A Rogue In Londinium movie

A New Look at an Old Devil

2011-07-06T13:03:00.001-04:00

The folks who are the brains behind A Rogue in Londinium have been in hibernation for these four months or so. But it is not because they are in need of rest, although I wouldn’t blame them. It is because they have been working silently and diligently on re-editing, re-sound designing, re-mixing and figuring out a way to succinctly tell the story in the least amount of time.

After having spent time and money in festival fees, festivals and talk back screenings, Elizabeth, the director, decided that she needed to go back in and almost rewrite the entire film based on audience reaction and review. I asked her about this process that a lot of filmmakers employ in order to perfect and finish a project ripe for the market.

“There has to be a synthesis of the filmmaker’s vision and the audience’s emotional response to that vision. The common denominators are the clues, the common notes and opinions that spread across many demographics. In that way an astute filmmaker and editor can either cut scenes wholesale, shift scenes, or trim the beginnings and ends of important scenes to get to the heart of the character’s intentions. Every frame has to move the story forward.”

True enough. Although I’ve only seen the film once thus far last October, I was certainly floored and impressed by the careful unfolding of the story. The one thing I did observe was that many people in the audience with the same reaction I had, felt like 10 to 15 minutes could be cut and the end tightened. It is a tough situation for anyone working on their own creation. Because the film has such high production quality with lush sets, gorgeous costumes and brilliant lighting mirroring the impressionist period and the darkness of Victorian London, it is like deciding which paintings to keep in your art collection. I asked Elizabeth about this.

“I was invited by a friend of mine who teaches a film class at one of the local colleges. I brought the film in and screened it before about 25 students from several different backgrounds and cultures. To be honest, I thought I was walking into the lion’s den, but my friend assured me that the worst that could happen is that students would get bored and walk out. At that time the film ran long, about 2 hours and 24 minutes. But to my surprise only 2 people left about 15 minutes before it ended because they had to catch a train. That’s not to say there weren’t areas where the class was texting or surfing on their smart phones. But when the room went really quiet because they were engaged in the story or when people reacted verbally to the dramatic twists and turns, I knew what to keep and what to cut. Afterwards about a dozen people asked when it would be released and where could they see it or buy it?”

Schindler's List

Editing is an art unto itself. It is about subtraction. Directing is about addition. So the two disciplines work against each other and yet provide a finely distilled finished product…like good whiskey or a fine wine. Most directors work with good editors time and again. It is a dance—a marriage, and the two compliment each other well. Thelma Schoonmaker has worked on almost every Scorsese film, winning three academy awards for her work on Raging Bull, The Aviator and The Departed. Michael Kahn has a thirty year working relationship with Steven Spielberg winning three academy awards for his work on Schindler’s List, Raider’s of the Lost Ark and Saving Private Ryan. Walter Murch who has worked consistently with Francis Ford Coppola on The Conversation, Apocalypse Now and The Godfather(s) says that when he is editing he stands up like a conductor because it is active. However, when he is creating he lies down so that his brain views the tasks in a very different way. When the director of a film is also the editor that person can find themselves working against everything they’ve just invested years of money, time and energy creating. Working alone is like performing in a vacuum. And so objectivity comes from the outside. I asked Elizabeth how she was able to come to terms with cutting out precious parts of her film.

“Time and distance are invaluable. I am independent…to the point of still being a guerilla filmmaker in a way. I have one thing that a lot of people don’t in this business and that is time. Since we are self-producing and privately financed I answer only to my partner and myself. There is no deadline, timeline or outside financiers breathing down my neck. That’s not to say I want to spend years on this. But there is no insane urgency to get the product finished and out into the market. I view these works in the very long-term. In today’s film world people must turn over a product and hit the market as quickly as possible in order to recoup the investment.” She tells me.

Dana Bennison and Whitney Hamilton

“I understand the value and urgency of working in that environment and I can certainly perform under those conditions but I find with personal projects that time is more valuable to ensure a truly finished product. Case in point: Our first feature, My Brother’s War, did the festival circuit, was picked up and distributed and did quite well. It made its money back. And one day I watched it and I could see where the rhythm of the film was off. I could clearly understand the notes people had given me during the editing process a few years back. But I was younger and it was my first feature and I felt strongly about leaving some of those scenes in at the time. In about two days I cut out sixteen minutes of the film. Upon viewing it again I could see how quickly it moved AND how it supported the work of the actors. It felt like a 70 minute feature and in reality it is now at a 99 min. runtime. The trick with editing is to make you forget time. As a result My Brother’s War is a selection at the New Hope Film Festival this year in July.” www.mybrotherswar.com

“And so how did that effect your approach to Londinium?” I asked.

“I really listened and observed people in the test screenings. I had private screenings with other filmmakers. And I took long breaks --- weeks at a time and did something else creative to give my brain a break so that I could return more objectively and without emotional attachment to the directing aspects of the film. In about a week I was able to cut Londinium down to a runtime of 2 hours and 7 minutes. My goal is to get it refined enough for a 120 minute runtime.”

So I asked if anyone has seen the current shorter version hinting that I’d like to see it myself.

Doctor Zhivago

“I screened it down south to a new audience that remained completely compelled. By the end of the exhibition people asked when it was going to be released. So it is working. A few more cuts and I believe it will be ready. I take solace in knowing that Stanley Kubrick took three years to finish editing one of his films. I was talking with friends the other day and the director David Lean and Doctor Zhivago came up in conversation. Mr. Lean was adamant about leaving in some of those quiet scenes between Omar Sharif and Julie Christie. It did not do well during the test screenings. People didn’t respond. Producers and studio execs were frustrated. And so Mr. Lean watched it again after some time went by and realized what he had done wrong. So with his editor, Norman Savage, he trimmed up those long looks and pregnant pauses and the film became the eight highest grossing film of all time here in the states. It also garnered five academy award wins with a best editing nomination for Mr. Savage.”

“So the big question is this: Why edit your own film?” I ask.

“John Sayles has been a big influence on me and he edits his films. There is also the issue of budgetary constraints. I look forward to the next project when I will have a budget to work with an editor.”

“What’s the next project?” I ask.

“Oh, I’m not sure I can say since it is so early in the process.” She demurs. “But it involves reenactors.”

Huzzah!

The re-edited version of My Brother’s War is available for digital rental on Amazon ($2.99).

http://www.amazon.com/My-Brothers-War-Directors-Cut/dp/B004W0CV8I/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1308000224&sr=8-3

What Do Movies Really Mean?

2011-03-15T13:18:00.000-04:00

The Oscars are well over and all eyes are now focused on the Spring festivals like Tribeca and Cannes. After watching the Oscars I was gratified to see The King’s Speech win. That and True Grit were my personal favorites. Afterwards I heard a lot of complaining about the show and in particular the gracious hosts. Firstly, the show has always had a comedian host with the likes of Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg and Dave Letterman, certainly the cream of the crop in their field of entertainment. Anne Hathaway and James Franco are not comedians and so it is like comparing apples and oranges. Incidentally, I thought Hugh Jackman did an amazing job when he hosted it the year or two before. So rather than gripe about the hosts, I personally applaud them for their guts and courage to take on such a behemoth task knowing that they would be under the nation’s scrutiny to ‘make ‘em laugh’. The other thing that I noticed is that many of the winners thanked the unions. With all that is going on in Wisconsin, the cradle of all unions, I find it thought-provoking and pertinent. As Americans, and particularly recent generations being reared and almost overwhelmed by the choices of entertainment these days, we take for granted the hard work that goes into creating movies and episodic shows like Boardwalk Empire and Nurse Jackie as well as Network Television series. There are between fifty and one hundred people, more or less, working behind the scenes on any given project or show depending on the budget. These people are grips and technicians, make-up artists, location sound mixers, editors, day-player actors, craft people, set builders and dressers. Because the content is so readily available for a minimal price we don’t seem to value or consider the type of hard work and long hours that these people put in, in order to deliver a show or film on time. These people behind the scenes went to college or apprenticed for years to learn their craft to be good enough to be included in the union. And in return the union protects their interests and livelihood by creating a structure to work within: A fair day’s work, a fair day’s wages. And because the business of film and television production is so precarious, these people deserve to have healthcare and pensions just like the local police and firemen. The other thing that the union does is ensure quality and craftsmanship to the consumer. Which brings me back to Wisconsin and the union-busting that seems to be going on. Every other manufacturing field has outsourced to other countries for cheaper wages and no rules on workdays, hours or healthcare. The car companies, i.e. Ford, part of GM and Chrysler are the last vestiges of ‘Made in America’, but they are barely staying alive (with a bailout). Foreign cars made here in the United States operate outside of union control like the Mercedes and Hyundai plants in Alabama. Any household appliance on the market is almost always surely to be manufactured in another country and computers and clothing have completely vanished to China, Japan and India. There was an article recently about an Apple manufacturing plant in Beijing. Management had to put up netting around the building because many workers are so unfairly treated they would rather jump off the building to their deaths than to return to virtual enslavement. There had been several suicides in eighteen months. Apple has since intervened with Americans overseeing working conditions. This leads me to pose another question. What do movies mean? America is the birth of cinema. Sure the Lumiere brothers created the first cameras and actualities but it was D.W. Griffith who told a story through the new innovation. And this new form of entertainment helped get us through World War I and ever more importantly World War II, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq, reflecting back to us what we as a culture were/are experiencing. It is a barometer for social change and evolution. Not just during war but during the good times, too. These people are the dreammakers, wizards and magicians. They give us permission to leave reality and to engage our imagination. Sometimes with poignant reflection and other times with amazing and fantastic yarns. These are the people that gave us such masterpieces as Citizen Kane, The Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wind, Ben Hur, The Ten Commandments, The Godfather, Inherit the Wind, To Kill A Mockingbird, Gettysburg, The Bridge over the River Kwai, They Shoot Horses Don’t They, Ordinary People, and 2001, a Space Odyssey. Not only do these positions behind the scenes deliver us magical distraction from our mundane worlds, but they are also a cog in the nation’s economy. Then there is the argument that Independent film (Truly Independent film, that is, operating far from the studios and large investors) will provide the content. If this is true will we see the majesty of another Wizard of Oz, Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter? or the breathtaking cinematic experience of 2001, A Space Odyssey? Perhaps in animation only by a brilliant kid living in his parent’s basement painstakingly animating for years on a computer. Film is a social medium. It is our own conscience and requires a village to create. Look at Norma Rae or Matewan. We cannot go back. The good ole' days weren't that good. Ask your grama.

I.A.T.S.E. was formed in 1893 to ensure the livelihoods of technicians, artisans and craftspeople devoted to theatre and film production. The Screen Actor’s Guild was created in 1933 in order to ensure the livelihoods of the people who dedicate their lives towards the craft of performance and to create humane working environments to the people locked into studio contracts at the time. The unions created child labor laws so that eight year olds do not work for twelve hours in factories. The unions created what we consider our weekends and our eight-hour shifts. The unions created safety regulations so that the tragedy of the Triangle Shirt Factory does not vanish from public consciousness. What amazes me is that people seem to resent the amount of money the unions require to do a job. Regardless as to whether someone works within a union or not each member of society needs to be able to earn a living in order to support themselves and their families and to create comfort in their later years. That is the American Dream. The union is one of the last forms of our country’s infrastructure---the working class. If the union goes then so goes a way of life that our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents worked so hard to achieve. It was not so long ago, about the turn of the last century, when the robber barons of the gilded age and the ultra wealthy conspired with corrupt law-makers to make it easier for them to get richer and neglect the common man. Theodore Roosevelt busted the monopolies and made it easier for competition as well as paving the way for organizing workers. We see ourselves looking at the same abyss once again with large corporations dictating policy and law-making to the detriment of its people. What does this have to do with movies? Once again, America is at the forefront of innovation and creative expression. If we outsource that valuable commodity sometimes called art, then where are we? Who are we as a culture? What do we really value and take pride in?

I spoke with Elizabeth, the Director for A Rogue in Londinium and she said that she could not have made the same film without the union.

“There is a certain pride and professionalism when working with union artists. That is not to say that non-union performers don’t provide the same professionalism. But I am guaranteed a level of quality.” She told me.

“As a matter of fact, our other film, ‘My Brother’s War’” a SAG signatory film, by the way, has been accepted into the New Hope Film Festival this year.”

“What will you do if the Governor of Wisconsin is successful in breaking the unions?” I ask.

“I’m not sure. Everything I’ve worked for will have gone up in smoke. I still operate in the truly Independent world but my goals are to be working wholly within union jurisdiction at a professional level where I don’t have to take on freelance jobs to supplement my income.” She said.

“Amen.” I reply.

And the Oscar Goes to...

