Far too many micro budget film makers just dive in and never give a thought to things such as lighting or blocking a scene. Today we are going to look at scene blocking and why it is as much an art as it is a learned skill.
The learned skill is easy. You can learn blocking from a book or a few videos on the subject.
If you wish to make a low budget film that looks professional you are going to have to master this basic skill or hire someone who has. To put it simply, blocking is the art of pre-determining the visual relationship that the camera will have with the actors in the scene being filmed. Look at it as moving around pieces on a game board. You can look at the art of film making as the art of placing a board game. If you do not know the rules then you are bound to lose sooner or later. You cannot play a game and trust to dumb luck. If this is true then why would you trust to luck where your film is concerned.
The following video will lead you through the basics.
This next video is a scene from the master film maker Orson Welles. He is considered perhaps the greatest artist to every make a motion picture and his masterpiece is of course Citizen Kane.
I hope that this gives you an idea of how it is done. The cool part is that thanks to digital video you can practice for hours until you get comfortable with the process of blocking before you every have to record one second of your actual movie.
Thank you for visiting my site. Please take a moment to add me to your google plus and to check out my books on film making.
Some times we forget that the camera is more than just a tool that we use as film makers. The camera can under certain circumstance become an actor in the scene. Through carefully planned out movements the camera can tell a story all its own. By simply angling the camera above or below the actor on screen we can tell the audience how to fell about the actor on screen.
From below the actor looms over the view. Making the actor seem more powerful and or important. From above we can make the actor look smaller or weaker as compared to others in the same scene. Consider this as you watch films particularly those made by the masters of cinema.
From the guys at video maker let’s look at camera movements from some great films.
Here is scene from one of my favorite thrillers. Study the camera movements and how they help to build suspense. Never has the steadicam been used better and this was before the arrival of the dslr.
Thank you for hanging in with my blog while I was away. Long story short is that I had a house fire and after a few months I am almost back to normal. Just lost a lot of equipment, files and time, but these things happen. I hope to touch on trends in the indie film world while I was away. The rise of a few filmmakers who are not celebrated because of the genre of their films rather than the quality. When a film maker starts at the bottom and over a few years builds an audience to the point where their forth theatrical release holds number one at the box office for two weeks and there are not a chorus of film makers cheering it makes me wonder if some of us are to into being like cooler kids in high school. I understand why Hollywood hates War Room, but why do other indie film makers. I always thought that the goal of becoming an indie film maker was to make movies my way. Movies that I wanted to see and were not being make. To make movies for an audience that wanted the same thing.
You know I think that it is time to do a post on Audience.
Whether your audience goes to church or to sundance or to mma matches or to the opera or to soup kitchens or anywhere else on earth the only thing that matters is film maker and his or her audience. Finding the audience is hard. Getting them to notice you is harder and getting them to follow you is hardest of all. If one out of every hundred micro budget film makers manage to do this then it can be considered a minor miracle. Hollywood has the entire world of film goers to connect with while we have to go out and find our audience and grow them day by day.
Thank you for visiting my blog and remember to add me to your google plus.
Most film makers never get enough of technique
answers. Robert Rodriguez teaches that even if you are creative you
have to learn to be technical if you want to be a modern film maker
and it is in that area that I wish to go into with the next few
questions. Okay lets talk about editing. What type of computer did
you use to edit?
Up
until late 2011, I used an off-the-shelf Dell Dimension PC for all my
post-production work. It was great for Mini DV editing, but cutting
HD on it was sluggish and it crashed a lot.Then,
in December 2011, I got hit with a very bad virus which forced me to
nuke my entire OS. Rather than reinstall everything on my ageing PC,
I decided to upgrade, so I built my own new PC from scratch. I'm
running Windows 7 Ultimate with 8GB of RAM, a GTX570 GPU, a Core
i7-2600k CPU and a solid state system drive plus a 1TB hard drive
which Throwback's 40 hours of rushes are residing on. I can now edit
HDV smoothly at full motion, with no stuttering or crashes, even with
effects added.
