damned, I'm sure). The first place to start in my mind, however, is the Dinner For Five episode that also included Roger Corman(!) and Rob Zombie (!).

(it's broken up into three sections and the video quality sucks, but screw it... it's free.)

After that everything is icing on the cake when it comes to a youtube "Bruce Campbell" search.

Oh. Why do we keep coming back to Bruce? Not 'cuz he's the best actor in the world, but because he freakin' gets it - and hasn't forgotten what it was like to be where many of us are right now.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

A (Good) Book on Screenwriting

2007-05-29T12:21:00.002-06:00

I encourage any one who fancies themself a screenwriter to take a look at J.J. Murphy's book, Me and You and Memento and Fargo. Murphy takes a sampling of American Independent film and compares it with the conventional Hollywood model (as preached by Field, McKee, and the like). Things like how they differ from, yet still adhere to, the three-act structure. Or how having a non-active/non-goal-driven protagonist changes how the drama of your narrative works. It's really good stuff.

Guillermo del Toro leads the Mexican Invasion.

2007-05-26T07:08:00.000-06:00

In the past seven days I've done two notable things: quit smoking and watched both Guillermo del Toro's movies, Pan's Labyrinth and The Devil's Backbone. Like the smoking, I'm sure I'll go back to the movies again and again. [editor's note: he's already back smoking...]

Why? Simply because del Toro (director of the under-rated Blade II, Mimic, and Hellboy) is doing what a lot of Hollywood filmmakers aren't: crafting movies from the ground up with good scripts that employ simple - yet elegant - themes; superior cinematography and set design; and, an appreciation for the psychology of montage and mis en scene . Companion pieces, PL and TDB are both set in post civil war Spain, dealing with BIG ISSUES (such as, oh... life...) from the perspectives of 9 - 11 year old children. As Stephen King used to say, good horror fiction has the capacity to take us back to when we were kids, wondering just what really was hiding under the bed at night. Del Toro does the same to his audience via making children his main characters; it is through their eyes that we see the world for what it is: a cold, calculating place filled with war and evil people.

Oh yeah, they also see the world as fantastic and beautiful, with saints among the sinners and a capacity to understand that there really are no "grey" areas between right and wrong until you get past the age of 12 (and then you justify things like wanting to own the Paris Hilton CD, even though you personally can't stand the chick).

For me, I just can't get enough of the guy's stuff, 'cuz I think he's brilliant. But don't take my word for it, take David Greven's:

"Del Toro’s persistent talent rescues him from critical oblivion. If we piece together moments from his films, we have an impressive body of cinematic statements. The little girl rescuing her grandfather from death in Cronos; Susan’s raised, slashed hand of defiance at the climax of Mimic; Blade’s embrace of the dying vampire woman at the end of Blade II—all of these images taken together amount to a profound and beautifully limned statement about moments of profound generosity and courage from embattled heroes in the face of evil. As a message, it’s utterly simple and awesome, like those in most myths and fairy tales. Del Toro’s work forces us to recognize that part may often be more significant than whole."

(You can read the rest of Greven's article here.)

Insofar as how del Toro's films affect the Boise community... well, they don't, other than they serve as quality studies on how to make a movie look awesome and not suck in the story department. Granted, del Toro has focused on horror/fantasies - but to cubby-hole him into that category as, "something I'm not interested in emulating" would be a mistake. If nothing else, how he achieves Hollywood level (and better) looking movies on minimum budgets - PL cost 13.5 million and TDB cost 4.5 million to make; chump change in la-la land - should be a sign to us that having money in the coffers doesn't necessarily make film making easier; just more expensive.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Booty Shake part two

2007-05-26T03:44:00.000-06:00

So what DOES POTC3 mean for Boise Filmmaking, anyway?

Damn fine question, glad I asked it.

When any monster budget franchise such as Pirates of the Caribbean or Lord of the Rings or even Back to the Future (remember that one, and how much part two REALLY sucked?) come out, the people with nice offices in Hollywood do a couple of things:

1) sign everyone on to multiple sequels, "just in case".
2) wait for opening weekend to arrive, hoping everyone else has done their job.
3a) if opening weekend tanks, fire assistants and move on to next project.
3b) if opening weekend doesn't tank, celebrate while someone else's assistants are being fired, then plot to make bukoo bucks on next two pictures in franchise.
4) realize that if franchise flops, you'll be looking for a new assistant.