2011-02-17T22:08:00.003-05:00

If you ask me it will most likely go to The King’s Speech. I predict that it will sweep the Academy Awards this year. And why not? Here we have extraordinary performances by both Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush with outstanding supporting performances by Helena Bonham Carter and Guy Pierce. Did anyone recognize the doctor from Nurse Jackie (HBO)? She plays a fantastic, albeit, brief role as Wallace Simpson, the American divorcee that mesmerized a king and brought about the abdication of the British throne in 1934. Beyond the historical significance of the film, it tackles the often overlooked and misunderstood issue of stuttering. No doubt many people have christened this film as a champion for compassion and understanding in the arena of speech therapy and the intense isolation and disconnect that people with this impediment feel.

The Black Swan is a cerebral and sophomoric, over-the-top film that I found myself bored within the hour. In the second hour I found myself laughing out loud. I don’t think that was Aronofsky’s intention, but if it is then, bravo! Not to take anything away from Natalie Portman. She fulfilled the part with great aplomb. But just like another actress from years ago who took on an over-the-top psycho role, Faye Dunaway’s performance in Mommy Dearest, I only hope that Natalie can side-step and overcome the repercussions of playing such a character. As you can tell I am not a fan of Black Swan and I will drink the proverbial cool-aid if it wins.

The Fighter is a wonderfully ‘real’ film that truly mirrors a slice of culture that exists in today’s world. Mark Wahlberg is good and incredibly shrewd as a producer and businessman. The real nuanced performances are found in Melissa Leo as the mother. She represents a woman that is all too real even for moviegoers. Exiting the theatre, I heard people say things like, “Do people like that really exist?” “Those people were so hard and ugly. Is that what people from Massachusetts are really like?” Yes, and yes. The hard and ugly part comes from the lifestyle. Melissa Leo won both the Golden Globe and the SAG Award for her performance. Amy Adams does a great job as the girlfriend and plays against type. She is a surprise and a breath of fresh air. But the real accolades and the Oscar will most likely go to Christian Bale for his turn as a crack addict. Not that I hang out with crackheads, but living in New York City one is bound to come across a few now and again and Christian nailed it beyond belief. He has become one of those actors that goes to those places that no one else is brave enough to do.

Inception was an amazing piece of cinema. At once cerebral and thought-provoking, yet thrilling and fast-moving. A smart story that makes one really ponder the idea of dreams and remote viewing. Leo’s performance delivers and so does Ellen Page, Joseph-Gordon Levitt and the incomparable Marion Cotillard. There was a film in the 80’s with Dennis Quaid that tackled the very same subject called “Dreamscape”. This movie takes the idea and multiplies it unto infinity. The effects and the writing alone should garner many accolades. I put my money on Visual Special Effects, Sound design and Editing for this one.

The Social Network is a film that tackles the birth of social networking and the backroom deals it took to make it a reality. Facebook users beware that the grand poobah of this new way of ‘community’ is tarnished in this semi-bio pic by Aaron Sorkin, best known for his brilliant work on The West Wing. In a recent 60- minutes interview, Sorkin said that he only loosely based his screenplay on Mark Zuckerberg, founder and bazzillionaire to the Facebook phenomenon. Making Zuckerberg, played potently by Jesse Eisenberg, an almost asberger’s type personality void of any real emotions ups the stakes in this courtroom drama. Wonderfully written and fantastically directed, it will certainly give The King’s Speech a run for its money.

The Kids Are All Right is, perhaps, my personal favorite of the year. Not only is Annette Benning and Julianne Moore’s performances real and visceral, it is the most authentic family drama to come along in quite a while. The fact that the kids have two mommy’s is only a footnote to the situations and issues that all families face at some time or another. I put my money on Benning to win for Best Actress.

Toy Story 3 is a wonderful animated feature that continues to deliver. A franchise that consistently proves that Pixar is the king of the Hill in its genre and domain. You can’t go wrong with Tom Hanks, Tim Allen and Walt Disney. Issues of abandonment are treated with care in this parable of love. Best Animated Feature and some technical awards is my bet.

127 Hours. James Franco stunned me with his brilliant and subtle performance as Sean Penn’s lover in “Milk” last year. This year he relives the nightmare of being pinned in a canyon miles from help and modern convenience. Portraying the life of Aron Ralston as he hiked a remote Utah Canyon alone and found himself trapped in the ‘narrows’. Unable to extricate himself, he took the brave challenge of cutting off his own arm in order to survive. At once a brilliant portrayal of man against nature as well as man against himself. The story becomes the ultimate resurrection of life over death. I have to be honest, I knew the true story and I was somewhat squeamish about watching a man cut off his arm but James Franco turns in a riveting performance reaching the realms of high art in this wonderful film directed by Danny Boyle of Slumdog Millionaire, winner of the 2009 Academy’s Best Picture. This will not win best picture but watch Franco as he climbs the academy’s political ladder. They will give him an award for both Milk and 127 hours for another film he does in the future.

True Grit is, perhaps, the best western I’ve seen in a long time. A remake of the 1969 John Wayne classic, based on the book by Charles Portis. Up there with Stage Coach, Who Shot Liberty Valence, The Unforgiven and Dances with Wolves, this film introduces us to a fine young actress whom I hope steals the best supporting actress award. Hailee Steinfeld is outstanding. Kudos to Joel and Ethan Coen for adapting the script and brilliantly directing a coming of age and going of age with this tale of revenge that turns into redemption. The gripe I hear from theatergoers are that it is verbose, but being a fan of Deadwood when it was an HBO regular, I found the writing a kind of 'American Shakespeare'. People did not speak in contractions or abbreviations then, and so it seems odd to the modern ear. But believe me, the Coens are right on the money with this one.

Finally, the Sundance darling of last year with a breakout performance by a previously unknown Jennifer Lawrence is a raw slice of life in fly-over country. Winter's Bone is set in rural Missouri and Arkansas, I wonder what people do to survive in hard times and this movie leads me to believe that people in dire straights will engage in illegal activity, especially if it only costs a few dollars to procure cold medicine from the local Walgreens or Walmart. Chasing the shadow of her meth maker father, a young girl tries to make sure she does not lose the farm to a jail bondsman and the law. John Hawks brings an amazing and frightening performance as her uncle who warns, threatens and then protects his niece from the other thugs dotting the countryside. It will not win, but as they say 'the nomination is what counts'.

I want to address a huge problem that threatens indie filmmakers and that is piracy. People seem to think that if they can watch a movie for free then they have gotten something over on Hollywood. The fat salaries that big name stars and directors get are the justification to steal. But increasingly small independent films are being uploaded online even before they make it to market. Not only is it unfair but it robs the unknown actors, and crew of their livelihoods and future work. If content can be watched for free then cutting edge films and stories will vanish because they need the small amount of revenue that they actually make to continue making and telling stories of significance. I spoke with Elizabeth, the director of A Rogue in Londinium and she said that Londinium had been pirated from a film festival screener. Luckily, a swift and impassioned lawyer made the requisite threats in emails to the offending sites and the links have been taken down. However, like a multi-tentacled monster, these sites proliferate because people patronize them. VOD downloads only cost from $3 - $5 from legal sites like amazon and imdb. For the price of a Vente Latte from Starbucks anyone can watch these films AND support the people who make them. I ask the public to let their conscience be their guide. Support those who bring stories of significance and enrich our culture.

Resolutions and Revolutions

2011-01-09T16:07:00.004-05:00

Happy New Year! A week late. Over the holidays I was simultaneously busy with family and yet had a lot of free time on my hands since everything in the outside world slows to a crawl. I treated myself to True Grit. I am a fan of the original with John Wayne, Kim Darby and Glen Campbell and I was a bit tentative to see what the Coen Brothers came up with. I have to say I was prepped by the media blitz that the brothers decided to return to the source, a novel by Charles Portis. My first impression within the first ten minutes was how brilliant Hailee Steinfeld is as Mattie Ross, the teenage girl avenging the death of her father. She owned that character and as a result shines brightest in the entire film. I enjoy Jeff Bridges work immensely. That being said it is extremely hard to take on a part played so wonderfully by the Duke himself. Being a child of the late 70’s my only association with John Wayne was as Rooster Cogburn. It wasn’t until I became an adult with film appreciation that I discovered classics like Stage Coach, Rio Bravo and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. I was even older before I watched the WWII films that Wayne made. I digress. Jeff Bridges is a talented actor. He played the part well. Matt Damon, however, made La Beouf his own. The chemistry between Haille and Matt is wonderful. What struck me about this version is how simple and streamlined it is, a strong adaptation with minimal sets and impeccable acting work. Alas, the Western genre is alive and well. Thank you Joel and Ethan. The last five minutes of the film were also particularly memorable. It is the epilogue to the story and the adult Mattie returns to thank Mr. Cogburn. What struck me is the simplicity and beauty of the last moments. The adult Mattie looked like a real woman, not an actress in a western costume. Elizabeth Marvel, a staple of New York Theatre and alum of the Coen brothers, is striking. I had never seen her before and I was immediately struck by how memorable a countenance she has, not to mention the lush cinematography she is encapsulated in. The brothers are known for their quick wit and wonderful timing. One of my all time favorites is Oh Brother, Where Art Thou. They are masters of the timing of language and their humor is quite original. Raising Arizona is a classic. Another Western that truly impressed me is The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It is an amazing film written and directed by Andrew Dominick. Beautifully photographed by the legendary Roger Deakins. With Brad Pitt as an unnerving and psychopathic Jesse James and Casey Affleck as the awkward hero-worshipping Bob Ford it runs just shy of three hours. There is a lot of tension, psychological ‘space’ and storytelling through the lush cinematography. When I watched The Assassination of Jesse James I couldn’t take my eyes off the story. It makes me wonder if only studio made films can run that long. True Grit runs an hour and fifty. Both are fantastic stories in their genre and yet totally different in style. Although A Rogue in Londinium is not a western there are similarities in style to The Assassination of Jesse James…in that they both linger in scenes for the emotional effect. I have a feeling that The Assassination of Jesse James did far better in Europe and overseas than in the US because of its length and editing style. I want to mention an amazing western that became a sleeper. That is The Jack Bull (1999) with John Cusack. Every time I stumble upon it playing on a showtime or starz channel I stop what I’m doing and watch it again. Once again, the story is simple and succinct. One of the reasons I bring up the genre is that on a recent visit to check out the progress of Londinium and talk with Elizabeth, the director, is that a Western is on the agenda for Bjornquist Films. Very exciting.

“How the hell are you going to pull off a western in this economic climate?” I asked her.

“Where there’s a will there’s a way.” She said. “Besides, we pulled off a Civil War story on a micro budget.”

“True.” I reply. They did. My Brother’s War.

“If the story is strong and simple and takes place on the trail, then we have almost no sets, a few actors, a few horses and their wranglers and a crew. It can be done and done well. Every project we do we seem to evolve in the art and craft of it.” She said. And I know this to be true.

“So what is happening with Londinium?” I ask.

“Well we’re fresh off the holidays so there isn’t much movement at the moment. I’m taking the down time to research the market.” She says. “I’m also trying my best to learn and utilize social media to inform my audience out there. It is a whole new animal.”

I ask her if she had seen the brief PR buzz around Glen Close’s project, Albert Nobbs, in which Glen’s character disguises herself as a man in Victorian Ireland in order to find work.

“Sounds awfully similar to My Brother’s War.” I say.

“I think this transvestism that we as a culture have uncovered from the past is nothing new. I think women in any culture because of their gender’s station in society have had to pretend to be men in order to survive whatever crisis, prejudice or injustice had befallen them. It makes for good story-telling and great drama. We live in a society where on the surface it seems like women are equal to men and that gender issues are blurry these days but they’re not. We have yet to elect a female president and 2010 was the first year we gave an outstanding award to a woman for Best Director. What does that say about our society and the things we tell ourselves?”

Food for thought. I chew on it for a while and it keeps repeating on me. I have always considered my wife to be, if not my equal, then my superior in almost everything.

“I read that Ms. Close has been trying to make this project for fifteen years.” I say.

“Isn’t that a shame.” She replies. “That it takes that long to rally people to see the value in a well told story. It was proven onstage. That’s what happened with The King’s Speech. It was a play first and adapted for the screen. I wonder how long it took Tom Hooper and David Seidler to move it from stage to screen. I’m willing to bet a lot less time than fifteen years.” She says.

“It only took you a little over two years to make A Rogue in Londinium. That’s a pretty big achievement.” I say.

“Yes, but I had a lot of help from my partners Patrick Sullivan and Thom Milano. The cast and crew were beyond amazing. I don’t know the details of Ms. Close’s project but I can’t wait to see it when it is done.” She replies.

“What do you see for the new year?” I ask.

