Found Footage 3d Screening

For the found footage genre to survive some people are going to have to take risk. This film, Found Footage 3d, was a risk and so far if word of mouth can be believed then that risk has paid off. Check out the trailer and try to check out one of the upcoming screenings.





You can visit the official site by clicking here.   

FOUND FOOTAGE, THE STATE OF THE GENRE ADDRESS

 

What qualifies me to give the state of Found Footage film making address? 

Have I ever made one? 

God no.

 Would I make on? 

Sure, but not in the horror genre and not pure found footage. 

Now back to the address. I am qualified because I spend almost an entire year writing a book on the subject. I interview dozens of low budget filmmakers for the book and sat through almost two hundred found footage films. I am a found footage war vet. I am the American Sniper of found footage films. When one is about to come out I get sent trailers and screening passes. I watch the trailers and never go to the screenings. Well until I got a pass for the new Blair Witch. I try my best to encourage film makers and rarely criticize them, but in this case... WHAT THE HELL? Scream, fall down dead and get dragged away. Lucky we have multiple cameras present or else we would not be able to scream, fall down dead and get dragged away some more and more and more and again. We are talking Eat, Sleep, Suplex, repeat.

  

    

  The state of found footage on the big screen comes down to this that during the last three years the only film maker who cracked the code (I am from Philly and have seen the guy) is that legendary waster of movie goers time and studio's money M. Night. Yeah, The Visit points us in a direction that we needed to go if we are going to save this genre for future generation to suffer through. It works because it broke the unwritten rule about death. The leads do not have to die. The kids in that film survive because they behave like human beings, not puppets, when trouble strikes they actual use reason to survive it. I suppose that the lesson from the Visit takes us back to the first Blair witch Project. The movie is character-driven. The kids drive the film in the same way that heather drove the events in The Blair Witch. These two movies also have natural humor. Think about both films and I would bet that you can recall every major character in the films. Can you do that with any other found footage film? Maybe Paranormal activity, but come on there are only two real people in the first movie. Perhaps character driven is the way to go save this genre. 

 
 

  Found footage films are still films. To make a good found footage film you have to go out and make a good film that happens to be found footage. Go found footage only if it enhances the story like in the movie End of Watch. Remember there is also the footage film where no one was harming during the making of the film. With the ability to shoot world class footage with a smartphone the possibilities are endless. To conclude this post I believe that going back into the past to try to copy the success of the Blair Witch Project was a tactical mistake that will hurt the genre in the short term while looking into the past for inspiration in the form of another new film could be part of the answer.  Operation Avalanche.

 

The Footage Film and The Year To Come

                    The Footage Film and The Year To Come

    This is going to be a quick post. First I would like to thank everyone who have made this digital film making  site a regular part of their lives. I would like to invite you guys to add me to your google plus. At Google plus you will get updates on everything I post here, plus at my other blogs.

    The first thing that I would like to share is a film that I really like. I wish that I had an interview to go with it. This would have been part of the found footage series. It is what I like to call a Footage film. The footage is delivered by the person who shot it rather than haven been found later. the title is Out of Court.



    Next I would like to tell you about the coming year. We are going to look at some new cameras and free editing software in the months to come. I am finishing up the first page of showreels for actors and actresses, I will be posting it soon. I believe that the theme for the year 2015 will be fan films and sci-fi. If you guys have seen a really good fan film let me know and I will see if I can get an interview with the film maker.

Okay that will be it for today. I will be leaving you with a great little iphone film from India that I came across a few weeks ago and a request that you guys check out my new book that I just published. It is a collection of my three books on digital film making and screen writing.

Part 2, Found Footage 3D Interview

To learn how to support the Indiegogo campaign for the film Found Footage 3D  please click here.

If you would like to follow this campaign on Facebook click here.

No preamble today, this is the second part of the interview with Steven DeGennaro.



Q) Clearly Scream was an influence on the making of this film. The reason I have gone down this road with found footage films is that just when I am ready to throw in the towel and move onto a subject like fan films a movie comes along and gives me hope that there could be something special here. Movies like End of Watch which is not a found footage film, but mimics elements of one and shows me a possible future path for the genre. There are films like The Frankenstein Theory that was fun to watch up until the young doctor Frankenstein decides that it would be a good idea to go and try to talk a ten foot tall homicidal monster out of murdering the rest of his friends. (Spoiler alert, talking softly to someone nicknamed the Monster usual ends badly.) Recently I saw a great film titled Out of Control from the UK. It was shot in the found footage format, but it was a domestic drama instead of a horror film. There is always something like Cannibal Holocaust or Rec 2 to show how good it can get when done well. What found footage films have influenced you?