What kind of
software did you pick?
I use
Adobe Premiere Pro. I've used Premiere since the late 1990s and see
no reason to switch to a different NLE. It does everything I want it
to do and I'm used to it and comfortable with it, so at this stage I
have no desire to jump to Avid or FCP or any other NLE.Were
you happy with the results?
Very
happy. Now that I'm using a powerful enough PC, Premiere basically
never crashes and I never have any glitches. It edits native HDV as
easily as if it was Mini DV. The export options are also great and
there are a lot of cool plugins available. Working on a PC instead of
a Mac, you also have more codec options available. When I create
intermediate files, I use the Lagarith lossless codec so there's no
loss of quality whatsoever when you go through multiple generations.
In fact, I usually export all my digital negatives as Lagarith .avi
files before transcoding them to DVD or Blu-ray or whatever their
final distribution format is going to be. If
you are considering an upgrade, to what software would it be?
My
next computer will be even more powerful because I'll want it to be
able to edit 4K down the track. I know my current PC can't edit 4K
because I've tried and it just can't keep up with the frame rate. I'm
not looking at jumping into 4K in the next two years at least, but it
is something I'm looking at for the long term. I just want to wait
for the technology to develop a bit more and for prices to come down.
I love the look of the new Sony F55 camera with its global shutter,
but it's way outside of my price range at the moment. But hopefully
in a couple of years, you'll be able to pick up a decent quality
prosumer 4K camera for a couple of grand. If someone brings out
something similar to the low-cost JVC handheld one but with a larger
sensor, I'm there. I understand
that you directed and edited your film yourself would you recommend
that to other film makers?
Definitely.
Having to edit footage you've shot yourself is a great way to learn
what works and what doesn't, and it helps you shoot better material
next time you go out in the field. Knowing what sort of coverage an
editor needs to make a scene work is essential for any director, I
think. I'm sure there are a lot of Hollywood editors out there who
are handed great-looking footage by big-time directors and it just
doesn't cut together, because the director has no real understanding
of montage. It's great for directors to know how to work with actors
or what lenses or lights to use, but without knowing how to "shoot
for the edit", as Michael Bay termed it, it's all for naught.
Going forward, I may not always edit my own films, but when you're on
a low budget, you kind of have to to save money.
From
the trailer it looks as if your movie is heavily dependent on
standard special effects rather than computer generated effect. I
think that the old school approach to visual effects looks better. So
many film makers are grabbing what they believe to be as cool piece
of software and adding a CGI creature into their film. In a Hollywood
style blockbuster these creatures look good, but at the micro budget
level they usually come out looking like characters from Wreck It
Ralph. Nothing spoils a creature feature faster than a killer bear or
T Rex from a playstation game. My favorite movie going experience of
all time was when I got to see the US debut of The Descent at out
local film festival. I got to see it in a packed theater that rocked
from opening scene to last. The creatures in that film are all makeup
and lighting with only a small amount of background CGI(the wall
climbing scenes). So the question is would you have gone CGI if
your budget was larger?
No. Even
if we'd had a huge budget, I wouldn't have wanted a CGI monster. I
probably would've commissioned a kickass animatronic costume from
Stan Winston Studio or Jim Henson's Creature Shop. I think CGI has
been grossly overused in the past decade or so, and we're really
seeing a backlash against it, as evidenced by the failures of "John
Carter", "Battleship" and "Jack the Giant
Slayer." I think the backlash may have started as far back as
"The Phantom Menace." Like many, I mourn the lost arts of
miniatures, matte paintings and practical effects. Granted, CGI is
essential for some types of movies. I don't think Roland Emmerich's
"2012" would have been quite as visually impressive if it
had relied solely on practical FX. But when I see CGI gophers,
scorpions and monkeys in the fourth Indiana Jones movie, I just want
to shake my head. So no, I wouldn't have used a CGI monster in
"Throwback." There's no substitute for a good old-fashioned
man in a costume. If you film him the right way, with careful
lighting and camera angles, you can get some great results. We've
taken the "Jaws" approach for Throwback in that you only
ever really get glimpses of the creature, you never see him full-on
in broad daylight. I prefer this approach. It's scarier, because when
you can't see the monster properly, your mind fills in the blanks.