“A completely new way of approaching and working within the business.” She says. “In doing a few private screenings down south and here in New York the enthusiasm and excitement over Londinium continues to build. If I can keep steadily expanding my audience then DIY distribution on the DVD/VOD front could yield a profit come the Fall.

“Are you planning on a theatrical run?” I ask.

“I would love a theatrical run even if it rolls out for a week in a few art house theatres here in New York. We’ll see how it does and plan from there. I am realistic, though. I know that unless there are millions in marketing behind a film that the film’s audience will only be reachable through grassroots efforts like the internet and social media. That is my extended goal. To turn the unknown and undiscovered into a remarkable experience and well-loved piece of cinema.” She explains.

“Huzzah!” I reply.

Kicking off Awards Season

2010-12-16T22:32:00.003-05:00

It has been a crazy time. And most readers would agree. For the last couple of years, ‘change’ has decided to grab on and take a chokehold in every aspect of life. Global volatility, the state of our country, the state of our livelihoods, the state of our relationships, the state of our physical bodies are all under scrutiny and duress. I’m not at all qualified to speak about the political and economic situation we are currently faced with. So I will leave that to people like Bill Maher and John Stewart. What I think is fascinating is the current state of the entertainment industry. We are seeing an industry in flux. Never before has technology been so easily attainable by one and all. For about $5,000 grand a person can set themselves up as a filmmaker, editor and distributor. Now, I want to make it very clear that just because someone owns the new fangled gizmo that takes gorgeous HD video does not a filmmaker make. A filmmaker has to have an eye. A filmmaker has to have a vision. Just because anyone can shoot a three minute video on the best pro-sumer equipment does not an artist make. Filmmaking is a craft. It takes discipline and sensibility from picking the best script, accessing the best talent for that script, an ear for dialogue and sound, surrounding yourself with experts in their field like art direction, sound, wardrobe and costumes, marrying yourself to a cinematographer who can visually interpret the script and your vision for such. I liken it to the idea that just because someone bought a bunch of paint does not make that person an artist.

I recently chimed in on a blog about ‘How to make a living in the film business’. Just like the state of our country the disparity between the haves and the have nots are reflected in the disparity between the studios (and mini majors) and those who are wholly independent. And I want to be clear. No one is making money at the moment. Not the studios and not the independent filmmakers trying to do what they love. MGM recently filed chapter 11. And yet You Tube is in negotiations t o begin producing content for their channels. Today there are no mid level boutique studios that championed the art house releases like Pi or Sex, Lies and Videotape. Just like the death of the middle class, the boutiques either went out of business or were snapped up by the studios. Hostile take-overs? I’m not sure, but if you can buy the competition then do it. Right now we have a glut of content. There is so much product out there with so many ways to access it that it is overwhelming to the consumer. Do I watch my TV, my DVD, my cable, my computer, my wii, my ipod or what? With so many choices it makes one tired. We tend to romanticize times when life was simpler. It wasn’t simple. There just weren’t as many choices. One thing is clear and that is the internet is the new TV/Theatre. It is the point of delivery. The only difference is that the consumer is also the programmer. So how do you connect with the person who will watch your film? OR How do you find the films that you are dying to see that aren't released in the traditional venues. Film Festivals now have more power than before. In years past it was a communal experience to watch films that wouldn’t make it to your local multiplex. Now Festivals are the only place where an audience depends on the programmer. If you can get into a festival, that gives your film some credibility whether good or bad. With the convenience of watching entertainment at home and the prevalence of ADD, movies and the way they are edited are bending to the will of the viewer. In the US if you have a 90 minute film or shorter then you have the perfect programmable piece of cinema. Film classics like The Godfather or Gone with the Wind or Citizen Kane are way too long. Editing has been tailored to a fast-paced world. Our attention as a culture can’t stand the pregnant pause. I call this the MTV effect because that’s where it began. It is a style that delivers only the peaks of the story. Watch NBC for an evening and you’ll know what I’m talking about. What is the correlation? Our culture has grown accustomed to instant gratification. Our experiences at work and at home fall below our expectations because we are constantly fed a false ideal. We can’t relax. We can’t really relate. I know I am looking at the glass half empty at the moment but there has to be a shift. Is the media and entertainment industry a reflection of our lives or is it being forced on us because execs need to fulfill a bottom line. It seems like everything comes down to the almighty dollar and what it is we value. The flip side of this perception is that filmmakers are now empowered to deliver their works of art directly to their audience. And those audiences are deciding what they want to watch. I read that if you can make a film for under $250K then you can peddle it on the web with your own DVD/VOD and possibly sell the foreign rights and make your money back and then some. Anything higher than that is a gamble and only a studio can afford to sink a major chunk of capital and break even. In another blog I read that Rene Zellweger’s latest film cannot find distribution. So the idea that name talent in front of the camera and behind does not guarantee a theatrical release or even a DVD/VOD with major player. In yet another piece of entertainment news Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boals cannot get financing behind their indie project. Kathryn just won the first female (ever) best director Oscar this past year for The Hurt Locker. Does that not account for anything? Expect the unexpected this year. Surprises abound.

The Golden Globes and SAG Awards were just announced over the past few days. I am excited about ‘The King’s Speech’. I said last week: Colin Firth – Best Actor and Geoffrey Rush – Best Supporting. Also I find Boardwalk Empire among the nominees for best series. I am a big Scorcese fan and have been glued to the tube every Sunday night since it premiered. The only recognizable people are Steve Buscemi and Gretchen Mol. Michael Pitt has only recently come to the forefront for his work as ‘Blake’, a Curt Cobain character in ‘Last Days’, and, of course, Dawson’s Creek. That gives me hope for the actors in A Rogue in Londinium. They deserve to be recognized for their talent and creative spirit. With so much to watch how does a film rise to the forefront of its audience’s attention? Publicity and Marketing? Social Media networking? All of the above? What if a small film with a lot of potential doesn’t have the budget for PR or the kind of marketing required to get the attention it needs? I asked Elizabeth, the director, what her hopes and fears are for the coming year regarding her Victorian drama.

“I will be meeting with a publicist in January.” She told me.

“What do you hope to gain from it?” I ask. “I’m curious myself since I’ve never ventured into the world of marketing.”

“Well, at the very least I hope that bloggers and writers in prominent periodicals and online magazines might say a word or two or even interview some of the actors about the project. I think we have a very interesting model. The way we made it with no outside help could be inspiring to other filmmakers and actors wanting to film their own projects.”

“And the best you can hope for?” I ask.

“The best would be to appear on TV and radio and really talk about the story, our experiences and engage in a dialogue with people out there in the same situation.” She says.

“Define your situation.” I ask.

“Well, we made a period film for under $100K, SAG signatory, utilizing ebay for production design and costumes. Our actors come from the theatre, and our behind the camera team had only one other film under their belts. We have no recognizable names (to date) affiliated.” She clarifies. “When I hear Cinderella stories like these about independent films it really makes me want to go and see them. It gets me excited that the art is still alive despite the financial crisis.”

“So you think A Rogue in Londinium is a kind of Cinderella?” I ask.

“Sure. I’m just waiting for my other glass slipper.” She chuckles.

Name That Tune

2010-12-10T09:49:00.017-05:00

It has happened to you as sure as it has to me. A melody or a few chords gets stuck in your brain and you can’t get it out. It occurs sometimes in the middle of the night. A song gets stuck playing over and over as if your brain hiccupped and keeps belching the same sounds again and again and then you’re left with trying to name it or reference it to a movie. The marriage of image and score is probably one of the most revolutionary as well as the most all-encompassing experiences one can have aside from a virtual existence with all five senses engaged. As a culture growing up with cinema we often sentimentalize our own memories to emotionally poignant movie scores. I know I have. The first flickers at the turn of the last century were accompanied by an organ or piano or a violin. Whatever the theatre at the time could house. By 1929 the technology had moved quickly to be able to marry actual sound and image. The early movies didn’t have much of a score. Music may have introduced the film and ended the film and the rest was actual dialogue, reference and foley. I can’t imagine a film today without some kind of score no matter how minimal. A filmmaker would be making a huge statement by obliterating music completely in his or her film. I think they’re called ‘experimental’.

I love music. I adore it. I am a band junkie. I could go from club to club and listen to all sorts of music. As a cinephile it is as important to my experience as the actors onscreen. One of the first scores/soundtracks that moved me and actually changed my perception of music in film and what it elicits on a visceral level was Peter Gabriel’s score for The Last Temptation of Christ. For me the soundtrack became a representation of what I thought I believed and not so much the images of the movie. Another example is the score from The Road to Perdition with original music by Thomas Newman. The music from that film is much more memorable than the actual movie. Certainly it was beautifully shot and I remember Paul Newman and Tom Hanks but I couldn’t tell you the storyline. The music, however, is at once haunting and yet is filled with quiet yearning. There are moments in the music when a melancholy and sense of disappointment and loss pervades the orchestration. When I sat down and talked with Elizabeth, the director of A Rogue in Londinium, we realized we had similar tastes in movie scores. She said that as she edited the scenes together she had used several pieces of Thomas Newman’s music as a scratch track. I asked her where and the scenes she described made complete sense. Other scratch tracks included Michael Convertino’s Children of a Lesser God, and Maurice Jarre’s Witness as well as Anne Dudley’s music for Tristan and Isolde. After seeing the finished film I have to say that the score for A Rogue in Londinium is amazing. If I hear a snippet of music from the movie I am taken right back to that emotional moment in the film. That is the mark of a successful score. I asked Elizabeth about the process.

“I work with a wonderful composer and musician, Jimi Zhivago. He scored my last film, My Brother’s War.” She says.

“So how do you approach Jimi and get him to give you what it is you want musically?” I ask.

“Well, you know I’ve worked with him on two features now and they were very different musically. The first was an intimate Civil War story and Jimi had some really great ideas about how to incorporate music into it. He runs Stanton Street Records and so he has access to a lot of talent. The music of that period is his forte. So instead of scoring the whole film he managed to put together a soundtrack of songs. Some were original from Kim Taylor, other’s were traditional tunes played by consummate musicians and amazing singers. People still find my email and request a CD of the soundtrack six years later. I forward them onto Jimi. When I approached Jimi with Londinium I said that I wanted the score to be minimal, subtle and only accent the scenes. I didn’t think actual songs would work for this story. I suggested that the score be only a select few instruments or even single instruments with only a few chords---almost a soundscape. I let him see the film with the scratch track and he made a few notes. Then we went into the studio and for two full days he played instruments to picture, laid tracks, mixed and we walked away with this amazing piece of music that I, myself cannot separate from the characters.” She explains.

“So he scored the whole film in two days?” I ask incredulous.

“Yes. It was amazing. I love working with him. Because we had worked together before we developed a short hand. He would play something and I would know immediately if it was right---if it captured what I was after in the scene.” She says. “Then there were moments when he would play and I would sit there with tears in my eyes because the music was so right and it exceeded anything that I could have imagined.”

“Which pieces of music?” I ask.

“I call it the snow scene when Victoria an Richard first meet on the cold London street and there’s a snow flurry.” She answers. “From that point, that first meeting, Jimi found Victoria’s theme. So he expanded it and when they unknowingly reunite for tea, that theme, Victoria’s theme, takes me right to that place---those first moments of attraction and infatuation.” She says.

“So what was the scratch track?” I ask.

“For the snow scene it was that first magical sound in Witness. It is a musical interpretation of tingles and goose bumps, mystery and curiosity.” She says.

If memory serves well it is when John Book can see the Amish woman bathing through the window---a powerfully sensual scene.

“Give me one more example.” I request.

“This may be a spoiler for your readers but towards the end of the film Victoria suffers a miscarriage and her life is at stake. Jimi came up with this amazing piece of music that is contemplative and woeful but as the scene moves along and Richard is recalling this moment of making love to Victoria, there’s a flashback/memory and we see Victoria’s face and the way that she drinks him in. In that brief moment her expression reveals this soul connection that is absolutely unconditional. Musically there are a few chords of violins and then as her face reveals her all encompassing love and compassion, the most subtle piano notes sounding like raindrops seems to step up in tone. I know I’m not describing it well, but because it moves up and not down, that trickle of feeling that is the piano is the flicker of hope that she will live and they will be together..forever. That one makes me cry more than any of the other pieces because it lodges down near the heart, you know?” She says. Then she turns at her desk and finds the scene on her editing system and plays it for me. Sure enough it is an understated piece of music and it certainly tugs at my heartstrings.

“So tell me about the suspenseful scenes.” I ask.

“I said I wanted something rhythmic, almost tribal, but not African, more Middle Eastern. I can’t say why those sounds seemed to fit with my idea about a killer but I kept hearing those scenes with that kind of music.” She said.

“So Jimi came up with middle eastern instruments?” I ask stupidly.

