Author Archive

Imagine report: Power to the People!

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

I was asked to participate in an interesting seminar / panel discussion that was part of the Imagine Film Festival program, in Amsterdam, Holland. The seminar was called Power to the People, and it discussed two basic topics: fan fiction and crowdsourcing. Attending alongside me were a New York -based filmmaker and an actor Zachary Oberzan, who had made his own interpretation of the book First Blood, called Flooding with Love for the Kid (2010), Alexandré Philippe, a documentary director who had released a film called The People vs. George Lucas (2010), and a Danish director Martin Koolhoven, who had crowdsourced 60-second edits of his hugely popular film Winter in Wartime (2008).

The Imagine panelists (from left): Zachary Oberzan, Alexandré Philippe, Timo Vuorensola and Martin Koolhoven.

The moderators had prepared a bunch of bold statements, which they flashed on the screen as a discussion starters, igniting the panelists to venture from fan art to crowd sourcing, crowd funding and finally the future of the film industry. Although I was one of the panelists, I felt the discussion was quite thorough, and didn’t degrade into circlejerking or a flame war at any point, which unfortunately can’t be said of every panel I’ve attended to.

Flooding with Love for the Kid is quite an interesting project, of which I had not heard of before the festival, although the film’s been out there quite prominently – just one of those things right down my alley that I’ve managed to somehow miss. The idea behind the film that it was shot with $96 in one apartment in New York, by Zachary Oberzan, who’s playing all the roles himself. Zachary, a big First Blood fan (first, the movie – then, the book), realized his life-long dream to re-interpret the novel, on which Stallone‘s film by the same name is based on. Fact is, he never had any money, equipement or crew to do it, but being an unemployed filmmaker and an actor in New York, he decided to quite waiting around for other people’s permission to make the film, and went ahead and just did it. The trailer is here:

Zachary told interesting stories, as he had contacted the novelist David Morrell who wrote the book, to gain his permission for making the film – and although Morrell didn’t own the rights, he did give his blessing. But still, Stallone has the filming rights for First Blood, and if he wanted to play asshole, he could sue Zachary quite fast. But the discussion of whether it would be either a fan film, a parody or something in between is something the lawyers are not especially enthusiastic to start fighting for.

Right now, Zachary is working on a film/theater project where he’s re-making shot-by-shot his youth fan remakes of Van Damme‘s movie KickBoxer (1989), and he tours around the world on theater stages showing the films and playing Van Damme on the stage simultaneously. A very interesting project touring right now, and goes by the name Your Brother, Remember. Check out the amazing trailer below – if this doesn’t make you think about Samuli Torssonen back in the days when he was working on Andy Bones and Star Wrecks, then nothing:

Alexandré Philippe, a director of The People vs. George Lucas jumps even further down the fan’s mind with his documentary, trying to find out an answer to the question of how far does the rights of the author go, and does a fanbase that’s been feeding the filmmaker for decades have any say on what can be done with the franchise and what not. Although Star Wars is quite unique case, it’s a great subject to mess around the topic; there probably is no fan of the original Star Wars saga who really can say they think the prequels, started by The Phantom Menace (2001), get even close to the original trilogy.

And more interestingly, as Lucas has been tampering with even the original trilogy, releasing new versions loaded with heaps of terrible, already outdated CGI and completely retarded plot twists and needless changes, the question is even more interesting. What version of the original Star Wars trilogy is the version that’s “real”? Who can make the decision? Lucas – who says that the latest remake of the original trilogy, the one where Han Shot First, is the real one, and the original one is obsolete? Or the fans who’ve fell in love during the last 30+ years over and over again to the very original trilogy – they’ve been denied an access to that film, and re-sold time and time again a newer, even worse version every time.

Check out this trailer for the film, it should prove to be quite an exciting watch indeed:

The last guest was a Dutch filmmaker Martin Koolhoven who made an extremely succesful Dutch film Winter In Wartime that’s been spreading on big screens all the way to the States. He was there because as a part of a competition, the fans of his film were asked to re-edit the film into 60 second segments. As it usually happens (he indicated it was especially a Dutch phenomenon), the people didn’t follow the rules and re-made the 60 second versions into a completely different stories that had nothing to do with the original film.

The winning piece was a very innovative 60 second short film where the main character rides a bicycle, and on his both sides jump on and off the characters of the film, thus telling in a very clever, cute and compressed form the story of the film. Instead of editing it, they shot the whole material, so they had really put an effort into making the film.

This led to a question I wasn’t able to give a clear answer to: why did I release Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning (2005) under a license which allows anyone to further distribute it the way anyone wants to, but not to make derivate works of it.

Like Martin said, there’s no better way to promote a film than a fan re-make – or a spinoff – of it – which have happened already so many times in Star Wreck’s case, the biggest of those being Star Wreck 2pi that’s currently in production – so why didn’t I allow, and encourage it further?

I enjoyed taking part in the panel, and liked the way the discussion travelled from defining a fan film to legal issues, and then moving on to separation between crowd sourcing and crowd funding, and eventually asking what’s the business model of a laptop filmmaker using Internet as his or her’s main distribution and marketing channel. I assume there’s not one clear answer to that, but I believe it’s “motion”. It’s impeartive to be able to keep the product alive, keep it spreading in whatever form it most naturally takes, in whatever media it most naturally goes to – whether it’s fan art, merchandise, DVD sales or whatever – and constantly try new things.

And coming back to Hugh Hancock‘s extremely good point he made during a seminar in Singapore – the most important thing in the Internet is to fail fast. Try new things, see if they work – and if they don’t, kill them, move on and come up with another idea. The Internet is in constant motion – the key is to keep up to it.

Here’s a a video of the trip; it’s quite long, and maybe quite confusing, but I wanted to grasp a bit of Amsterdam and a bit of the panel to it. Enjoy:

Imagine report: Vuvuzelas in a Movie Theater? Absolutely!

