Pendulum Drift - the movie

Inception or Deception or maybe just stick with Toy Story...

2010-07-28T13:41:00.000-07:00

Been waiting around for the latest installment from Chris Nolan for a while...ok since Dark Knight. After watching the latest Toy Story at the IMAX at the National Media Museum in Bradford on Sunday the 25th of July, I was really taken by the lovely wee story that the Pixar team brought us this time round. I dont think its the best Toy Story to date, but certainly nonetheless an enjoyable turn. So with the wonders of 3D still fluttering in my eye, and I decided to watch the same evening, Inception at Cineworld.

I was really really really looking forward to it with unabated breath. This was after all the follow up to Dark Knight - a film which I quite liked but never thought it deserved the hype that it got, apart from the Ledger performance in that film and some nice set pieces - it was a bit of a let down for me personally - but hey you cant have everything.

Ok - Inception. A story within a story within a story within a story and it goes on. But they are dreams. Dreams within dreams within dreams and it goes on.

Right from the set go, we are plunged into (SPOILER ALERT - DONT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU DONT WANT ANY PART OF THE FILM SPOILED FOR YA!) a chaos of dreams - information extractors from people who are dreaming/sleeping. Although I cant remember my dreams that drab through, the worlds created here by Nolan are clincal and certainly are more life like without any notion of fantasy. No - this is part of the ploy used by Nolan throughout the movie. Are we watching the story being played out in a dream or is it all real and vice versa. However Nolan takes it a step further and introduces multiple layers of dreams so that it becomes confusing to follow. The jargon used in the film is off putting and supposed to heighten this tension as to whether we are following the film being unravelled in a dream or not.

And that is the downside of this film. Nolan has lost the plot of the story and becomes more interested in the ploy of confusion. He tries to confuse and deceive us into thinking that there is something in this film to enjoy, and there is not, bar from the point of trying to figure out if this is all a dream of whatever.

It's a poor show by Nolan. He has got a pretty big budget for this film and has used some great effects where he turns paris upside down - which looks pretty cool in the cinema but certainly does not aid the storyline further.

The action sequences are pretty rubbish and boring, and tries to do some sort of matrix thing with slow action - but its all rather bland to watch, and you think it will become more exciting but it just seems to get more absurd by the minute.

Poor Michael Caine has a weirdo small role as a uni lecturer and also as the grandfather to the main character played by Decaprio.

Acting wise - its all rather stale. I was yawning and feeling the need to take 40 winks - as it really got very uninteresting in places.

Towards the end - Nolan tries to make us thing whether the ending is dream or has the hero returned to real life. Unfortunately all I wanted do was go home and snooze.

You see towards the end of the film. Decaprio is lying on the beach. He gets taken by some guards to a room which has a character who contracts him to embed an idea into another person (his competitor in the business world). Now that character was shot in a dream which everyone in the story is part of and if he does not make it - then everyone goes into limbo and cant return into the real world. They stay in a dream state forever. However, we see the the character take a gun and a gunshot is heard. we dont know if he shot himself or Decaprio. Why is this so important? Well - you see the absurdness continues. If the contractor kills himself the that takes Decaprio, the contractor and everyone else back up the dream states (since they are several layers into various dreams levels - look its complicated alright - just go and watch the damn movie and you'll see what I mean), anyway, if Decaprio is shot - then the rest of the movie has to all be in a dream. Because if Decaprio is shot - he and anyone else still left in it stays in the dream world limbo state forever and the dream becomes their reality.

As we never get to see who was shot - due to the edit in the movie - we just dont know if the contractor shot himself or Decaprio. This is the crux of the finale since it decides where the hero is left in the film and whether he succeeded in his goal.

To make the point further - Decaprio as a spinning thingy called a Totum which is supposed to help him know whether he is in the real world or a dream. So we see him spin the Totum, and he leaves it spinning on the table whilst he goes to see his kids (which he had been barred from seeing because he could not return to America because apparently the cops thought he had killed his wife - ok ok ok this is also complicated and I wont go into it - go see the movie to find out more about this), anyway, when Decaprio goes to see his kids the final image we see is the spinning Totum, however the sound we hear is of a Totum that is about to fall on the table. So the sound tells us that the spinning wheel will fall - but we are left with a spinning wheel.

This is supposed to make us leave the cinema questioning if it was all a dream or not etc etc.

Well the only thing that went through my mind was what a load of tosh. Can I have my money back please? Thats what was going through my mind.

Summary - Nolan attempts to intrigue us and leave us on a knife edge, but fails to provide any real tension or provide basic suspense moments for a film like this. Memento was a cool movie.

This is supposed to be some sort of follow to that kind of non-linear mucking about with the timeline sort of movie.

Instead Nolan makes us confused for no real reason. The film is bland for most parts, the action is tired looking and the effects are not that great - so where in the heck did all the money go thats whats bugging me?

Inception is for die hard Chris Nolan fans only - and Die Hard was a much much better and cooler movie IMHO and in the words of Clint Eastwood, 'Opinions are just like assholes - everyones got one'. And so this is my opinion and I'm one of those assholes with an opinion and an asshole. So go stick that up yer......

Quangoless film world - works for me dude!

2010-07-28T13:31:00.000-07:00

With the conservatives in power - the world for quangos is falling around left right and centre. In film land - this is a bombshell. For better or for worse it should mean the democratisation of film for all. And for the first time, should see us Brits playing hard and fast with the yanks across the pond. They dont have quangos or whatever you want to call them calling the shots. Filmmakers call the shots and make the films they want to make.

This restructuring process in the UK I am hoping will at last show us the drab and dribble, the creative entrepreneurs and visionaries shine from the haystack of crud. And ofcourse put a stop to the wanton waste that occurs here across all fronts and mindless admin pap that goes with it and the pretentious crap and the.........................................

Industry! Or waiting around for Goddard and co.

2010-07-19T16:42:00.000-07:00

It always amazes me that folk still like to use the term film industry in the UK - more so in Scotland. Obviously they dont know the meaning of the word industry. Maybe they should look it up and find out what it really means.