Even the creature's glowing red eyes in this movie were done
practically, using special LED lights. I was determined to avoid CGI
as much as possible. There is a little bit of digital FX work in the
movie, but it's restricted to gun muzzle flashes and things like
that, because we couldn't afford blank-firing guns and all the safety
requirements and red tape that go with them. We've done all our gore
shots practically, with prosthetics and fake blood. Moviegoers can
tell the difference. Even if I get to work with bigger and bigger
budgets, I think I'll keep insisting on doing FX practically, as
"old-school" as possible. I have an idea for a pulp
adventure story featuring a lost city and dinosaurs, and if I ever
get to do it, I want to create the dinosaurs with stop-motion as a
tribute to Ray Harryhausen and the animators he inspired like Phil
Tippett. I know stop-motion is out of vogue (except for films for the
younger crowd like "Paranorman" and "Frankenweenie"),
but I'd rather do my dinosaurs with good stop-motion than lousy CGI.
I think audiences would respond well to a revival of stop-motion for
a retro fantasy adventure. Here's hoping "Throwback" is
enough of a success that I can afford to commission Laika to do my
dinos for me.
I'm glad you mentioned "The Descent."
It's one of the best horror films I've seen in recent years and I'm a
big fan of Neil Marshall's. He's clearly inspired by John Carpenter
and "The Thing", which for my money is the best horror
movie ever made. Marshall even uses the same font for his titles as
Carpenter, which is a cool homage.
The final part of this interview will
focus on post and distribution. Please take a moment to stumble us
on stumbleupon, bookmark this post and to share it with a friend.
Final note for today. For those of you who only use Youtube could you
check out Vimeo. The traffic is not as good as Youtube, but the
video quality is great. Also if you post your work at Youtube there
is no law that says that you can not use Vimeo as well. You will be
reaching a larger audience if you use both. Part of being a successful digital filmmaker is to go out and find the audience. Finding the audience for your digital film is sometimes taking advantage of every possible chance to reach them.
Some of you will disagree strongly with this statement. I will make it anyway.
Alfred Hitchcock was not only the greatest filmmaker of the 20th century, but he was the greatest indie filmmaker as well.
“He worked for studios all of his life. He made the most hated of all types of films to the old world of indie film makers. He made the kind of films that made money. You can’t call that guy an indie film maker.”
I can and I will.
Look at it this way, in the world that Hitchcock lived in there was no way that you could be a truly indie filmmaker. The only one who tried it was Orson Welles and he got crushed by the studios. Movies cost a fortune to produce. The only way to distribute them was through the studios and the theaters that they owned and operated. Tv did not exist when he started his career. There was no dvds, no videos, no digital downloads, no internet. He had to work within the system and take his shots when he could.
In England he had some control near the end of his time making movies there. Arriving in America he was employed by David O Selznick, a hyper control freak who had no problem with re-editing Hitckcock’s films. Some would argue that he re-edited Rebecca into winning best picture. I would argue that it was probably a best picture winner before he touched it and if it had lost Hitchcock would have won with the first of his truly indie productions in America the film Foreign Correspondent.
When not working for Selznick his contract was loaned out to other studios. This gave Hitchcock the freedom to do within reason what ever films that he wished to. This allowed him to make the movie that would be his favorite, Shadow Of A Doubt. He took a movie star and turned him into a serial killer before most of the world had any idea of what a serial killer was.