Tuesday, April 19th, 2011

Vuvuzelas in a movie theater isn’t normal, but in Amsterdam, it is.

The Night of Terror is a long-running tradition as a part of Imagine Film Festival, the Amsterdam’s own Fantastic Film Festival. The idea behind the event is simple: the organizers screen four horror films during one night, in the most beautiful film theater in Europe, Pathé Tuschinski.

The trick is, that the audience is expected to participate by shouting, commenting and screaming. In addition to this, people bring horns – vuvuzelas, among others – toilet paper rolls, light sticks and other loud and/or throwable items with them, to color the screenings even more.

The rules are simple: if there’s a man on the screen – any man – everyone shouts “HOMO!”. If there’s a woman on the screen – any woman – everyone shouts “HOER!” (Whore”). And whenever anything remarkable happens – like someone is killed, people scream and shout as loud as they can. And during the the rest of the times, commenting by the means of animalistic screaming is more than welcome.

I know we missed most of the content, given that commenting happens in Dutch, but the vibe was certainly there. I don’t think we’ve laughed more in a movie theater since we saw Dead Snow (Død Snø, 2009), but it’s good to know that the films are far from such quality acts. The film we saw (we only lasted through one film, to be honest) was called Husk (2011), which was a big steaming pile of mid-budget horror crap. But the film was brought suddenly alive, when there was a full house of screaming people around you. As a cherry on top, as Pulp Fiction has already taught you:

“You can walk into a movie theater in Amsterdam and buy a beer. And I don’t mean just like in no paper cup, I’m talking about a glass of beer.”

So I assume the party gets harder as the night progresses.

We slipped out of Tuschinski after the first film, no matter how much fun we had, we were completely beat, and I had a seminar the next morning and I didn’t want to be completely offline.

If you are in Amsterdam during Imagine Film Festival, don’t hesitate to get your tickets for the The Night of Terror. It’s definitely worth it, one-of-a-kind experience. But I do feel bad for the director who I heard wasn’t aware of the name of the game here, and left the Night of Terror screening extremely disappointed, because “people couldn’t hear his film”.

The hordes of people waiting for the second screening to begin.

Finland Goose-Stepping into Dark Ages?

Monday, April 18th, 2011

Yesterday, Finland suffered one of the worst election outcomes that any country can hope for. The biggest winner of Finnish elections was The True Finns -party, an extreme right wing, anti-EU, border-closing, xenophobic and strongly religious party that became from one of the small side-notion parties into the third biggest party overnight.

But simultaneously, it was a reminder: no more can we expect politics to happen just by placing the votes and hoping for the best. The years of stability are over, and we’ve got too used to the fact that whatever happens, there’s nothing dramatic happening in the way the new parliament is formed. Well, now it is. Goose-stepping (well, maybe “goose-wobbling” is a more accurate term in these circumstances) into the Parliament are waves of unexperienced, loud-mouthed right-wingers who will have their hands full trying to make Finland into a more closed, nationalistic  and narrow-minded country.

This means we need to activate, help our parties, candidates and MPs to fight against this regression. Especially now it is not time to leave the country. Also, to every candidate who didn’t get elected, now it is not time to quit. The next four years are going to be harsh, but the next elections are coming, and more than ever, we need the people to activate politically, to work their asses off to get their candidates to the parliament, and make room for reasonable politics again. Go out and find what you can do for your party, candidates or MPs, support them any way you can – whether it is by officially becoming a member of the party, supporting your candidate’s efforts to get elected in the municipal elections, support them financially, and eventually building up a good counter-response for next parliament elections.

Remember, this is not the end of the world. For the next years we may feel like we’re watching an extreme slow-motion train wreck taking place in the Finnish parliament, but there’s going to be new elections in just few years, and then it’s time to clean up the mess that’s been made, and start re-building.

We need be aware of what’s going on in the politics. We all know it’s a dead-boring issue, but not following what’s happening is great grounds for the extremist takeovers. The right wing has always gained more popularity during the financially harsh times, and each country in EU is facing hard times explaining the citizens why helping out a country you’ve once visited in for a holiday is actually necessary for better tomorrow. Fueling its rocket from this unclarity, and pumping some more gas from problematic immigration issues like the Romanian beggars and refugee family unification, the party is set to go, and get all of those who’ve never understood a word of international politics to get activated and to vote. And when you have a trustingly smiling True Finn leader who everyone can identify with, we have a scary movement with enough fuel to go this far.

The only positive thing about Finnish elections were that Wille Rydman didn’t get to the Parliament, although he did get way too close. I’m also happy in a bittersweet way to see that the Pirates were left on shore to develope their party (or maybe to form a new one, excluding the racist-chauvinists, silver surfers and candidates who think that comics about ass-raping are a good way to promote adult discussion over information society), because the issues they are pushing forward are way too important to be handled by random bunch trolls.

I’ve thought about an Internet service I call “Follow Your Representative”. It would be a social media news source moderated by independent entities, feeding the news and the official parliament records on the doings of the elected parliament members, and reminding of the election promises they were promoting to get elected. In the service, the audience can easily follow what their candidate has actually been doing during his or her’s service, vote how well they’ve kept to their promises, follow on how many parliament sessions they’ve attended, what they’ve voted Yay or Nay  for, and discuss and possibly even directly communicate with the MP. I’m not one to do this service, but I’m hoping someone would – so that in four years time, we’d have a good database of what the elected parliament members have been doing during their term, and if they are worth a re-vote.

One thing which tells me that things are not progressing the right direction is that for the first time in my blogging life, I’m just a little bit afraid to push “send”, after writing an article that’s criticizing the right wing national movement in Finland. These guys now have the power, and we’ve seen where that leads.

Let’s make sure it doesn’t get further than this.

The Oscars 2011 Results, and what we think of them

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

The Oscars have been handed out to their rightful (mostly) owners, and the Zombies made their predictions. This year we didn’t know too much about the films – Essi had seen a good bunch of them, I had only a handful, but compared to last year when we were really, really digging into the bits and pieces of the films, we were really just lost. So much of our predictions were based on something else than really seeing the films – guessing, and trying to make some kind of sense of earlier awards and how the Academy would act like.

