Online Filming Tips: Part 2

http://gigaom.com/2007/07/27/top-ten-online-filmmaking-techniques/

The above link is fairly informative, even if it is primarily for producing web-based content, though it does highlight some good techniques that can be used in any form of filming, and features some good examples of these techniques in use (though they are predominantly art-house classics).

So, I'll definitely keep these in mind when preparing for my own filming.

Distribution Stratergies

Distribution Strategies

The success of a film can depend as much on the distributor as on the film itself- many experts say distribution is the key to power in the media industry.

The key to distribution’s success is taking in where/when/how/whom/who before releasing a film.

Distributors promote and market films in territories and negotiate release patterns with exhibitors.

Distribution of most big budget Hollywood films is directly controlled by the majors themselves. In the UK, Paramount and Universal, with 20^th Century Fox, are joint owners of the biggest distributor, UIP. In 2004, the majors, through their own distribution companies or in partnership, took around 80% of North American market.

A film costing $70m to make and £30m to distribute must make money for the exhibitors as well as the distributor. To make profit at theatrical release a ‘studio picture’, costing $100m needs to gross at least $200m more at the box office.

The distribution process of the majors, usually starts with a wide release in every major city in the US (approximately 3000 screens). Often the majority of profits come in the 1^st weekend.

After this marketing blitz and initial release, ‘hit’ or ‘miss’ status is determined. After initial release in the US, weeks, or even months later, it is released to other territories.

The alternative distribution strategy is the platform release. A film opens in only a few cities and then gradually moves to a wider market, helped by ‘word of mouth’ and critical response.    

Once a film has finished it’s ‘theatrical run’, the next window is DVD release (rental and retail, which is now normally done on the same day). For the 

Industry Regulation part 2: Violence

Depending how violence is displayed on the screen depends on what classification a film gets, for example if a film just shows a gun fire followed by a person falling or a slight splatter of blood (like what is showed in most westerns) then it will most likely be given a PG rating. The more intense the scene and the portrayal (i.e. more realistic), the higher the rating; although in recent years more intense sequences have creeped into lower classifications, for example the torture sequence that features in "Casino Royale", which is fairly strong considering the classification (12a); however this could be put down to the fact that the scene doesn't go on for long, it's shot mostly in long shots so you don't see fully what is going on and the sequence holds back on gore or any graphic depictions.

But what is interesting is how two similar films, that deal with the same subject matter, with similar sequences of violence get different classifications based on how they portray these sequences; like "Kick-Ass" and "Super", both focus on the idea on a "homemade superheroes", but both take this concept in different directions, whereas "Kick-Ass" glamourises it to an extent by playing it mostly for laugh, whilst the fight scenes, though graphic, are done in an over-the-top over choreagraphed kung-fu style that disconnects the audience from it, to the point where they are just looking at it and going "that's cool". This then removes the scene (shown below) from reality to such an extent that you can only look at it in that respect and revel in the black humour of a little girl slicing drug dealers up.

This is quite a contrast to the stark realism of "Super" that strips back the most of the modern glamour of superheroes, to leave us with a story about an man who has a few problems who fights crime (although this has been visted before in a few comics), and so it's approach to violence is therefore far more realistic than "Kick-Ass", and is more shocking as apposed to humourous (well it is funny, but to most people it's harder to laugh at). This is reflected in it's classification, whereas "Kick-Ass" is a 15, "Super" is an 18; this is because the film dwells more on the injury of the participant moreso that it's 15 rated counterpart.

A look at filmmaking tips online

http://www.videomaker.com/tips-to-get-started

The above link features many useful tips for shooting, that will help with the filming of the film opening, such as the "twelve helpful tips for shooting a great video" as this highlights a few things that I will have to take in to consideration for the shoot, particularly the white balance (in fact I'll have to check if the camera that I am using has it) as this has been the thing that has ruined some of my earlier work, leaving loads of footage unuseable as it doesn't fit together.

So, on the whole the article is very informative and has informed me more about what to take into consideration for the shoot.

