SCREENPLAY, THE DREAM VS. BUDGET REALITIES

SCREENPLAY THE DREAM VS. BUDGET REALITIES

You wrote a great screenplay. You were dying to go out and shoot it. You sat down and did a budget breakdown and discovered that Guy Ritchie would think twice before blowing that much money. In other words you are a low budget film maker, but you wrote a big budget screenplay. 

 

This has happened to us all. 

 

The thing that you are going to have to do is set it aside until you can afford to make this film and go about writing and producing a film or two that will help you to raise the money for that script. 

 

You are going to have to learn how to write a low or micro budget screenplay. The problem with this is that most film makers only have a few clues as to how to do this. Limited locations and limited cast members is part of it, but not the whole story. Because if you are not careful you will limit yourself right out of writing a quality screenplay. Instead you will end up with a film that looks and sounds like it was paid for with food stamps. 

 

The rules of crafting a great script does not change. In fact you have to focus more or these fundamental rules when writing your low budget screenplay.

This is a chapter from my new audio book on screen writing. If you have an audible account or a kindle account you can easily check it out there. Also available on iTunes.

You see that writing a low budget screenplay is not enough. You need to write a quality one. When I started this blog many years ago I wanted to help other film makers while learning as much as I could along the way. I love movies and want to see better and better stories being told. If you go back in time to the 1930's and 40's then jump to the 70's it seems like people did know how to make great films, but since then the secret of steel was left on the battlefield. It is time to get back to making great movies again. Great movies begin with a great script. Over the next few post we are going to talk about writing.

Thank you for visiting my blog and please take a moment to share this post.

"9-12-13" Making of A Found Footage Film

     

The hard thing about doing these series of post on the topic of found footage film making is finding quality films to that stand out from the crowd and film makers with an interesting story to tell. After all is said and done this is a blog dedicated to film making and each post should advance our film making knowledge. I know that for many of us the dream of becoming a film maker not only began with seeing that one film that we wanted to know how it was done, but watching or reading an interview with the person behind the camera.  For me listening to my favorite film maker Hitchcock talk about film making was at times a bit overwhelming. He is one of those visual geniuses that saw the world in a way that Mozart heard music. Amazing to witness their work, but impossible to chase. In the end it was Sam Raimi who I could relate to and believe that hey I could do what he was doing. Hell, I wanted to make movies like Evil Dead.

    What I am saying is that I hope that you guys through these interviews find a film maker or two that inspires you to just go out and do it.

The next interview is with Mark Atkins, the film maker behind  9-12-13. You can find his website for Minds Eye Productions by clicking here.  If you would like to rate the film on IMDb you can visit the page by clicking here.

Q) The first question has to be what is 9-12-13 about?

a) '9-12-13' is about an egomaniacal wannabe horror filmmaker trying to cash in on the found-footage genre by making a movie set in the 1980s and shot on Hi8 to gain fame and a reputation as a 'master of horror.'


Unfortunately for him and his ragtag cast and crew, they bump into a group of drug runners in the woods - one of whom has a fierce loyalty to his ringleader brother and has a taste for murder. With the cast and crew becoming corpses, the filmmaker sees another option besides fight or flight.

He will make his masterpiece after all - with the killer as his new star.



Q) The found footage film has slowly and steadily carved out a place for itself as a true genre of film making during the last few years. Why did you choose found footage as the genre of your film and what has to change if found footage films are going to be see real growth as a genre?

a) I've been a fan of the genre since before 'The Blair Witch Project.' I remember finding a crummy quality VHS of 'Cannibal Holocaust' at my local video store as a kid and watching it on a Saturday afternoon with a friend and, while not fooled by the format, loved the possibilities of it.



Beside that, I saw the third 'Paranormal Actvivity' film and was blown away on how badly they dropped the ball. That film was set in the 80's and it was OBVIOUSLY shot on HD. I was thrilled with the idea of a found-footage story being told on the old analog VHS-C, 8mm, Hi8 or even Digital 8 format - what better way to establish your film's 80's flavour and setting?



Needless to say, I left the movie pretty anry and I immediately started to think on how to make an interesting found-footage story without reusing too many of the tropes that have risen from it. AND to shoot it on analog.



Q) You did an interesting twist on the film within a film plot. I guess that the question has to be about the script. This story is clearly more plot driven than the average found footage film. How much of the story was down on paper before you started to shoot and how much did the cast get to improvise during the shoot?

a) After setting myself on making a found-footage project, I really wanted to do something different from the others I've seen. Strangely enough, I went back to 'Cannibal Holocaust' for inspiration. Just because I was making a story in a particular genre doesn't mean that I can't tell a tale that I wouldn't be interested in making. That movie is about a group of people watching the footage that the audience was viewing, so I thought I would take it to, what was to me, the next logical step. Instead of having what was effectively two different movies married together, I would just have two different stories being told at the same time. The trick was how to keep the storytelling device (the camera) the same between the two. And I also wanted to do it without supernatural plot devices. No haunted cameras or possessed cassette tapes or any 'hand-wave' excuses.