Having checked out the world B.O. lists over at www.boxofficemojo.com, I've noticed a few things: fantasy/sci-fi films really rake in the bucks if they're done right. And by, "done right" I don't mean, "having a great script." Here's the top ten worldwide money makers:

1) Titanic
2) The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
3) Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
4) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
5) The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
6) Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace
7) Shrek 2
8) Jurassic Park
9) Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
10) Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Hmm. Not exactly David Mamet quality dialogue ripping off the pages of these movies, y'know? BUT... these are all very sexy looking popcorn films with big, epic cinematography/sfx and big, epic soundtracks by people we never hear on the radio. And these are the movies that people talk about when they talk about how much fun they had at the movie theater, whether we like it or not.

AT THE WORST... POTC: AT WORLD'S END is going to continue to foster in the common Mr. Moviegoer's mind that, for a movie to be REALLY GOOD, it's gotta emulate one of the above 10 movies - none of which would ever come close to cracking my personal top ten list. As lower-budget filmmakers in Boise, we haven't a chance at making these movies; Jurassic Park's production budget came in at $63 million alone (add another $20 mil for advertising, etc.,), and I'm pretty sure I don't know Michael Crichton or Steven "Big Daddy" Spielberg.

So what do we do?

Well... AT THE BEST... these movies perpetuate themselves in Hollywood; it seems that everyone in la-la land is trying to make the next Two Billion Dollar franchise. Hey, I don't blame 'em. BUT... it does allow for a whole world of errors that the consumer ends up paying for. For every Lord of the Rings movie, there are twenty Pitch Black sequels that all seem to suffer from the same thing: crappy scripts.

Anyone rush right out to buy Caddyshack 2 on DVD lately? Me neither.

Ultimately, this massive amount of effluence and dreck makes Hollywood look bad, and that's when the doors open for the indie filmmaker. BUT: the indie filmmaker can't be a lazy bastard, oh no he and she cannot! They have to hustle and work their networking craft all over the place, and even that's not going to get them very far unless they have one of three things:

a) the treasure of the Sierra Madre.
b) whatever's in the briefcase Jules is delivering to Marcellus Wallace.
c) the best script possible.

Desire, heart, talent - all these things account for tons in the everyday world, but let's remember something: making movies isn't about living in the everyday world. It's about living in a fantasy land where we get to pay (hopefully) people to hop around according to our whims while cameras roll.

So. I say let Hollywood have their blockbusters. When it comes time for movies with good scripts - and it will again - the doors will be that much more open for the likes of me. Err... us. Uhm... whatever.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Shake your booty.

2007-05-25T04:12:00.000-06:00

Johnny Depp & Co. are here to take even more of your money back to Disneyland.

Went to the early Friday AM 12:35 showing of Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, mostly because:

a) I wanted to see it to get the bad taste of PTC2 out of my mouth.

b) Shrek the Third left bad taste in my mouth too, so I had to get SOMETHING done about it...

c) All the previous showings (from 8 pm on) were sold out.

d) Fewer teenaged bastards in a super-late night showing.

e) I figured I'd be up anyway.

f) All of the above.

If you answered "f", that'd be the correct answer. First off, lemme say I'm a fan of the PTC franchise, if not so much the films themselves. Damnit, these movies are so insanely huge undertakings, the only thing bigger seems to be the stories they try to tell and the way they tell them. My biggest problem with PTC2 was that, when watching it in the theater for the second time, I realized as the FISH HEADED FREAKS came out of the water that I was watching a really expensive and elaborate Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers movie, and that kind of thinking really sucked the entertainment out of the picture for me. Needless to say, PTC was bloated, under-acted, under-written, and over-long; but still a solid "B" movie due to the sheer spectacle of it all.

PTC3, however, is a different story. Not as tight as Numero Uno, and still a good 30 minutes too long, PTC3 takes spectacle to a whole 'nother level, with CGI shots that would win best animated picture Oscars for everyone - if only we could tell where the animation ended and the reality began (or vice-versa). Add to that a script that is so ludicrous that it only makes sense if you don't think about it too much, and we're talking one of the first movies I've seen that doesn't give a flying rat's ass if you WANT to willingly suspend your disbelief; it grabs you by the knickers and shouts, "DEAL WITH IT!" at the top of it's lungs.