A) There’s nothing quite like the granddady of them all, The Blair Witch Project.  One of the most effective horror movies of all time, and a completely new experience.  There are people who claim now that it’s only really remembered because it was the first, but I re-watch it once a year or so and it’s just a really, really well-told story and so effective.

For my money, the greatest found footage film of all time is Gareth Evans’ segment from V/H/S/2, “Safe Haven”.  That is as nearly perfect as a short horror film can possibly be.  I love The Sacrament, which has a very similar feel in a lot of places.  I’ve never really understood all the hate that Ti West’s segment in the original V/H/S gets.  That short, to me, really nails what I love about found footage, which is how completely real it feels.  So when you realize that really awful things are about to befall a very real couple, it’s a thousand times more terrifying to me than every ghost story that Hollywood has ever put out combined.

There’s a really obscure film called Skew that also does the same thing very effectively.  This movie was actually made before Paranormal Activity, but didn’t get picked up until much later, which is a shame, because it’s so good.

I totally agree with you about The Frankenstein Theory, which was really well done up until the last ten minutes or so.

Overall, I like movies that really commit to the premise.  I enjoyed Cloverfield and Chronicle and [Rec] and movies like that, but they don’t have the same sort of visceral punch as a movie that really works hard to convince you that it’s real; not necessarily on an intellectual level, but on a visceral one.

Q) In your videos for your film you talk about practical effects. I have always thought that if it is real on the set then it looks real to the audience. I believe that is laziness more than money that makes beginning film makers use cheap CGI for blood, bullet wounds and even scars. I don’t mind CGI for background, it was done well in Gladiator to reproduce ancient Rome and it is done well in the tv series Gotham for making elements of a city that does not exist. How important were practical effects to the making of your film?

A) There’s nothing at all lazy about making any movie, I can assure you, especially a low-budget one.  It’s a grueling process that often takes years to bring to fruition and requires dozens if not hundreds of people working together seamlessly as a unit to pull off.  So I certainly understand where filmmakers are coming from when they decide to use CG instead of practicals a lot of the time.  It’s not about laziness.  It’s definitely about budget, and about control over the final product.

Actually shooting the film is the most costly part of the process.  Every hour you spend on set you are paying dozens of people, most of whom are sitting around waiting at any given time.  So a practical effect that takes time to set up or reset between takes can get very costly very quickly, completely independent of how much the effect itself costs. When you compare that to one or two guys pushing pixels in a studio four months later, you can often get much more bang for your buck with digital.

But as will all things in filmmaking, it requires talent, planning, a lot of work, and a little luck to make any effect work.  Ultimately, CGI is a tool, and like any tool, it has its uses.  I wouldn’t use a hammer to cut a piece of paper, and I wouldn’t use a wrench to drill a hole in something.  It’s all about figuring out which tool works for which problem, within the confines of what you can afford.

So yes... it was very important to me to do as many of the effects practically as we were able to do.  But I didn’t let that stop me from deciding to use CGI where appropriate, either by itself or to enhance the practical effects.  Gore effects rarely look good when they are all CGI, unless you are wiling to spend a lot of money.  But practical effects sometimes don’t work right, and you end up having to fix it later because the sun is coming up and you have to get your shot, one way or another.  That’s a big part of the reason we are doing this Indiegogo campaign: to fix one practical effect that looked awesome when we tested it, but—through no fault of anyone in particular—just didn’t work on the day.  So my choices were either: a) live with the really bad practical effect, b) do a really cheap CGI effect that would look just as bad, or c) spend the time and money to do the CGI right.  I want (c).







Q) You are in the Post stage of your production. This is the most overlooked part of the film making process. Only when the final shoot has been recorded do many first time film makers realize that the hardest part is actually ahead of them. This being your first 3D film were you prepared for the challenges that you are now facing?