“No. It was the rhythm that I was interested in. It was a Peter Gabriel kind of thing.” She says.

“AHA! I love Peter Gabriel!” I exclaim.

“So in the end Jimi adjusted a drum. And he began a beat and then kept building as the suspense in the scene was building. And all it ended up being was that drum solo with cymbal crashes at the end. It really was amazing because onscreen I had a dancer come in and move seductively and rhythmically as part of the scene and the actress and the music merged magically.” She explains.

“It was definitely mesmerizing. The audience was absolutely engaged and the music was entrancing.” I say.

When I think of composers I think of people like John Williams who has created some of the most memorable scores with Jaws, Star Wars, Indiana Jones and E.T., et. al. Then there’s James Horner of Braveheart, Glory, Titanic and Avatar fame. Ennio Morricone who is a maestro of composition with such films as: The Mission, The Untouchables and Cinema Paradiso. When A Rogue in Londinium is released Jimi will be sought after for his musical gifts even more than he already is.

Step Right Up, Folks!

2010-12-03T19:07:00.006-05:00

I must apologize for my absence firstly to the filmmakers of A Rogue in Londinium and to all of you out there who sometimes surf here to my blog. I’ve been MIA in remote parts Tanzania and Khazakstan helping work on a documentary. Can’t say any more about the project for nondisclosure reasons but, alas, I am back in the good ole’ US of A. Upon my return I have found some exciting films about to be released and am eager to compile and compare. What I find interesting is that several of these high profile films and possible Oscar contenders are period pieces. In the time I’ve been away the chatter about new distribution modes and the beginning of festival season has been amazing, surprising, depressing and yet refreshingly challenging.

I want to begin with “The King’s Speech”. It began as a play and was adapted for the screen. However, because of budget constraints the pomp and circumstance of Royal Britain, i.e., the crowds, balls and state dinners could not be produced. It makes for a very intimate human drama with a good amount of classic British humor and fascinating behavior. It is a favorite in the Oscar race. The performances are sublime and nuanced with a handful of favorites with a cast including Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush and Helena Bonham Carter. A film about the younger brother with a speech impediment in line for the throne after his older sibling, Edward, abdicates for the love of an American divorcee would be a hard sell. It is the stuff that the Weinstein brothers like best and recalls their past accomplishments and roots. Having strayed way off the path the Weinsteins first sold Miramax to Disney in 1993 and then tried to buy it back. They left the Disney owned studio in 2005 and after expanding in ventures on the internet, social media and gaming and trying to grab a demographic not usually theirs they found themselves in deep debt scaling back to the essential elements that made them trailblazers in the first place with classics like Pulp Fiction, Heavenly Creatures and Shakespeare in Love. They remind me of the old days when Sam Goldwyn would pull a rabbit out of his hat like “The Best Years of Our Lives” (directed by William Wyler in 1946). “The King’s Speech” is one to watch and you will be satisfied. Colin Firth for Best Actor and Geoffrey Rush as Best Supporting.

The second film “The Conspirator” is the first production for The American Film Company. It has committed to making films absolutely based on the facts of American History. The founder of Ameritrade is the force behind this interesting new company. Where Ted Turner fell in love with the Civil War and at times made exceptional films like “Gettysburg” and “Andersonville”, his passion for the subject seemed to exhaust the interest of his larger audiences. “Gods and Generals” was mediocre at best and the third in the trilogy, “The Last Full Measure” has been in the works for years now. The American Film Company’s creed involves all of American History. Stories we were never told in school, truths that have been hiding, myths that no longer satisfy and adventures lost in the dusty archives of our libraries.

“The Conspirator” is more like an old time movie – Inherit the Wind or Twelve Angry Men. A period courtroom drama set during the Civil War. Directed by Robert Redford and starring James MacAvoy and Robin Wright Penn as Mary Surratt and her court appointed attorney. After John Wilkes Booth assassinated President Lincoln and was tracked down and shot, Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War at the time took over the running of the government. To quell any thoughts of insurrection and rebellion by the South they rounded up anyone associated with Booth as conspirators in the plot. Mary Surratt’s son escaped and was never found yet she was held responsible on the thin evidence that they met once in the boarding house she ran. In the end she was publicly hung. Her attorney, a Union veteran is torn between the honorable reasons he fought in the Civil War and the sham trial being performed to satisfy public discontent. Will it find its audience to sustain a theatrical release? It premiered in Toronto this year without a distributor. However, Lionsgate and Roadside have agreed to roll it out for a March 2011 release. Is Redford whispering to Oscar with this period drama?

“Bel Ami” is another small period flick with Robert Pattinson, Kristin Scott Thomas and Uma Thurman. Set in 1895 in Paris, Bel Ami is the story of Georges Duroy, who travels through 1890s Paris, from cockroach ridden garrets to opulent salons, using his wits and powers of seduction to rise from poverty to wealth, from a prostitute’s embrace to passionate trysts with wealthy beauties, in a world where politics and media jostle for influence, where sex is power and celebrity an obsession. This logline comes courtesy of the official website. Here is a small film based on a classic novel, produced by Simon Fuller of American Idol fame and it had quite a hard time finding a distributor. Studio Canal of France finally agreed to release it in that country for May 2011 and Optimum Releasing will pick it up for a UK release in August. How can a movie with Robert Pattinson of the Twilight trilogy vampire fame not find distribution in the US? It makes one pause. The power is shifting from the studios that are going broke to the filmmakers who can - with the power of the web - reach their audiences without a middleman. According to a recent quote from Thomas Mai, ‘now more than ever is the time for filmmakers to hold onto their film’s rights.’ That is the only way a filmmaker will see any revenue from his or her project. Sell the foreign territories but hang onto the North American DVD, VOD rights.

Now this brings me to “A Rogue in Londinium”. I was away during the private screening at the Player’s Club in New York in October but the filmmakers graciously accommodated me and a few close friends that were not able to make the earlier date. A mutual friend had access to a small screening room in the building where he lives and we sat down the other night to take a look at Elizabeth’s new film. Wow…I was speechless for some time. Knowing what I know about how they made it for less than $100K, I was astounded, impressed and moved. The performances each rock solid and nuanced, stand up to the previously mentioned films. Whit Hamilton has succeeded in carrying his part of the story with sex appeal, charisma and poignant vulnerability. An unlikely choice for the part he rivals James Franco and Johnny Depp and holds his own. The only difference is he is not famous…at the moment. The secret behind his character will only add to his future success and will be the talk of the town when revealed. Rebecca Damon’s portrayal of Victoria Thornton is magical with every nuanced look and gesture. Judy Krause who plays Catherine Burroughs is a miracle – at once charming and gorgeous then calculating and downright evil and again sympathetic and tortured. The only difference between this micro-budgeted film and the other Independents are that the people involved are not well-known…yet. They will be. Take my word for it. If this little film can run the obstacle course of the festival circuit and gain momentum you will see these exceptionally talented people working again and again. If you feel like supporting this amazing small film go to their facebook page and become a fan. You won’t be sorry.

Power Brokers and the Glass Ceiling

2010-07-17T14:08:00.005-04:00

We live in interesting and changing times. The role of women in filmmaking is making major leaps forward and I, for one, am intrigued with the challenge. I like to think of myself as the Alan Alda of the indy film reviewing world. I like the idea of women taking charge in the film industry. They’re great managers and when you have to work with a team you need a good manager. Producers and Directors have to be able to communicate with large numbers of people. Women have been perfecting that role for millennia. The gender role is that of mother, housekeeper and boss of the proverbial nest. Throw a guy into the job of keeping up with 2 to 8 kids, coordinating school and hired help and balancing the household checkbook. It’ll drive one to drink. I tried it once and gave it up---or, rather gave the big job back to my wife. Now don’t get me wrong. I like blockbusters. Some of my favorites are Braveheart (despite Mel’s recent rants) Gladiator and Robin Hood (despite Russell’s recent rage induced actions) and the first Alien. American film is born out of violence and sex. The Great Train Robbery is the perfect case study. A helpless ‘victimized’ woman is tied to the tracks of an oncoming train. If the hero rescues her it is implied that her gratitude will be so great she’ll let him all up into her grill. If he fails in his mission she will be violently dismembered. But what if the same film had been made by a woman? Ida Lupino? Or Jane Campion? And played by Marlene Deitrich or Bette Davis? What if Angelina Jolie or Jodie Foster played the part? How would the character use her own intelligence and problem solving skills to free herself? How would the frame be composed and what interesting things would we discover? I find that an interesting choice and the Europeans, particularly the French, have explored this idea of women as heroin (albeit in a more subtle form) rather than victim for some time now. Look at the films of Catherine Deneuve and Isabella Huppert. By the way, Angelina opens in a new film called Salt later this year and I look forward to seeing her play an action figure and carrying the story. Another fantastic development is the historic win of Kathryn Bigelow, the first woman to win a Best Director Oscar for The Hurt Locker. It’s about damn time. The studio system has been a male dominated business since the beginning. Men make movies men want to see. It’s quite rare to find a male director willing to make a chick flick ‘just because’. But if the demographic says there will be money made then they’ll do it. I find it interesting that a glass ceiling has been in place for a particular gender. Exceptional story-telling is genderless. Exceptional talent is genderless. If the person can convey an engaging and insightful and, yes---emotional response from an audience, what difference does it make. We are in the midst of a heightened ‘henny penny syndrome’ to coin a phrase from aquarium age by Ralfee Finn. With the fall of the real estate market, the financial institutions, the health care system, our increasingly inept education system, the ongoing war and the ecological disaster of the gulf, people feel like the sky is falling. And rightly so. The daily stress of navigating our own private lives with the world about to implode does not make for a relaxing and enjoyable existence at the moment. Add to that the distractions of being connected via blackberry, FB, email and you tube and we are quite an isolated society. Our interactions come from the internet and not so much face to face encounters anymore. We as sentient beings seek comfort. And one of those ways is to be entertained by a good yarn. We can step out of our mundane existence and identify with heroes and the hero’s journey. Some like the tried and true formulaic tales because they know what the end brings. And to the studios it brings revenue. However, formula grows stale and the curious and adventuresome will give their time and money to an original and creative expression. That is the difference between art and commerce. The world is unpredictable. Throw children into the mix and you have to be flexible and alert. That’s where I know women excel. Another film about to open that, honestly, I wasn’t sure I would like is The Children Are All Right by Lisa Cholodenko. I like her work. High Art was an interesting perspective on the human condition. It revived Ally Sheedy’s career and made Patricia Clarkson the toast of the town. Laurel Canyon made Frances McDormand a tour de Force. And now we have a film about a same sex marriage and their kids but ultimately it is about family and not about gender. It is universal and appealing to anyone who has ever dealt with family issues. As the paradigm of distribution and technology shifts I am willing to bet that more movies will be made and received with glowing reviews by women in the industry. As a nation and a global community the continuing trend of making socially conscious films is only a reflection of the current mindset of the audiences out there and a reaction to the more self-absorbed Hollywood movies of the recent past. In today’s culture to be famous is to be infamous. It requires no talent whatsoever, just a publicist and bad behavior. Corruption is uncovered at every turn with the bright light of truth and people wanting to believe in integrity and ethics. What do we teach our children to affect change? Mom and dad both work and they share the household responsibilities. No one wears the pants in the house. That will go the way of the horse and buggy. And truthfully that has been the great illusion for many hundreds of years. Women throughout history have not had a voice until the last fifty years.

I’ve had the opportunity to look at some of the assembly of A Rogue in Londinium and I find it fascinating that the director, Elizabeth Hamilton, has put the lead women in a place of power within a Victorian context. I keep wondering if Richard really is the killer or not and that is one of the threads of the film. The theme is Redemption. Can a killer be redeemed? If he is, indeed, the killer? In reality we will never know who Jack the Ripper was. We know what kind of man Richard is in the beginning and he is completely transformed by the woman he loves by the end. And Victoria is transformed by the act of love and loving despite the dangers and complexities she encounters. They both take a risk and shed their old selves to become renewed and redeemed together. Again a universal theme of going down into the underworld to slay the demons and rise from the ashes like the phoenix. There is violence and a little gore, provocative situations, sexual suggestiveness and very brief nudity. Nothing that hasn’t already been seen on HBO or Showtime. It had a very intense effect on me and it is because I wasn’t able to ‘see’ everything. I had to participate with the storyteller to fill in the places that aren’t overt. And that made me ‘feel’ on a very deep level. There is a scene that takes place at a celebratory dinner where the characters are all speculating about the perpetrator. Charles clarifies Prince Edward Victor’s prior statement: “I think what he is trying to say is that women operate under the influence of emotion whereas men operate under the influence of Intellect.” A very Victorian sentiment. When Richard is asked of his opinion he says: “I think to make a gross generalization about literally half the population is to do them a great disservice.” I must concur. I know plenty of men that operate from emotion and it usually ends up in a pissing contest or a bar brawl. And I also know plenty of women that operate from intellect. Some of my ex’s were too detached and steely to heat up the pleasure dome. When it comes right down to it, balance is the key in art, in love, in business, in life. So sayeth the maestro of Willyburg.

