Like father like son

Sean has been watching A Bug's Life for the past week. At the beginning, when all the offering table breaks and the food falls down into the river, he says, "they should have used tape, Daddy."

Hello Dolly

Apparently I am very proud of our IKEA Lack table Dolly with wheels from OSH hardware since I talk about it all the time. So here's a photo.

Ornithopter test [video]

The ornithopter arrived the other day. It's slightly different than I was expecting—better looking actually. The rubber bands on this vintage (RE: old) item from Ebay were fossilized so I had to buy a new box.

Watch video test

Cheaters Anonymous

In Poseidon, wave size accuracy is optional.

I've been thinking about cheating in film because I just reread the Cinefx article on Poseidon. The article states that they cheated the wave size depending on the shot: sometimes it's 500 feet tall, sometimes just 200 feet.

There's a long tradition of cheating in film and Ben and I seem predisposed to cheat from the start. When the slightest shooting problem arises, the first thing that comes to our mind is to cheat. Let's move the lighting fixture higher. Let's change the angle slightly. Let's move you over here even though before, you were over there. Let's shoot this on a different location: no one will know. Cheating works because film by its nature fragments reality. In interpreting the world for the camera, locations are destabilized for expressive purposes. Further, filmic spatial ambiguity is such that without signposts, it's often difficult to tell where you are.

Interestingly, however, I found out that for our project, the footage looks better the less we cheat. In the church shoot, I consciously avoided cheating anything. And the scene cuts much more smoothly than the others. It's interesting to me that rather than learning how to cheat, we started cheating and are now trying to reign it in.

A $160 million Circus of the Stars

Warner's Poseidon is less of a movie and more of an experiment in cinema as if Wolfgang Petersen tried to see if a film could be carried only by the authentic emotions of actors in peril. Unencumbered by character development or dramatic questions about who to follow, who lives or who dies, or which way to go, Poseidon is filmed somewhat incredibly in sequence, with the actors doing their own stunts on gigantic sets. Petersen and DP John Seale shoot with multiple hand-held cameras striving to capture actual anxiety in the performers documentary style.

The result is... OK. Part of the problem is the mix of live action and visual effects. Sure the actors experienced on-set peril (wearing safety harnesses), but the film is so chock-full of effects work, from the 99% computer-generated opening shot to the numerous digital set extensions, that we become inured to the spectacle assuming everything was probably shot bluescreen. Nor does the marketing help. In a good DVD extra, Petersen and the actors talk about the harrowing experience of being on set. But their message has already been dulled by the segment's title, "Ship on a stage," which conjures images of actors drinking Evian in trailers between takes.

The performances also suffer from perhaps too big a dose of reality. Amazingly, that really is Josh Lucas swimming under a pool of fire. But Lucas' determined expression is the kind of mask we put on when trying to accomplish a task under stress. By putting his actors in difficult situations, Petersen has stripped away actor-y performances to reveal yet another level of performance never getting to primal emotion.

Finally, the film can't get around the central emotional requirements of mainstream cinema. We're set up to believe that this is going to be a gritty keep moving-or-die drama. Indeed, the grainy cinematography used after the wave hits pleads for us to take the movie seriously. Yet, the characters have to pause and reflect when one of their group dies—even though we know that the water is rising quickly around them. These kind of concessions disrupt any attempt by the filmmakers to express authentic terror.

Poseidon is an intriguing experiment, a sort of big budget reality show in which not-quite bankable actors do their own stunts on gigantic soundstages. This Circus of the Stars-meets-Survivor is a taut, brisk watch forsaking even the expected denouement. But it its desire to strip away the conventions of the genre and distill film to the thinnest of narrative threads, Poseidon also does away with the reason we watch these films in the first place. It's reasonable entertainment with a hollow aftertaste.

Stunt bird, spinning bird [video]

The ornithopter on order

We're now waiting for the arrival of our ornithopter—a bird-like toy that flies by flapping its wings. I found that neither Ben nor Erik have seen one of these things fly. They're actually surprisingly realistic. The ornithopter stunt bird will make its appearance flying in silhouette past the church window.

The other day I bragged about Ben's amazing techno crane substitute. You can see the test shot [here]. This rig beats our IKEA lack table dolly rig for low tech goodness: Ben is holding the camera aloft using three strands of fishing line. The camera spins by twirling it one way to "wind it up" and then letting it go. The bird shown in the video is the actual stunt bird we will be using. However, it needs to be suitably bloodied and mangled for its on-screen debut.