A)We did a proof-of-concept in 2013 to test out a lot of the really difficult stuff, especially with regards to the 3D aspect.  So we really worked out a lot of the kinks by going through that process.  We made a ton of mistakes and we learned from them, so we went into the feature with our eyes open.

That said, we still have a long way to go before we’re done.  But I’ve found in making my movies that my complaints in post-production are rarely technical, but usually artistic.  I find myself wishing I had directed an actor differently, or shot something from a different angle, or gotten more coverage of a scene.  Some of those things can be fixed with reshoots and ADR and visual effects, but some of them you have to live with.

I’m getting to the point now in editing the film, especially with the ability to take a few weeks away from it while I concentrated on the Indiegogo campaign, where I’m starting to forget the movie that I intended to shoot and starting to see the movie that I actually shot.  So instead of being about, “Oh, I wish I had done this thing better,” it’s more about “How do I make the best film possible with the materials I have at hand?”

I’m usually my own harshest critic.  But overall, I’m very happy with how the movie is shaping up.  When we’ve shown it to people, they’ve largely laughed in the right places and gasped in the right places, they like the characters, and they come out of it satisfied.  So I think we’re on the right track.






Q) Film makers do what has been done before because it is easy to market. You open a pizza shop and sell the same kinds of pizza as all the others because you do not have to educate a public about a new thing. Found footage shot as 3D is a new thing. You are basically going to be the first person to market stuffed crust pizza. How long did you prep for the marketing challenges?

A) Ugh... this has been the greatest blessing and the greatest curse at the same time.  So many people see the title and they assume that we are making a gimmick, not a movie.  They expect Sharknado, which is a funny concept that’s basically unwatchable as an actual film.  So we have a real uphill battle trying to educate people about what we are trying to do.

We started our marketing efforts very early, and I’m really glad we did.  Aside from amassing more than 25,000 fans before people had even seen a single frame of the finished film, we’ve also been able to really hone our message and figure out how to sell the film to audiences.

I decided to make this movie because I love found footage, and I hate the way that it has become a bit of a joke because there are so many people who are so bad at it who keep flooding the market with crap.  I really feel like it’s exactly the right time for a movie like ours, and that it will appeal to people who love found footage, as well as those who think it’s overdone.  If I can get that message out, I think we’ll do fine.

Ultimately, the movie will speak for itself. If it’s good, people will tell their friends and more people will see it.  Hopefully, it will be good when we are done.

Q) Any advice for future film makers? Particularly those who are going to attempt to jump the found footage hurtle?

A) Don’t.  Found footage is a really tough sell these days precisely because so many people are trying to do it, and so many of them are failing at it.  So unless you have a truly killer idea for something new and original, it’s probably a genre that, at least for the next few years, it’s better to stay away from.  I realize that may sound a little hypocritical coming from a guy who is making a found footage movie, but it’s the truth.

Ultimately any movie is about telling a good story.  And if you are a good storyteller, you will find people who are willing to go along with you on a journey, whether they be actors, investors, crew, producers, etc...  So the best advice I can give—if I’m even qualified for such a thing—is to hone your craft.  Work on as many movie sets as you possibly can and watch and learn from people who really know what they are doing (as well as from the people who clearly don’t know what they are doing).  Go out and make short films.  Get good at it, first.  Then try to make a feature.

Found footage is so tantalizing to first-time filmmakers because it looks easy.  It’s not.  Found footage is not some shortcut where you get to bypass all the essential things you need to know to make a decent film—acting, writing, pacing, camerawork, editing, sound, etc.  There’s a reason why you have to prove that you are good at those things before anyone will give you money to make a real feature.  So get good at those things.  If you think you are capable of making a good feature film, and you have a story that you think is worth telling, then it doesn’t matter whether it’s found footage or not.  It doesn’t matter whether it’s going to cost ten thousand, a hundred thousand, a million, or ten million.  If you’ve proven that you are capable of pulling it off, then people will help you achieve that goal. If you haven’t proven yourself capable of those things, then you have no business wasting everyone’s time and money.

I just happened to want to tell this story, and it happened to be found footage.  If I’d had a more traditional story to tell, I would have worked just as passionately to make that happen, and probably a lot of the same people would have come along for the ride with me.