The UK filmmaker, the hobbiest - burning the candle at both ends with a huge hole in his pocket has seen the landscape become bleaker by the day. The chances of drawing funding to their projects becomes remoter by the day - as the film budgets shrink alarmingly - there seems to be no end to this pit.

However as the UK economy tightens it belt and as the arts and cultural arenas see the chop in funding - is there any hope for the meagre hopefuls?

In many ways the indie filmmakers are better prepared for this funding vacum than the 'pros', since indie filmmakers have had to make do without and seek other ways of developing and making films without the necessary cash since the outset.

Maybe this is the time for indie filmmakers to shine - their resourcefulness and creative ways of coming up with solutions rather than throwing cash at the problem could see numerous talent come to the fore.

No or low budget filmmaking is certainly no model to make films. It's something that is inherent in creating art in the first place and film like other forms of art finds it a place of poverty and hardship.

You certainly cant wait for handouts and indie filmmakers have certainly taken the initiative and got on with the job in hand - doing it for themselves - taking it by the horn without fear.

This can be evidenced by the large number of self financed or nil financed films coming through - and hope Pendulum Drift can be part of that new wave of 'can do' movies next year.

It's all nip and tuck

2010-07-06T15:57:00.001-07:00

Having just come back from the Edinburgh Film Festival 2010 - invited back as one of last year's EIFF 2009 Trailblazers - something had changed. I had only been to a couple of events mainly due to many of my commitments to other projects currently in progress.

There was a metamorphical chameleon like changes going on at the 2010 film fest. It had shrugged off the old and adorned a new visage at it's office doors. This had become a festival of discovery. A festival to find the talents of tommorow. Unfortunately the changes meant that talents of the past and present were thin on the ground. Budget constraints and cuts were evident throughout. From the various stills being taken and posted on the website to the lack of pizazz and frenzy - EIFF 2010 had certainly shifted it's axis.

It's long been thought that the future of the festival lay in it's ability to mimic the success of it's american cousin - Sundance. A festival that also has changed from the early remit it posed to a much more commerialised play. Things go in circles. And so do films. It seems in an endless cycle of remakes these days (Karate Kid for example - I mean c'mon).

So as film festivals try to change direction to bring meaning to themselves as entities to remain relevant in today's quick shift on the ball, straight in your face technology loving crowd - so must the product that plunges onto festival screens in an almost swan lake like fashion. Not sure if anything here is making sense of whether it is grammatically correct or any of the spelling is correct - but hey - this is my blog! Seriously though, filmmakers are now needing space. Space to show their works. And as such space is scarce - it's becoming a big issue for many artists.

Yes I call filmmakers artists because thats what they are. The title of filmmaker means less to me as it labels me in way that is not meaningful to what I really do. Sure I work in that field of making motion pictures, and maybe that is a better term, but certainly I work as an artist - creating something from nothing and it is my own expression of what is relevant to me at that time.

Lets get back to film festivals first (and I wont bother about saying any more about remakes Hollywood is supposed to have all these original creatives that are paid millions - well where the *uck are they then? Oh yes - in remake land. Ok - film fests. Yes there is a danger that with the wonderful world of technology many more movies are going to be made and although film fests are cropping up left right and centre - that still does not mean that there is sufficient room to screen every single movie made. Festivals receive thousands of entries but only a handful can be picked to be screened unfortunately. Even though the filmmaker oops sorry- artist - has spent possibly a couple of years working on it. Only finding down the road that nobody wants to screen it. Now you might be thinking hey - its possible crap - thats why it was not selected for screening - but then thats what art is - opinions. It may be great in one persons eye - hell it may be great in everyones eye and vice versa and crap - you get the picture.

This gig is all about opinions and no one deserves not to have a podium for their work. Thats what this blog is about. The right to screen. Why? Because somebody for better or worse spent a part of their life making it. Thats all really.

So back to Edinburgh then (to book end this blog). Yes it has changed direction somewhat - but I think it is a good path that it has ventured on. It's a journey I would encourage despite some of the critical press reviews I have seen of late completely debunking some of the if not most of the films screened at this year's festival. Nobody said you had to like the vision being created by the artists or go along on their journeys on the big screen - but certainly its a brave arena to enter for anyone - since the lions are out there with their masters wanting blood. And l think motion picture artists (hey I found myself a new title) are like the new gladiators entering the theatre of sure death - because in the screening rooms you can smell the fear as the critics take pen to paper or fingers to keyboards and blood begins to be spilt in the sand.

At Edinburgh Film Fest 2010 - a hell of a lot of blood was spilt. The lions had plenty to feast on.

Roll on EIFF 2011 where I guess many more lions will be let loose to cut into some more fresh meat and spill more blood. Here's to the gladiators of the big screen.

Cinematic Engineering

2010-05-09T15:19:00.000-07:00

Post wrap thoughts - and there are so many.

The film industry is supposed to have it all wrapped up. Film production methods which date hark back to the beginning of the industry are still used widely today. Taught in most film schools and churning out filmmakers who on the whole cant think out of the box, traditional filmmaking techniques are quite simply dead in the water.

Working on Pendulum Drift - which came about due to my own research on my Masters dissertation in 2009, was all about developing new ways of making film easier to develop in a much more organic manner. Taking leads from John Cassavetes, Mike Leigh, Altman, Lumet and Coppola, I was able to develop my own unique approach to filmmaking. Luckily my dissertation supervisor agreed. And with the support from the Screen Academy in Scotland, I was able to experiment, develop knowledge, and gain insights from other filmmakers who had embarked on new development methodologies in filmmaking.

My own experience in the world of Information Technology and specifically, Software Engineering, helped me to hone down processes, which I would then develop on my next project - my feature film debut as writer/director/producer, PENDULUM DRIFT.

Software Engineering is about developing software, but more importantly is about engineering the code in the smartest and simplest way possible. Software Engineering encompasses the use of modules, or rather breaking down the most difficult tasks to be performed by the code into smaller, much more manageable chunks.