So, once the story outline as written and the beats were in place, I quickly decided to not have any written dialogue. All of the lines in the movie are improvised by the cast following my direction that I laid out in a scene-by-scene 'blueprint.' I felt that having a polished script would make the performances too clean and would take away that raw vibe that a real-life situation would offer.



Q) Night time shooting is a task even on a big budget film. On the low to micro budget film that due to the fact that it is found footage and cannot use standard film lighting it ends up falling in to one of two camps. Hopelessly under lit or sadly over lit (the film Area 407). How did you deal with the problem of lighting?

a) To keep with the more realistic slant I wanted to give the story, I made the decision that less is more. All the lighting is from natural sources - to a point. I knew that I wanted to shoot predominantly at night and the story would not lend itself to being anywhere near street lights, buildings or other electrical sources of light. That left very, very few options, so flashlights were the obvious choice.



The second question was how to use them. You could light a scene with flashlights located from behind the camera, but I really, really, really wouldn't recommend it. So, I decided to use them as a prop for the actors to use. They would light the scene and the flashlight would serve as a believable item their characters would use in the situation they were in. The only problem is that the flashlights were only great for effect lighting and the odd fill, rim or spot lighting tasks. That's when the question led back to what would the key light source be?



The answer was the camera. It was the only constant in the entire story, so why would it not be the main source of light in a found-footage movie? It was also important that it wasn't a big, professional light that I just mounted on the camera. For the effect to be successful, I felt that it had to be just the on-board camera light. After a lot of testing in different weather and lighting conditions and understanding the limitations of the light sources and the camera, the lighting scheme worked out really well so that's what we went with.



9-12-13 from Mark Atkins on Vimeo.



Q) The question of how do I record quality sound is usually not tackled until a film maker has gone through the trial and error of shooting a film or two. How did you manage to record quality sound? What did you learn from the experience?

a) I'm a cinematographer by training, but even I would say that without quality sound, nothing can save you. I decided to use this philosophy and do the complete opposite. I used story and character to dictate how I would light, so I did the same with how I would record sound. Everything you hear is from the on-board camera mic. I didn't think that the character of the director would give a damn about good quality technical skills, so that's the motivation I used.



Obviously, there was a lot of testing of the audio on the camera ( a LOT more than with the lighting) and after figuring out the microphone's effective range and how wide the spread was in picking up effective dialogue, the rest fell into place.



Q) I have found that too many low budget film makers fall in love with the newest Dslr camera and end up overlooking the fact that they need to match the camera to the situation. You went for a grainy look to the film. What camera did you use and is that the camera that you wanted to use?



a) Again, I let the characters and the story dictate the technical aspects and if the story was about a guy wanting to make a movie set in the 80's, then by God, I was going to use a camera from the 80's! I could have used an HD camcorder or DSLR, but then I would have had to spend a bunch of time and effort in post-production to make every frame look like it was from an old camcorder. So, I went to a few garage sales and bought an old Hi8 camcorder that had the video light I wanted. Best $40 I ever spent.



There is a line in the movie where the director character explains that the timecode, date and battery displays on the screen change every time you turn the camera on and not to worry about it, well - that was a real thing. After a couple of days of filming, I felt the need to explain why the time and date on the display kept changing on the screen, otherwise the audience would be removed from the story and just think that the real filmmakers didn't know how to use their camera. Every time I turned the camera on, the display would change values and I could NOT turn off the display. It would turn off sometimes, but then reappear at random times. That was something that wasn't in my control, so I put it in the story.  Ironically, no one but me noticed or just didn't care about that fact.




Q) You have a pretty solid cast. Where did you get them?

a) Friends and friends of friends. I didn't want professional actors because of the unpolished feel I was going for and I wanted to keep the project on the down-low for the promotional campaign I wanted to experiment with. Luke Morrissey, who plays the ringleader of the drug runners, was a friend of a friend and through him I was able to hire the two actresses Jordyn and Jamie and one of the drug runners, Tom Mason. My buddy Sean, who plays the youngest of the drug runners, was a friend and co-worker. Matt Matthiason, the lead actor of the movie in the movie, had worked at a magazine show I briefly was a part of and Spiro Zinis, the serial killer, is a friend. Alex, the camera man character, is another local filmmaker and he was awesome.



I had a good friend of mine cast as the character of the director, but he fell through with only a couple of weeks until shooting and I put the word out for anyone who could come in last minute, but no one could commit. With no other option, I had to play the part. Like almost the entire cast, this was the first time I ever acted. It was difficult to pull double duty being director both in front and behind the camera (technically triple duty - I was also the serial killer behind the camera), but it was a terrific learning experience.



Q) How long did it take to shoot the film?


a) Three days for principal photography and another two for pick up shots. The last scene's location was the hardest to find, but luckily a friend of mine, Andy, allowed me to use his shop. In the end, I actually made him a character behind the camera, too. You have to use all the resources you have, sometimes!