Curiously enough, it seemed to work. And, amid all of this chaos and confusion there were moments of surreal beauty and (gasp!) script depth.

Script depth? Yeah, I wrote that. And, yeah, I wrote it in conjunction with PTC3. Why? Because the movie does a curious thing nearing the end: it takes what would normally be an opportunity for sugar and honey - staples of a Disney flick - and gave us an honest moment that came off as neither contrived nor a cop-out. Is PTC3 an overwhelming clunker of a movie with truck-sized logic holes, too many characters, too much counter-Esperanto, too much everything? Yep. And it's still damn entertaining (with the exception of a 20 minute lull that ends the second Keith Richards shows on the screen to steal the show for awhile), with one big difference between it and its predecessor: the crazy in PTC3 is honest here, while in PTC2 the crazy was a thinly veiled lie.

So what's this got to do with Boise Filmmaking? Hunh. Well, that's the subject of my next blog...

... but right now I need sleepy.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

You mean films are made in Boise, Idaho??

2007-05-24T11:44:00.000-06:00

I like making movies... I like telling stories. That is why I chose to be a film maker. Boise is a great place to be to make movies too... To tell you a bit about myself, I started out recording sound for bands and playing music myself. I toured with several bands and then decided the constant travel was deterimental to family life. I have always been a filmmaker though. I have done or worked with others on a total of 14 music videos and several films in southern Utah before I ever found myself in Boise. I worked for KSL television as cameraman and sound mixer while trying to write my first original "good" screenplay. Friends of mine have made a go of it in LA and done okay(they are not rich by any means.) I have been writing and directing and shooting films since I was very young... This will reveal my geeky side when I tell you that the first full length (2 hour) movie I ever worked on was a prequel to star wars(yes we filmed our own version of what we thought needed to be in episode 2 of star wars back in 1985!!) I won't say our SW flick was good, but for a bunch of kids and a camcorder it turned out pretty awesome back in 1985!!! Making films that sell and making a living on them is a difficult venture. Without a lot of money to back you up front and to give you some clout with the studios and theatres you would like to release in it is difficult to get their attention, and that is even before you add to the equation that you as a writer or director have a vision and a story you want told. I believe in quality of production and of story line. I am not only a filmmaker/editor but also have my hands in colorist work and in special effects(CG and practical) There are good things happening in filmmaking around Boise(many of which recieve very little press) and I very much enjoy being a part of that. I would like anyone who considers a film in Boise to remember that Boise has a lot to offer. In my opinion the challenge in a film is bringing the vision and story to the screen in a way that will impress and draw viewers. Just to comment on the i48 observations briefly, i48 was disappointing to me as I saw many films that I felt more deserving of the "best of" than those that made it. Mine(like everyones) is a subjective opinion but I hope that people who make a difference to our filmmaking future in Boise will NOT think that i48 "best of" is representative of Boise, but only of the tastes of those who judged i48. I have attended 48 hour festivals elsewhere that blew my mind as far as quality and story telling go, it would be nice if we had that quality in i48 but I suspect it has more to do with a) how the judges view what is quality and b) the participants and how they chose to represent themselves. IE when quality is rewarded it raises the bar but only if said quality fits the tastes of those who have the power to reward... Whether that be i48 or a big studio... I will continue to make films because that is what I enjoy and because I have stories begging to be told and for no other reason!! If I make my living at it some day that will be nice. If you are a fellow filmmaker, let me know how I can help you... If you are an investor looking to invest give us a chance and let's talk!!!