Here are our predictions – X is Timo, O is Essi and the yellow with the Oscar on top is obviously the actual winner. As you can see, Essi did much better job than I did – with 15/24 – and I did only 10/24. But next year, the tables will turn.

There’s also a bunch of comments to follow these predictions on the winners and runners up, just under the pic.

LEADING ACTOR – COLIN FIRTH (THE KING’S SPEECH)
I don’t think anybody was hugely surprised by the Leading Actor Oscar going to Colin Firth for his awesome role in The King’s Speech as the stuttering king. He respected the Nr. One Rule of Oscars as stated by Kirk Lazarus from Tropic Thunder: “Never go full retard”. “Everybody knows you never do a full retard.” “What do you mean?” “Check it out. Dustin Hoffman, Rainman, look retarded, act retarded, not retarded. Count toothpicks to your cards. Autistic. Sure. Not retarded. You know Tom Hanks, Forrest Gump. Slow, yes. Retarded, maybe. Braces on his legs. But he charmed the pants off Nixon and he won a ping-pong competition? That ain’t retarded. You went full retard, man. Never go full retard.” Putting that aside, he did an awesome role, in a don’t-go-full-retard -way: I believed him, but I simultaneously saw the enormous acting effort he did to nail down the role. I wouldn’t know who else could’ve really won this; Bardem and Bridges already have their Oscars, and Eisenberg and even Franco will have another change, unless they botch their careers up. So Colin was also the righteous choice.

SUPPORTING ACTOR – CHRISTIAN BALE (THE FIGHTER)
I don’t know anything about The Fighter, but I know that when Christian Bale sets his mind on something, he can be quite awesome. But still, I don’t like him; he’s a bit creepy. We all know the meltdown he had on set, and it’s been largely inspiration for many people in all fields of life – one of our actresses in Iron Sky actually was listening that little freakout on loop with earphones when preparing for one scene. And since I haven’t seen any other films – other than The King’s Speech, and Geoffrey Rush already has an Oscar, I’m fine with this. The Academy gets my blessing. They may rest peacefully now. I know they’ve been very nervous about this, and been flapping F5 on ZR’s website for hours after the award was handed out, and I didn’t return their calls – they must’ve been frightened to death – but it’s OK. It’s a good decision. Thank you.

LEADING ACTRESS – NATALIE PORTMAN (BLACK SWAN)
It’s amazing how beautiful actresses were nominated this year, and the most beautiful of them all – hell, apart from Essi, Natalie Portman is probably the *most* beautiful woman alive – won the award. Neither of us has seen the film, but the small clips I’ve seen are really strong, so I believe the best one won, although Essi has been appraising The Kids Are Alright also quite a lot. But it was not a competition of whether she would win or not – it was probably one of the safest bets on these Oscars. And for a good reason. And always remember, there’s so many reasons to love Natalie Portman. And, just to state it out loud, one of my biggest dreams as a director is to get to work one day together with Nicole Kidman and Natalie Portman.

SUPPORTING ACTRESS – MELISSA LEO (THE FIGHTER)
Essi picked wisely Melissa Leo, I thought of Amy Adams – just because I think Amy Adams is a lovely actress, but Essi saw the trailer and knew instantly who’s going to win. I did like Helena Bonham Carter’s role, and I think she’s absolutely one to win Oscar one day, but this wasn’t her year. That day will come, and we’ll know it when it hits, she’s a terrific actress, and looks like a billion dollars. If that expression is to say she’s beautiful, mysterious and almost cartoon-like in many ways. So, anyway, the Melissa Leo won this one from the Fighter, and I’m bound to think that The Fighter is a film worth to see.

ANIMATED FEATURE – TOY STORY (PIXAR)
Also known as the Pixar price, and it went – again – to it’s rightful owner, Pixar. I didn’t see any other films, and although I do think that The Illusionist seems like a film worth seeing, there just was no competition to the awesomeness of Toy Story 3. To me, it was the best film of 2010, and I would’ve gladly given the biggest Oscar to that (but of course, that won’t happen anytime soon…). Regardless, that’s a damn fine film, and deserves every Oscar going it’s way. This year we won’t probably see Pixar Oscar, since Cars 2 looks like … well, Cars 2. Probably a fine film, but won’t compete for Oscars (unless they come up with the category of Best Merchandise Sales Oscar), but maybe 2012, when they are pushing out their first live-action film John Carter From Mars… Impossible to say, but I have a tingling sensation that another Best Picture Oscar for Scif might be already on it’s way.

ART DIRECTION – ALICE IN WONDERLAND (ROBERT STROMBERG AND KARIN O’HARA)
Art Direction is basically pulling the vision out of the director’s head and transferring it to the screen into real or CGI sets. A good art director is aware of what the director wants, and when he or she is in synch, their ideas become something extraordinary. Tim Burton has always been very careful with the art directors he’s been working with, and no matter what people say of Alice in Wonderland, it was quite a world of it’s own. This Oscar seems also to be the one where they tuck Harry Potter every year, but I think Inception was a real contestant there. The world of Inception was precise and beautiful as well, especially when the city bended on itself… That was filmmaking, I tell ya.

CINEMATOGRAPHY – INCEPTION (WALLY PFISTER)
Yes, there was a lot of super-high-speed camera in Inception, and the whole cinematography of the complex and multi-layered Inception was very well taken care of, so I think the Oscar went to a right person. He shot most (if not all?) of Christopher Nolan’s films, and always with such excellency, such grandness and such Hollywoodness that one can only admire his work. He’ll be out for quite a bunch of Oscar nominations in his career, that’s for sure.