Perpetual motion—for real?

Today's Wired News features an article about Steorn, a company that claims to have created a perpetual motion device. Steorn says its technology "provides a significant range of benefits, from the convenience of never having to refuel your car or recharge your mobile phone, to a genuine solution to the need for zero emission energy production." It seems weird to me that a company claiming to have overturned one of the CENTRAL LAWS OF PHYSICS sees recharging a cell phone as a primary application.

BTW, for our new readers—in our film, the drama starts when our protagonist accidentally creates a perpetual motion device.

Score to date: 3d:4, 2d: 3

In the latest round of the battle of the 3d thinkers vs. the 2d thinkers, both sides scored a tie today.

To recap: the 2d thinkers believe that anything can be done with string and tape. This quick, seat-of-the-pants approach usually works at first but can't stand the rigors of production. The 3d thinkers usually opt for using either wits or good construction techniques.

Round 1 went to the 3d thinkers. The 2d approach for mounting the spinner prop on a paper plate, chopsticks, string and tape proved to be a dismal failure. It took the construction of a solid wood mount to make it work.

Round 2 was a tie. The 2d folk constructed a makeshift dolly out of PVC, cheap furniture wheels and an IKEA Lack table top. The 3D folk made the the PVC mount sturdier and now it works extremely well.

Round 3 went to the 3d thinkers for figuring out that we could flip the camera instead of flipping the entire crane arm.

Round 4 went to the 2d folks. Their use of tape, as documented in the previous post, proved highly effective for covering chrome, covering wood and mounting the candle-lit chandelier.

Today, both sides tied once again. Ben took the tape-and-string approach and used it to mount the camera. In our test shot, he was able to beautifully duplicate a really difficult crane-up w/ 360 degree rotation. Ben made it work using his knowledge from the spinner. But he was inspired by the 2d toolset.

Score: 3d: 4, 2d: 3

First he looks. Then he looks again. Then—and this is good—he looks at something + more on stillness.

If I had to pitch this project it would probably sound like the title of this post. Been editing the church scene. It works fine, pretty much like the pre-vis. Now that I see it in context, there seems to be only one action throughout the film--Ben looking at things. I need to think a bit whether I find this a problem or whether this is just the way the story is. That's the joy of independent film I guess. Where else are you going to see a 15 minute film of someone just looking at stuff?

RE: the stillness problem. I found that you can use an almost-still shot as long as it's short. Also the candles help a lot in terms of animating the scene. The second shot of Ben reading shows him turning quickly, with a kind of angularity. That works well too. Angular, precise motion.

Going to church

The latest shoots have gone quickly and uneventfully. On Friday we finished the red room and last night we did all of the planned previs church shots in three hours including set dressing and lighting. I planned the use the FantasyFX Haze in a can at one point and then Erik asked whether it was flammable or not. "No, it couldn't be," I said. I then looked at the label which says CAUTION CONTENTS EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE DO NOT USE NEAR OPEN FLAMES. So I promised to diffuse the shot in post, hence the versions you see here.

Notes:

>It was tough to shoot in that small space. It would have been nicer to shoot using a longer dolly track--not that we had one.

>There was something about shooting in a candle-lit church that had us all singing Gregorian chants.

>The pre-vis shot is more dramatic than what we shot. Maybe I should have used the crane?

>It was hot in there because of the light (just one) + candles and because it was small. Ben was sweating. It was the first time we used makeup--some talcum powder I had in the car. Still, he looks kind of shiny on tape.

>The table Ben is using is a fold up card table with a checkerboard built into it that we found in the room.

>In the latest battle of the 2d vs. 3d thinkers, 3d wins. Last week when Erik and I were trying to figure out how to flip the crane mount, Ben said, "Why don't you just flip the camera upside down." Of course, it worked and saved us a lot of time and head scratching.

>Ben is wearing a hooded sweatshirt. It was his actor-y idea for a costume that would evoke a monk's robe.

>We always forget to think about chairs. Ben is sitting on a folding metal chair but it's hidden in the shadows.

>The candle light fixture is a repurposed electric chandelier hanging precariously from a board suspended between two bookcases. If you look really closely in some of the shots you can see the board.