Ultimately, there is no substitute for hard work, talent, and experience.  If you don’t have those three things, wait until you do.  Because you rarely get a second chance in this business.  Make it count.

Thank you again Steven and good luck with the campaign and the film.

     Okay guys that is it for today please take a moment to like this post on Stumbleupon and to share it with a friend. In closing I would like to add Steven's award winning comedy short film First Date.





 

Found Footage 3D, The Interview PART 1

This is going to be a two part interview with Steven DeGennaro, the film maker behind Found Footage 3D. At the moment he is in the middle of a Indiegogo campaign for his film. If you would like to check out the campaign you can do so by clicking here.   In you wish to know more about the project you can visit the website by clicking here.

If you thought that making a found footage film is easy I think that you are about to lose some of your illusions. It is easy to make a movie. Record ninety minutes of footage and cut it together and you got a movie. The problem is that making a good movie requires much more than this. It requires months and in some cases years of planning. Followed by endless weeks of shooting and re-shooting and then the hard work begins, it is called post production. I have interviewed a guy who shot a film in a day, I have seen it and it was not very good. I interviewed the director of Joker Rising which was shoot in six days ( shoot in six days, but there were months of pre and post production) and many believe that it is the best fan film ever made. You can shoot, edit and distribute a movie with your iphone, this does not mean that if you wish to be a film maker, whether found footage, epic fantasy or straight drama you do not need to learn all that you can about writing, lighting, editing and a hundred other things that go into making a great film. I know that many readers have taken the found footage series of post lightly while planning to shoot their own found footage films. If you plan to do it as a hobby then take to it any way you wish, but if this is going to be your profession then invest the time and effort to learn how to do it as well as possible.

Let’s get to part one of a two part interview.






Q) You are in the middle of an Indiegogo campaign for your 3D found footage film.
What is the plot and what will make it different from the other found footage films out there?

A) Found Footage 3D tells the story of a group of filmmakers who go out to a cabin the woods of Central Texas to shoot “the first 3D found-footage horror movie”, but end up in a found footage horror movie when the evil entity from their film starts showing up in their behind-the-scenes footage.  What Scream did for slasher movies, we aim to do for found footage.  Like Scream, our characters know all of the rules, tricks, and clichés of the genre, and we use that structure to comment on and poke fun at the tired tropes of found footage, while at the same time, turning them on their heads and executing an effective scary movie.

Q) Hollywood uses 3D as a way of milking more cash out of audiences for its tent pole films, with the occasional film that was meant to be seen in this format like Avatar and Inception. I would image that in this case 3D has been selected for the effect that it will have on the audience rather than any box office concerns?

A)The 3D is an essential part of the storytelling, for me.  We certainly didn’t undertake the decision lightly.  So on the most basic level, we’re shooting in 3D because the lead character of our movie, a charismatic but ultimately soulless movie producer, decides that if he shoots “the first 3D found footage horror movie,” he will make a killing at the box office.  So right away, we’re almost sort of making fun of ourselves for doing the same thing.

But at the same time, once we had given ourselves a good reason to do it, I decided very early on that we had to do some cool stuff with it.  And found footage—especially a movie about people who are making a movie—allows us to do some things that no one has ever seen before.  We have the practically limitless depth-of-field of a consumer camcorder, which means that rather than having the subject be in focus, and everything in front or behind him being out of focus, the viewer can choose what he or she wants to focus on in any given shot.  That allowed us to really compose shots with a ton of depth in them, with multiple layers, rather than just “here’s an actor; here’s a bunch of fuzzy stuff behind him.”

Also, because our villain is itself a creation of the very footage it inhabits, it can do things within the footage that wouldn’t necessarily make sense in a more traditional movie.  Things like moving from one screen to another as people watch footage on a monitor, or appearing differently in one eye than in the other.  That kind of stuff.



Q) There are a few ways to shoot a 3D movie. The easiest is to set up two identical cameras side by side and in post blend the footage to produce a 3D image. What types of cameras did you use to shoot the film? Also when shooting on a budget, you sometimes have to trade the camera that would be perfect for the job for what you can afford. Any cameras that you wanted that you just could not afford?