COSTUME DESIGN – ALICE IN WONDERLAND (COLLEEN ATWOOD)
A two-time Oscar winner Colleen Atwood just nailed the third award from Alice In Wonderland, and that’s no wonder. I did for some reason think that King’s Speech would get it, because I did like the way the film looked like, and like the stuff people were wearing, and it felt like it was very well in period (not to say that I’m an expert in early 1900′s British garderobe, but when things are right, you just know it – that’s the magic of details).

DIRECTING – THE KING’S SPEECH (TOM HOOPER)
The reason we need film directors is because otherwise all the films would be like this. There was quite a formidable bunch of very possible winners, and I think the biggest fight of the Oscars was actually the Directing Oscar this year. Fincher’s been evading evading Oscars from day one, and so has Aronofsky and both absolutely deserve an Oscar, but this time it fell on the lap of Tom Hooper from his astonishing work on The King’s Speech. I do think it went to the right address but I wouldn’t have been at all surprised if it were either of the others. But to be honest, we’ll be seeing Aronofsky and Fincher at Oscars in the years to come, and they’ll get their Oscars and lifetime achievements when they’re old – but with Tom Hooper I can’t be that sure. He’s a tremendous director, but maybe not as prolific as his younger older, more American colleagues.

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE – INSIDE JOB (CHARLES FERGUSON)
I was really, really, really hoping for Banksy to win the Oscar, and I think most of the viewers were as well. Exit through the Gift Shop was quite possibly the best documentary I had seen since… I don’t know when. It wasn’t even a documentary, it was a performance and a statement, which most of the viewers managed to miss completely, and this – I think – was its demise in Oscars. Exit Through the Gift Shop went full retard. Inside Job, on the other hand, seemed to be – as the commentators in Finnish TV pointed out pretty well – a safe bet for American audience. A subject where it’s easy to blame Everyone Else, instead of looking into the mirror. It’s the multi-billionaires, not us. But it was, I really trust, a good documentary. Hope to get to see it one day.

DOCUMENTARY SHORT – STRANGERS NO MORE (KAREN GOODMAN & KIRK SIMON)
We picked the best name for the price, and failed. Really, had no idea about the film at all, just… picked one. That’s all. Nice. Good. Very good.

FILM EDITING – THE SOCIAL NETWORK (KIRK BAXTER, ANGUS WALL)
What is a good edit in a film? The one you pay no attention to, yet the film manages to grab you by the balls and push you around for 2 hours, and you’re all in for it. That’s good editing. It’s not split screens, scattered storytelling or whatever the hell you might think, it’s just about rhythm of the whole film and how to achieve it. The Social Network probably deserves it, but there’s great editors nominated there as well, but I wouldn’t have any real idea what else it could be. Well, I suggested 127 Hours because I don’t know why… It’s kinda hard to say, I’m just starting my editing progress of my film and I think I’m going to be wiser after the next 9 weeks about what is and what is not good editing.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM – IN A BETTER WORLD (SUSANNE BIER)
The one thing you can count on Foreign Language Films is that there’s always one film you’ve ever heard of, and that film won’t win it. This is what happened this year as well, but it’s great because the price went to Scandinavia – Denmark! Congratulations! A lot of good things have come from Denmark, so In A Better World is definitely on my list of films I do want to see.

MAKEUP – THE WOLFMAN (RICK BAKER, DAVE ELSEY)
The Wolfman didn’t shine, although it had a good cast, but the makeup was quite natural choice for the Oscars. Werewolf transition is one of the most traditional Hollywood special makeup tricks, and here we see it again, this time using the most modern technology.

ORIGINAL SCORE – THE SOCIAL NETWORK (TRENT REZNOR & ATTICUS ROSS)
To me, the Original Score was the most interesting and game-changing Oscar this year. First, I was hoping it to become a competition between Daft Punk (who did Tron), Social Network and Inception, but unfortunately – and out of no real reason – Daft Punk wasn’t even nominated. But more importantly, Reznor won. The old industrial freak who crafted himself through game soundtracks(Quake), collaborating with such filmmakers as David Lynch and Oliver Stone (Lost Highway and Natural Born Killers’ soundtracks) into an Oscar-winning composer outdid himself, but more than that, it was a brave move from the Academy to give the price to him, when Zimmer had simultaneously released his much more traditional but breathtakingly beautiful Inception… But really, Reznor nailed the score with Brian Enoesque minimalistic precision. But Reznor didn’t work alone – one could say that without the help of Atticus Ross, already a celebrated soundtrack artist (Book of Eli), he couldn’t have succeeded in the first place. I’m terribly happy for this Oscar on so many levels – mainly, because this might be a sign that also we’ll get past the typical soundtrack music in the future more easily, and get to hear more experimental soundtracks also in major films.

ORIGINAL SONG – TOY STORY (RANDY NEWMAN)
As it was tweeted, Randy Newman should accept all the Oscars and give all the speeches in the future. His sovereign, relaxed and ironic approach to the price – this was his 20th Oscar nomination, and second Oscar – was fun and to the point. He noted that above all, the Oscars are supposed to be good TV. And that’s what he delivered. He’s a super-professional, and will probably be popping up at the Oscars in the years to come, and his awesome song for Toy Story 3 definitely deserved all the appraise it got.

ANIMATED SHORT FILM – THE LOST THING (ANDREW RUHEMANN, SHAUN TAN)
It’s a shame I didn’t get to see even the short animated features this year, since I’ve so far always loved them quite a lot in Oscars. Of course I had seen Day & Night, loved it, but the price went to another film called The Lost Thing, of which I know nothing but it did look quite beautiful the seven seconds of it that I got to see. Congratulations, I’m sure you’ll get picked up, and have a great career at Pixar. I envy you… Well, thinking it another way, hope to see you around at Pixar one day!

LIVE ACTION SHORT FILM – GOD OF LOVE (LUKE MATHENY)
Another I-Have-No-Idea-What-You-Are-Talking-About -price, we hadn’t seen anything, and had no idea about the winners, so there’s nothing much to say.