A look at three directors part 2: Frank Henenlotter

Frank Henenlotter
He received his main film education in the grindhouses of 42nd street, watching double and triple bill of exploitation films; this has influenced his own style of film making, as he himself considers his own movies to be "exploitation" films, more so in their attitude and low-budget. His first full feature was the gory horror-comedy "Basket Case", a story of siamese twins who wreck vengeance on the doctors who separated them at birth. Complete with grimy cinematography in the style of  "Taxi Driver", this film managed to capture the seedy glory of 42nd Street prior to the "Disney-fication" in the early '90s, earning this film a special place in the hearts of many exploitation enthusiasts, that and it's tendency to suddenly switch to stop motion animation (the film had a really low budget).

Like most of his other work the film has developed a cult following and spawned two sequels (although they both veered more towards out-right comedy rather than the shocking mix of horror and comedy that makes the original a classic), and it pioneered his trademark of twisted ending that appear in all of his films, including the fantastically perverse twist at the end of his latest film "Bad Biology".

"Brain Damage" was his next assault on good taste, which is actually a metaphor for the dangers of drug addiction, the story concerns Brian who forms a relationship with Elmer, an Aylmer, who gives Brian wild hallucinations in return for human brain; the film explores the same seedy New York underbelly as "Basket Case", especially the with drawl scene, which also manages to preempt "Trainspotting" and actually manages to out-shock it in terms of cold-turkey hallucinations; the joy of this film comes from the creativity that comes across though out the entire film, from the trippy Elmer sequences that are juxtaposed with bloody brain-chomping deaths along with the overall design and pseudo-history of the Aylmer

Elmer the Aylmer

After Duane's cameo in "Brain Damage", Henelotter came back to everyone's favourite wicker basket carrying siamese twin with "Basket Case 2" featuring a whole host of new strange and unique characters. Although its shift from a bloody horror with comedy to a comedy with some horror sequences doesn't work as well, but there are a few sequences that do stand out, like the opening, the bar with the private investigator and the ending, which really does catch you off-guard.

 After the '80s, he only made two films in the '90s before going on 16 year long hiatus before making the outrageous "Bad Biology", those two films were "Frankenhooker" and "Basket Case 3", the former being the story of Jeffery Franken, who after his fiancee is killed by a lawn mower accident, goes about resurrecting her, his only draw back is he only has her head, his solution is (with the aid of explosive "super-crack") is to use parts of street-walkers. However, the film has been criticised for misogyny, as the protagonist rebuilds his girlfriend how he wants her to look, which ends up turning her in to an undead sex-object (the "WANNA DATE?" sequence), which quite rightly could be horribly offensive and could be taken as a case for this if taken out of context and not reviewing the final half as Henenlotter is in fact criticising this behavior and the protagonist is confronted with his own behavior (once his girlfriend has regained her own consciousness) as she questions him on why she has gone from the big, virginial girl from the prologue to an undead hooker. It all then balances out in the end as Franken gets killed by the prostitues' pimp, and is revived with the remaining hooker parts ("the serum could only revive women"), what goes around comes around.

It is a nice trashy black comedy with a very '80s asthetic and a spot on performance by James Lorinz as the demented Jeffery Franken; worth mentioning is the sutle touches, like the floating brain and the TV news that get some of the best laughs.

 Unfortunatly I havn't seen "Basket Case 3", although I have heard it's like "looney tunes with more blood" and has had poor reviews all round.

"Bad Biology" is his collaborative effort with R.A The Rugged Man, and was shot on a low budget but it still holds up with his earlier work; the film concerns two abnormal individuals, an experimental photographer and a reculse, who find one and other in this rather bizarre love story that takes body horror to strange levels.

Information taken from wikipedia and Hotel Broslin

Filmography:
-Basket Case (1982)
-Brain Damage (1988)
-Basket Case 2 (1990)
-Frankenhooker (1990)
-Basket Case 3: The Progeny (1992)
-Bad Biology (2008)
He also has been working on "That's Sexploitation" for Something Weird Video, along with releasing films with Something Weird as part of a speciality logo, "Frank Henenlotter's Sexy Shockers.