It's a Brave New iWorld

2010-06-25T11:48:00.004-04:00

First I need to apologize for being absent for about a month now. Pressing work assignments and family stuff have kept me busy. And the editing-slash-assembly of all the footage has been keeping the editor(s) of Londinium quite busy as of late. As the months have passed I have been keeping my eye on what is being made and distributed and I find that there is a niche audience for this kind of film. Certain periods in history seems to move in cycles corresponding with the public’s psyche. For a while there was a huge Austrailian and New Zealand invasion with the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Then there was a big Mexican influence in cinema with Pan’s Labyrinth and Y tu Mama Tambien. Every decade or so there seems to be a resurgence of Holocaust/World War II films. This year and last seems like the Victorian Era proves prominent in cinema and DVD. Films like Bright Star by Jane Campion, The Young Victoria produced by Scorcese, Sweeney Todd and Alice in Wonderland both by Tim Burton, Sherlock Holmes by Guy Ritchie and Cheri by Stephen Frears. Some being quite successful and others relegated to critical success with limited theatre runs and small box office. Merchant and Ivory have molded their careers around Henry James’ novels and that time period. It appeals to a certain type of moviegoer and not to everyone. However, it seems that most directors take on at least one Victorian project just for the hell of it or maybe because there is a built in audience for these kinds of films. Years ago (and I risk sounding like an old man) but the best place to see these lush period films with their lavish sets and brilliant costumes was on the big screen. It still is the best place to see these movies and other period films only because seeing it big becomes the experience as if submerged in the time. Dolby surround sound designed so that you’re hearing what you might hear while standing on that battlefield or dancing in that huge ballroom. But the paradigm of delivery is shifting and with technology advancing at such a rapid rate it makes me wonder how these beautiful little gems will get to their respective audiences. DVD is fine and with huge plasma screen TVs in some homes it tries to imitate the movie theatre experience. But the option to ‘pause’ to go and get snacks or run to the bathroom or answer a phone call or text all thru a film renders the experience quite different. And because we as a culture have become so distracted by all the little things in life it unfairly translates to the movie watching experience. While no one pauses the film in a theatre, people do get up and down and answer phone calls text constantly with little screens shining brightly in the dark and talk loudly as if they are in their own living rooms. Being a cinephile it ruins my experience so I pick and choose exactly what I want to see on the big screen and where. That aside, my concern for this film is how it will run the obstacle course of getting from obscurity to the public. The festival circuit is the tried and true way of trying to get juice behind a project. But because there is a glut of content the competition is fierce. Nowadays it seems that a publicist is a necessity in order to grab the attention of programmers and festival directors. And you can’t just hire any publicist. You have to do due diligence and really find the right fit for your film. A little publicity including interviews in some of the trades is always helpful and that gets the ball rolling. I feel confident that A Rogue in Londinium will find its way into a good festival and get some traction from there. There are many ways that this particular film has veered off the tried and true path of movie making. The way the filmmakers produced it and the surprise that will be the marketing hook will take it further than most. Enough said on that. Festivals aside the other concern is distribution. It seems that the way of the future is VOD. Video on Demand. That is the last link on the road to delivery. Hopefully if you’ve made a film and you’ve tended to it and loved it and marketed it well thru the festival circuit you may get a theatrical release. Theatrical releases (with the exception of blockbusters and sci-fi) these days are primarily for critical acclaim, as the box office is usually paltry. The other gamut to run with a project is approaching HBO, Showtime, STARZ and some of the other cable networks like IFC Channel and Sundance Channel for a limited release there. The deliverables for cable, though, can be daunting. And as my neighbors have informed me a lot of people are ditching cable. The monthly cost of having access to these stations is just way too expensive in these lean times. So people are turning to their computers and watching things on Hulu or Vimeo or downloads from HBO or Showtime. The screens are getting smaller, too, as one can download just about anything from iTunes and watch it on your itouch, ipad or iphone. If Apple has their way the entire culture of television will be downloaded as VOD from a mac computer (or iThing) to a large cinema-screen monitor (like a tv) and viewed that way. Television sets will be a thing of the past like the Edsel. I would not be at all surprised to find Apple/Google creating its own studio to deliver content to the iMasses. I even heard the rumor that the new iPhone will have iMovie on it so that video recorded can also be edited right there in your hands anywhere and uploaded to share (via iFlip/iShare or You Tube, of course). Bollywood has taken the challenge of creating an entire feature film using cell phones as the cameras. (certainly recording audio separately). I have watched scenes of the Londinium movie that have been stored on the director’s iTouch and while it is fun to hold the gizmo and experience the film that way, I wonder how that small screen effects some of the wonderful acting and how it is perceived. Our eyes and brains are naturally inclined to see another at the actual size it appears. That is where the emotions register and the nuances of thought can be sensed. Magnify that and it becomes drama our ancient predecessor to religion and ritual. It’s in our genes. We want to feel. Even when we don’t, we really do because it shakes us up and makes us sift through our own experiences or lack thereof. In this new iWorld the DVD will be a thing of the past. Blockbuster, Hollywood Video and even the mom and pops are going under. Netflix began with DVD but it is steadily shifting to VOD. The producer’s first film, My Brother’s War is on VOD with Netflix (as well as DVD for now). With production tools so affordable anyone can make a movie in this age of Aquarius. It will be up to the talent, i.e. writers, directors and actors to rise above the rest and shine. That is why I have such confidence in this big little film. It will certainly be interesting to see how talent navigates this new digital age and how the unions deal with the onslaught of new media.

A few people who have their fingers on the pulse of this ever changing landscape are Stacey Parks with her Film Specific site: filmspecific.com. She was sending podcasts out to her fans on facebook during the Cannes Film Festival. Interesting little tidbits for filmmakers and anyone interested in new trends developing in acquisitions. The other trailblazer is Peter Broderick, president of Next Wave and independent consultant on the changing paradigm of production and delivery. Anyone can be a filmmaker but not everyone can be an artist.

The Last Hurrah

2010-05-25T23:47:00.005-04:00

Alas, it is the last day of production and I have pulled out my black suit. My son wanders in as I iron my shirt and tie and asks me with eyes as big as saucers “Dad? Who died?”. The only time he has ever seen me dressed in my Sunday best is when we’ve had to go to funerals. Huge crocodile tears start streaming down his face. I want to cry and laugh at the same time. “No one’s died, buddy.” I say calmly.

“Don’t go easy on me, dad. I can take it.” He wipes his tears and pulls a chair up next to the ironing board to hear the full tale of some distant relative’s demise. “Seriously, son. No one has died. I’m wearing this monkey suit as a kind of joke.” I explain.

“That’s a shitty joke, dad.” He says and I warn him not to use that language…or at least don’t slip and say that word in front of your mother. “It’s like…I’m playing Gomez for a skit.” I try to explain.

“I heard The Addam’s Family sucks. Except for Bebe Neuwirth.” He says. The kid is still in his single digits. And I feel like I’m talking to Ben Brantly of the New York Times. “Jeez, who told you that and HOW do you know who Bebe Neuwirth is?” He shrugs his shoulders non-chalant and wanders off in search of a nutter butter. For the record I have never seen The Addams Family on Broadway and neither has my son so his review should be regarded as null and void. Meanwhile, I get all gussied up and make my way over to the Londinium Brooklyn brownstone. I think the producers should make a brass historic plaque and affix it to the front of the building because no one and I mean NO ONE will believe they shot at least fifteen different sets (if not more) in the rooms of the parlor floor. Just the feat itself deserves a plaque. I arrive in the afternoon and Thom asks me if I’m on detail for the president. “The only thing missing is the curly wire from your ear.” Ed says.

“It’s not called a curly wire, Ed.” Thom chastises. To which I reply, “Look Felix and Oscar I get the meaning. Details---details…”

“It’s called an earpiece.” Thom explains.

“What? I’m sorry I can’t hear you.” Ed says. The cigarettes emerge from Thom’s pocket as his teeth begin to gnash.

“I’m sorry. Did you say you wanted a sandwich?” Ed says grinning.

“Yeah, some meat between two slices.” And he flips Ed the bird.

“It’s the last day, guys! Play nice.” I say.

They both reply in perfect unison, “Go F*** yourself.” We all laugh.

“I come in reverence to the gallant end of an amazingly entertaining film shoot.” I expound. “Between potato salad and cigarettes – accompanied by stomping out to the stoop, I have never laughed so hard in my life. I have never been informed of so many ‘acting techniques’ in one project that I had to look them all up to find out their roots. I have never wondered in complete and utter awe of how you guys pulled this period film out of a hat with a five-dollar bill. It is truly magic.” I continue. Then I am ushered to the backyard where the sun is now setting and I find the incomparably evil and creepy Stewart Walker as Jules ‘collecting’ images and the stunning and beguiling Elisa Gierasch, playing ‘Gert’, one of the prostitutes that Richard had been with only moments earlier. She is about to proposition him. And just like in some movie theatres where the audience is quite audible I want to yell, “Don’t talk to him---you’ll be sorry. Don’t do it---he’s dangerous!!” It is a lovely September evening with a cool breeze to drive away the midday heat. The actors hit their marks and I watch with the same vague voyeuristic feeling as she strikes a deal, money is exchanged and she begins to unbutton him. I feel so dirty. Then a glint of light hits for a split second on a metallic object and I can only assume with the help of my imagination that the killer’s knife has been exposed. I think I know who dunnit! The scene is covered and we move inside. Elisa is laid out on the old farm table in the kitchen ready for her special effects make-up. Patrick and Thom begin the hour or so process of creating what looks like a knife gash from the belly to the throat. Pretty gruesome and accurate if you look at the actual crime scene photos of Annie Chapman and Catherine Eddowes. I ask the director about the accuracy of the murders since there are six victims in the Londinium story.

“Well, you know, Jack wasn’t the only killer in the slums of the East End of London. There were several copycat killers that weren’t mentioned or purposefully hidden to avoid chaos and panic in the streets.” She says. “London was extremely polarized at the time with the influx of immigrants crammed into a very small space. They were agonizingly poor. In 1888 alone approximately 1600 people died just in those ten blocks radius. Disease, addiction. malnutrition, poor health and hygiene, stresses of daily survival, the elements and violence all worked against the poor. Thousands made their beds nightly in the local cemeteries because they could not afford a place to sleep indoors.” She explains. “Not that different from the very poor areas of India. And yet there is no middle class. You were either desperately poor or of the gentry. You can still find that disparity today in developing countries.”

“So Gert might be the only actual ‘victim’ of the ripper in this story.” I ask.

“She might. No one knows who the killer was and though five murders are attributed to him he may have killed many, many more. We have no way of knowing.” She says. “The police and Scotland Yard were in the infancy of forensic work. They did not think of sharing information with other police departments like we do today. That is why he was so successful as a killer.” She says.

“I think he was successful only because the media realized the murders sold papers.” I say.

“Absolutely.” She concurs. “There were probably several dozen of his kind all around London with some overlap. As I said, if you look at the records there was violence occurring every day. Murders happening every night perpetrated by individuals who could no longer cope with the atrocities of poverty and what that brings.”

“Well put.” I say.

“Nice suit.” She says and she walks away to prepare for the next set-up. I step out onto the back deck. The yard is lit up with an entire Arri light kit. Elisa is sprawled out on the paving stones. Thom and the director try to make sure she is not exposed before the camera roles. Pat dips his hand into a bucket of ‘I-don’t-know-what’. He pulls out bloody entrails and sausage casings or something and places them on the special effects make-up down the center of Elisa’s chest and abdomen. She is a bloody hot mess. It is so gory I feel the urge to puke. Thankfully I am well aware that the whole thing is fake. On three of five of Jack’s victims he cut them from stem to stern. That is from the uterus up to the throat. He then pulled out their intestines and cut out a few sweet meats for souvenirs. In the infamous ‘From Hell’ letter, the only authentic note from the murderer, he sent part of a human kidney along with it to the chief of police. The prior victim was missing her kidney. As the jib moves slowly up and over to reveal the truly heinous crime I feel a martini coming on. CUT! And THAT’S A WRAP! Thom announces. That vague martini feeling is morphing into a bender. Huzzah!