Using those software techniques of breaking down the monolith into bite size chunks, Pendulum Drift was able to be shot in 5 days, using only 11 Sony 48min HDCAM tapes. The shooting ratio therefore for the 90min film was approx 5 to 1. This was achievable thanks to using the principle of editing while shooting.

I have edited all previous films, and must have spent at least in the area of 2 years editing solely. Editing is a great training ground for directing. And it certainly helped me when I was directing PENDULUM DRIFT.

Understanding the levels of coverage required is important when shooting, as directors have to make sure they have enough shots to allow the editor to make the joins seamless in the edit suite, but at the same time, the director has to keep the producer happy, and not go over budget and timescales on the shoot. Too much coverage leads to waste and expense.

So coming back to modules, on PENDULUM DRIFT, I made sure that the film was modularised, ensuring that the shooting was manageable in chunks. Importantly, it helped me to gauge how much of the film was being shot everyday day. It certainly helped me to keep the project on track, and I made sure that I had the key scenes in the bag. After that it was a matter of filling in the story gaps, and due to the many issues of the shoot, the story had to be re-written almost on a daily basis. This was made easier, since I was also the writer.

In my previous blogs, I mention the rise of the hyphenates. The writer/director/producer all in one deal is something which I wrote would become the norm in film production due to digital technology. On PENDULUM DRIFT, being a hyphenate made it easier for me to make the difficult decisions needed on set. I was able to problem solve, and fix the story on as needed on set. I was able to make the producer decisions of budget and timescales. I was able to direct this and make sure the narrative of the story was kept on track and we kept rolling the camera.

Engineering was a key component that helped PENDULUM DRIFT to be made possible. The breaking down of the processes right down to the minimalism on the set, whether it be one shot deals, simple camera work, minimum shot coverage, all helped to ensure that the film was able to be completed. It was certainly tight, but we did it.

Of course, having a refined filming methodology was paramount to the success of the film process, but the other key components were the carefully selected cast and crew. I spent a vast amount of time prior to the development of the film, looking at key individuals to take part in the production. Indeed all the cast and crew were key components in the film process. Having quality cast and crew is the vital requirement to ensure that any film methodology can be achieved. Thankfully, I had made sure that the actors involved were capable of working in an organic manner if needed, and the crew were selected due to their high technical skills they possessed. On the film set of PENDULUM DRIFT, and the cast and crew worked very hard to achieve my vision of the film.

I will be ensuring that the next film project I undertake will take into account all the lessons learnt from PENDULUM DRIFT. Being a first time feature filmmaker, means I was learning alot on set myself. It's only when you get on the set, that you really begin to see the various issues involved. And I just cant wait to start developing the next project now, and start implementing all the things I learned on PENDULUM DRIFT, so that I can make the next project even better than before.

So is there a formula? Well I am not sure if there is one, but the following is certainly a guideline:

A great cast
A great crew
An original storyline which is organic
A filmmaking methodology which takes into account the filmmakers own experiences in other areas
Understanding editing or better still have substantial editing skills
Keeping things simple.

I think if you can get the above organised, then you can make a film with a decent budget, withing a short time frame.

PENDULUM DRIFT was filmed in 5 Days straight- using only 11 X 48min tapes!

It's a wrap for Pendulum Drift - A 5 Day feature film - Amazing!

2010-04-28T19:21:00.001-07:00

Wow!
Not sure what to say actually. This film surely had to be cancelled once the damn volcanoe decided to erupt, with me stranded in Ireland on the Engage - European film academy programme, making a dash from Dublin to Belfast by Taxi, then a Ferry across to Stranrar, then another taxi to Edinburgh, then a long drive home 60 miles up north!

To top it all, two of the main cast were also stranded in Spain. With no flights in sight, I thought this film project was doomed to be a curiosity piece.

To make matters worse, Sean Boyle, the First AD decided to email me the night before the shoot, telling me he was going walk about down to the set of Emerdale!!!

They say shit happens, but it certainly crapped all over this project big time.

Being a first time feature film director, it's common knowledge that a very experienced First Assistant Director is an absolute must if things are to go well.

So the writing was on the wall then, or was it?

However, with some quick thinking, I decided to gamble and put Paul McGuinness into that Hot position of First AD. Looking back at that decision - it was the right one. Paul quickly over the coming nights (and this was a night shoot folks - 12 hours over 5 nights) became used to the role requirements and helped me to keep the project on track.

The cast and crew were fantastic! They kept working very hard and kept their focus despite the problems being faced, which night by night seemed to lessen.

We already had lost a shooting day, Thursday and the film schedule looked daunting if not impossible, and I really had to think on my feet for the entire shoot to make it all work, or at least ensure that the key scenes would be filmed. Without the key scenes, there was not movie.

To make matters worse, the Sunday night shoot (which was a scheduling nightmare) saw an actress pull out. The project looked very precarious at that point, since there was no AD in place to sort out the production, and the production manager was also new to the job, so things seemed to get from bad to worse. However, the actual shooting throughout was great. We managed to get on average around 15mins per night, and sometimes alot more in the can.

The cast and crew bonded really well and Garry Torrance, the DoP, was extremely quick to setup the shots, considering the night time shoot issues and the logistics of it all. The crew really did work their backsides on this one. They were incredible, really incredible.

The gruelling night shoots however started to take their toll by the third day of the shoot. And since one of the actresses had pulled out, I had to start carving out and writing new material everyday to ensure that the story still had some sort of structure to it on the spot. It meant I had to be the writer, producer and director on set. Not ideal.

Since I really needed to concentrate on directing, but the writing had to happen since the dynamics of the story had changed. I started to have arguments with myself, putting on the various hats of writer, director and producer. Funnily enough it worked out. I was able to make the quick decisions needed and learned the rope on set as quickly as possible. And managed to steer the story in the direction it needed to go, otherwise it was not going to make sense in the edit.