Q) There are a lot of 80's horror film references in the film. The director in the film mentions my
favorite scream queen of all time (also the most underrated) Linnea Quigley. What are some of the films that you admire?

a) I grew up watching everything I could get my hands on, regardless of genre. When I hit about nine or ten is when I really started to get into horror flicks and most of the ones that shaped me were from the 80's, so Quigley, Brinke Stevens, Jamie Lee Curtis and Barbara Crampton were in the movies that I loved.



As for the films that I admire, my favourite film of all time is 'Dr. Strangelove,' so I'm a big Kubrick fan ('The Shining' is my favourite horror movie). I love John Carpenter's work, especially 'The Thing,' 'Big Trouble in Little China,' 'Prince of Darkness' and 'In the Mouth of Madness.' I could go on and on about Kurosawa, Hitchcock, Peckinpah and Scorcese, but the films I admire from the past few years or so are 'The Fall' by Tarsem Singh, any film by Park Chan-wook, 'The Innkeepers' by Ti West, 'Lovely Molly' by Eduardo Sanchez, 'Goon' by Michael Dowse and 'Tyrannosaur' by Paddy Considine. Again, there's a lot, lot more that I could mention.



Q) You have directed a feature before. Which was more difficult to direct. The narrative
feature or the found footage film?

a) '9-12-13' was the easiest by far, but for a number of reasons. Unlike my feature debut, 'Mind's Eye,' I had a smaller budget ($700 vs $10,000), which meant that I had fewer locations, fewer cast and crew and a LOT more freedom. I have to switch up scene orders on the fly? No problem. I'm not getting the performance I want out of an actor or myself? Instant re-takes. Setting up or taking down shots? Minutes instead of hours. It was more like summer camp with my friends than anything else.



That being said, there's nothing quite like working with trained (and paid) professionals making their jobs look easy and, thus, making your movie look and sound like a million bucks. I love the different disciplines that come together to make a script into a film. I love collaboration and teamwork and the feeling of people believing in you and your crazy ideas and you believing in them and their crazy ideas. Thirty people stuffed into a hot set at 3am is one of the worst hells to be in, but it's one that I absolutely, positively love to be in. It brings out the best and the worst in  people and ideas and I'm addicted to it.

There's definitely pluses and minuses on both sides, but it depends on the story you are telling and how you want to tell it.



Q) Any projects in the near future?

a) I'm currently working on a sci-fi feature film script about alternate dimensions, hallucinogenic drugs and the meaning of life. I'm planning to shoot a trailer for that this Summer and start the crowd-funding campaign in the Fall of this year.



Q) Any advice that you wish that you had been given when you were starting out as a film maker?



a) Ask questions and be humble. Learn everything you can about how to make a story. Keep yourself educated on what's going on around you. Don't be afraid to listen to suggestions from anyone - they are sometimes better ideas than your own. Surround yourself with people who make you challenge yourself.

With all this in mind, however, keep this advice closest to your heart: this is your story. Do NOT let anyone else tell you otherwise. Spielberg can't make Kubrick movies, Picasso can't paint Monet paintings and no one on Earth can make your story but you. So make it the best story you can and you will regret nothing.

Thank you for agreeing to do this interview Mark. If you guys would like to see his feature film
Mind's Eye you can see it on Vimeo by clicking here. 

Thanks for checking out this post, now if you could spare a moment to add me to your google plus and to share this post with a friend that would be great.

Canon Hv20 Feature film (Throwback) Part 3

The third part of my interview with Travis Bain is ready. I would like to first than him again for the time that he has given me and the information that he has shared. Digital filmmaking is a process. No one is born a filmmaker. There are born painters and singers, but film making is a learned skilled. Sure there are those with more talent for the game than others, but I believe that hard work and the willingness to keep trying again and again is what will get most of us from the planning, to the page, to the set, to the screen.

The lesson that you need to take from the making of Throwback and other filmmakers that we will be introduced to over the next year or so is that you do not need a boat load of money to be a film maker. You can make a micro budget film with a few thousand dollars. I have been told that features have been made for less than a thousand dollars. It is mostly a matter of deciding to do it and not giving up until the film is finished. Do not let any excuse stop you. It is okay to slow down and make sure that you are not going too fast or making mistakes along the way, but do not stop until your digital feature film is done.


Okay The third and final art of the Canon Hv 20 interview.


First I forgot to ask about sound last time. What did you use to record sound. Did you go with an add-on mic or did you record external sound and sync later?

