Film No. 2 (d. Matthew Clayfield, 2004)

So, meanwhile, this is the first film that I've made here at "film school".

Now, it's by no means a masterpiece, not in this man's opinion anyway, but it's good for what it is. And what's more, it was something that I really needed to make.

So, enjoy.

DOWNLOAD Film No. 2 (d. Matthew Clayfield, 2004)

__________________
www.esotericrabbit.com

Silver,

I warmed up to this piece much more than the last. Basically I felt that I understood your angle in life a bit more after viewing, which probably means you got your message across in this film. The opening shot with the fan, to me anyway, would connote a whirlwind or maelstrom of some sort. I take this to be a metaphor for your life and your feelings about yourself/path at this point in time.

We haven't spoken much on these boards, but I dig having the chance to watch budding directors/filmmakers skills come to fruition, or I dig getting a glimpse anyway.

_S

__________________

Silver,

I enjoyed the film. There was some nice framing and unique style of narrative. I loved the quick snap of "Les Cahiers". I would like to inquire on the reason behind this assignment at BU? I also attended film school and would like to know your assessment thus far into your program. I see that you have a keen eye for framing and it stems from your vast knowledge of cinema. It is nice to know that you are a true cineaste as well. Was this shot on a Panasonic - DVX100, or was the resolution fixed in post? Anyways, congrats, nice work, continue your ken of cinema and be sure to keep us posted with your work.

peace!

Radio Raheem

"Don't Believe the HYPE!"

Interestingly, the fan was one of the only shots in the film that didn't have some sort of symbolic [or at least, consciously symbolic] connotations to it. I just wanted the film to start that way.

The rest of the film, however, especially towards the end, is very, very deliberate in its manipulation of cinematic space. The guy playing "me," of course, isn't me – I'm always behind the camera – and so despite the film's pseudo-documentary style, I was trying to constantly remind the audience of this fact. In other words, I didn't want the manipulation to be "invisible". There are four shots in particular that I feel stand out as "authored" shots.

The first is the high-angle zoom in the shopping centre. The zoom, I feel, is a very mechanical tool – one that I personally equate with manual operation. Unlike a dolly or tracking shot, the zoom draws attention to itself as something that someone behind the camera is actually executing. Of course, dolly and tracking shots are manually executed too, but they are much more natural and organic in their movement – much less obvious and much more omniprescent.

Then, in order of appearance, you've got the blatant manipulation of the mise-en-scène [the Cahiers du Cinéma in-joke]; the irregular pan at the river and, of course, the final shot of the film. Each of these shots [along with a few others] were set-up to feel "directed". As a result, I hoped to make a bit of a comment on the presence of the director in cinema – on the fact that a Scorsese picture always feels likes a Scorsese picture and that the filmmaker must ultimately become an active [if unseen] character in his [or her] own film.

So, yeah, while the fan didn't particularly mean anything to me while I was shooting it, this was still the first film towards which I'd given a lot of extraneous thought, particularly in regards to what I was showing in each frame and why.

Basically, we were given the very open-ended task of producing a two-and-a-half minute video. I had originally planned to make a short film entitled Big, Bad Wolf, but found that it was much more important to me, both personally and artistically, to make Film No. 2, which I did, from start to finish, in roughly forty-two hours.

And as far as the course goes, I'm really enjoying it. A lot of film schools don't do the hands-on thing until the second or third semesters, focusing instead on the history and theory of cinema, both of which I'm steadily teaching myself anyway. So, yeah. Thus far, at least, it's been entirely beneficial and to my liking.

I don't know what you mean. Are you talking about the aspect ratio?

The film was shot with a Canon XM2 [which is the GL1 in the States, I believe] and was then adjusted in post-production. I cut the film using Sonic Foundry Vegas Video 4.0 and then – just for the record – drained the colour by fifty-perecent [to give it that sad and "muted" feel].

Thanks for the kind words, both of you.

No prob, Now that I have your direct insight into the film, I want to view it again and try to key in on the shots you mentioned. I have to comment on the acotr playing you, now that I know it isn't you. He played the part well, and his facial expressions were great. I recently watched a little blurb where Gabrial Byrne dissected a couple forms of acting, and the highest form in his mind, is facial/body language acting. Getting certain ideas across to the audience through gesture as opposed to just dropping an anvil of dialogue on an audience. I think you guy achieved this, and gave the film a reflective, if not pensive mood. Kudo's for that. Friend of yours? Fellow student perhaps? Also, is that you on the V.O? the voice added much to the mood for me....