With all the problems faced right at the start of the shoot, it was a relief for everyone at the end, since we had lost not just one, but in effect 4 shoot days. It was supposed to be a 9 day shoot, but turned out to be a 5 day shoot with a a fews shooting on the final Sunday.

Everyone on the shoot deserves a medal. The cast and crew worked really well together and we managed to have some fun also during the break periods, and tried to rest before the pace picked up again.

Certainly there were many lessons to be learnt on this project, and I certainly have learned on the job countless lessons. This is a good thing in many respects, as it will make the next project much stronger.

Film school certainly is great to give you an overview of the industry, but doing it for real is really the only way to learn and develop skills essential in this industry.

I would certainly advise others wanting to make the jump, to actually make films, since by doing, you will learn some hard lessons. And if you learn those lessons and continue to grow - then you will develop as a filmmaker.

I have started on the path to filmmaking via this film project - and now even more determined to continue the journey.

The highlight for this project though must be the fact that we made a feature lenght film in 5 DAYS, a feat that needs to be noted well. And considering we lost 4 shoot days, two actors (of which one had to be quickly replaced), re-write on the set of the new stories, the loss of a First Assistant Director, gruelling and long night shoots, just some of the main examples of what was faced on the project, then I have to say that we did exceptionally well to get this film wrapped up in 5 DAYS.

The great cast and crew made it all happen. Without their energy, their commitment, and tireless work effort put in, this film would not have been made. The Sound Recordist, Graham Day and his crew, Garry Torrance and his camera crew, and all the other crew members such as Nicolas Cross, the driver (and stills photographer), Paul McGuiness (promoted from 2nd AD to 1st), Renate Farkas, the production manager (new to the job - but worked really hard on and off the set), James Clark (the makeup artist), Jackie Clark (the art director) - all worked really hard.

Summary? Never give up. Keep going even against all odds. Because if you are lucky enough to have a great cast and crew onboard - they really will make the difference between a film getting made, a film not getting made.

The next stage is the post-production stage which is expected to take many many months. That is also a convoluted and difficult stage of the filmmaking process. And a very important stage - the stage where the film gets re-created once again, but this time in the edit.

Will keep you posted on how this develops.
Thanks again for your support. Xxxxxxx

Filmic Scenes?

2010-02-15T17:49:00.000-08:00

Corries and Eastenders are nightly telly dramas, localised for UK home consumption (although these programmes have travelled well across the world, translated into many languages). They are shot in a particular way that has been described as 'industrial'.

By this term, my own interpretation of it means processed, mechanised, churned out, produced in large quantity to exacting specifications to time and budget. Industrialised telly then by this very concept means it has to fulfil certain obligations to specific guidelines.

Modern nightly telly dramas have in the recent years developed into mass entertainment, where the writers have began to create contemporary storylines which challenge perceptions, add to the morning before 'work' break chatter, and add inches to tabloid gossip columns.

Why has telly been defined as not being filmic though? This has certainly nothing to do with the technicalities of filmmaking, what camera you are using etc. It's more to do with structural requirements of the development of the story, but more importantly with the size of the TV screen that awaits you, when you get home from work. Telly size has contributed to the way TV dramas has been constructed in the past. However this has changed in recent years, thanks to massive LCD screens now adorning our living rooms (those lucky enough that is).

In the US, hit shows such as Dexter, Lost, 24, CSI etc have led a move away from small screen affair to creating almost feature film type dramas which now sit more comfortably on the larger LCD screens. They are certainly more filmic in terms of the visions depicted on the screen from the directors behind them.

So, it can be deducted that cinematic product is now no longer limited to cinemas, but can find a place in your lounge. So what are filmic scenes then? What made cinema different from TV?

Cinema has always been a place of escape. A vista for dreams, a landscape for make believe where fanstasy takes over from reality. New worlds are created and larger than life characters inhabit them.

TV has traditionally been a place for reality. Watching other peoples lives from an observational perspective, being happy and smug knowing that our lives could not get any worse than the lives of those living in fettered arenas such as 'enders' and 'corries'.

TV programme producers have always been carefull to tread in luke warm waters, not wanting to go beyond certain boundaries which were limited to them by the various TV watchdog commissions and bodies. Cinema was always a place for visceral engagement and challenge our norms and cross boundaries without worrying about commissions and watchdogs looking over.

TV then can be described as censored in some terms, whilst cinema is prone much less to the cutting bin by outside bodies.

Programmes such as Big Brother have added to the observational aspects of watching other humans live out tedious spectrums, whilist cinema has dived deep into unexplored avenues in recent years with the advent of 'torture porn' for example.

Filmic Scenes for me at least - mean scenes which are not obliged to fulful any remit, or follow set guidelines. They should not adhere to watchdog comission polices and contraints, not following a cookie cutter approach and don't fulful specifc criteria and specifications.

I'm only interested in creating scenes which expand on the known, and dig deeper into uncharted territory. Pendulum Drift for all wants and purposes explores a number of intriguing areas human condition. This may be observational, but never constrained to limited spectrums.

And certainly these 'filmic' scenes can be created for both cinema and TV!

The last of the Hyphenates

2010-02-11T15:24:00.000-08:00

Writer-Director
Producer-Writer
Producer-Director
Producer-Writer-Director

Hyphenates!

It always seems foreign to the untrained eye to grasp the ultimate in filmmaking hyphenates.

The producer-writer-director (not in any particular order) has been the oddity of an animal from the dawn of filmmaking itself.

In a heavily unionised film industry especially across the atlantic, where Ridley Scott, working on Blade Runner, found to his cost, when he tried to operate the camera and become involved in other non-director related activities.

When creative forces within oneself are driving not only the passion for the project, but also the vision and the narrative, it becomes a difficult process to create art, or from a producer's perspective, a product, and from the writer's perspective, a great story, when it's all an internalised process, something which afflicts artists, but in filmmaking or LA LA land, becomes troublesome for some.