Jaffe Zinn takes on the world

2007-05-24T03:38:00.000-06:00

http://www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/releases/detail/1626

Quick excerpt:

"NYU's Kanbar Institute Announces the Winners of 2007 Richard Vague Film Production Fund Award"

"The Kanbar Institute of Film & Television at New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts has announced the winners of the 2007 Richard Vague Film Production Fund awards for alumni filmmaking. In the past, the annual awards were for 1st place ($100,000) and 2nd place ($75,000) and went to two recent graduates to make their first feature-length films. In a departure from previous years, this year’s panel decided to award three prizes totaling $175,000 due to the excellence of the submissions.
The 2007 Richard Vague 1st place winners ($75,000) are: Eric Linn ‘06, Graduate Film Division, for Why We Pull the Trigger, a narrative film that follows three friends who enter the strange world of the underground black market for body parts as a way out of their dead-end jobs and mounting debt; and Jaffe Zinn ‘03, Undergraduate Film Division, for Saturday, a narrative film about the small town of Buhl, Idaho as it slowly awakens during the course of one day to the tragic death of one of its young citizens..."

In the short time that I've known Jaffe, I've found him to be a truly engaging and decent person with an integrity I wish I could emulate. Unfortunately, I ain't got it. I also wish I was as damn cool as Zinn, but darn it, he's got me there, too. I'm proud of what he's accomplished coming out of Idaho, and look forward to hearing about his upcoming production. Hopefully, he will be able to use a number of area filmmakers to help him with his shoot; I know I wait with baited something or other to hear about how Saturday progresses.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

i48 - a compromise; a protest.

2007-05-24T01:03:00.000-06:00

TDO makes an interesting comment in regards to "i48 2007" where he writes: "The i48 is a great EVENT, and a lot of fun, but it's no fun for me if I consider it a competition."

I have to agree. My team this year had - by far - the easiest, most laid back time playing in i48 possibly ever to be recorded in the history of the event. By 4:00 pm on Saturday, we had wrapped and were literaly sitting next to Pete's pool, drinking margaritas and talking about film with our two "interns". By 4:00 pm on Sunday, I had finished making DVD copies of the movie for the team members and was heading to the Flicks with all the material in tow. By Sunday 8:00 pm, we had watched our film at the Van Dam's pad and were pleased as punch as to the quality of our little film. At that point in time, we were all winners and had drank the punch of success.

Alas, the punch of competition packs a bit more sting to it. Granted, after seeing the films that won the competition, I have no beef with their success. Certainly, I get confused some times when a film (such as in year two) plays out of assigned genre and wins 'best screenplay' for a rant that appeared to be transcribed after the film was made, but - for the most part - I don't have a lot to complain about with the awards. And TDO is absolutely right; if nothing else, i48 forces us to make a movie, as well as attempt to raise the bar while making said movie.

And damn it, we felt pretty good watching our film in that 4:30 screening. And damn it, we felt pretty snubbed after Ellis named off the films that would be playing in the 'best of' showing, knowing that our film was better than others. And damn it, TDO is also right when he writes: "I don't know exactly how they determine what's 'best of' material, though, and that might help."

And damn it, I think I know what I'm going to do next year, and I call upon any filmmaker that felt snubbed yet again this year to join me in this mild protest:

"SINCE... the filmmaking experience in the 48 hour time period is great fun and inspiring; and
SINCE... the competition experience in the post 48 hour time period is disillusioning, destructive, and unpredictable (insofar as judging is concerned); and
SINCE... I believe we all enjoy the former but not the latter, I PROPOSE the following:

To participate in i48 - 2008 as fully and completely as we did in years previous; to complete our films within the 48 hour deadline; to arrive early to the packet turn in at the designated area; and to purposely and willingly wait until five minutes past the 48 hour deadline to turn in our films. Thus, we have enjoyed said creative process of filmmaking, eliminated any potential controversy by the judges and directors of i48, and made our point clear, that we will not compete by their abstract rules, but we will participate in an event which is, honestly, otherwise a positive and enjoyable experience."

I write this with the expectation of being able to participate next year, should scheduling allow for me to do so. I also write this knowing that a number of my fellow filmmakers really do enjoy i48, and they really don't want to think poorly of the directors of the event, but - damn it - sometimes they make it really hard to not wonder just what parameters they're working under. The bottom line for me is that I like Ellis and Bayne; I've worked wtih Greg in the past, and shall continue to do so in the future. As for Ellis, he and I are business partners, and it infuriates me that this yearly competition is what gets in the way of us moving ahead as filmmakers, leading to our spending one month out of the year feuding because of our own personal philosophies. Perhaps next year, with this protest - and even if it is just me that is protesting (as I expect it to be...) some will hear what is being said from the sidelines...