For most of the movie, I just recorded audio straight into my Canon HV20 with a Rode Video Mic mounted on the camera. Rode is an Australian company and they make excellent microphones at reasonable prices. I’d highly recommend their products to any indie filmmaker, especially those on a tight budget. Their Video Mic is a very directional, compact shotgun mic which has provided me with very clear location audio. In a handful of situations, though, we found ourselves filming in noisy locations due to gushing river water, so on those occasions we recorded backup audio into a second Canon camera (an XHA1) using wireless lavalier microphones. I'm hoping to use wireless lavs all the way through my next feature, in conjunction with the Rode Video Mic. That way, I can either just use the best audio source in post or blend the two together. We didn't use a boom swinger on “Throwback” because we couldn't afford one, so it just seemed quicker and easier to just stick the mic on the camera and operate it myself. There'll be a little bit of wind noise to remove in post, but not a whole lot because we used a furry "dead cat" windsock on the mic throughout the shoot, which attenuated most of the location wind. I think we've done pretty well considering that the entire movie, except for one scene, was shot outdoors. The audio is remarkably clean, although I do want to use wireless lavs more on my next feature, and maybe a digital field recorder as well. There are some cool ones out now which record a safety track that's about 20db lower than your main track, so if there's a sudden audio spike like an actor suddenly yelling out a line at the top of their lungs, you can use the safety track rather than your clipped main track. Luckily we didn't have too many cases of that on this film. Whenever I knew an actor was about to shout, I'd simply lower the recording levels so they wouldn't clip. That's one of the reasons I shot the movie on the Canon HV20 and not a DSLR - you have full manual control over your audio levels. We'll probably only have to re-record a small handful of lines to replace ones tainted by background noise. Otherwise, about 95% of the dialogue you'll hear in the movie is the original dialogue. I always prefer to use the original dialogue if possible, because you can never truly replicate the actor's performance later on. When they're on location and in the moment, that's when you usually get the best material. I never used headphones to monitor sound on location, I just watched the audio levels on the LCD screen and made sure nothing clipped. I’m using some good-quality Sennheiser monitoring headphones in post, although lately I’ve mainly been using them to rock out to Led Zeppelin while I cut action scenes. “Achilles’ Last Stand” is great for keeping you awake and motivated at 2am. I’ll do the sound mix later when the picture edit’s locked off. It’s important to use proper monitoring headphones for your sound mix because consumer headphones that are made for iPods and so forth usually boost the bass and do other funky things to your audio, so they don’t give you an accurate reproduction of your soundtrack.

The subject of post production is overlooked by many first time film makers thinking that they will cross that bridge when they come to it. Did you have post in mind before you started filming?

Absolutely. You have to have a post-production plan in place before you even shoot a frame of footage. You have to set up your workflow in advance and practice good media management otherwise post is going to be a haphazard mess. In a way, a movie isn’t made during production, it’s made in post, so it’s crucial to start planning your post strategy even at the script stage. For example, knowing that we were going to film “Throwback” almost entirely outdoors, I deliberately wrote the script to have as little dialogue as possible. From the outset, I wanted to tell the story visually rather than through endless chitchat. They are called motion pictures, after all. My opinion is that if you want to watch actors talk for two hours, go to a play or a Tarantino film. Otherwise, I’m in the Hitchcock camp: I believe in telling the story visually, with camera angles, action and montage, and defining your characters by their behaviours rather than boring exposition. There have been a number of recent Bigfoot movies where the characters blather on about their relationships and their emotional issues. Nothing sucks the life out of a horror movie faster. I went in the opposite direction—I wrote “Throwback” to be a lean, economical, fast-paced suspense thriller with an action beat every five to ten minutes. With minimal dialogue, your sound mix is easier because you can build your soundtrack from the ground up with a mixture of canned and foley effects. There is character development in “Throwback”, don’t get me wrong, but like “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, we get to know the characters along the way, as we get swept along by the action. Having minimal dialogue also helps your movie’s chances in non-English speaking countries.

Do you get others involved in producing the final product? Do you outsource sound work or the soundtrack?

On this film and my last, “Scratched”, I’ve followed the early-Robert Rodriguez model of pretty much doing everything myself. When you’re on a tight budget, the best person to do post-production on your film is yourself. You are your own best possible employee. You know that you’re always going to turn up, never slack off or call in sick. You’ll work for free, and work tirelessly because you feel passionate about the project. Plus you know the material intimately, so you never have to say “I want it done this way.” On my future films, as the budgets increase, I would love to delegate more tasks to people who know more about these things than I do, but right now, I’m dong all the post on “Throwback” single-handedly. I haven’t outsourced anything as yet, apart from my animated production company logo and a couple of CG smoke shots. As Rodriguez has always said, it’s great if you can be both creative and technical at the same time, because it’s really empowering. Best case scenario is that we get picked up by a distributor and some money becomes available for a professional sound mix in a proper facility. But until that happens, I’m just trying to do the best job I can on my home system.

What about audio effects?

The vast majority of the sound effects in “Throwback” are coming from Sound Dogs, a great US company you can buy sound effects from one by one, which to me makes more sense than spending thousands of dollars on a huge sound effects library you might only ever use a fraction of. So I’m mostly using Sound Dogs, but if I need a basic sound effect like a simple splash of water or something, I’ll just foley it myself and save money.

When making a horror movie there are a lot of little things that have to be done in post. Did you plan on that ahead of time?

Yes. There were a few shots where we knew there'd have to be a digital effect added later, so we'd film it in such a way that when the effect is added, it’ll blend perfectly with the background plate. You’ve got to plan ahead with your audio, too, by recording ambient sound you can use later to fill in any gaps in the soundtrack.