Hyphenates in filmmaking occur when, in the simplest way I can put it, when you self finance a project. Ofcourse there are other compelling reasons. Funders are not interested in your project. Funders dont 'get' your project. Funders are not interested in low-budget non-genre flicks. When Funders dont think you have a track record. When funders dont want you to be a hyphenate!

Well, I'm a hyphenate. A foreign object which slides in and out of the filmmaking world. Making what I want, when I want, but not without compromise. Alas there are compromises to be made, thinking otherwise is naive and foolish.

Having complete artistic control of a project for me means keeping the projects integrity intact. Ofcourse self funding a film means that you cant expect to get named actors nor crew who may have worked on the Titanic (the film that is, not the ship).

No. You have to look local. However, that's when the real creative muscles are stretched and brains vexed. Finding talent locally can be a fun task. Indeed, for Pendulum Drift, it was a real pleasure. So by putting on the producer-director hat on, I was able to find suitable actors and crew without having to go down the traditional casting directing route. I knew what I was looking for in my actors, and after some seeking, I found them all (well nearly all).

I wrote the film, so I know how the characters behave and look. So I am best placed to do the casting. And in low budget land, it really helps if you can do the casting yourself. It really helps to shape the project from the ground up.

It will also help you when you come to direct the film, because having a cast you believe in will help in the development of the film from rehearsals to the actual shoot.

Hyphenates in low budget filmmaking are more or less essential. In the modern world of filmmaking, there is no other way you can make films. Ofcourse you can make films with larger loosely coupled crew, or you can make it as a hyphenate, closely coupled and tighter knitted.

John Cassavetes (especially if you have been following this blog will know by now he is one of my great inspirations), a brilliant american indie filmmaker, was exactly that, a hypenate. John worked with very low budgets, inexperienced cast and crew, but managed to make films the way he wanted to. John loved to collaborate but he was the controlling element, and he ensured he got what he wanted, budget or no budget, it was never an excuse. But, even he had to compromise, but they were compromises which led to solving problems.

Filmmaking is all about solving problems. It' a can do process, not an excuse ladden affair of cant do this or cant do that. If you want to make the film, it will happen if you want it.

I want to make Pendulum Drift, and I am fortunate enough to have assembled a cracking cast and crew who I hope will enjoy working with a hyphenate in the coming weeks.

Actors - Puppets or Muppets?

2010-02-04T15:51:00.000-08:00

From the start of the movie business when audiences saw a steam train hurtle into the screen at them, filmmakers have always since been inventive to entertain and surprise their audience.

With the current 3D spell of Avatar, director James Cameron has tried to capture the magic of his storytelling vividly as possible using the latest technology that affords him. 3D then is here to stay, and appears less of a fad than it did a few decades ago.

So with all this new fangled cinematic technology, where does this leave the actor? Actors are currently being motion captured or rendered as animation or CGI. Directors in particular have always had a love hate relationship with actors. They were needed to partake in the narrative and for the audience to relate and go on a journey with. Whilst other directors who will name remain nameless, have tended to use them as backdrops for their architectural based visions.

Actors then in the current climate are both puppets and muppets. Take Andy Serkis for example. He has found a niche for himself undertaking voice over roles and also being motion captured for his animation counterpart. Is this the future of the modern day actor?

Directors normally like to work closely with actors to shape their performance and the best out of them, whether the actor can appreciate it or not, that's another thing altogether. Having to contend with egos and other strange actorial behaviour and jousting for positions is another. The modern day actor is now expected to fulfil a multitude of duties, mostly behind the camera.

The days when actors could frolic and give masterful performances on film is becoming at odds with the reality of cinematic underakings by Hollywood. Although that is not to say that filmmakers or Hollywood will not be developing 'star' vehicles in the future. The problem is that 'star' vehicles cost millions of dollars, whereas recent low budget hits such as 'Paranormal Activity' for example, was made for only a few thousand dollars.

It seems that audiences want someone different. They have seen everything that Hollywood can throw at them. They crave for the extraordinary, and that is something which the indie filmmaker can deliver at a higher percentage than mainstream fair. Indie filmmakers tend to be much more open to developing challenging and confrontational material. Indie filmmakers love and live for risk, whereas Hollywood hate to take such risks of folly and misadventure.

For indie filmmakers, actors still mean something. They are still the most important element of the film (on par with the story itself). Indie filmmakers dont have to rely on special effects (athhough with digital effects now so easy to create on personal computers, this is not an issue), but rely on the old trodden track of storytelling.

Low budget filmmaking especially relies on actors to give the best performances possible, as that is the only thing that will engage an audience. In some ways indie filmmakers might be the saviours for the acting fraternity, and in a funny sort of way, could attract much more expensive talent into their film projects on the cheap. The thought of Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt for example, appearing in low budget movies may not be a pipe dream for long. After all these stars still crave for an audience to see them in the traditional way, rather than being seen as pixelated equivalents on screen.

The film project Pendulum Drift, was developed from the ground up provisioing for actors. There are no pixelated versions in this film. Working with the wide range of talent on the project has so far been enjoyable and worthwhile. I have learned alot about the way actors work and I have learned alot about the way I work with actors. It has been an overall interesting experience. The characters which the actors play are very different and unique in many respects to what has been portrayed before. They have a sense of realism and engagement which excites me, and I am looking forward to the coming weeks to see what I can make on a no-to-low budget film. It's certainly risky and challenging, two elements which I live for, and hope something can be produced which will also interest cinema goers to watch.

Enter the Chicken (without nunchakus)

2010-01-31T18:22:00.000-08:00

Venturing into the world of creativity always makes me wonder about the world itself that I am about to embark into.

Film is a world that I know well. Or so I thought. My father had been involved with the industry since the late 40's and continued to be involved right up till the mid 70's as both film distributor and film projectionist, but his roots were in cinematography. And I consumed plenty of those special movies as I managed to sneek into the projection rooms on many an occassion. I suppose some of the best films ever made came out those decades, when producers were willing to stretch deep into their pockets and invest in risk laden feature film projects. Risk is the producer's lair. Or was till the 90's came upon us. And since then, the era of sequels, preequels and works of adaptation have been the bread and butter of hollywood fair.