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

i48 2007

2007-05-22T16:17:00.000-06:00

A year ago on the SPF message board, I wrote that I didn't think that the then-current (2006) batch of i48 films were very good. Certainly, there were a number of quality short films, but for the most part, I felt that the bar hadn't been raised; it had been lowered to a significant degree. All of this came from a conversation about how I felt about my film Greasepaint being left out of the "Best Of 2006" showing. Granted, our film was turned in late, and I was told at one time that - because it was late - said film wasn't eligible for being in the "Best Of 2006" screening.

I was fine with that, until I went to the screening and saw other films that had been dq'd for lateness playing there. That was when my ire went up a bit, and I asked a few more... pointed questions. Ultimately, it came down to, "Will, you have a naked chick in the trunk of a car."

Okay, fine. I understand being punished for pushing the line of the competition, but the reality is - and you can go back and look at the film for yourself - there was nothing in my film that broke the rules of the competition. And so, in 2006, because of a perceived fear of how the audience might react to a naked chick in the trunk of a car, the "Best Of..." showing did not, in fact, have one of that year's best movies in it.

Move to 2007. Yet again the "Best Of..." showing proved to lack integrity, by presenting a number of films that were significantly inferior to others as the, "Best Of 2007." Setting my film aside, I find it infuriating that an event promoted as a "competition" would go so far as to not have transparency in its judging, thereby creating a metaphorical "crap shoot" to see what are considered the "Best Of..." films of 2007. Anyone who made a quality short film this year and was blatantly snubbed by the i48 competition judges and/or managers in favor of sub-standard filmmaking should be upset and confused.

Of course, there's the question of taste now, isn't there. Imagine my utter disbelief when I'm watching the i48 2007 documentary, Love For Sale. While the subject being interviewed was interesting enough, the film merely consisted of a well-edited opening sequence, followed by two extended static shots of a man being interviewed. Now, all cinematic quality aside, as a documentary Love For Sale wasn't near the film that Lost In Boise ended up being, and - lo and behold - guess what? Lost In Boise won 2nd best film of the competition, while Love For Sale garnered nothing - yet both are showing in the, "Best of..." section. Interesting. But what was more interesting is that, while I was castigated for showing a naked - yet judiciously covered - woman in the previous year's competition, the interviewed subject in Love For Sale commenced to discuss: prostitution, pimps, his being, "horny", a woman he describes as only wanting to have sex with him (also described as having, "44- D breasts"), "getting laid", etc.

No one walked out of my film in 2006; this year, a woman took her child by the hand and left the theater during the 4.30 showing of Love For Sale.

And yet this film, with its questionable material and raw, basic filmmaking techniques, is considered (by the judges? The competition directors? We'll never know...) to be... what, exactly? I'm not certain, but what they are saying to the community and to the filmmakers that support this competition is this:

"Films that were NOT better than this film are NOT in the 'Best Of...' showing."

Otherwise, why call it a, "Best of..." at all?

This year i48 was a success, of that I'm certain. I also believe that the general crop of films turned in were significantly better than last year's films. I also believe that the Open Category films which won their respective awards deserved them (although I question giving the, "best sound" award to a music video where the lyrics aren't understandable because of the sound mix, but whatever...). I was pleased that the best film of the competition - as was the case in the previous two years - was, in fact, recognized as the, "best film"; as was the second best film. My commentary isn't about awards; I find that - with a few exceptions - the awards go to the films which deserve them.

But I do have a problem when someone sets two films side-by-side and not only recognizes the inferior product as, "superior", but rewards it as well by publicly endorsing it as being "superior".

It is an insult to the makers of quality films.

The managers and judges of i48 can rectify this situation; all they have to do is acknowledge quality in their, "Best of..." showings, without throwing bread to the masses to quell their shouts. But until they do so, it's my belief that this so-called "competition" is anything but a competition, and until the judging process is transparent and the judges are revealed, the integrity of i48 can be considered highly suspect.

- Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

What's Wrong With Smallpond?

2007-05-22T15:45:00.001-06:00

Good question. Right up there with, "Why'd Will leave Small Pond?"