Do you plan on test screening the rough cut before doing your final cut or will it be straight to final cut?

I generally try to avoid showing people rough cuts unless they’re within my “inner circle.” When I screen my work, I prefer it to be as complete as it can possibly be so it's as close to my vision as possible. I don't want people to see a half-baked version of my film and judge it based on that. When people start seeing the movie at preview screenings in a few months’ time, they’ll be seeing something extremely close to my final cut.

I do not know what distribution is like in your country, but the options have grown here in North America. For a micro budget film many of us look to Video of Demand (VOD) and itunes rather than considering theatrical release. Did you have distribution in mind before you started production?

Definitely. The whole reason for making a genre film in the first pace, apart from the fact that I love them and they’re fun, is because they’re the easiest types of films to find distribution. Horror movies sell well, and they probably always will, because there’s a huge market for them, so it was kind of no-brainer to make one as my second feature. I found out the hard way, from making my first feature “Scratched”, that modest little comedy-dramas shot on Mini DV with unknown actors have basically zero chance of finding a distributor.

What are the distribution plans?

The first phase of our strategy is to hit the film festivals. We want “Throwback” to tour the film festival circuit and be seen by audiences and generate buzz. Film festivals offer great exposure, so that’s our first port of call. We’ve already had interest from two of the world’s biggest ones, which is really cool. After a few festival screenings, if the movie is received well, we hope to be in a position to sign with a sales agent, who can then pick up “Throwback” and run with it, and hopefully help us sell it to some distributors around the world. I’d love to be able to sell the film to every major territory around the world. It’s a very Australian film but its also got universal appeal as an action/adventure story, and because it doesn’t have too much dialogue, it would be quite straightforward to subtitle or dub for foreign territories. A theatrical release would be a dream come true but we’re realistic about our chances. It’s very expensive to release films theatrically. Sometimes even movies with well-known stars go straight to video, or if they do go to cinemas, they only make a few thousand bucks. To be honest, I’d be more than happy just to see “Throwback” released on DVD and Blu-ray. A multi-platform release would be ideal. VOD is an interesting new market, but I don’t want to limit the film’s chances to just that market. I think the vast majority of people still prefer to watch movies at home on DVD o Blu-ray, so in that regard, I would love to see “Throwback” end up on shelves in places like Blockbuster and Target. Our 1080p imagery is going to look beautiful on the average HDTV. With the success of Fincher’s Netflix series “House of Cards”, I think VOD is a promising new outlet for long-form TV series, and I myself am very interested in getting into mini-series down the track, but for feature films, I don’t think cinemas or optical discs are going anywhere just yet. People love to watch big movies on big screens, plus going to the cinema is a fun social experience. As long as morons with mobile phones don’t spoil it.

What is next?

I’m developing a slate of projects for different budget levels. So if “Throwback” is a success and someone offers me a million dollars to make a movie, I have a script we can do for a million, or if they offer me five million, I have one we can do for five million. It’s a bit of a mixed bag. One is kind of action/horror inspired by Lovecraft, another is action/sci–fi and another one is a remake of a classic adventure story. By the same token, if someone offers me some other project to do, I’d definitely consider it. There are also novels I’d love to adapt, like Richard Preston’s “The Cobra Event.” I’d love to remake John Boorman’s film “Hell in the Pacific.” Even a big-screen version of an ’80s TV show, like “Battlestar Galactica” or “Knight Rider” would be great fun. What film I make next will depend entirely on how much money’s available and who’s willing to back me. But I’ll be aiming for the stars, so even if I fall short, I might still hit the moon.

Do you plan on specializing in one genre?

No, I want to mix things up like Kubrick or Fincher or Danny Boyle. I'd love to bounce around different genres. I'm very keen to do action, sci-fi, fantasy, crime, horror and blends of those genres like action-comedy and that sort of thing. I want to take my films to conventions like Comic Con and mingle with my fellow geeks!

You know once you do a horror film or sci-fi it is hard not to be classified as a horror film maker. Ridley Scott has done almost every type of film, but people hear his name and think Alien or Blade Runner first. The only film maker that I am aware of who ever managed not to be classified as a type was the great Robert Wise. He did everything from The Day the Earth Stood Still, Run Silent Run Deep, West Side Story, The Haunting to Star Trek. Is it possible to do any type of film you wish? Or do you look forward to being the master of a genre?

