Its very easy to get carried away.Once you?ve got hands on with a ?pro? camera, fitted interchangeable lenses, fiddled with a plethora of buttons, wrangled cables and external monitoring systems, fitted up a steadicam or a jib, crane or dolly; its very easy to get carried away...
At which point the process of being carried away can lead to a destination of delusion - delusion that all these things above are necessary, are crucial, that you cannot make a good looking movie without the apparent and tangible trappings of the cinema apparatus.Now this isn?t the usual rant about ?story? is everything and it doesn't matter what it looks like. That?s bullshit. Much like saying painting is all concept and it doesn't matter what the painting looks like. Of course the look matters otherwise you?d write a book and not make a movie....!
The delusion however is to believe that a great look Cannot be made Without the grandiose accessorizing.This is the mind set of ?professional appearances?. That a big camera rig, all the tools of the trade makes You LOOK like a professional filmmaker, and in looking like one You FEEL like a professional filmmaker. And, so the equation goes, when you LOOK and FEEL like a pro you will be capable of making PROFESSIONAL films, received with professional adoration. It?s the deep and universal desire for all filmmakers to be Legitimized by their work, to feel Legitimate in their art and profession.
But Perspective is a crucial trait and getting bogged down in the desire to LOOK and FEEL like a Pro rather than simply making professionally accepted work is a sure way to mediocrity and obscurity. Because if you buy into the mind set of nothing less than the full ?Pro Kit? will allow you to make a good looking film then you?ll spend most of your career waiting by the phone for someone to give you Permission to make a film, rather than actually getting of you arse and making them with whatever is available.
Don?t wait for permission... Make films without Permission..!
This short film was shot with a Canon HV20. Its costs about $1200 and it looks like this
There were No interchangeable lenses, no P+S, no Redrock, no Steadicam. Just a plain cheap HV20 and mostly handheld.The trappings and accessories of cinema production are great and powerful but watching images as good as this from a palm-sized $1200 camera should put things in perspective a little. gear is nice, big budget is nice but dont ever delude yourself into thinking these are NECESSARY.
Of course, that said, if you want to jazz up your palm-sized HV20 you can always add a few accessories such as:
Your warning to be honest/simple is one I remind myself every day. Esp since technology is advancing everyday and we are all deluged with enthusiastic advertising to go and by the newest thing. As you point out, it's really not about the tech, it's about having an imagination and having a passion to get those ideas out of your head and into your film/machinima/animation. And your example film really demonstrates that the creative filmmaker can do just fine with simple equipment.
Once again, your comments are an inspiration. Thank you.
-Ricky
Posted by
Ricky Grove
on June 23, 2008 at 04:15 AM EST
#
From James Cameron:
'I think the most important thing if you're an aspiring film-maker is to get rid of the "aspiring". How do you do that? You make a film. I don't care if it's two minutes long and shot in Super 8 or DV or whatever. You shoot it, you put your name on it, you're a film-maker. Everything after that, you're just negotiating your budget.'
full article: http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,,942591,00.html
I think this is similar to the situation for actors: do i want to be an actor or do i want to be a star? Actors work - professional, amateur, big budget, small (Alec Guiness spoke of this). The star will only work in a star vehicle.
So, do we want to make movies, or only make big budget movies?
I think an equally big challenge is not just to become a film-maker, but to remain a film-maker.
Long time. Went over and had a look http://www.dimeworth.com/.
Fab visuals and colours from Ayz Waraich.
Re: film making without permission I couldn't agree with you any more.
It's also interesting how we're made to think if we don't make films that look like something else we don't stand a chance in hell.
Posted by
david
on July 06, 2008 at 02:13 AM EST
#
Hey Mike ... interesting contrast to your viewpoint in February's 'Aspiration Interface Design' (AKA Antics VS Moviestorm) post. Couldn't agree with you more !
Cheers
Posted by
Pete Larkins
on July 21, 2008 at 11:40 AM EST
#
Once again, your comments are an inspiration. Thank you.
-Ricky
Posted by Ricky Grove on June 23, 2008 at 04:15 AM EST #
'I think the most important thing if you're an aspiring film-maker is to get rid of the "aspiring". How do you do that? You make a film. I don't care if it's two minutes long and shot in Super 8 or DV or whatever. You shoot it, you put your name on it, you're a film-maker. Everything after that, you're just negotiating your budget.'
full article: http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,,942591,00.html
I think this is similar to the situation for actors: do i want to be an actor or do i want to be a star? Actors work - professional, amateur, big budget, small (Alec Guiness spoke of this). The star will only work in a star vehicle.
So, do we want to make movies, or only make big budget movies?
I think an equally big challenge is not just to become a film-maker, but to remain a film-maker.
Just thoughts.
mark
Posted by mark on June 23, 2008 at 03:51 PM EST #
Long time. Went over and had a look http://www.dimeworth.com/.
Fab visuals and colours from Ayz Waraich.
Re: film making without permission I couldn't agree with you any more.
It's also interesting how we're made to think if we don't make films that look like something else we don't stand a chance in hell.
Posted by david on July 06, 2008 at 02:13 AM EST #
Cheers
Posted by Pete Larkins on July 21, 2008 at 11:40 AM EST #