A)The beauty of found footage (from a budgetary point of view) is that you get to shoot on cheaper cameras. Indeed, in my opinion, to really do it right, you are required to shoot on cheaper cameras.  There’s a certain aesthetic that’s required in found footage.  If it looks too nice, then it works against your suspension of disbelief.  I’ve seen found footage movies that were clearly shot on state-of-the-art big-budget cameras with full Hollywood lighting, and then the character looks at himself in a mirror and you see this little dinky handheld camcorder and it pulls you out of the story because you know that camera couldn’t possibly look that good.

From even before we decided to shoot in 3D, I wanted the aesthetic of the film to be very lo-fi and real.  So when we made the decision to shoot in 3D, we did a bunch of research on readily-available 3D camcorders and we settled on the Panasonic z10000.  It’s a camcorder with two lenses side by side, and it operates more-or-less the same way any prosumer camcorder does, with the exception of being able to change the convergence of the 3D effect (which can further be tweaked in post as well).  So we bought 3 of them (two of which appear in the film, with a third as a back-up in case we broke one of the other two).

We also bought a 3D GoPro rig to shoot “surveillance” footage.  Because of the wide-angle lens and the fact that the cameras are not necessarily 100% aligned when you shoot, that footage was a little more difficult to deal with in post, but it looks really cool when we’re done.  Again, this is something that most people have never seen before.

Q) The found footage genre is the genre that has experienced the most growth during the last two years while also receive the most hate from hardcore film goers. For every Paranormal Activity, there are five films like Crowsnest, Area 407 and Devil’s Due.  Can this genre make it long term or are we talking disco?

A) We live in a time where everybody in the Western world carries a camera in their pocket at all times.  One hundred hours of footage are uploaded to YouTube every single minute.  The news, our Facebook feeds, our Twitter feeds, and TV news are filled with footage shot by everyday people.  Terrorists upload videos of beheadings.  Protestors film cops. Cops film car chases.  Surveillance cameras watch a lot of what we do in public spaces.  Journalists and citizens alike film war and political unrest across the world.

So no... I don’t think that the idea of telling a story through the eyes of one of the characters in that story is a style that is going to go away anytime soon.

Q) The thing unique to the found footage genre is how so many of the film makers that I have interviewed approach the writing of their films in totally different ways. Film maker A may write a complete screenplay in standard format. Film maker B may craft an outline of scenes and piece it together in rehearsals. Film maker C comes up with a title, a basic beginning middle and end point and allows his or her actors to improvise the film from that point on. What approach did you take to crafting the screenplay?

A) I admire the balls it takes to go into a situation where you don’t know the story, you don’t have the beats of a scene in mind, you make everything up pretty much on the fly.  That’s how they did Blair Witch, which is still, in my opinion, one of the best horror movies ever made.  They got great results, and they also spent a hell of a lot of time crafting the movie in the editing room.  But it could just as easily been a complete disaster, and unfortunately, for many filmmakers, that’s exactly what happens.

At the same time, if you over-plan, you end up with something that starts to feel rehearsed and stilted, and you lose the realness that found footage relies on for a lot of its best moments.  So I didn’t want to necessarily script out everything.

So the screenplay was a constantly evolving process for me that took over two years from initial idea to the time we rolled cameras.  My first few drafts left a lot of detail—particularly the dialog—intentionally vague.  I think it came in at about 60 pages or so.  But then people had a hard time really envisioning the characters and the finished movie in their heads, and that made it difficult to get certain people—like Kim Henkel and some of our investors—on board.

So I went through and I wrote out a lot of the dialog, knowing that I was going to eventually scrap a lot of it once we were on set.  I’m glad I did, though.  In fleshing out the beats of each scene, I was able to connect more with who the characters were, which helped a lot in casting the film and in shooting it on a really tight schedule.




Q) Where and how did you find your actors and did you give them any room to improvise during shooting?

A)The most important thing for me was to make sure that the characters never felt like they were saying lines.  So the actors had free reign to use their own words any time they wanted to.  At the same time, because a large number of the scenes had to play out in long single takes from a single camera, I couldn’t let them just meander around a scene for hours and hope to fix it in the editing room.

So the first thing we did was spend three days on the set—just me, the actors, and the director of photography—talking through and rehearsing each scene.  The beats of every scene were there in the script, but they had a lot of room to improvise around those beats.  We used the rehearsal process to figure out what scenes and lines were really working, and which ones weren’t, and I went and did some rewrites based off of that.  That allowed us to show up on set and shoot very very quickly, because we’d already worked out a lot of the kinks beforehand.