I think if you get enough clout you can do any movie you want, but even then it’s not always guaranteed. Apparently Michael Bay, one of the world’s most successful filmmakers, had to make the third Transformers movie so he could do his own personal project, “Pain & Gain.” You’d think a guy like that would be able to just pick any project he wanted, but I guess not. Even in Hollywood, money’s tight these days. Mind you, though, I don’t have any deep desire to do un-commercial, experimental films anyway. At this point I just want to make a variety of genre films right now, whether it be horror, sci-fi, action, fantasy or some sort of hybrid. That’s what I love about John Carpenter’s career—he’s never gone and made a boring Thomas Hardy adaptation or whatever, he’s jumped around between horror, sci-fi and kept it fresh. I remember seeing “Big Trouble in Little China in 1986” and thinking, “Wow, what is this?” And I’m sure people felt the same way when they first saw “Halloween” in 1978. As for “The Thing”, well, people just didn’t know what the hell to make of that back in 1982. It was ahead of its time. So yeah, if I can make another genre film after “Throwback”, I’ll be extremely happy. There are lots of new HD cameras out that I want to test. I don’t even care if I can’t afford an Alexa or a RED, I’d be happy to shoot my next movie on a Panasonic GH3 or the new Blackmagic Design 4K camera. If I can shoot cool shit and get paid for it, that’s all that matters to me.

Take a moment to share this post with a friend and to add us to your google plus.

Digital Feature Filmmaking With The HV20 Part1

Digital Feature Filmmaking With The HV20 Part1.

I hope that this will end up being a three part series on a feature film shot with the Canon HV20. If you are a regular reader of this blog they you know that I have my favorites and of all the consumer camcorders ever made my favorite is the HV20. This camcorder along with its big brothers the Canon HV30 and HV40 were well on their way to becoming a staple of micro budget film making and then the Dslr revolution hit. People quickly jumped ship and this camera sort of got lost in the shuffle.

I am here to remind the film maker that is just starting out that there are advantages to using a camcorder to shoot your first digital feature film.

The first and most important advantage is that it is designed to shoot video.

The Dslr cameras even with their hacks are at heart stills cameras. That is what they were designed to do. They do a great job at it and can shoot awesome video, but you have to work hard to do this.

Second there is the price. Camcorders like the HV series cost less. And can recorder for a much longer time. You can have your camera and be ready to shoot for less than three hundred dollars. And I am including extra batteries and dv tapes in that three hundred dollars.

Three and this is an important third, they are better at recording in camera sound. You can add a good mic and a sound mixer and get great sound that you will not have to sync later.
Let’s look at the production of a HV feature that was shot in Australia. This is the first part of an interview that I am conducting with the film maker.


Here is a look at the trailer for the Canon HV20 digital feature ThrowBack.

Here is the beginning of what I hope to be a three part interview with the talented film maker.


How did you pull it off and were you ever tempted to go with the crowd running head long of the Dslr cliff?

Using the HV20 for Throwback was mainly a question of economics. I had an extremely limited budget and it just made more sense to shoot with a camera and accessories that I already owned than spend thousands of dollars on a new camera, new lenses and all the add-on bits and pieces that I would've had to buy to go the DSLR route. I didn't want to hire a DSLR to shoot my film on because I believe an indie filmmaker should own their own gear. If you accidentally destroy or damage it, you only have yourself to answer to, but even beyond that, it's so incredibly helpful to have a camera with you 24 hours a day and know that if you need to go out and do reshoots or whatever, the camera's there, not rented out to someone else and unavailable. And I didn't know anyone in Cairns to borrow a DSLR from, because I was only fairly new in town, so it just made sense to shoot the movie on the camera that I'd already owned since 2007. I knew the HV20 was capable of stellar results so I wanted to push it to its absolute limits and get some amazing shots out of it, and I think we've achieved that. There are shots in the movie that aren't in the trailers which are just going to blow people away.


I kept an eye on the DSLR revolution and followed its progress, and it all looked very interesting to me, but there were other factors, besides the cost, that kind of put me off shooting on a DSLR initially. Throwback started production back in 2010, and back then, DSLRs were still plagued with problems like moire, line-skipping, poor dynamic range and rolling shutter artifacts like wobble and skew, which I hate. The HV20, on the other hand, wasn't a still camera that was being used to shoot video, it was a VIDEO camera that was designed for videographers, so it had a lot of features that you couldn't get (and still can't) on DSLRs, like zebras, a low-contrast cine mode, 3.5mm headphone and mic jacks, continuous autofocus (which I didn't use often but it was very handy for moving subjects as it's very hard to pull focus on an HV20), manual audio level controls and many others. Plus, in 2010, I kept reading horror stories about how DSLRs would overheat and break down, and because we were going to be filming in hot jungles, I knew I couldn't work with a camera like that because it would be too unreliable. And in fact, we actually shot a couple of night-time scenes on a Canon 5D MkII by firelight, because we needed the larger sensor, and all those horror stories came true because the camera kept overheating and shutting down all the time. But when I used the HV20, however, it very rarely gave me any hassles. It just made sense to use a camera that I'd already invested money in, in terms of not only the camera itself but also filters, lenses, accessories like a Hoodman LCD and so on.

Now, of course, the GH3 is here, which is probably the first stills camera designed specifically for videography, instead of a stills camera where video is an afterthought. It would've been cool to shoot on a hacked GH2, but as I mentioned, money was a big factor, and I decided that rather than spend more cash on camera gear, I should save that money and put it into something else instead, like props, costumes, road trips to cool locations and things like that. And I'm glad I did.