SOUND EDITING & MIXING – INCEPTION (LORA HIRSCHBERG, GARY RIZZO, ED NOVICK & RICHARD KING)
I’ve always wondered why are Sound Editing & Mixing a different category, where as Visual Effects and Special Effects are not. Not to say that mixing and editing wouldn’t be a completely different crafts, but so are VFX and SFX. If someone can give me a feasible explanation, I’d loved to hear it. But Inception, yeah, well – what’s there to say? A technical Oscar, and Inception was by far the technically most satisfying movie of 2010, so it was the right address.

VISUAL EFFECTS – INCEPTION (CHRIS CORBOULD, ANDREW LOCKLEY, PETER BEBB, PAUL J. FRANKLIN)
I do have a bit of a problem of this category, knowing how much different worlds VFX and SFX can be. In my understanding and experience, Special Effects means everything that happens for real, and Visual Effects everything that’s created with a computer. So for example, rigging a huge rotating room and total zero gravity would be Special Effects, and creating a fire-breathing CGI dragon would be Visual Effects – and probably these two departments wouldn’t ever even get to meet or know each others’ names. But this year, there was Inception and Alice In Wonderland competing for the same price, and as it is well known, Alice was mostly CGI with so much green screen in the studio Tim Burton had to wear purple glasses to not to go crazy, where as Inception was basically made for real. Now don’t take me wrong, I do think Inception deserves the Oscar, but I’m just confused here – how can these two entities even begin to compete? It’s just two so completely different worlds…

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY / ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY – THE SOCIAL NETWORK / THE KING’S SPEECH (AARON SORKIN / DAVID SEIDLER)
The big fight in these oscars boiled down to The Social Network and The King’s Speech. Since both won their own categories of script, it was really hard to guess who’s gonna win, but as the Directing and Lead Actor went to The King’s Speech, it wouldn’t have made too much sense if The Social Network had won. But I’m sure every one of the scripts were amazing.

THE BEST PICTURE – THE KING’S SPEECH (THE WEINSTEINS)
Essi was saying The Social Network, and out of a brainfart mind of mine I said Inception (mainly because it’s always the movie that I least want to win that wins this price, but I should’ve been a bit more realistic…), but we both were wrong. It was, of course, The King’s Speech. And quite well-deserved one it was. I was secretly crossing my fingers for Toy Story 3 or maybe even Winter’s Bone which was a real indie film, but The King swoop the table and so it should’ve been. And remember, these 10 films were really well-deservedly aiming for the Best Picture, and (maybe apart from 127 Hours, which was fine but really, what was it doing in this category?) will remain legendary films of 2010′s in the years to come.

All together, the road was bad but the race was good. The gala was a bit crappy, but the films were particularly interesting this year. Next year, after we’re done with Trekathon, I’m going to be watching only films and my plan is to have seen every single one of the films of the next Oscars!

The Zombie Room Oscar Predictions are in!

Sunday, February 27th, 2011

This year has been quite a stupid year for us regarding the Oscars. As you may remember, last year I was in national TV, and I had seen mostly all of the films. This year – completely opposite. Neither of us has seen almost any of the films, mainly thanks to Trekathon. While the rest of the world has been going to movies, we’ve been sitting tight on our asses and watching Star Trek. So, this year’s predictions are mostly drawn together using the Hatson-Stetson -method – i.e. The Secret Art Of Guessing.

So, anyway. Here are the predictions. Tomorrow we’ll see which of us wins. And remember, these are not our *opinions* as much as they are our predictions on how the Academy will reward films.

TIMO’S OSCAR BALLOT:

Timo's Oscar Ballot

ESSI’S OSCAR BALLOT:

Essi's Oscar Ballot

Here’s what I learned directing Iron Sky – Notes from a newbie filmmaker

Sunday, February 13th, 2011

Photo by Tarja Jakunaho

Having just returned from Australia after finishing the shoot for my first professional feature film Iron Sky, I thought I’d take a second of your time and share some of the experiences I had within the last three and a half months and 40 shooting days to you who are interested in shooting a film somewhere in the future. I’m talking here to directors, but I’m sure people working in other positions might find something helpful here as well – if nothing else, reading this might make it easier for you to understand us, the directors, who are usually lost and hopelessly sad creatures on the set.

Working as a first-time director without a film school basis, walking into the set was a bit strange experience for me. I had never visited a real set, and I had only a vague idea on what the people on various positions do. So suddenly, I had people who I had no idea who they were asking questions I had no answer to. I’m really lucky to have as good First Assistant Director as I had (Peter McLennan) who was out there, really helping me out, and such a great Director of Photography as Mika Orasmaa is to make my life a bit easier. They both understood I knew nothing, but helped me through. The first three days were the worst, I made all the possible mistakes during those three days, but after that I started to learn more about the physics of the shoot, and that’s what I want to talk to all you first-time directors here.

PRE-PRODUCTION

Pre-production meeting at Frankfurt.

Pre-production is crucially important time for every filmmaker, and out of every second you have actually available for a proper pre with Director of Photography, First Assistant Director and other heads of departments, you should use them wisely to think through, inspect and tinker with every smallest detail. Because, as a director friend of mine told beforehand – if something can go wrong, it will. At least, you should be prepared to it. It’s clear you can’t prepare yourself for everything, so one of the best ways to try to leave a bit of air everywhere, to fix things as they fall apart.

BLOCKING AND SHOOTING

Blocking through a scene (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

Blocking through every scene beforehand is important. After the actors know what they are supposed to do, and the camera knows where to begin with, and where the key moments take place, it’s relatively easy to repeat the scenes over and over again. Ideally, you would have the possibility to rehearse the scenes beforehand with the actors, as clear as possible, but never lock yourself to what you come up within the rehearsals, because when coming over to the set, you find so much more possibilities and a huge load of problems that completely change whatever you’ve rehearsed. So rehearse, but keep an open mind when walking into the set.