You state you just wanted to open the film with that shot of the fan. Have you asked youself why. Subconscious auteur direction perhaps?

_S

Silver you should feel a lot more proud of yourself. I really thought this was excellent, and feel that if you continue with the course you're on you will succeed (however you want to interpret success).

Is your first film online somewhere? I'd really love to see it.

__________________

Silver,

The question regarding the type of camera used that I was referring to is the new(er) 24p DVX100 by Panasonic. The resolution on your film was crisp and I was unsure of it being the quicktime capablities or your use of a DVCAM or simply fixing it in post.

Again the story was short, sweet and deep. There was an array of unique focus and framing that I enjoyed. Keep up the good work.

Remember that in film school, beware of conformity and lack of experimentation. Go beyond what your fellow classmates are doing, cause in the end some will be allies and most will be competition, something you will witness in the semesters to come. Controversy and diversity in your style will grab people's attention. I am interested to know how it faired compared to your "allies".

peace!
RR

It's just a matter of treating the DV format with a little bit of respect. If you pay the same amount of attention to the lighting and framing of your picture as you would do were you shooting film, you'll walk away with beautiful, crisp images. If you treat the camera like the camcorder it is, you'll get nothing but home movies.

In terms of our marks, I don't yet know, but as far as style and content goes, I was definitely my own man.

A lot of people were very shocked to think that I had made it, not to mention the fact that I was screening it to an audience of my peers. It's a very out-there film in terms of self-loathing.

Marks aren't important in film school, remember that.
I agree with the comment on how you use the camera, no doubt.
It is funny how you commented on the reactions of your peers. I can attest to your experience. If film school has taught me one major thing, you have to stand out and with that comes controversy and experimentation, so don't be shy in being different, as you already know it has turned some heads. Keep up the good work, I am certain that in future projects you will attain the respect you deserve from students and facutly. Best of luck Silver.

If your film does connotate your true feelings, as a filmmaker myself, doubt is always going to haunt us, yet it will only make us better filmmakers and drive us to succeed in the long haul.

Keep your head up.

peace!

Radio Raheem

"Don't believe the HYPE!"

Woah. Write what you know is what they say i guess.

Much better than your last short in terms of style and message (even if it's the surprisingly self-referential one that it is),

It's just made me ponder about what's expected of you if you go to film school. You're having to be writer, director and editor i guess. That puts a weird kind of burden on you, as much as it bestows control.

Nicely shot tho mate, it's good to see that you can use your other skills to make your writing/ideas come to life.

I'm sure your ego and experiences will bring you something new to chew on soon enough

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

You're preaching to the choir, Baby.

The following, Golgot, was taken from a blog entry that I made a couple of weeks back and I feel that it addresses, in some way, your comment. The whole "do-everything-yourself" nature of this first project [and only this first project, mind you] was something that I noticed myself:

That's interesting, Silver. ()

I did wonder how the whole set-up worked.

I think we've talked briefly once about the importance of authorship/having a message to convey. The whole autonomy thing obviously helps with that - and might shock some wallflowers into expressing themselves rather than hiding behind others perhaps?

But at the same time, collaboration does seem to be the aim of the game, so it is a confusing task in some ways.

Like you say, it's a tried-and-tested formula at a respected school (i'm assuming it's got teacher's who've actually done stuff then yeah? ). Maybe the early focus on controlling all elements helps with understanding how to bring an individual/unified feel to a project? (learning the problems, appreciating the interaction between the disciplines...stuff like that). I reckon that must be the hardest thing about a group effort - creating a final product that's consistant/coherent "internally" and "externally" as it were.

I'm wondering whether there's also a level on which they're testing your ability to communicate both verbally and visually. i.e. can you use both story and style to communicate what you desire, (and also pitch and stand-up for your film etc under criticism etc)

So many films seem to gain their unity/purpose by applying a bland-ifying set of norms to ensure consistancy etc. A core skill in being creative must be learning all the ways of applying your creativity.

(I'm just guessing here tho . Having the time and the mind to be making films is just a dream for me. I'll just keep carving out the occasional "auteur" effort from old footage, writing, and pushing for a future gleam of collaboration )