Wisdom vs. devices

Yesterday Ben was giving me some editing suggestions while we sat at the computer. It was really productive because our discussion brought up a variety of issues. As you know, I've been going through the film trying to emphasize and punctuate certain events. So I've been applying various punctuation "techniques" all the while feeling uneasy about doing so. Ben's and my discussion inevitably turned to Steven Spielberg. His films, especially Raiders, showcase a variety of emphasis and underscoring techniques so we use them as a touchstone for discussion. Example: in every Spielberg film you will see a dramatic push in for emphasis. Ben's take on Spielberg was that he generally substitutes technique for wisdom. In other words, any emotional understanding is eclipsed by an emphasis on techniques that prespecify emotion.

Ben's thoughts on the matter made a lot of sense to me and really helped me to articulate some of the problems I'm having with the film. First, segments of the film feel perfunctory, as if they exist only to move Ben from point A to point B. It's areas like these that Ben thinks are too "unceremonious." Ben was saying, correctly, that the film (like any art) is the details. You have to want to draw in an audience to experience something every step of the way. But until now, I've been feeling that I have only two choices: keep the flow of events moving (which ends up looking too prosaic), or apply some dramatic emphasis technique (which seems contrived).

Ben's comments helped me to realize that I really am interested in drama and the specifics of the film. I'm just interested in a particular take on film drama. The problem, then, is not that the scenes are unpuncuated. It is that they are inadequately expressed. When I say expression, I am not talking about the projection of emotion, but the artistic act of making meaning public. I don't need to "dramatize" events. I need to cinematically express an understanding of the event. Sometimes, this even requires expressing an event's prosaic nature. For example, let's consider the scene where Ben finds the map with "Infinite Motion" Nevada on it. Right now he looks at the map and then we dissolve to the truck driving in the desert. It needs something. This is a big revelation in the film. It breaks Ben's monotonous routine, intruding on his life. But for me, revelation is less about aha! and more about tenacity. There is a mundane quality to revelation. It doesn't leap out; it lingers.

So rather than showing some dramatic reaction shot or having the camera swirling around our character ala A Beautiful Mind (both of which I've considered), maybe we go a different way. Maybe Ben sees the map. But then he goes back to work. And he keeps working at the printing press. But maybe now he seems to be thinking about what he just saw. And then maybe we cut back to the map. And it just spins around and around in circles for awhile. Like the spinner. The scene is less about awe and more about hearing an unrelenting persistent voice.

The entire discussion with Ben was very helpful and left me giddy for the rest of the day. I feel like I have a handle on what I'm going for. And Ben, you'll never work in this town again.