During the shoot, we then didn’t do many additional rehearsals right before shooting, so that the actors could keep fresh and be spontaneous.  Often they’d nail it on take 1 or 2.  Sometimes, when we got to take 6 or 7, they’d start feeling too rehearsed, and we’d throw in a take or two where they got to completely toss out the script and have fun.  We very rarely used those takes in the finished film, but they usually loosened things up enough that the next take, which was much closer to the scripted scene, worked really well and found the perfect balance between improvisation and structure.

In the end, we had a mixture that was probably about 85% highly structured scenes with improvised dialog, 15% of what we called “marshmallow moments,” where we set up a scenario and the actors just freeformed it for ten or fifteen minutes and we jump cut the best parts, and then a rare scene or two where we ended up with the dialog very very close to what was written on the page.

It was a very unique way of working, and it never would have worked if the actors we got weren’t so damn good at it.  We went through a pretty traditional casting process. I spent several months watching audition tapes—I eventually saw over a thousand auditions from over ten thousand submissions—and then we had in-person callbacks for my favorites for each role, where I got to see them with the other actors.  It was actually very easy to eliminate about 80% of the hopefuls right away, because despite explicit instructions that I wanted them to use their own words and not stick to the script, most actors just can’t pull that off.  They either stick exactly to the script, or they improvise and are just really, really bad at it.

In the end, we ended up with six lead actors that had amazing chemistry together and were really great at exactly the kind of improv we needed for the film to work.




         Thank you for visiting and please take a moment to stumble this post on Stumbleupon and to share it with a friend. Again if you would like to support the this campaign click here.

New Found Footage From Eduardo Sanchez

New Found Footage From Eduardo Sanchez

Today I would like to continue my series of post on found footage with a look at the newest film from one of the directors who is most responsible for the popularity of the genre. The found footage genre would not be what it is without Eduardo Sanchez and the Blair Witch Project. A generation of film makers have followed in the footsteps of this film maker and his film. Some would argue that this is not a good thing, but it is something that is going to be around. It is part of the film making landscape.

Take a look at the trailer for the new found footage film Exists.

 

This is a interview done with Eduardo Sanchez about his upcoming film. I would like to thank Monster Movie Talk for this interview.

 

Thank you for visiting. Please add me to your google plus. A quick note to film makers reading this. I am always looking for topics and interviews you can contact me by leaving a comment. Also I am going to be adding an acting reels page. If there are actors out there who are looking for work in low budget films (no pay, plenty of credit) send me a link and I will post it. So many great actors are looking for work and so many film makers are settling for who ever shows up. A superior actor can raise the quality of a micro budget film.

Found Footage Summer Trailers

 
This summer looks to be the biggest yet for the found footage genre. Both the larger budget type that will make it to theaters and a few that will end up in the VOD world.

The more I learn about these movies the more hope that I have for their future. Film makers are adapting and growing the genre in interesting new ways. The formula for these types of films is being abandoned and something that has been referred to the Footage film is creeping into the genre. In a footage film, footage is recorder, but those doing the recording do not have to die in the end. They can survive, they can go one and they can even become the ones who publish the footage to the world.

 Also digital film makers are looking to devices like the iphone and the gopro to capture their footage.

 Let’s have a look at the first found footage film that I am going to be showing you. This a horror film titled As Above, So Below.


 

 The next trailer is for the horror film Afflicted.



  Now we move on to a mega summer release and since it stars children I am sure that it will not even up being a found footage film. Hollywood does not allow you to take out any little monster under the age of twelve or so, that was the reason why The Devil’s Backbone was shot in Europe. Most of you have seen the Trailer for Earth to Echo.





   The last trailer for today is a little horror movie from Europe. I hope to get an interview with the director during the next week or so. The trailer is for The Pigman Murders.


 


  

 That will be it for today. Please take a moment to stumble this site on Stumbleupon and to share it.


  

"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.

Throwback and Other Updates

                    Throwback and Other Updates

    This is a quick update on the Canon HV 20 feature film Throwback. The film has been selected to screen at the Famous Monsters Film Festival in San Jose, California. Below you can seen the new poster art of the film.