A look at three different directors part 1: Quentin Tarantino

I am going to take a look at three different directors, with three different styles and what influence they have over the intro that I am currently planning.

Quentin Tarantino
Quentin Tarantino burst into the indie movie scene in the early nineties with his own brand of fast-talking, pop-culture influenced crime films, starting with his heist-gone-wrong film "reservoir dogs", although critically panned in the states, with a limited release, the film went on to be something of a success in Britain.

Now recognised as a classic, the film is non-chronological in structure (so as to influence and play with the audience's sympathies) and never actually shows the heist itself (although it play a very brief audio clip), by doing this the audience is kept in the dark about the heist, this keeps them questioning the motives of the characters, especially since the plot of the film concerns the inclusion of an undercover cop in the heist.

Although, it was with the Palme d'Or winning "Pulp Fiction" that cemented his style of film, with it's thick vein of dark humour and pop culture versed characters, the film was released to wide spread critical acclaim along with making $213,928,762 at the box office and influenced just about every other crime film made in the 90s.

His work can be divided up in to his '90s work, which consists of extremely well written crime films (this is for both films he has made and ones based upon his screenplays), and his post-2000 shift in to going back to the films he grew up on: exploitation films. His first real effort was 2004's "Kill Bill:Vol 1", the first of a two-part series based on the kung fu revenge films that populated the grindhouses in the '70s, although part 2 resembled a spaghetti western in feel and provided a contrast to the out-and-out Tokyo bloodfest of the first. (Interesting fact: the typography of "Kill Bill" at the end of part 2 is the same used for the American trailer for "They Call Her One Eye" (AKA: "Thriller: A Cruel Picture") the infamous Swedish rape-revenger whom Tarantino has called the "the roughest revenge movie ever made"- also Daryl Hannah's character is based on Christina Lindberg's character in the aforementioned film).

He then went in to full on grindhouse mode (after guest directing "Sin City" with Robert Rodriguez) with 2007's"Grindhouse" an attempt at recreating a double-bill exploitation experience for the modern cinemagoer; the end product was a double-dose of exploitation maddness with an impressive cast (for a faux-sploitation film) and purposfully imposed grain, the two films were "Planet Terror", Robert Rodriguez's zombie movie- notable for it's protagonist's machine-gun leg in the final reel and it's John Carpenter-esque score, and Tarantino's "slasher-movie-on-wheels" "Death Proof". They then added some faux-trailers, to the already risky idea (directed by Eli Roth, Rob Zombie and Edgar Wright), this led to "Grindhouse" being cherished by those how saw it at the cinema and the critics, however it was a flop- leading to the films being hacked apart when it was released in the UK (to get some money back). Although, many cite it as the start of the exploitation ressurgence which lead to the creation of the faux-sploitation genre (modern movies that try to emulate exploitation films of the 1970s), such as: "Black Dynamite", "Machete", "Hobo With A Shotgun" and "Father's Day".

His next film, "Inglourious Basterds", started what he terms himself an "alternate history trilogy" that encompasses "Django Unchained", each featuring, you guessed it, an alternate take on history in the style of a well known sub-genre. They both feature cartoonish violence, almost bordering on the excessive with "Django", although many deemed his treatment of such a difficult period of American history which brought him under fire for from critics and other directors, one of the most vocal - Spike Lee- stated via twitter "American Slavery Was Not A Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western. It Was A Holocaust. My Ancestors Are Slaves. Stolen From Africa. I Will Honor Them.".

However "Django" itself was well recieved by many critics, and after having a taste of directing a western it seems he has been bitten by the bug, and as of this point in time will be directing another entitled "The Hateful Eight".

Filmography:
-My Best Friend's Birthday (1987) (lost film-never released)
-Reservoir Dogs (1992)
-Pulp Fiction (1994)
-Jackie Brown (1997)
-Kill Bill Volume 1&2 (2003 and 2004)
-Grindhouse/Death Proof (2007)
-Inglourious Basterds (2009)
-Django Unchained (2012)

Industry Regulation

I recently looked at how the film industry is regulated, in the UK it is the BBFC (British Board of Film Classifications), and is responsible for the classification of film, DVD and other home cinematic format (ever since the 1984 Video Recordings Act, which was brought in after the "video nasties" outcry), they catergorise them depending on what the work contains, for example if a film has strong language and excessive violence, then it is unlikely that it will be suitable for young children, and so it will be given a higher certificate.