Lunching with Sweeney Todd

2010-05-16T13:26:00.003-04:00

Only twelve hours have passed since yesterday’s shoot and I arrive to the Brooklyn brownstone in Fort Greene to find the kitchen transformed into a French café. I pass the set builders and art directors as they sleepily grab a cup o' jo and head to their respective hacienda’s for a few hours of much needed sleep. The scenes scheduled for today are between Charles Thornton played wonderfully by Keith Herron and Vincent Morris portrayed with gentle aplomb by Jerry Marsini. Mr. Morris is a business associate of Mr. Thornton. In the first scene Charles tells Vincent that he has been appointed to the royal treasury by Queen Victoria. Hmmmm. He tells his business partner before he tells his wife. Here is an interesting insight into the marriage between Charles and Victoria and the partnership between Charles and Vincent. All along I have witnessed that the marriage is an arrangement with no sexual component whatsoever. Devotion? Yes. Platonic love? Certainly. Protection? You bet. Charles seems to be in a monogamous relationship with his business partner. Victoria not only accepts the love affair between the two men but willingly plays the beard so that Charles can be fulfilled without the threat of scandal. What does she get out of the union? She can freely devote herself to reform, travel and charity without the trappings of marriage and that includes companionship, sex and children. Everyone wins in this complex arrangement until Richard enters the scene and something within Victoria is awakened.

I want to talk about the possible scandal that could have taken place with these characters. In 1895 Oscar Wilde was arrested and tried for sodomy and gross indecency. Sodomy in Britain at the time was a felony crime and punishable offense earning years in confinement with hard labor. Oscar Wilde was an aesthete, a celebrated playwright, a philosopher and poet who came from an upper class family, his father a surgeon and knighted by the crown. The Importance of Being Earnest, The Picture of Dorian Gray and A Woman of No Importance are some if his best loved works. Here is a man who is rich and famous even for his time. He has friends in high places and yet the dark side of Victorian London remands Oscar Wilde to two years hard labor in Wandsworth prison. At about the same time Paul Verlain, a symbolist poet and writer was also tried for ‘buggery’ in France and imprisoned for two years hard labor. The famed myth that Prince Albert Victor Duke of Clarence was the killer also includes the royal family covering up the fact that the prince had ‘unnatural affections’ for men. He was implicated along with other aristocrats in the Cleveland Street Scandal---a homosexual brothel located in the bohemian section of London in which telegraph boys were paid by wealthy clients to engage in sexual activities. Lord Arthur Somerset had a warrant out for his arrest by the Metropolitan police and his friend Prince Albert Victor insured his escape to France to avoid prosecution for sodomy. It was common at the time for aristocrats and society to ‘slum it’ in the east end of London during the Victorian era. Charles and Vincent indulge in a little slumming as well. Whitechapel was rife with prostitutes of both genders. It was the perfect hunting ground for Jack the Ripper. Slipping in and out of a densely populated area of immense poverty and anonymous people was easy and violent crime was common. It was where the sex trade thrived.

Through the course of the scene Vincent suggests that Charles have an heir. A child would prove to a court of law that Charles was a dutiful and loving husband and Vincent could be the child’s ‘uncle’. Such a shame that even today over a hundred years later some LGBT people feel compelled to hide their true selves for fear of job-loss, abuse and prejudice.

It is during this scene that Charles agrees that an heir would make things ‘look’ better and that he is certainly willing, but Victoria is delicate and has been advised ‘not to conceive’. When Vincent presses further Charles tells him that she could die from pregnancy. This information sets up the risk that Victoria takes when she knowingly conceives with Richard.

We break for lunch and a costume change and skip to the end of the movie. In one of the last scenes Charles meets with Vincent in the same genteel café. Charles is obviously troubled over Victoria’s emotional state. He blames Mr. Rhys to which Vincent offers to ‘do something about him’. Vincent is problem solving as a partner might do. Charles explains that he will have to take Victoria to New York. Vincent assumes he will be going as well already planning where he will stay and how they will continue to carry on with their partnership. Charles tells him he must go alone. He must take care of his wife. BOOM. The equilibrium is thrown out of balance. Vincent asks him point blank if Charles is leaving him. The pain on Charles’ face is palpable. He is between a rock and a hard place. He is betrothed to two people at once and must make decisions based on priorities. Society dictates ‘for better, for worse’ and Charles takes his vows seriously. After all Victoria’s presence in his life has afforded him the freedom to find his true love. Charles asks him to wait for his return when Victoria feels better, but Vincent is unsure if waiting will prove anything different. Charles is devoted to his wife. Vincent is not the center of Charles’ world as he once thought. So Vincent decides to leave the relationship. Watching Charles sacrifice his happiness for his duty and seeing the love of his life walk away is excruciating. Played with subtlety and nuance the actors give the scene an agonizing touch.

During the scene there was an extra sitting at a table nearby. He was directed to read or make notes in a notebook so that he blended in with the café patrons. The actor took the direction and ran with it. I’m not sure how much of him will be seen in the final edit but when the last take rolled and the director said that the scene was done our extra revealed what he had written:

Got to run to the store to pick up a few things:

· knives

· gloves

· stain remover

· flowers for my mother, Mrs. The Ripper

· butterscotch drops for me

· top hats

· a new walking stick for dad, Ralph the Ripper

Things to do:

· go on a bloody rampage

· buy a new horse and carriage

· clean scalpels

· rejoin facebook

· look into a new therapist

· kill a few more women

· have my cape altered and cleaned

· Have lunch with Sweeny Todd

Thank you, Louie Vitiello.

The Devil Made me do it or the Road to Perdition

2010-05-07T00:01:00.017-04:00

Two sets have been created and recreated in the 36 hours since I last visited the Fort Greene brownstone where the Londinium crew has been working at break neck speed. In the front parlor Jules Whitby’s tinker shop has been moved from the kitchen and recreated and dressed. In the bedroom a blackbox theatre has been erected out of old black velvet theatre curtains and c-stands. A fog machine is chugging idly by ready to fill the space with smoke. In the kitchen I am introduced to Trevor Bittinger playing Dr. Stephens for the day and a dancer, Jasmin from Austria. First up is a scene where Dr. Stephens tries to conjure up the spirit of Dr. John Dee, Astrologer and alchemist extraordinaire to Queen Elizabeth herself. We’re talking 1560’s not the current century. In his psychotic effort he conjures something far more sinister and perhaps a manifestation of the dark state of his mind. The nude masked dancer appears in the mist as Dr. Stephens continues his soliloquy. The sight of it reminds me a little of “Eyes Wide Shut”, Stanley Kubrick’s last film starring Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. The brief idea of it is that Tom (also a doctor) pulls a Salahi and crashes a member’s only masked ball after his wife confesses that she thought about cheating on him. Once inside the mansion he is stunned to find a secret society of men whose identities are hidden by Venetian carnival masks and robes engaged in an orgy with hundreds of nude masked women. The woman he selects as concubine warns him to get out. When he is discovered she is sacrificed.

Now, obviously for budgetary reasons there is only one grand master and one nude woman in the Londinium scene. After watching this scene intercut with an incredibly provocative one between Catherine and Richard makes me think that this insane doctor has connections with the dark side and just maybe…maybe Catherine is a part of it.

Looking at it from a sociological point of view, sure. The class system in Britain at the time assured people of noble birth had an unfair advantage over everyone else. Old white men make the rules and they usually belong to a group or society or brotherhood in order to unify and achieve their common goals. In America it is the Skull and Bones, The Trilateral Commission, in Europe the Bilderberg Group, the Carlyle group, the Illuminati (Thank you Dan Brown), and of course the Freemasons. Afterall, it was the Freemasons that formed this country. I bring up the Freemasons again only because the myth surrounding the ripper murders resurfaces that the killer was a mason. But a new character in the ripper crimes seems to hold the public’s imagination. That is the rumor of Dr. William Gull, physician to the Queen. Dr. Gull was responsible for treating Prince Albert Victor when he came down with Typhoid fever. In 1973 Joseph Sickert, the illegitimate son of the artist and ripper suspect Walter Sickert, claimed that a royal cover-up involving Dr. Gull was responsible for the murders. This plotline is the basis for From Hell, the Johnny Depp film about Jack the Ripper. Apparently the Prince fell for a prostitute in the East End while taking art lessons from Walter Sickert. They had a child and were secretly married with other hookers in attendance as witnesses. Sounds outlandish already, however, the murders were supposedly perpetrated in order to get rid of all witnesses and evidence of the marriage, the baby, and the alleged wife. 1) Gull was not a Freemason according to my research. 2) He had a stroke in 1887 and was half paralyzed to the extent that he could no longer practice medicine. The murders occurred in the fall of 1888. Gull could not have physically conducted the murders. 3) The Prince was known in close circles to favor men. 4) Prince Albert Victor was also mildly retarded and most likely incapable of secretly marrying anyone. The real conspiracy around the Prince is that he had contracted syphilis in the Bahamas and Dr. Gull was treating him for venereal disease. And the joke of it all is that Joseph Sickert recanted his tall tale and said he made it up. Interesting lies become an ingredient in the elixir that myths are made of.

Robert D’Onston Stephenson is more likely the historic suspect that our Dr. Stephens is loosely based on. He murdered his wife although he was never caught. He spent time in a lunatic asylum in London. And in an extreme case of projection identified one of the hospital’s doctors as being the killer. Even going so far as to visit Scotland Yard to tell them what he knew of the murders and the murderer. He suspected that the killings were part of a ritualistic murder rite, that the bodies had been killed at specific points in order to form a geometric symbol using the streets of the East End as a canvas. A pentagram, perhaps? Who knows. Does it stand up? By a stretch of the imagination, sure.

In the movie Dr. Stephens propositions Jules to put his motion picture camera to work for him explaining that ‘it could contribute a great deal to the field of medicine’. Jules commences collecting images for money. But when does collecting become creating? The first snuff film is born. But Jules can’t keep his trap shut even though he is being paid to follow Richard. I smell a set-up. Richard and Jules become acquainted once Richard realizes he is being ‘watched’. ‘Show me how it works’, he says and Jules more than accommodates. For a story set in the Victorian era it certainly has a contemporary moral tale to tell. Big Brother and a whole host of unknown eyes are watching us at all times. It poses the question of feeling safe or violated? What energy do our physical selves hold and how is that energy affected or disturbed by psychic manipulation. i.e. voyeurism? A lot to think about from a little blog. Dr. Stephens’ taste for unknown women or ladies of very low esteem is piqued and his tastes move from collecting images of dying whores to gathering images of one of the most prominent women in London, Victoria Thornton. Jules concedes and does it out of greed and extortion. Dr. Stephens does it for more lascivious purposes. Even Richard pinches the pieces of Victoria’s image for his own designs. I know this sounds trite but I hope it is out of love. When Dr. Stephens arrives one day to get his freak on over the images he finds that the celluloid is missing and threatens Jules with a big-assed knife. But he doesn’t kill his source because the images will stop. It’s a marriage made in hell. Richard goes to extreme measures to protect the identity and honor of his love. If their affair is made public a scandal could ruin the lives of all involved. After the dancer is filmed and dismissed Thom asks me if I might stand in as a dark figure. “What do I have to do?” I ask. I stand there and am handed a mask that looks a lot like a possessed goat. Then Thom gives me a black robe. This is still early September and it is hotter than the hinges of hell on the set.

“You’re going to wear this and just stand there. You don’t have to do anything.” Thom assures me.

“That’s the best acting tip Thom ever gave me.” Ed says cheerfully.

“Don’t you have a boom pole to collapse?” Thom replies and I can hear the beginning tone of exasperation starting to build.

“I can tell you’re getting hungry.” Ed says in a sing-song voice.

“I’m not hungry. I’m getting annoyed.” Thom replies.

“You want me to fix you a sandwich?” Ed asks sweetly.

“You can’t keep throwing food at me every time I start to lose it.” Thom continues.

“Are you losing it?” I ask concerned that I might completely melt or pass out from heat exhaustion.

“If you’re going to start in on me, I can’t work like this.” Thom says and the pack of cigarettes makes it from his pocket to his hand.

“Okay. You are not going to leave me standing in this latex for ten minutes while you smoke. So put them away and get the director so we can roll.” I say assertively.

Ed gives me a mark. I stand there sweating buckets while under black velvet and latex. The fog machine chugs and now I am blinded with smoke. ACTION! I have truly arrived at perdition.

Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder

2010-04-20T23:26:00.002-04:00

I find myself driving a van at seven in the morning transporting crew and equipment up to horse country in West Chester (New York). Thom has once again sweet-talked me into helping out even after I told him I don’t DO early. On the drive up I realized that this is the twenty-seventh day of the thirty day shoot. There are only three more production days left and the whole thing will be over. I’m not sure I’m ready for that. A kind of melancholy takes over me knowing that the fun-filled days will soon come to an end. And then I think about real crew people and how they feel when a project is over. My guess is that they usually (hopefully) hop from one project to another and treat it like a job. Sometimes the jobs are good and fun and at other times a challenge with conflicting personalities and high tension. I remember reading in a movie magazine, Moviemaker, I think, that Ang Lee goes into a light depression after each project. And most definitely after making The Hulk. He has directed such diverse films as Eat, Drink, Man, Woman, Sense and Sensibility, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Brokeback Mountain for which he won the academy for Best Director. So I wonder how our director feels about this project transitioning from production to post. I’ll come back to this question in a bit. We arrive at a friend of a friend’s farm. It’s not a working farm but a horse farm and Whit has donned his usual black wool suit, top coat and hat. I ask him if he’s ready to saddle up.