Enter the lair of the chicken - we know it tastes good, but is it really good for us? Thats the million dollar question. As hollywood entices us into the cinemas with such 'gem's ahem as Terminator Salvation, remakes of Halloween, and the grossly over-hyped Batman The Dark Knight, we are not only biting off more than we can chew (or rather the fried chicken), but we ourselves are turning into that chicken. Or at least the movie producer has become one. A chicken that is. Unable to take those risks, and dive deep into those bloated pockets, but are now finding them rather thinly lined with those Benjamin Franklins.

Pendulum Drift is being made with next to no money. It is high in vapour talk and the budget is vapour thin. With only pockets to dig into which are lined thin, the only thing which I have in abundance is sheer passion and love of this film project. I dont have lottery funding, I dont have venture capital money, I dont have donations, I dont have some fancy equity capital share financing deal, nor do I have a bank overdraft. My Mrs, the Executive Producer on my previous film project, BO KATA, had kindly agreed to give up the family holiday money we have been saving up for the last couple of years (and we've not actually had a holiday in seven years). Why would somebody do that? Could it be that she is willing to take a risk, albeit a calculated risk that my previous project (indeed all my prevous works have proved to be successfull for some reason or another - ok ok lets not do the twighlight zone ditty for now).

Would it not be great if film producers and investors actually managed to grow some faith and actually start to put some of those dollars on something a bit more risky? I mean is this business not all about risk? Creativity is not a risk averse arena. Great things come out of taking gambles, and I believe that Pendulum Drift is probably the riskiest film project I have ever undertaken, for both scale and the scope of what I am trying to achieve.

However, unlike Bruce Lee, I am not entering the Lair with nunchakus and kali sticks this time round. I'm taking with me a bunch of tasty fried chickens, maybe not to eat, but certainly after those drumsticks have hardened, they'll be good enough to bat those scaredy cats on the head with.

Oh well here's us waiting for the next sequel to Avatar, for the rest of us, there is Pendulum Drift...

Casting - Part of the Puzzle

2010-01-26T17:31:00.000-08:00

The second workshop last weekend proved to be very interesting. Finally, the 'hustler gang' were all in attendance, and looked the part, as near to what I envisaged.

Casting is a complicated process of research and discovery, and the last weekend proved just how important it is to get it right. Choosing the cast is like choosing the artistic materials such as the type of paints, colours, brushes etc.

The crucial decision that a director has to make is finding the right cast mix. It probably accounts to around 80% of what a director is tasked with. Independent filmmaking has additional issues to contend with. Audiences tend to go to cinemas to see 'stars', not actors. Having named actors, 'stars', is one of the ultimate goals of a film production. However, Independent filmmaking has no such luxury.

A keen eye to spot talent is one of the key requirements of a director, and even more importantly, finding cast that will turn up to the set sober and on time. Finding the right tonal range of the cast is vital, since it is like finding the right palette from which to work the brush on the canvas. Filmmaking is process of disovery, and re-discovery. Some of the cast of Pendulum Drift changed due to not finding the right mix of talent who gelled naturally together. An actor named Christian Zanone had sent in an email to me, well after the deadline date had passed. All the roles had been filled. However, I had to make a few changes to the 'hustler gang', who needed to have the right elements to make it work. Christian consistently pestered me with email to get auditioned for the film. After a number of these emails, he sent in his showreel, and I was surprised by it. It was short but to the point, and he had the look I needed for the remaining 'hustler gang' role.

Needless to say Christian performed very well considering he had come in cold to the project. I am looking forward to working with these talented actors in the coming weeks and building on the progress that has been made so far.

So if getting the cast right is around 80% of what a director has to do, then what about the other 20%?

If Hollywood, Bollywood, Lollywood, Nollywood etc etc knew what this 20% was, then every film made would be a success. The truth is nobody knows what the remaining 20% is. And it's not the script. Through the political structures of industry practices and underhand tactics, scripts are selected not on merit, but on factors which sometimes bear no relevance to film creation.

However, it must be noted that a great script will help a film find it's feet, whereas a bad script will result on film that is dead on arrival. A great script nontheless still won't guarantee success.

I think the remaining 20% consists of a number of things:

- cast and crew who gel together and have the same objective as the director, which is to make the best film possible.
- lots of luck
- energy
- a natural buzz
- originality
- something that is risky
- something which catches the publics imagination
- something which has core issues to address
- contemporary and progressive

Casting needs to be planned and carefully considered. I think Pendulum Drift has finally got all it's main cast in place.

Just need to worry about the remaining 20%.

Big Crew Little Crew

2010-01-20T14:53:00.000-08:00

There are many instances when size does actually matter.

Film production is a complicated art where technical and creative paths meet. This fusion of forms should lead to the culmination of great art, in the form of cinema of-course!

So what is the minimum crew size for a film production? I'm not too sure myself, since in my last project, I handled just about everything myself. I know when things begin to get stretched, when things begin to teeter on the edge of collapse. That is the point where an extra pair of hands come in handy. Bo Kata, my previous film project was shot very economically and with only two people. Myself and my wife. I tend to work very quickly, and the mobility of working in this way allowed me to shoot fast from the hip and get it all done on time, on budget. Constraints which make you creative in solving problems and able to act much faster since you are the 'guy' at the front-line, able to react and make important decisions instantly.

So, I suppose my take on an ideal crew size is when every member of the production is fully occupied in their roles/jobs. Being beautifully formed and small is an asset to have in film production, since it will allow greater freedom of movement, and the unit can move much faster, decisions can be made much quicker, and more of the day will be spent shooting rather than trouble shooting!

Improvisation

2010-01-19T17:35:00.000-08:00

David Thewlis gives the performance of his life in Mike Leigh's Naked, as a thinking man's rapist. His dry wit and uncomplicated understanding of the world that surrounds him, makes us want to journey further into the dark pits of his mind. A journey that is filled with emptiness, loneliness and a craving for something to fill the void of existence itself.