Blocking the scene on the set – whether it’s based on rehearsals, or doing it cold turkey – is good to start before the actors arrive. Discuss it quickly through with DOP, or VFX supervisor, and with First Assistant Director, to make sure there’s nothing you didn’t take in account regarding lights, camera/crane angles or the lack of green screen, that could be fixed easily by just taking the action back few steps the other direction. That is because changing directions during the actual blockthrough gets confusing, and eliminating every bit of confusion beforehand is really important.

Photo by Tarja Jakunaho

After a quick walkthrough of the scene with heads of department, it’s time to clear the set, hold the work and get the cast in. Be prepared to give a bit of time for this – in many cases, this is the first time the actors walk into the set, and it takes a bit of time for them to familiarize the place. This usually takes the form of fooling around with some setpieces, doing something unexpected and just basically strolling around, asking questions and trying to understand more about everything. See, for you as a director you will already be very familiar with every small bit of the set, but for the actors, they’ve imagined the set in one way and whatever kind of set it is going to be, it definitely is different from what they’ve thought it to be. When the actors are familiar with the set, it’s so much easier for them to start inventing things, creating life to a dead set and bringing the characters alive in that surrounding. No matter in what kind of hurry you are, give the actors a bit of time to get familiar with everything, and you’ll get much better results on their end as well.

The actual blockthrough works – at least on my experience – quite well in three stages. First – it’s a readthrough. Just let the actors read through the lines, and let them wander around the set a bit more. The idea of the readthrough is to understand the approximate length of the scene, spot how the actors are going to perform and to find out possible problems in the first place. It’s quite possibly the first time you actually hear the dialogue, and depending on how precise you are with sticking to the script’s dialogue, you might want to make some notes about lines that don’t work very well. But – and this is important – DON’T start solving these issues at this stage. Now, you need to move.

Stunt action (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

Next, based on the readthrough, it’s time for a walkthrough. Tell the actors where to stand, who to talk to, how to approach the scene, where they can go and where not, and then let them do it once or twice, just to get an idea of the space they’ll be using. The walkthrough is usually also the biggest possibility for you to screw up things quite easily – so keep your script supervisor next to you. Make sure you don’t create any huge continuity issues at this stage, issues you won’t realize how big they are until they become actual problems when shooting. Just keep an eye on what big changes there are going to be – someone taking jacket off, someone lighting a cigarette, someone placing an item from a place to another – these issues are things you’re locked to, so make sure that’s what you want. Because once it’s been rehearsed that at this point she has a cigarette, it’s there, but if you at later stage realize that she can’t have the cigarette in another place, you’ll have to get rid of it somehow, which means possibly one or two more shots. Not to say it wouldn’t be worth it, and that’s what film is – constant action, motion, people doing things – just make sure that’s what you want, and try to realize the continuity issues it might bring up and then decide if it’s worth going for or not.

After the walkthrough, you’re going to properly block through the scene once or twice. This is as much for the actors as it is for the camera and the lightning department. You’ll watch as the actors perform the scene – almost like in a theater stage – and give the DOP (and you) the possibility to find the best angles and the best camera moves, and make some markers on the floor and/or walls for the actors, and then you’re good to go. As soon as you’re done with blocking the scene, leave the set as far away as you can. Let the departments begin their jobs, lighting the set, moving the crane, placing the green screen, and walk away with the actors…

Ready to shoot (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

Because – and this is usually one of the the most important moments of directing at least in my opinion – the post-block 20 minutes you have with the actors is the time to jump into problems of the text. If some action didn’t feel right, you have time to work on it. If some bit of dialogue just sucks, you have time to discuss it. If the actors have questions, you have a possibility to answer them. If someone has a completely different approach to the performance that you’re looking for, you have time to address this.

This 20 minutes is basically for you and the actors to get everything out of the scene before the cameras are rolling, because after that you’re on the set and you only have time for 3-4 re-takes per shot, which is usually just to fine tune the performances, and changing the big master action is not an option anymore, not without changing everything completely.

In short – don’t rush the blockthrough. Rushing it lands you in to even more problems, more time and more stress on the set. Solving the problems during and after the blocking makes it easy to repeat the same action from different camera angles, focusing on different actors and pieces of performance depending on the angle and the lens you’re using.

When starting to shoot, it’s good to know your actors. What you want is the best performances, but some actors are better during the first few takes, and some actors get better after they’ve familiarized themselves with the action and dialogue and other actors. So when planning the rhythm of the closeups and angles, always think where to start. Sometimes, it’s good to start with closer coverage, but usually I find it best to start with wide master shots, where you don’t see in too much detail the actors’ faces – this gives you time to rehearse the action as well, realize what’s wrong with performances, and start fixing them as you go into closer coverage. It’s a process, and once it’s clear and you know how it works, it’s quite straightforward. First do the wide masters, then pick a direction depending on your actors (the ones you know are better in the first few takes) and go tighter, tighter and tighter until you change the direction. Leave the pickups the last, because you either might find a way to grab that little bit of action as you shoot a direction, and if not, it’s usually good to use the main energy of the actors to the performances.

FILM MINUTE

Faster! Faster! Faster! (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

One of the biggest misconceptions on the set is something I call the Film Minute. It means the time it takes to fully accomplish one task. Usually, when you ask how long it takes from anyone, they’ll say “it’ll only be a couple of minutes”. It’s important to understand what does it mean, so here’s a little multiplier chart for you to understand what certain expressions of time mean:

Multiply film minute x 5:
* Camera Department
* Props Department (stand-by)
* Costume Department (stand-by)

Multiply film minute x 10
* Visual Effects department
* Stunt department

Now, as a director, what do you care? It’s the First Assistant Director’s job to keep up with the schedules – that’s true. But in the end of the day, it’s only you who knows what’s really relevant, what’s worth the time and the effort when looking at the big picture, what’s not. So, for example, if you want to have some sparkles on the scene, you might want it just because it looks nice, or because it establishes an important electricity malfunction which will be later used in the storytelling. 1st AD won’t know the importance of the one little thing, especially if it’s something you’ve come up at the set quite quickly, so it’s up to you to determine will it be the worth of the time it takes. Because, in the end of the day, it’s all about the coverage – you either have the coverage you need by the end of the day to edit the scene together, or you don’t. If you don’t, you go overtime. And the overtime is the thing that’s gonna kill you. Trust me.