“Sure. I’ve been riding since I was eight years old.” He says. I’m a bit stunned.

“You give the impression of a slacker or a surfer.” I say.

“Yeah, I know. I don’t do either. I’d like to surf. But the Atlantic is too cold for me.” He adds. Man up, I’m thinking to myself. But, alas, I have a little padding so the cold doesn’t quite affect me.

“I can tell you think I have robin’s eggs for a change purse.” He says smiling and he gives me his charming ‘stink eye’. John, the owner of the horse walks this beautiful equine specimen out into the sunlight. I am told she is a racking horse. For those people interested in horses a racking horse has a very comfortable singlefoot gate. They are like riding a Cadillac. These horses along with their superior version, the Tennessee Walking horse, were bread for the masters on the large plantations down South before the Civil War when cotton was king. Being in the saddle for eight to twelve hours a day surveying your business can make a body sore! Most people who take a horse back ride usually get on a quarter horse or a mixed breed of that nature and their gate is very bumpy and extremely uncomfortable. John tells me her name is ‘Shadow’ and she is an inky velvet black in the sunlight. Whit mounts and takes her to the far end of the pasture along the treeline. At the turn around he gives her a click and gentle kick and she is off so fast she’s a blur. He rides by at a full gallop so fast that I feel like Jack the Ripper has hijacked Sea Biscuit. Then as I am about to turn and follow I watch as Whit gets Shadow to jump the fence and run up the road. Okay, I have to admit he has cohones. Thom tells me the original shot was with a car mount but since the owner did not want tire tracks in his field we had to settle for sticks. Unfortunate, as riding along side Whit on horseback with the camera would have been incredibly dramatic. The road had too many anachronisms.

Meanwhile back at the set the art department has dressed the bedroom as Richard’s studio and the lovely Sandra DeLuca reappears in her Victorian finery as Sophie. She has become one of Catherine’s ‘playthings’. Interested in Richard and particularly a portrait by him she has arrived for a sitting that could very well turn into a laying. The chemistry between the two actors is electric and they play off of each other with great aplomb. As Richard and Sophie are about to take the sitting to the next level the bell rings. It is Mrs. Hopkins, Victoria’s head Governess. She has arrived with a note---the very thing Richard has been waiting and pining for. Suddenly he shuffles Sophie out with only a few words of consolation. Thus begins his daylong ride to the English countryside. As the crew sets up the dolly for the next shot I take advantage of the downtown and see if I can snag the director for a few minutes.

“Only three days left. How do you feel?” I ask.

“I’m ready to be able to relax, that’s for sure.” She replies. “But…I know on the last film I did, that after I recovered from the exhausting shooting schedule there is a definite post-partum feeling.”

“I’m already feeling it and I’m just a spectator.” I reply. “So how do you deal with it?”

“You know, I’m not sure. I think that the older I get the more I have to ease myself from one transition to another.” She explains.

“That sounds mentally healthy.” I say.

“Well it was trial and error for me because on my last film I finished shooting and I was so excited about putting it together that I immediately began the editing process. I foolishly thought that if I kept busy I wouldn’t feel the sadness that comes when something is over.” She says.

“Sounds pre-meditated to me---like you had an antidote.” I add.

“Naw, I think it exacerbated the emotions, the let down.” She says. “Because as an indie filmmaker you have to wear several hats. And so sitting in a dark room by myself for days on end watching the footage and cutting it into something made me yearn for the social, physical activity of production. I fervently missed everyone so much---I missed the process.” She says.

“Yeah, but you still had access to those people, right? They were your friends as well as collaborators.” I say.

“Sure. I could get any one of them on the phone or have lunch but it’s not the same. You’re deeply involved in a creative atmosphere---and I say that not to diminish the importance and gratitude I have for the people in my life. But having lunch is different than creating something together.” She explains. “It’s greater than the sum of the individuals.”

“Point taken.” I reply.

“I was at a party not long ago and I had the opportunity to meet and chat with another director. It was such an epiphany for me. I thought I was just super sensitive or even unbalanced because of the rough emotions I went through after the first feature. But this director, another woman by the way, experienced the exact thing I had experienced and so I didn’t feel alone or ashamed or inadequate as a person anymore.” She adds.

“That’s great.” I say and I’m sure my face betrayed my bewilderment.

“It’s very similar to a break up. It really is. My last film took six months to shoot. I was emotionally involved for six months with all the actors and the creatives and it was such a rush---so much fun and hard work, too. We met a lot of people and made a lot of new friends along the way. Then when principal photography was over everything feels like it grinds to a halt. You don’t see anyone anymore because you are busy in post trying to deliver a finished product in a timely way to pay the people back. Everyone else has scattered to other projects. So here you are watching all the memories of that wonderful six months in time. It’s like looking at old photographs of past boyfriends or ex-husbands or babies that have grown up. You forget about the pain or the disagreements or the extreme physical fatigue and something in the human brain makes one yearn for something intangible and fleeting.”

“But it isn’t intangible. It’s fixed in the finished film.” I reply.

“True.” She says. “And that is what makes it all worth while when you can see and share what you’ve accomplished together with the ones you love.”

“I guess what they say is true. Absence makes the heart grow fonder.” I add.

“Living proof.” She says and she is off to work on the scene.

The Color of Money

2010-04-08T22:04:00.002-04:00

Over the few days off from the Londinium film I promised to take Justin to Coney Island. Our last hurrah before school starts. It was a perfectly pleasant day until we were walking out of the park and the kid decided he wanted to ride the Cyclone. The Cyclone is the most hair-raising ride I have ever been on in my life. The Cyclone rollercoaster is one of the last and oldest wooden coasters in the world, built in 1927 with such stomach turning spins that it is the high water mark for almost every other coaster built. The probability of being ejected from the ride by the thin steel bar is quite high and promotes the forming of phobias far and wide. I try to tell Justin he is not old enough to ride the killing machine. As a matter of fact I would not let him ride it until he turns 21 for fear of maiming and paralysis. He plops himself down right there on the pavement and proceeds to have an old-fashioned tantrum. I threaten him by saying, “If you don’t stop with the hissy fit then there will be no cartoons for a looooong time.” Now, I am not and have never been a proponent of spanking but the kid pushed enough buttons on my anger elevator that I was one red curly hair from corporal punishment. Even in drunken belligerence I have enough sense to resist fisticuffs. Exhausted and deeply pissed-off I requested the wife to tend to the offspring for the rest of the night while I tied one on. I knew the next day would be light. The schedule was filled with pick-up shots and small scenes with Whit in the artist’s studio. Most of the scenes are of Richard in the process of painting. Montage sequences with jib and dolly shots beautifully orchestrated as the paintings of Victoria come to life. Since the scenes were incredibly technical I felt like I could show up towards the end of the day. Thom said that in between set-ups the director has to step in and don her painter’s hat to work the painting(s) a bit more to show progress. There were several canvases in various states of completion to speed up the process but it sounded a little tedious to me without an official duty so I opted for rest.

During Richard’s time the Salon, that is the official art exhibition of the Academie des Beaux-Arts in Paris, was the place to be as an artist of any worth. Today the new painters are filmmakers and the new Salon is Cannes and Sundance, Toronto and Berlin. I ask Whit what he thinks about it all.

“I’m an actor playing a painter and so my take on it is that films can be like moving paintings. I mean, I watch Terence Malick’s work and it is definitely the ilk of the great masters of art. Days of Heaven is a masterpiece of filmmaking.” He says.

“I agree. It’s one of my favorite films of all time.” I reply. “What do you think of the films that go unnoticed that might be just as good as Days of Heaven but are not seen because the juries or curators can’t or won’t program them?” I ask.

“It’s a real shame. People need to see cinema as art. And art as cinema. I don’t have a lot of experience with film festivals and I don’t want to grossly generalize because I believe there are still truly indie fests out there wanting to feed their audiences with exceptional material.” He replies.

“But…” I say.

“But we all know that Independent films are in competition with studio films. What better way to eliminate your competition than buying up all the boutique distributors and making them adhere to Disney or Paramount rules and tastes.” He says. “It becomes generic especially in hard times. No one wants to take a risk on something different and it shows with the movies the studios are churning out now.”

“That only partially answers my question.” I say. He thinks for a minute.

“When Sundance started it was exciting and it made an unknown filmmaker’s career---“

“Steven Soderbergh, Sex, Lies and Videotape!” I excitedly interject.

“Sure. It made unknown actors bankable talent.” Whit continues.

“Andy McDowell and James Spader!” I yell.

“It was great and Redford had the vision and passion to give artists a chance.” He says.

“Then something went really wrong---” I say.

“Yeah! I mean Sundance became a corporation---it became the very thing it was reacting against. The studios used the festival to introduce their art films that weren’t really art because they were financed by the same machine that backs the studios and the publicists and the ad agencies and the big name talent.” Whit says. “I do want to clarify that just because big money is behind a project does not mean it is not art. It can certainly be artistic and visionary. I mean, I enjoy Tim Burton’s stuff. I just feel that where there is big money there are too many cooks, i.e. producers interfering with the health of an artistic creation…and the director’s control.” Whit adds. Well stated and I am duly impressed. The guy can think and verbalize.

“Do you think Sundance should just come out and be a market like Berlin’s (EFM) and MIPCOM at Cannes?” I ask.

“I think that is exactly what it is and because it started as a festival with vision it has lost its luster because it has become more about buying and selling. Don’t call a dog a cat or a goat a horse, ya know?”

“I agree. I think Sundance is really trying to retrace its steps and recover its original mission, though.” I say.

“Yeah? I hope you’re right. What came out of Park City this year that was not studio backed---and I mean international studios as well. Channel4 and the BBC and Canal+ are studios so they don’t count.” He says.

“The Runaways.” I answer meekly and I know I am dead wrong.

“They produced Brokeback Mountain and Into the Wild. Both Oscar contenders so they don’t count.” He says. How does he know all this shit AND memorize lines.

“I think that Redford and his advisors and backers are really honing in on issues that they feel deeply about. I mean, they’re producing shows about going green and how people like you and I can be custodians of the earth rather than consumers. I think he has a program specifically to introduce native peoples and their talents to a larger audience and to enhance their visibility and opportunity.” Whit says.

“Yes, I’ve seen the show.” I respond.

“It takes money to change the habits of a generation or even generations living in a throw-away world. We can’t do that anymore. We have to have a conscience about what we use, what we eat, what we grow, what we wear, where and how we live and to live by what we honestly need and not feed the monster of what we ‘want’. Instant gratification is a luxury that we cannot afford any longer.” So sayeth the reverend Whit.

“I think we got off point.” I say.

“Not really. We’re all connected.” He says. Okay…I hear that phrased tossed around a lot these days. Philosophically I get it.

“If you think about it storytelling is as old as humanity. What we really want as an audience---what I want as an actor is to be taken out of myself. The trick is how to tell a good story sans the bells and whistles. Capitalism is great. Don’t get me wrong. It is the great motivating factor for invention and innovation. Less is more. Subtlety. We have to pare down to the basics to get to the heart of what we’re trying to say. Cinema and by that I mean computers, iphones, ipads, you tube, digital theatres and digital streaming are the campfire that illuminates the storytellers who enthrall an audience with ideas and emotions.” He says succinctly.

I’ll drink to that!

A Parade of Human Oddities

2010-03-30T11:46:00.004-04:00

Inside the Londinium set that is Jules’ tinker workshop I spy small tintypes called memento mori, hundreds of them hanging on the wall. Memento mori or more appropriately, memorial portraiture were in fact Victorian post-mortem photographs. With the advent of photography originating in the daguerreotype in 1839, portraiture was made available to the middle class. People of all walks of life could have an image of their beloved. Sometimes families had only one image of their endearing relative. And sometimes that image was made after they died. Because the infant mortality rate was so high in those times a lot of these memento mori are of dead children. Some are ghoulishly propped up with irises painted on their closed lifeless eyes and a favorite toy placed in hand. Others have been arranged to look as though they are in ‘eternal slumber’. These glass plates and tintypes are morbid and reflect the socio-cultural mourning attitudes of the time. And yet, like a car accident you can’t help but look. In the later Victorian era corpses were photographed and memorialized in their coffins. Some of the most famous daguerreotypes are the field photography of Matthew Brady and the infamous images of dead civil war soldiers on the fields of Gettysburg and Antietam. A bit less infamous are the post-mortem photographs of the five slain prostitutes that Jack the Ripper murdered.