Yeah. Why DID I decide to quit being associated with a group that I helped create? Well, a couple of reasons. First and foremost, I was tired of the message board being a sandlot where people with agendas other than filmmaking would voice their slime. Foremost among these people was Jordan (I won't use last names here; you can figure it out if you want at SPF...), who couldn't get past childish attempts at promoting flamewars. It got to the point where someone would actually (shudder) want to talk "film" on a real level, and then a number of idiots would simply degrade the conversation because of ...

... because of what, really?

A need for attention? A perceived lack of respect? An anger about this filmmaking community being "elitist"?

Dunno.

Anyway, it got old and started reading like a book club to me. Want to see a real message board nightmare? Look at the "Scripts/Screenwriting" section over at SPF. Poor writers; any time one of them tries to get any kind of discussion going, it gets shot in the ass.

Not that SPF doesn't have it's positives. Snyder does a fine job in the "Technical" section, and for that kind of info, I think it's serving its purpose: to educate and inform. But as for the rest of it...

Too many tourists.

Other reasons I'm done with Smallpond: it doesn't serve it's mission statement anymore; the screenings are in a gloomy place that can maybe hold twenty people; very few people actually network at the screenings, and it just doesn't feel like a film community anymore.

So, I'm moving on, and this blog is part of that. My "mission statement" for this blog, if you will, is to discuss and write about the Boise filmmaking community as one who has decided to be a professional filmmaker. I'll be honest - I'm sure my blog about i48 2007 will have some vitriol in it - but I'm not going to take the "low road", like so many have before on SPF. Granted, at one time I was as bad as the next person on the SPF message board, but I'm so... beyond that now. I choose not to be a tourist any more.

If you want to comment at this blog, you'll have to be given access by me. While I appreciate the open door philosophy of some blogs, I'm not going to play that game anymore - you want that, go to SPF. Here, life is moderated. Lightly moderated, but moderated none the less.

Okay. That's it. On with the show.

-Will

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Boise Filmmakers

2007-05-22T15:39:00.001-06:00

A new blogspace in response to the changing world of Boise filmmaking. More to follow. If you wish to post comments on this blog, please email me at the following address: aard7arkwill@cableone.net.

Real Filmmakers. No Tourists.

Boise Filmmakers

10 August 2011

2010 is in the Archives, Baby.

VAGABOND LANE 2010

The Gods of Technology Have Won This Round...

Suspended animation in the blogosphere.

Render time fill: David Lynch

Update While I Wait For Rendering...

"I wish the kaiser were back..."

Microbudget Filmmaking: The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

Vagabond Lane News

Vagabond Lane News

South Park Leads to Cultureal Appreciation; in Related News, Hell Freezes Over.

More Poster.

The Highly Contested Election For Adams County Sheriff

Jungo

When Current Projects and Vanishing Point collide.

VAGABOND LANE LIVES.

Stan Winston is Dead.

alternate posters

Blue Smocks

dolls.

Update: A Season For Brooding

all us misfits.

Buzz Buzz!

lana in life

Tag! I'm it!

Oscars tonite.

Flashback: The Hotel New Hampshire

Oscar Predicitons

Season For Brooding

Behind the scenes of "I Am Henry"

AMERICAN DIONYSUS FILMS

A New Year, A New Look.

I Am Henry.

The Sin of Nora Moran

Boise Filmmakers group on Facebook

Notes on Old Whittier Theater

Old Whittier Theater

Message Board Removed

Ratatouille available on DVD today

Women in Film

Idaho International Film Festival Part One

Preview Screening for GUNS rocks the Flicks.

Guns of Jericho

Guns of Jericho plays I2F2 2007

Message Board Updated

Ratatouille

Vagabond Lane

Filmaka Competition.

online video might pay?

Go Drew!!

Drew Wattles is a Rock Star

Boise Filmmakers Blog Construction

The Host / Ocean's 13

Boise activity in the last 12 months.

Who and What Do You Read?

Bruce Campbell is the Patron Saint of Indie Filmmaking.

A (Good) Book on Screenwriting

Guillermo del Toro leads the Mexican Invasion.

Booty Shake part two

Shake your booty.

You mean films are made in Boise, Idaho??

Jaffe Zinn takes on the world

i48 - a compromise; a protest.

i48 2007

What's Wrong With Smallpond?

Boise Filmmakers