The classifications break down is as follows:
U-Suitable for all.
PG- Parental guidence, may feature some mild language, and some scenes of violence and scenes of horror.
12- Suitable for those aged 12 and over, will feature some mild language (and one use of strong), violence, discreet nudity and drug references.
15- Suitable for those aged 15 and over, will feature strong violence, language, sex, nudity and drug use;although it can't be seen to glamorise violence or drug use, and sadistic violence will most likely be not acceptable at this level.
18- Suitable for those aged 18 and over, will feature very strong violence, language, sex, nudity, drug use and horror.

For a much more detailed breakdown go to http://www.bbfc.co.uk/what-classification/guidelines

Shot types and their intended effect

Many shot types are employed just about any film made, and they are all there for a purpose be that to move the story along or to show the audience something that they may have not noticed otherwise. So here is a run down of commonly used shot types, examples and their intended effect on the audience.

Close up
This is an extremely common shot that appears in just about every film, as it can be used to show the audience a detail that they may have missed, be it a facial expression, a twitch or an object that has significance in regard to the scene or film in general. This can also be seen as setting up an enigma code, a shot of something that isn't explained leaving it up to the audience to figure out.

Extreme long shot
Extreme long shots is exactly what it sounds like, it's a long shot taken from extremely far away; t can be used as an establishing shotby showing the exterior.

Master
Is the recording of an entire scene, from start to finish, from an angle that keeps all the characters in view; it is usually a long shot, and can be used as an establishing shot.

Extreme close up
This differs from the close up by focusing on a smaller detail, for example, an eye.

Mid/medium shot
A medium shot is usually framed from the waist up and is used to show a subjects’ facial expression in context of their body language.
Long shot
A long shot shows an entire object or human figure, it is usually used to place the subject in relation to its surroundings.

Establishing
An establishing shot sets up or established the context for a scene; it is usually a long or extreme long shot.

Insert
Is a shot of part of a scene from a different angle or focal length from the master shot; they cover action already covered in the master shot, but emphasizes a different aspect of the action due to the different framing.

Pros and Cons of two ideas

The two are ideas are the weird mad science film (previously mentioned in the "initial idea" post, although I've started to get a better grip on the plot for it, and how to pull it off) and a possibly easier to pull off opening in the style of a light-hearted crime film (like the Tarantino inspired/rip-off "Go"), so here is a list of the pros and cons of both ideas to help me decide which to film.

Pros- Mad science film

• Can be shot in one room (mostly).
• Won't need as many actors.
• The idea is fairly original.
• The violence and gore will be done in such an outlandish and absurd way that it will (hopefully) not be able to be taken seriously.

Cons- Mad science film

• Will need to employ the use of special effects for a few sequences.
• Will need actors who are okay with the content of the script (the gore and the outright weirdness of it).
• Will need to acquire permission to use a room in the science department to film in, and permission to use various scientific instruments.
• Will need to use a large amount of lighting (to create the atmosphere needed), and I will need to find a way of tinting the lights.
• Will need to dress the set appropriately (this may take a bit of time).
• Will need to find specific props and costumes. 

Pros- 90s inspired crime film

• Won't need as many special effects.
• The costumes will be easier to find (i.e. normal clothes will be fine).
• Won't as intensive lighting.
• Can be filmed over a longer period (because of more locations).
• Less chance of continuity errors (in regard to set).
• Less time needed to dress the sets.

Cons- 90s inspired film

• May need a larger cast.
• Will need to film on numerous locations.
• The violence could be seen as being insensitive (using teenage actors to portray gangsters, when real-life gang violence is on the rise).
• By shooting on location, the scheduling could be hectic.

Film production

A brief look at film production.
http://prezi.com/ky_edxlz5tqe/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share