Mike Leigh worked carefully with his actors (as he has done for much of his filmmaking career) during the development stage of Naked. Certainly one of my favourite films. Certainly not an altogether enjoyable ride, but one that makes you think, take notice, and gradually ferment in your mind.

The dialogue in the film is especially of noteworthy mention. It has a certain distant echo which rings true in your mind, even if it is only for a brief moment.

Johnny, the character David Thewlis plays, has many great and memorable lines to spurt from his mancunian 'gob'. Lines such as:

"Basically, there was this little dot, right? And the dot went bang and the bang expanded. Energy formed into matter, matter cooled, matter lived, the amoeba to fish, to fish to fowl, to fowl to frog, to frog to mammal, the mammal to monkey, to monkey to man, amo amas amat, quid pro quo, memento mori, ad infinitum, sprinkle on a little bit of grated cheese and leave under the grill till Doomsday" or perhaps this line:

"Was I bored? No I wasn't fuckin' bored. I'm never bored. That's the trouble with everybody - you're all so bored. You've 'ad nature explained to you and you're bored with it. You've 'ad the living body explained to you and you're bored with it. You've 'ad the universe explained to you and you're bored with it. So now you just want cheap thrills and like plenty of 'em and it dun't matter 'ow tawdry or vacuous they are as long as it's new, as long as it's new, as long as it flashes and fuckin' beeps in forty fuckin' different colours. Well whatever else you can say about me, I'm not fuckin' bored"

Without improvisation we would never have had the lines such as above coming out of Johnny. Improvisation frees you from the constraints of putting pen to paper, when you can work directly with the source material, the actor. Surely actors are more than capable of forming comprehensible intelligent speech without the aid of the scriptwriter? There is more to improvisation than just 'making' things up as you go along. It certainly is far more complex than that. It takes a special talented actor who can break free from the shackles of pre-dialogued script and take part in a process of self discovery, a process of building and re-building oneself to eventually come to the one basic element, truth.

The creative and artistic merits of working in an improvisation method are paved with both pain and pleasure, and one that not too any actors (whether they are experienced or otherwise) like to embark on.

I handpicked the actors from the brilliant talent that is on display in Scotland, and wished that I could bring more actors onboard this project. So from the actors I did decide to bring onboard, my first selection criteria was the actor's pursuit of the unknown, and a willingness to try and experiment with something new. The actors all knew beforehand that Pendulum Drift was an improvised film project, and certainly were not afraid of the method and journey that lay ahead of them.

My method of improvisation is unique to me. So I was not sure how the actors would take to it. It was interesting at the first workshop that there was air of anticipation. A curiosity to know how and what this method entailed for the actors concerned.

I was surprised to see so many of them taking it in their stride. Actress Danielle Farrow was a natural, and she had worked with other acting methods also. Danielle Stewart was another actress who glided into the improvisation technique which I had developed, and I was encouraged to see how creative she was. Other actors and actresses also did very well considering they had little exposure to this type of acting.

So what is improvisation? It certainly is not 'making it up' as you go along! It's a carefully crafted process of pushing and pulling in different directions, making sure that the director is working closely with the actor to 'free' them from the prefabricated film, the written script, always heavy in dialogue, which when spoken smirks of lies rather than truth. It is only when the actor discovers his/her inner self, and give themselves up to the narrative, can then a truly interactive, immersive experience be had. For me that is what improvisation is. A much more refined (to the trained eye) method of developing cohesive dialogue than spending hours alone, inventing lines to put into the actors mouths. Of course some actors don’t want to improvise, they want someone to write the lines for them, and then they just want to say them. Of course, then other issues arise, when actors begin to reinterpret those lines to their own ends. Not what the director intended.

Acting From Within

2010-01-15T14:59:00.000-08:00

Directors such as Ken Loach (UK) and John Cassavetes (US) have been renowned for using non-actors in their films. Ken Loach for example tends to primarily work with non-actors, as he believes this adds naturalism to his films.

I will be talking about my cast in detail and what I am hoping they will bring to my film Pendulum Drift. I have already very briefly introduced both Nicky Modlin and Danielle Farrow, but want to go into a bit more detail about them.

When I was shortlisting the parts, Nicky stood out from the extensive head shots and CVs that landed on my desk. He literally looked the part for the character that I eventually cast him. It is the physicality that first drew me in. In fact this was the case for all the parts that were eventually cast. Although Nicky's CV had noted less acting experience than others, his energy and varied and interesting life he had lived indicated numerous talents. And when I met him for the very first time at the workshop, I knew instantly he could play the part for the character I had him in mind. That was true when the workshop started and he became the character I had in mind instantly.

Now this was an interesting turn, since Nicky's CV although light in acting experience was not a true indicator of the abundance of inherent talent within. This leads to actress Danielle Farrow. She was the character whom I had cast as Nicky's wife in the film. Danielle was the opposite of Nicky. Her CV was heavy with acting experience, mostly theatre based. I had worked with her before on the other feature film I am also developing called, Shooting Ducks. She was amazing to work with and she was an obvious choice to cast in Pendulum Drift. Her vast experience coupled with the new energy of Nicky, helped to elevate their first improvised workshop. I think Danielle is a very generous and giving actress and she helped to guide Nicky in the improvised scene beautifully, and Nicky was able to extrude his naturalism from within into the scene without much effort. I was really impressed to see both Nicky and Danielle performing their parts, and it is something that I will look forward to seeing in the final film too.

Music To My Ears

2010-01-14T17:36:00.000-08:00

I'm going to make an effort and head over to Glasgow this weekend and watch the Strike Nineteens live in concert. A local band suggested to me by David Campbell, who thought they may add value to the soundtrack for Pendulum Drift. Having listened to their many tracks, I have to agree with David. They have a certain rock and roll sound that is edgy, raw and very cinematic.