>As I have long advocated, you can never be with enough tape of various kinds. Last night we used strapping tape to mount the chandelier on Ben's improvised crossbeam. We used black lighting tape to cover up some of the white wall that was showing and black electrician's tape to cover a chrome spot on the chandelier.

Sad things, silly things

Yesterday my Korean mother in law arrived. As is customary, we stopped at the cemetary on the way home to visit my late wife's grave. My mother in law always brings a box of items to perform a ceremony at the gravesite. We wiped the marker and trimmed the grass. She placed a photo of my wife in a purple frame on the grave. She scattered cookies and orange juice. My brother in law recited a prayer.

While I was there I was thinking about the green shrine which is supposed to be a memorial for dead people. When these things are shown in movies, they are often too precious, too cohesive.

My mother in law brought silly cookies that look like either owls or snowmen, I can't tell. The photo frame appears to have been a promotional item since the words SAN MIGUEL BEER were displayed on the glass below my wife's face. (My mother in law can't read English).

To me, it was perfect. That's what I think reality looks like: sad things, silly things, meaningful things layered in time and space.

Church library

Trying to see if the actual lamp post outside is bright enough to light the stained glass window.

Checked out the church library this evening. I keep forgetting how small that space is. We need to rig a wood beam to hold our hanging light fixture. I think it will look OK if we keep the lighting hard and shadowy. Plus we need to use lots of candles. The street light outside looks bright enough that we shouldn't have to mount another light outside.

And in other news, the LA Times reports that violent crime is increasing in the high desert where low housing prices, unclaimed gang territory and decreased police scrutiny are drawing new gang members. The high desert is where we've been shooting our desert scenes.

Three minutes: done, er... almost + mini reviews

Today we used Ben's backyard to do the desert scene shots in which the wind blows the photo out of Ben's hand. My laptop is now grinding away rendering out the scene. The edit is basically complete and is just missing the shrine interiors which I'm saving for later. Today I asked Ben why it was taking so long to shoot our film. His response: "because you don't know what you're doing." I think he was joking, but he is right. Then he continued, "because the film is being created during the process of shooting." A good observation. The stuff we shot today came out of our first desert shoot. It was windy that day and when Ben ripped the papers out of the shrine, they were blowing like crazy and it gave me the idea to incorporate blowing paper into the scene.

We have the church scheduled for shooting next week during the evening. That should be fun. After the desert, any kind of location work indoors with electricity should be easy.

Here are some movies I've watched lately. Actually, of the following, I only watched two all the way through (Incident at Loch Ness and Monsters, Inc.) I think I have a lack of faith in most films and I don't believe that I'm going to be rewarded if I watch all the way through.

V for Vendetta
I got though three chapters and couldn't watch any more. The comic book dialogue was driving me crazy and I was getting annoyed by the clumsy blocking of a lot of the scenes, especially the fight scenes. I also couldn't get past Natalie Portman's English accent.

Monsters, Inc.
Sean has been watching this over and over. Incredible level of craft as I mentioned before. The story seems so convoluted, it's always amazing to me that it seems to make sense to people.

Incident at Loch Ness
Until I watched the extras I never even realized that this mockumentary was filled with visual effects. Werner Herzog has a good screen presence and for me, his delivery of the line "she doesn't look like a sonar operator" was hilarious. Quirky.

Negadon Monster from Mars
Having been brought up watching kaiju films on Saturday afternoon TV I was really looking forward to this kaiju-inspired indy CGI flick put together by a few Japanese guys at home. I was really impressed with their 60's style star field matte painting. But the human characters were waxen and the scenes barren and lifeless. I guess part of what makes kaiju films kaiju films is the top view shots of crowds pointing and running away.

Anxious Animation
Great resource for cut-out animation.

Mimic
Got it for the beginning in which shots fade in and out. Similar to what we're doing in the red room scene.

The Omen (1976)
Interesting compressed time montage sequence using still images.

All About Lily Chou Chou
I watched a bit until this seemed to be another one of those tales of media-obsessed adolescent alienation.

Bloodrayne
Poor Uwe Boll. Everyone hates Uwe Boll. Read his wikipedia bio. I had to see at least one of his films. I didn't make it through this one but what I saw was a lot better than I was expecting. Some stylish directing and editing. It didn't seem any worse to me than other films of this type. But apparently, if you're into this kind of stuff, it really sucks.