A few years later Hitchcock would gain his total independence and form his own production company. This did not last long due to the fact that he wanted to be a little too experimental. He made the movie Rope that was shot in ten minute takes. Easy to do now, but a nightmare to do back in the forties. At the turn of the 1950s he was back working for the studios with a new respect for what they could provide and also what it took to make truly independent films. He would spend the next ten years making a few movie for fun and profit and then others for himself. This cycle would allow him to give the studios what they wanted. Massive hits like Strangers on a Train, The Man Who Knew Too Much and the Blockbuster North By Northwest.
His indie type on movies were almost as successful. Movies like The Trouble With Harry, I Confess, Rear Window, Dial M for Murder and Vertigo.
If nothing I have offered has gotten through and you still think Hitchcock was only a big studio director and nothing more please explain Psycho.
He took a tv crew to shoot a movie. He shot it in six weeks. He shot it in black and white. He used mostly his own money. He took a movie star and killed her a third of the way into the movie. He was the most famous director on earth. Famous for elegant thrillers with Grant and Stewart and Grace Kelly. Nearing the age of sixty he hammered the film going world with a dark and bloody little thriller that despite hundreds of attempts no one has been able to come close to repeating during the last 50 years.
And he followed that one up by spending a year working on and shooting The Birds.
Hitchcock could have relaxed. He could have settled into doing the same movie over and over again, but instead he was always stretching and straining to do what had never been done before.
Indie stands for independent. Doing it your way is what will make or break your indie film. Right now there is a film festival in my city. Except for the Graveyard shift (horror and action from around the world) there is not much independence of thought on display. Do not think about festivals or awards when making your film. Do not think about anything, but what will please you and the audience that you have in mind. This is why Hitchcock’s films have endured the test of time.
Are their filmmakers today who work within a studio system and still managed to maintain their independence? Have a look at the films of the great foreign filmmaker Takashi Miike. Izo, Zebraman, One Missed Call, The Happiness Of the Katakuris, The 13 Assassins, Audition and Ichi the Killer. He has done a dozen more I could name.
This post has strictly been my opinion.
Okay that is it for today. The next post is going to most likely be about Found Footage. I know that we have talked about this subject before, but it has become a Genre that is almost strictly part of the horror film world and I think that it is time to grow the genre.
Thank you for visiting and I am still looking for my first guest Blog post. If I could pick the subject it would be editing. That is my weakness and it must be someone’s strength.
Digital filmmaking involves learning most of the basics that film makers have learned for decades. Lighting and sound are a large part of the filmmaking process, but there are other basics that you need to master if you are going to make a quality film.
Today we are going to talk about framing your shots and scenes. I could use a lot of filmmakers as an example, but the one that I am most familiar with is Hitchcock and I am back from seeing one of his films on an actual movie screen. I just saw the Birds on the big screen and it is a master class in how to frame and re-frame scenes.
What?
“What is framing?”
It is what it sounds like. Picture a photo in a frame. See how the image is centered in the frame that is what we are talking about. In film making terms the center of attention should be framed at or near the center of the screen in all scenes. Most digital cameras will offer up a framing grid for you in the basic menu.
Okay what I want you to look at right now is this basic tutorial on framing.
Now I hope that you understand better what we are talking about. Next I want to look at Framing a shot in action. Now we will look at scenes from the movie the birds. In this scene called by many the gas station scene Hitchcock not only framed it well it he took it to a completely new level by framing his lead actress within the scene he is framing. Hitchcock is an artist, you can learn a great deal from him and other directors. Take a few things from your favorites. It is not stealing it is imitation. You imitate your favorite hitters in baseball, your favorite quarterback in football. It is okay, your own voice will develop as you do this. Brian De Palma is a Hitchcock follower. He is still Brian De Palma. Clint Eastwood takes from two directors Leone and Don Siegel. The combination makes him the award winning director that he has become.
Watch how your favorite directors frame a shot and then a scene. Learn from them and use what you have learned to improve the work that you are doing.
Thank you for visiting, remember to add us to your google plus and to stumble us on stumbleupon.