Music has always been an integral part of cinema (if not daily life), and I had thought about the sound of the film inconjuction with the visual aspects. Properly selected music can add a layer of emotional connectivity which sometimes just is not possible to achieve any other way. It adds distinctive motives to character, tone, subtext and theme (maybe not in that order though).

I thought Pendulum Drift could benefit from a solid musical foundation where every track, every beat, every melody, would take the viewer further and deeper into the heart of the story, the characters and objectives. Each track personalised for every character.

Speaking to David Campbell was a real joy. He immediately understood the concept of the film, and went into my mind, looked inside, and saw what I was trying to achieve with this feature film project. I knew instantly he was the man for the job. The man to start the hunt for the vital tracks for the film. David's insight into the current band's and movers and shakers up here in Scotland is a real asset, and is currently assembling a multitude of tracks which will be suitable for the film.

There will be plenty of discussion, debate, and some ups and downs before the final tracks are selected, but it will be worth it in the end. The Scottish feel of this project, the culture, the vibe, will be reflected in the musical landscape which will be created, acting as a transparent window into the film without getting in the way of the story or clouding it.

I can't wait to meet up with David and talk more on this, and look forward to hearing the Strike Nineteens live. I have a real feeling that this band will strike it big in 2010, and the live music scene in Scotland can only benefit from it (and maybe my film too).

Developing Character

2010-01-13T17:02:00.000-08:00

I remember my tutors always telling me to develop character is to develop story. And I agree with that. I think an audience follows the journey of the character, and not the journey of the story. The characters take the audience on a journey which then becomes the story.

Their story must be the summation of a characters journey. Does that follow? Make sense?

Writers tend to concentrate on developing a story, and then filling them with interesting characters which make the audience want to go through the process of the story.

Pendulum Drift is heavy on character, but I did write the story initially. But whilst character was being developed, that aspect introduced me tolook at the choices which the character could then make to change the story options or paths.

I like to work with actors, and in the 1st workshop, I developed the characters with the actors, in the hope of extrapolating the character from the actor. I was very suprised at how quickly the actors managed to quickly adapt to my improvisation method. I was impressed by fledgling actor Nicky Modlin who had the least acting experience, yet he performed better than I could have imagined. And Danielle Farrow, an experienced theatre actresss showed me how her vast experience when harnessed, could exploit the benefits of my improvisation method and techniques. I was impressed by every actor taking part in the improvisation workshop, and they all brought their own unique aspects to it. And will be talking more about them.

I'll being diving into this topic further as I continue to get into the characters and the actors behind them as the feature film project Pendulum Drift continues the development journey.

WOW! What a fabulous Cast & Crew we have onboard this feature film project!

2010-01-11T18:44:00.000-08:00

One thing I had learned from watching low budget movies in the past is that you can’t skimp on talent. No matter the budget, no what the timescales for shooting etc. One thing that the audience will respond to is great artistry on screen. Actors embellish the emotional canvas of the big screen and the crew provides the technical pizzazz to drive forward the visual and audio needed to represent the narrative.

Well, we are fortunate to have a cast that is just so brimming, no, oozing with sophistication, charm, energy, positivity, and raw talent, that I can’t wait to get on set and start working with them, and for me the actors represent my palette from which I can guide the brush strokes onto the visual canvas, applying with graduated pressure, the oils from which I dip into my minds eye, a cathartic process from which emerges my dreams, my hopes, my story.

I had already worked with a large number of the actors during the 1st improvisation workshop back in December 2009. It was relaxed, a fun process, which allowed me gauge the extent to which I was able to cajole, push, pull, and finally apply the improvisation method which I had honed as part of my Masters Dissertation. The result was liberating, engaging, and importantly an exchange of ideas with the material I would be working directly with, the actors themselves. For they had to ‘own’ their characters which they were creating with me, finding from within themselves the truth of it, without limitation, and without compromise. It felt real, they felt real. It was real.

In future blogs I am going to introduce the cast, the crew, and then look at how I arrived at this point. This point of mutual anxiety of having to make a feature film with the selected cast and crew, where we all decided to embark on a journey of pain, discovery, knowing we would be jostling with the highs and the lows, the long arduous hours of torment. One thing is for sure, we are all in it together. Here you will find out what drove me to it? Why did I want to make this film? Why did I think I could make a film? All these questions and more will be answered as best as I can. Watch this space!

Pendulum Drift - the movie

2010-01-10T09:36:00.000-08:00

We've been in the development stage for this film project from the beginning of December 2009, and it has been an interesting experience so far.

I studied for my Masters in Screen Project Development at Edinburgh Skillset Screen & Media Academy, Scotland from 2007-2009, graduating in November 2009 with a Distinction, and winning the Abbey Santander Award for Outstanding Achievement in Film & Creative Media. To top it all, I also won the University Class Medal for the year. So I was certainly confident to say the least to try and develop large scale projects, jumping from shorts to features. This confidence had been injected prior with Edinburgh International Film Festival awarding me the Trailblazer award in June 2009, where the award was presented to me by none other than Sir Sean Connery himself. It was a surprise and an honour indeed!

For my Masters project, I decided to research an area of film development which has been discussed to some lenght by film critics, film educators and researchers for many years.

Improvisation. Improvisation in the context of filmmaking and film development has been key for some of the worlds innovative film exponents such as Mike Leigh(UK) and John Cassavetes(US). Ofcourse there are others such as Woody Allen and Robert Altman to name a few, who have in one way or another, used improvisation as a technique in their film projects.

My own research led me to look at the aforementioned filmmakers and adapt their methods to my own needs, and in-turn I have managed to create an improvisation method which suits my style of storytelling and narrative construction. I have decided to embark on a feature lenght film project to experiment further with my own brand of developed improvisation techniques.

After the 1st improvisation workshop with the actors in early December 2009, 90% of the cast were secured. A number of new actors have been added to the team.

I am very excited about the range of talents onboard this project, both cast and crew, and there is a certain wave of optimism about this film venture from all concerned even at this early development stage.