People look down on the HV20 now that the 7D and GH3 and so on are all dominating the indie filmmaking market, but they forget that the HV20 is still a great HD camera with excellent manual controls and, if you use a quality mic, great audio. It's basically just a cut-down XHA1, which was a great camera from Canon towards the end of the last decade. Obviously you can't achieve the same ultra-shallow depth of field on the HV20 that you can with a DSLR, but you can come close to it. On Throwback, I used numerous tricks to get my DOF as shallow as possible, including shooting wide open with a neutral density filter in daylight, and quite often zooming in slightly. As a result, you'll see shots in the movie which you would swear were shot with a DSLR, but no, they were done on the HV20 shooting a max aperture with an ND filter and a slight zoom factor. Exposure-wise, it was just a matter of letting the camera set the exposure and then dialling down the gain until I saw a pleasing image on the LCD screen. I just exposed everything by eye, and of course the zebras came in mighty handy too. I just tried not to let the highlights blow out and everything was hunky-dory. Prosumer cameras are always factory set to overexpose everything so you have to compensate for that in each shot, which is why the trailers for Throwback look like an actual movie and not home video. We also tried to avoid shooting in high-contrast situations wherever possible. Most of our filming days started at about 6am when the sun was still low in the sky and the light was soft. Magic hour. It works for Terrence Malick and it sure worked for us, too.

That is it for part one of this question and answer. Just remember we are talking about being digital feature film makers. The word digital being important. You do not need an expensive camera to shoot your micro budget film. You can do it with video camera and the price point for many of them are becoming more and more appealing. If you want to become a digital film maker go out and start shooting footage. Get use to using what ever camera you select and keep shooting. It is better to have a two hundred dollar camera or camcorder that you are familiar with rather than a two thousand dollar camera that you are afraid to touch. Digital Film making is about having fun, if you are not enjoying yourself then you are doing something wrong. You can do it with an iphone, a Sanyo, a 8mm camera, a Vixia Camcorder, a Dslr or a Red one.
Good luck guys. Please take a moment to share this post with a friend.

Digital Filmmaking, About Paying It Forward

            Digital filmmaking, Paying it Forward

    The thing that we do not do enough of is to just pay it forward. We make our films and are so self absorbed by the process that we do not think about those who will follow us. This is truly a shame since many of us did not attend film school, but learned how to do this from books, articles and online tutorials.

    If there is some behind the scenes footage included on a dvd it is usually silly out takes and the occasional interview with a cast member. Even voiceovers done by directors are largely wasted on everything, but the technical aspects of shooting the movie. I have learned more about shooting a movie from listening to directors like William Friedkin than I have from all the film making books that I have read.

    Today I would like to introduce you to a behind the scenes look at making of a very promising micro budget film. The basic background of this movie is that it was shot using a camera that has been brushed aside too quickly in everyone’s rush to embrace the Dslr revolution. Yes I know that you can make a kick ass movie shooting with a Canon 7d or my favorite a hacked panasonic Gh1, but you can also do some great work with the Canon HV series of cameras. Not only with the addition of a depth of field adapter, but with the bare camera.

    Below is the trailer for, plus behind the scenes footage,  a great looking Canon HV 20 film. I did not think that you could get footage this good looking from just the naked HV 20. I hope in future to interview the film maker and find out what went into the production of the film Throwback.

    Okay that is about it for today. Please guys take a moment to check out their channel on youtube and remember that any advice that we can give about lighting or editing or working with a crew may help someone who is just starting out.

    Last thing for today, I would like to add a coming attractions page, but to do this I could use some coming attractions or new releases to promote. I will put up a clip along with a link to your website or page. 
Just something to think about guys.

The GH1 camera.

                The Panasonic GH1, Hacking Away

    This is a pretty nice little camera that has been discontinued by the company and replaced by the GH2, which we will review in the future.

    Let us get right down to it.

    Is this camera in the same league as the Canon Dslr cameras?

    Well no, not it its standard form, but hell yeah once it has been hacked. Once it has been hacked you will have on your hands a digital filmmaking monster. I could tell you about how it stacks up to other dslr cameras or I could offer up a few reviews.

    First up is the Panasonic GH1 going head to head with the Canon Rebel T2i. I love the T2i, but dollar for dollar the GH1 can be gotten for a lower price new or used at some camera shops. I will offer up a link to at least 2 such shops.

    Here is the first tutorial.



    Next up is the GH1 going head to head with the work horse of the Canon family of Dslr cameras, the Canon 7d.  I thought that it would not measure up. Well guys I thought wrong. This camera takes no prisoners as it hacks away at the competition.



    Okay now that we have looked at these two matches. I am going to conclude with one tutorial on hacking the GH1, but before I do that just keep in mind that the camera is not as important as the lighting. You can shoot a great low budget or micro budget film with any of these cameras. With many of the pro-sumer camcorders. Your camera is still just a tool, but it does feel nice to have a super powerful one like this camera or its big brother the GH2.