Underworld Evolution
Stylish, but small looking. Really limited color palette.The oddest thing about this to me was that a lot of the flying effects were done practically. I thought they were composites. Apparently this is a lot better than Bloodrayne.

2046
Looked like one of those "sideways glances and mysterious trysts" kind of films. I might try it again later.

Stillness vs. stasis [video]

This shot from Harakiri at 11:22 goes on a full 55 seconds. When the person facing away from the camera is talking, it looks like nothing is happening.

Desert scene [excerpt].

It's important to distinguish between stillness and stasis, I've discovered. Stillness looks formal and quiet but not static. Stasis, on the other hand, occurs when nothing's happening. It's OK if something is still. It's not OK if something's static. I've been confusing the two. I've been trying to achieve a ritualized stillness in some of the shots. But many of these shots just never looked right and didn't edit right (Ben standing at attention in front of the spinner, Ben facing away from the shrine).

I've been rewatching Harakiri again to see how Masaki Kobayashi did it. Many of Kobayashi's shots are still, but there is always something happening. A small gesture. A look or glance. And when the visuals are absolutely still, there is dialogue going on. So there is always narrative progress or visual activity, generally both intertwined. In addition, Harakiri has a distinctive look because of the formalized, methodical, ritualized gestures of the characters. Also, a lot of the cutting is not on action, but occurs before or after.

This desert scene edit contains the "still" shots that worked for me. You can see that except for the crane shot, there is no camera movement.

The first shot is a low angle tripod shot. I really like the little glints of light reflecting off the truck. That was an accident. I wouldn't even know how to do that on purpose except in post.

Next are some tripod shots of landscape. We didn't plan to shoot in a windy area, but I like the way the wind adds life to the shot.

The crane shot is the only shot in this excerpt in which the camera is moving. The camera glare on the truck really annoys me, but I don't know if it annoys me enough that I'll fix it in After Effects. I know someone who used to do this kind of work on a Liberty system--rebuild lost frames, fix negative scratches, etc. It looked tedious. I wanted to do the extreme wide shot of the truck in the distance and the crane shot in one piece. However, in the crane wide shot, the wind was blowing causing the crane to shake. I guess I could stabilize it, but I actually ended up liking the way the shot looked split in two. Erik did a great job of bringing the crane to a stop. Not easy. This is one of our later takes. By this time, we got Ben to kick up some dust when he brings the truck to a stop. We also got him to turn the truck slightly to the right to reduce the reflection and add a little more drama to the shot.

In the shot where Ben gets out of the truck you can see the white cardboard reflector reflected in the truck door. I'm not even sure the reflector was doing anything to light Ben's face since it was so far away in this shot. But I don't think most people would notice.

The next couple of shots show Ben walking through the desert. Here I used a technique I found in Bruce Block's book (see bruceblock.com). In order to smooth out the cut between the two shots, the center of interest at the end of shot one (Ben walking to the right) is in the same screen location as the center of interest at the beginning of shot two (Ben walking toward us). Also note that there are some towers and power lines I need to remove digitally. It's that monitoring problem again. I just couldn't see them on the viewfinder. Actually, the Quicktime movie I provided is about the same size as my viewfinder so you may not be able to see them either!

I like the shot of the green shrine. Here's where I usually get myself into trouble. The shrine is absolutely centered and has the potential to look static. But Ben walks into frame at a diagonal and the wide angle lens accentuates the movement in space. Plus, the wind is blowing adding life to the scene. I wasn't sure I liked the skinny trees in the midground when we shot but I'm happy with them now. They break up the composition and shake in the wind adding liveliness. By the way, this wind-blowing thing seems to be a big deal. Kobayashi often uses wind during Harakiri's fight sequences to animate the scenes.

In the shot of Ben viewed from the shrine's POV you can see the tiny crosses and religious paraphenalia dangling in the wind. I got this idea from a Betye Saar installation I have in Quicktime format of all things. In her installation there is a box spring frame from which hundreds of tiny religious artifacts are dangling. For our shrine, I was thinking that the hanging objects would make the shot look more interesting and give Dan ideas for audio. They also create some depth by providing foreground focus. I also remember the commentary on the Enter the Dragon DVD in which they talk about the banquet scene on Han's island. The high angle shot looked dead, they said, until they shot through bird cages on the ceiling. So the green shrine shot is a weird combination of: still (vs. static) shots + centered, formal composition + deep space + Betye Saar + Enter the Dragon.