So understanding Film Minutes is also director’s job, and even though your job as a director is not to micromanager things – there are departments for that – you need to have a good grasp of things.

The reason why Film Minute is never accurate is because of few reasons. First, every head of department makes things sound a bit easier than they are. It’s not because the lack of experience or because they’re just evil people, it’s because the other departments. There’s always unprepared requests coming from you – as the director – or from the DOP, or from the actors, and all this takes more time than prepared. The other point reason is usually that if something is changed, it usually needs rehearsals, new markers on the ground, new eyelines and so on. And especially, when you go into issues that have to do with electricity, safety, fire or stunts, there’s always the safety factor, the rehearsal and re-rehearsal factor and so on, which usually flows to other departments as well. So, basically Film Minute is usually quite accurate – if you work alone on the set. But whenever you’ll get a Film Minute estimate, remember that it’s just an estimate from one department – other departments usually will have their say on things as well.

And this, of course, is again not your job, but the First Assistant Director’s job to translate the length of the operation or request to you in realistic time, but before even giving a request, it’s good that you have an understanding on how long things will take, just to be on the same page. Remember – whatever you request out of the blue will usually cost money and time, so always be careful to request for things you are sure you want.

LANGUAGE ON THE SET

Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

As a Finn, it’s hard to remember that you have to be more polite than is natural to you when working on the set with actors and the crew. In Finland, we don’t have a very good equivalent for the word “please” – which itself is short for “if it please you” – and we’re not used spreading compliments and excessive thanks around as much as we should. That’s just the basis of Finnish language – closest to really being polite, we do use T-V distinction, which in short means we talk of a person in plural, which sounds ridiculous in English, so we can’t even use that. But that’s no excuse – people on the set are used to better manners than Finns usually are especially when talking in foreign language, and that’s something we need to adjust to when working in a non-Finnish set.

This means, keep your ears tuned to how the people treat each other on the set. They do use words like “would you be so kind”, “please”, “sir” and “thank you” much more frequently than we Finns would. We had some feedback from the actors and the crew of our lack of pleases and thank-yous, and first we were a bit laughing about it but started to realize that the way we work does make us sound much ruder and much more assholes than we actually are, and I did learn to try to enhance my politeness whenever working with a non-Finnish crewmembers and/or actors. The words are “please”, “thank you” and “sir”. With these three additions to your normal English when working in a high-pressure environment – like a set usually is – you’ll come across more efficiently. Trust me.

SHOOTING IN GREEN

Studio before the green screen is up (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

Shooting in studio is a world of it’s own. It’s contained, controlled and a bit boring. Boring, because at least in our case we didn’t have any full sets on the stage – mainly floor, railings and some equipment that were important for the actors to interact with. Everything else would be created later on with CG, so every corner of the studio is surrounded with green screen. For me, as a director – and as quite an experienced director when it comes to a full-CGI-created sets like we had mainly in Star Wreck – it’s easier since I know every set and at least approximately know what kind of surroundings there will be created with a computer. But for everyone else working on the set, especially the actors and the Director of Photography, it’s really helpful if you spend a little bit more time with them to explain what’s supposed to take place in the green screens around you, what it looks like, and create some markers on the screen to give an idea where several objects or points of interests are. It’s still hard for the actors to really jump into the green screen set, especially if the actors are more used to traditional sets, so printing out whatever concept art – or even just some reference pictures – you might have of the set is going to be extremely helpful for them. Even better, if you have a 3D-environment on your laptop of the set with you, it’s very good, especially when planning the shots with DOP and other heads of department.

Green around the Moon (Photo by Mika Orasmaa)

But sometimes it might also be a good idea not to describe in too much detail what there is around them. Because the problem is for the actors that if they don’t really experience the space around, see the things moving around that are just dots on green screen, they have to imagine it, and they have to play it out loud, sometimes too loud for the camera. Udo Kier, when I was explaining him one of the sets, said he didn’t want to know too much. The set we were in was a huge hangar in the Moonbase, but Udo wanted to play it like it was his living room. He didn’t want to know of the marvels around him – in the end, he was playing the Moon Führer, and everything around him was blatant, boring and way too familiar to be marveled by his character, and this – not looking around, not paying attention to huge Moon Nazi stuff happening around, provided a performance that had more nobility to it.

So, when working on a green screen set with the actors, be careful how much information you feed up to them, and in what form. Sometimes, less is more. But take the time it needs to place good markers to whatever things you need, otherwise you’ll find actors looking around into completely wrong directions at same thing, and that’s just stupid.

Green Men (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

WATCHING THE MATERIAL

The Monitors (Photo by Tarja Jakunaho)

One of the things you need to be extremely careful with is showing the material to the actors during the shoot. Many people would like to see what they’ve just shot, but it’s not always a good idea to show material – actually, the less they see themselves on the screen, the less they have anything else but you as the director to trust upon, and the more they trust you, the better their performances will be for your film. That’s the general theory which I found good to follow. The best way that I found working for me is to create an environment where the actors trust 100% on you, and no other reference, and if they require to see the material, do show them that only to grasp the continuity or a bit of action, not the performances.