    I am simply telling you that if you are going to buy your first Dslr or if you are looking to upgrade this is a camera to look at.

    What?

    I know the name of this site is Cannon digital film making. The name will not change. We are going to talk mostly about shooting with a Canon. The feature that I hope to shoot before the year ends is going to be shot on Canon equipment. That said, I am going to up grade to a GH camera in the future. I will get one because there will be scripts that demand a certain look. I will shoot with a camcorder when the script dictates it. Like most things in life the situation dictates what we do and when we do it and how we do it.

    Upcoming will be a post on the GH2 and further hacks.



    Final thing for today. I am still looking for more trailers for my trailer park. If any of you have a trailer posted on youtube that you wish for me to add drop me a note by leaving a comment and I will probably post the trailer. Maybe even do an interview. Good luck guys and remember us on stumbleupon and google plus.

Directing Part One

                The Director in You - Part 1

    Most likely you will be the director of your low to micro budget film. How well you do this job will be the one thing that impacts your movie more than anything else. This is the one part of the process where you are not held down by equipment or budget. You are as good as you are going to be at this moment in time.

    Picture this, a hack direct is a hack director whether he has a thousand dollars to spend on his first movie or a hundred million dollars. It will show through and no matter how good the camera or sound or acting is the director will be noted either positively or negatively.

    I believe that there are only three kinds of directors. Let us look at them.

    First is the Artist. I do not mean the silent film, I mean those special few who stand out from the crowd. The hated one percent who are gifted unlimited. I will name a few, Chaplin, Hitchcock, John Ford, David Lean, Woody Allen, Steven Spielberg, Scorsese, the Coen Brothers and Ridley Scott. If I included foreign directors I could list many more. The two I will mention are John Woo and Sergio Leone. Each director has a signature look and feel to their films. Watch three minutes and you know exactly who shot it. 

    The next level is the technician, these film makers are hard workers who get the job done. It is not always pretty, but they finish what they start. Some of the greatest films every made have been done by these guys.  Here is a list of some, Victor Fleming (Gone with the Wind and the Wizard of Oz) Robert Wise (The Day the Earth Stood Still, West Side Story, The Sound of Music), Billy Wilder, William Friedkin, Don Seigel (Dirty Harry Films, Charley Varrick, The Big Steal), George Lucas and James Cameron. You may disagree by saying that guy is an artist, that guy is a hack and that guy should be erased from history. Fine we can do a list someday and argue each and every choice, but for now let’s just go on.

    The last level is the Hack. For the sake of not getting hate mail I will not mention any of them (okay you forced me into this, they can blame you guys later for this one} Spike Lee is a hack. He should be hacking people home from grocery stores rather than making movies. The next crappy movie he makes will be the next crappy movie he makes. How about thee Gus Van Sant, overrated, smug and did I mention smug. Remake another Hitchcock film why don’t you and when you are done paint a better version of the Mona Lisa.  Ron Howard is not a total hack, but man he is great at stealing defeat from the jaws of victory. Ron close to being a good movie is not a good movie no matter what your friends in Hollywood tell you. I would rather have the Fonz direct a movie for me, I would go on, but your daughter is smoking hot so I am going to stop before I offend you. Not going to leave the women out of Hack territory. Jodie Foster is not very good. Jodie if you invite a guy into a dark theater for two hours with the promise of showing him a beaver you had better deliver more than the Road Warrior with Elmo attached to his wrist. Last is Sofia Coppola, she is a better actress than director. Do I have to say more?

    I know that this reads like my list of loves and hates, but it is not. I want to list you guys amongst the technicians and the artist and not the Hacks, but where you end up is really up to you. Digital feature filmmaking is not easy, but I hope at least a few of you will make it look easy.

    If you are an artist there is no advice for you here, you are gifted in ways that I can not begin to describe.

    If you are going to be a technician which is the majority of us who make low budget movies then my advice will be simple. Surround yourself with people who are better than you when ever possible. Better with lighting, better with sound and editing and better writers. Be a great listener. Part of leadership is not waiting to talk, but being eager to listen to everyone around you. Take advice seriously. This does not mean that you have to use it, but listen and absorb. People love to work for and with those who pay them some attention. Keep it basic. When shooting you do not have to do twenty takes and coverage from ten angles. Woody Allen rarely if ever does closeups and Clint Eastwood rarely does more than three takes of any scene. Have fun making the film and have fun with your crew. If you are very lucky you may do more than one feature film so treat this one as if it is your only child after all it might very well be. Never argue in front of your crew. Be the most enthusiastic person on the set at all times. If you are not who will be?

    Okay in part 2 and 3 of this we are going to look at styles of directing.

    Here is a sample of what I am going to explore. This is  Martin Scorsese’s signature editing style.

  

 

Okay that is it for now remember to stumble us on stumbleupon. To check out the trailer park and if you have a movie that you think should be included let me know, maybe we can include the short or trailer and do an interview about it. One last thing I opened with David Lynch for one reason he may be the only director on earth who manages to be all three types of directors in the same movie and or tv series.