This is Jules’ livelihood and an important clue to his character. The invention of photography also ushered in an odd version of voyeurism as previously discussed in an earlier entry. It is believed by many American Indians that cameras steal a part of the soul and incarcerate it in the processed image. Could there be something to that? The mere fact that these one-of-a-kind photographs are hanging by the hundreds in Jules’ workshop leads me to believe that he is collecting souls, if you will. Not actual numinous spirits but the captured tokens held so dear by loved ones. Perhaps he is trying to feel close to something thru the collecting of these images. The first time I was made aware of memorial portraiture was in the movie The Others with Nicole Kidman. About halfway to two thirds thru the film she discovers a photo album in one of the rooms filled with post-mortem portraits. This is when she realizes that the servants she hired are really dead people. Brilliant! Jules’ real talent seems to lie in his skillful capturing of moving images…of people dying. Violently.

Three different rooms, three different sets. The only room not in use today is the bathroom and the hallway. The first set is in the parlor and has been built and designed to look like a part of the outside of a sideshow complete with hand painted sideshow banners advertising not only Jules Whitby and his Magic Lantern Show but also the Elephant Man (who, by the way was on display in 1888 in the slums across the street from the London Royal Hospital and for a brief moment in time considered a possible suspect in the murders.) David Lynch’s brilliant film, The Elephant Man is one of my absolute favorite movies of all time and truly seems to capture the attitudes and grim reality of London without all the saturated color of the Merchant Ivory ventures.

This exquisite set is really only a pick-up shot as we watch Richard move from the dinner scene thru Hyde Park and stumble into the sideshow tents. Further inside the Fort Greene Brooklyn brownstone the furniture in the bedroom has been moved into storage for the day and the walls draped in canvas with fly doors and flaps. There are five extras hired for the day, patrons of the magic lantern show and a hand picked rabble of ne-erdowells. Jules stands behind his podium cranking his zoopraxiscope and presenting his collection of images to a paying audience. For a penny or two people could wander into alleyways and watch what was called ‘actualities’. With Edison and his Kinetiscope these actualities turned into nickelodeons. For a nickel patrons could watch a fictional story like The Great Train Robbery in a theatre setting. So began the world of cinema.

In Londinium this early actuality, however, is of Richard wounded as he stumbles into the street on that first snowy night as Victoria comes to his aid. The grainy black and white images glide across the blank canvas as Jules narrates a fictional story eerily similar to the East End killings. He implies that the young woman (Victoria) is a victim and that the dark man (Richard) is about to do ‘unspeakable’ things to her. “Did she take her own life…or did he.” Jules poses to the entranced audience of ruffians. It gives me pause. Is he foretelling the future or spinning a dramatic yarn. One of the ruffians is Dr. Stephens. In the opening scene of the movie Dr. Stephens approaches Jules, “I think you can contribute a great deal to the field of medicine.” He says. Almost immediately I wonder if Jules will be supplying the good doctor with cadavers. However the good doctor’s desires are more sinister and include the capturing of images of dying bodies. I watch Whit playing Richard and the dots he seems to connect via emotional streams. I wonder how I would feel to have an intensely intimate moment captured on a device and then displayed for all to see. I would feel violated in a way and quite vulnerable. I can see this progression in Richard as he watches the cold faces of the strangers taking in the moving pictures of he and Victoria connecting on a soul level. He can go one of two ways: Overcome the obstacles before him and take action or harden himself to cover his insecurities. I am torn, I am fascinated by the villain in him but I want him to be the hero. I want him to do the right thing but I’m not sure what the ‘right’ thing is yet.

I am momentarily distracted as the other sideshow begins. Ed, our last minute extra is dressed in a morning suit and bowler and wanders in and out of the show tent in take after take. Thom is assistant directing and after each take Ed asks, “How was that Thom? Did that look okay?”

“It looked fine, Ed. Don’t over think it.” Thom replies.

“Good note.” Ed says smirking and moving to his first mark. The director calls action, the extras are choreographed and move as planned. Ed looks natural. Once the director yells CUT! Ed feigns nervous anxiety. “Thom? Was that a one good?”

“Yeah, Ed. It was fine. You’re just walking in and out of the tent with purpose. Ask yourself where are you going and where are you coming from.” Thom says growing exasperated.

“Isn’t it ‘where I’m coming from’ first, then ‘where I’m going’?” Ed replies.

“Whatever you’re doing it’s working, Ed. Everybody first mark.” Thom orders.

“He puts me at ease.” I hear Ed say to another extra trying to stifle a giggle. Murray just nods and takes his place.

Richard must know that he is being set-up or used in some clandestine scheme and he plans to unravel the mysterious machinations that put him and Victoria in peril. The next set is located in part of the kitchen. Jules’ Tinker shop had to be temporarily moved in order to create the other sets. Richard tails Jules and finds him in an alley yard with a prostitute. Whit, looking sinister and lethal approaches Jules as the hooker skitters away frightened. Richard pays Jules to show him how his invention works. Once inside Richard discovers a plethora of substances in Jules’ workshop: Cyanide, Arsenic, Nicotine, all lethal poisons, by the way, as well as proper chemicals for film developing. Jules claims the poisons are for ‘killing the rats’. But Richard knows better. They end up drinking quite a bit. A little liquor creates a braggart and show-off I always say. And Jules is no different. When plied with alcohol and flattery Jules is happy to reveal his ‘actualities’. Richard holds the celluloid images in his hand and marvels at the technology involved. He tries to buy the image of he and Victoria on that snowy night and when Jules refuses Richard decides he will figure out another way to possess the film.

The Actor Whisperer

2010-03-22T23:15:00.003-04:00

I wake to find Justin jumping on the end of our bed. It is Saturday and the weekend has begun for him. My wife is oblivious. She went out with ‘the girls’ the night before and the hangover that is due to arrive in an hour or two is still dormant. I bribe my son with fruit roll-ups and a bag of skittles to stop the infernal wave motion. “We don’t want mommy to throw up in the bed. Because that means daddy will HAVE to do laundry and he doesn’t have time.” I say. Wrong! The kid jumps higher and faster making me have to pull a sumo move on the squirt. Once on the floor and during the morning cartoons he devours the sugar remuneration and I plan my escape back to the film set. This could be grounds for divorce since I am not making any money for being there. I know my wife is thinking that she gets a ‘get outta jail free’ card meaning she doesn’t have to baby-sit after a bender, but this isn’t Kansas, my friends, and Glenda is NOT coming. She’ll have to wait for the rainbow to show up on Monday. I’m gonna catch holy hell for it, I know.

I arrive to find Whit decked out in Ripper guise looking dapper and a bit dangerous. It is the first scene of the day and the set looks amazing. Once again the art department has outdone itself. They have created a tinker’s workshop with bare brick walls in the center of their brownstone parlor. It is outfitted complete with wood burning stove, crappy cot and reels and reels of celluloid, tins, cores, camera equipment, glass plates, camera obscuras, cogs, wheels, metal thingamajiggies and whatchamadoodles. Things you might find in Edison’s Black Maria or Henry Ford’s garage. In the scene Richard has just killed Jules and returns to Jules’ workshop to confiscate any and all film content that might be incriminating. Since he is on the run he does not take the time to look at anything and begins to cram the reels of celluloid into this leather satchel. Thom slates. Pat is behind the camera; Ed is on sound holding the boom. The director sits behind the set walls and watches the monitor. ACTION! I watch as the first take unfolds. Richards enters quickly. He puts down his knife and begins packing his bag with all the film reels he can find. He goes to another pie safe and begins cramming the tins and film into his case. It’s taking a while, I think to myself. It’s taking too long. I notice the director’s shoulders are moving and realize she is laughing uncontrollably. CUT! She says. I hear Thom burst out in laughter. Whit stands there blankly with tentacles of film poking and flowing out of his bag onto the floor. He looks like a stoned Sigmund the Sea monster. Thom and Ed cannot straighten up. “What are you? Ursula the Sea Witch”. Thom chides. That is exactly what he looks like. “Let’s get rid of some of these tins and rolls of film.” Thom says in between breaths. “It’s not too incriminating---waltzing out of Jules’ workshop with evidence trailing behind,” Ed demurs. The art department gets rid of over half the detritus Whit has to gather. Thankfully this speeds up the scene. As we begin our second take Stewart Walker arrives and moves quietly into wardrobe. When we break Whit says, “I thought I was going to lose my ever-lovin’ mind! It seemed like the film tins were multiplying like a virus as I was collecting them. Then I thought ‘keep going until cut’. I knew there was no way in hell I was going to fit all those tins into this bag AND the celluloid.”

“Maybe if you smoke another doob you might get it all crammed in there.” Ed says laughing.

“I’m not high or post-high…today.” Whit confirms. “I don’t do that anymore. I gotta work, man.”

We set up for the next scene. Richard has come upon Jules in the park with a corpse. They hear footsteps and make a run for Jules’ studio. Once inside, Richard is determined to see what Jules has been shooting. Jules accommodates and threads up his zoopraxiscope. The film footage is of Charles in a not very platonic embrace with Vincent in a back alley. This confirms the arranged marriage between Charles and Victoria for the audience. This does not bode well for anyone involved except Jules. Richard is curious as to why Jules has the evidence. Jules explains that he will hold the celluloid for ransom and if the Thorntons won’t pay then he will exhibit the scandalous scene at the World’s Fair. Richard has been known to have sticky fingers and it is referred to in various scenes. He puts them to good use and pinches the priceless footage. Then the sepia toned images of Victoria move across the canvas screen. Richard is moved by her likeness and Jules notices that the sometime dodger he has befriended has a ‘thing’ for her. He uses that information to his advantage. Stewart is the epitome of a professional actor. He has great questions and works toward solving problems on the set in terms of character issues with the director. They have a wonderful rapport and he gives his all in a performance. Because of sound issues the actors must react to non-existent film footage. There is a question about eye-line and the director moves in to adjust. Thom suggests a point of reference whereupon Ed declares.

“Ya know Thom is great for those kinds of recommendations. I call him the actor whisperer because he has great tips.” Ed says. I truly think I am about to pee my pants.

“If I could get you to shut the frig up then I really would be an actor---boom pole man whisperer.” Thom replies a bit miffed.

“You know I’m just joking with you.” Ed says smiling.

“Keep it up.” Thom says growing more ruffled.

“Watch this.” Ed says. “I bet I can make him stomp out to the stoop.” This is what my grandmother would call throwing a turd in the punchbowl.

“Leave him alone.” I say. “We have to go outside later and it is hotter than the hinges of hell outside.” It is true. The humidity is unbearable and Fort Greene Park yawns before us.

“Ya know, Thom. You make sandwiches a lot like you give acting tips. You think you could make me a double decker when we break?” Ed says trying not to laugh. Thom stares at him with seething anger. The murmur of the set diminishes and Thom slowly and dramatically saunters off a la Bette Davis. “I’m going out for a smoke.” He says and sure enough he stomps outside to our wonder and glee.

The newbie of the day arrives. It is Tristan O’connor. She is playing Rose, one of the prostitutes in the film. Stephanie takes her in to make-up and by the time she exits wardrobe it is dark enough outside for us to make our way to the local park. We have a couple of extra crew people to handle the makeshift light boxes courtesy of Patrick. The dew point is so high even at 9Pm that we are all mostly drenched in sweat. We rig up out mechanical SFX apparatus to Tristan. She accepts a pull from an unseen (off camera) stranger. And as she tips it back the knife slides effortlessly across her throat. I’m not sure if I wrote about this is a prior entry but our crew rigged an exterminator can with ever smaller clear plastic hoses affixed behind the latex wound glued to the actress’s throat. Once the knife pulls away the pressure of the can is released creating a spray of fake blood and the subsequent ‘bleeding out’. It looks so real that I find my stomach beginning to turn. That is a direct compliment to Tristan who performed the death throes with great acumen. She falls to the ground and bleeds out. It is gruesome and almost too real. Richard is in the park at the same time. I can’t figure out if he is the killer or just in the vicinity. When he comes upon Jules arranging the corpse for his camera I wonder if HE is the killer, the first snuff film director. I also question why Richard doesn’t go straight to the police with the information and eyewitness account if he is not the killer. Why would he be protecting Jules? I know why Jules would be protecting Richard. Money. It is all so seedy and unsettling and truly makes me wonder what stratagems go on in the mind of a psychopath. I find myself trying to walk in those guys shoes to figure out who dunnit. I know one thing for sure. I don’t like their shoes…