SCHEDULES

First page of the last callsheet

Last, but not least – let’s talk about schedules. Although it might feel a bit strange to jump on and take part in the scheduling from the first draft of the schedule on – do that. I didn’t, I had never seen a proper schedule before, and I didn’t pay too much attention to it. This attitude will backfire. Also, when working with the schedule, don’t fool yourself. Things take a certain amount of time on the set, and there’s usually nothing you can do about it. You can’t rush a stunt coordinator to do his or her’s job faster – if they are pro, they will do things efficiently, but their main concern – and your’s, too! – is the safety. And it takes a certain amount of time. So if you – sitting before your computer months before the shoot, looking at the schedule – go like “naah, we can do at least 30 shots on this day” – you’re fooling yourself. It’s good to remember that normally, you’re able to do 10-25 shots, depending on various factors. If you’re doing a well-contained drama scene with few actors, only dialogue, you might be able to cover 25 shots in a day. If you have a bit of action – someone slapping someone, someone falling etc, – it’s probably around 20. But if you have anything more than that, the number goes down. 15 if you have action with harnesses, or stunt doubles (not because the stunt doubles wouldn’t be effective, but because there’s makeup- and costume change etc ahead) and so on, and 10 if you have anything big like explosions, fire or other practical major visual effects.

It’s good to keep this in mind when preparing for the schedules, because it helps nobody if you’re not realistic with planning. Because, in the end, what you need is the required coverage, the required action and the required takes – if it’s unattainable, you’ll go overtime. And if you go overtime, your producers will hunt you down with machetes and chop you to pieces. Not to mention entities like Completion Bonds and so on. So, whatever you do – take your time really being realistic with schedule planning with your DOP and 1st AD – and even after that rehearse, use all the possible pre-production time you can ever have as effectively as possible and then you should be on the safe side. If you’re an experienced director, and walk on the set without having done pre or rehearsals, you’ll fluke it up. Either you’ll compromise the coverage – which usually means the scene doesn’t work – or action – which means the scene is boring – or takes – which means the actors act badly. And none of these things are what you want to do. You want to do a good film, and the best way to do one is by being realistic, no matter how boring it is.

AMA – ASK ME ANYTHING

So, here goes the first dump of random advice I mustered from my brains. I’ve done two AMA’s (Ask Me Anything) on Reddit, if you’re interested to hear more of my experiences, check them out. The first one is from the last night before the first shooting day in Frankfurt, and the second one just after the final wrap party of the whole shoot, in Gold Coast.

You can also ask questions in the comments section below.

Oh, and welcome back to Zombie Room. We’ve been silent for apparent reasons for quite some time, but now we’re back!

Rare Exports on Apple Trailers – looking very good!

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

It’s not every day that you go to Apple Trailers’ page, and spot a film promotion there on a Finnish film. Jalmari Helander‘s first feature film Rare Exports, that’s based on the Rare Exports shorts that have been circling around the Internet for quite some time already, just landed a new page for Apple Trailers, and for once I can be proud of how internationally a Finnish film has been promoted. Go see yourself, here’s Rare Exports’ page on Apple Trailers!

No Khan in Star Trek 2 – but who? Horta? Mudd?

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

It seems that we will not be seeing Khan in Star Trek’s yet-untitled sequel – which is damn good, since there’s already made a Star Trek movie with Khan in it and it’s a very good film already. So no need to re-invent the wheel there. But who’s gonna be putting up the party against the renewed Enterprise crew? It’s being said that it’s not a conventional villain as such, but someone we’re already familiar with from the first season of The Original Series.

GeekTyrant does a good list of possibilities – I’m hoping it would be Horta!

A shareware novel gets a filmed by Darren Aronofsky

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

Writer Max Barry, who has released his book Machine Man in a page-per-day – within the same time he writes it – format on the Internet as a feed (with first 43 pages for free) has just launched a major feature film deal with Mandalay Pictures, directed by the awesome Darren Aronofsky, one of the best out there. What’s even more interesting in Barry’s book is that he allowed people to comment and to discuss the pages he released every day, and partially based the continuation of the story to them – so one could say it’s partly collaboratively created novel as well.

Now there’s Internet for you.

I’m not sure why Aronofsky wants to do Wolverine 2, maybe there’s quite heaps of money involved, but I sure hope he jumps on this film as soon as possible, because it sounds just plain awesome. If a book’s first sentence is about dismemberment, it’s going to be awesome:

“One Tuesday afternoon my left leg was severed. It wasn’t as bad as it sounds. Well, it was. It was agonizing. There was a lot of screaming and flopping around and trying to tear my shirt into pieces to stem the bleeding. While I was busy with this, my co-workers stared through two-inch polycarbonate security glass and beat on the door.”

You can read first 43 pages for free, and sign up for a feed for full book on Max Barry’s website. The novel will be released in 2011, the filming might or might not start after Aronofsky’s done with Hugh Jackman.

(Via GeekTyrant, The Hollywood Reporter, Slash Film and maxbarry.com)

Michael Jackson’s Thriller will be remade as a feature film.

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

For reasons that remain to be unclear tome, the plans to re-create Michael Jackson‘s Thriller as a feature film are afoot. I’m not surprised at all, the music video made in 1983 by John Landis and featuring Michael Jackson himself must be one of the greatest moments of Zombies on a screen of any size, and was a remarkably great and important part in making music videos have their golden age in the 80s that lasted all the way to late 90s. So picking a good old idea since everyone seems to be completely out of good new ideas is a natural way to go. Yet, making a remake of Thriller without Michael Jackson is like making The Predator without Arnold Schwarzenegger – and look how well that went…

(By the way, Schwarzenegger stated just 4 hours ago in his Twitter that we should “stay tuned for more info on his next project with James Cameron”. I intend to.

Anyway, now the big film blogs have started to whine about how wrong it is that the short film is being remade. The same people who think it’s just OK to do a remake of a film like Let The Right One In – the main difference there really is that Let the Right One In is a Swedish movie, made in this strange language, so it’s OK to rape the shit out of the film. But when it comes to a Zombie music video, remaking that seems to be one hell of a whining point.

Anyway, I’m not specifically looking forward for the remake of either one of them – Thriller or Let the Right One In – but I’m aware that the latter of thes two was remade only because that’s the American equivalent of subtitles. Anyway, here’s the original Thriller music video, enjoy:

(via GeekTyrant & Slash Film)

Related Posts with Thumbnails