    I think far too many film makers rush their trailers out there and do not take the time to get a great poster done. Which is part of the overall marketing campaign you should have in place before you start shooting. Stills from your film along with the poster can be used very effectively to market your film on sites like Pinterest. There are tens of thousands on film buffs and fans on that site and their reach has yet to be fully exploited by film makers. Something to think about.

    The found footage series of post is not done. There are at least three more interviews still to be posted. After that we are probably going to be looking at digital film making and shooting a web series. A lot of film makers are going the web series route rather than shooting a feature. Also the web series can get you access to acting talent who may not want, for what ever reason, to shoot a feature with an unproven film maker.

Now I would like to show a few trailers that I find interesting. Two of which are from active Kickstarter campaigns.



  
Thank you for visiting my site. Please take a moment to add me to your google plus.

 
 

Found Footage, Night of the Vampire

  

    Today I will be continuing my series of post and interviews concerning the subject of
Found Footage film making. I realize that there are many film makers who look down upon the genre of found footage films in the same way that horror and sci-fi has been looked down upon for decades. Like all other genres of film when these films are done well they can stand side by side with films from any other genre. When done poorly, usually for the money, they can turn out as bad as films in any other genre.

    Keep in mind that there is no one great genre of film making that towers over the others nor should you ever feel as if you are slumming it because you are doing a film is a particular genre. Dramas usually win the big awards, but I would argue that they are the ones most likely to bore an audience to tears. I believe that films should be entertaining. Going out and shooting a film on purpose that is not entertaining is like making a meal that is not tasty. Found footage can, in the right hands, be very entertaining. The short film that is the subject of this interview is just that.

    The award winning short film Night of the Vampire from the talented film maker
 Owen Mulligan is a great little horror film.

    This is my interview with Owen.

Q) I suppose the first and most obvious question has to be what is Night of the Vampire about?

A) Basically, Night of the Vampire follows two guys who go on an overnight hike in the remote wilderness of Vermont but end up fighting to survive after encountering a strange creature with an appetite for blood.

Q) Seeing a short and tight film in the found footage genre is the exception and not the rule. Tell me what made found footage the choice?

A) I’m a huge fan of found footage. I think that most found footage is horrible though but when it’s done right, I really love the genre. Anyway, this was my chance to do one of my own and see what it would be like and if I’d be any good at it. I really enjoying shooting found footage and especially because I can shoot without a crew and with a minuscule budget. The pseudo-reality of it all is what really excites me though.

Q) I have always been a fan of the vampire film. For the sake of chasing huge profits the classic vampire film has been replaced by brooding teenage boys covered in glitter. The short glimpse of your vampire looks like you went back in time to the classic look favored by F.W. Murnau. If you had gone feature length would you have shown more of your vampire or would you have left it mostly to the imagination?

A) If Night of the Vampire had been made as a feature, yes, I would have shown more of the Vampire but very carefully with only glimpses. Our vampire was definitely inspired by Nosferatu and creating an animal vampire that was the opposite of the Twilight monstrosities. Anyway, I could definitely have a lot of fun making a full length found footage film about vampires. I’d love to expand the lore.

Q) I am doing a series of interviews and post on the subject of found footage film making and the question that seems to get different answers each time is about rehearsing the cast. Did you spend much time rehearsing before shooting or did you jump right in?

A) I always rehearse the cast and I always leave room for improvisation during the actual shoot. We will do one rehearsal and then I go back to the screenplay and make adjustments because a lot of issues and ideas always surface during that time. This is a must for me when doing found footage or any film actually. It also saves a lot of time during actual production.

Q) The found footage genre has become a part of the film making world largely due to the possible return on investment. When these movies hit they hit big like in the case of The Blair Witch, Paranormal Activity and The Devil Inside. Having shoot a short on that has won awards. Do you plan on returning to the genre with a future project? Also do you believe that the genre can survive if it does not expand to include comedy, action, suspense and even straight drama?

A) Yes, I have a new found footage film coming out to our YouTube channel this October 27th, 2014 which I collaborated on with Haunted Vermont and Obscure Vermont. It’s called Dead Static which is an anthology containing three pieces of footage recovered from some of the most haunted places in Vermont. The tales include Emily’s Bridge, Green Mount Cemetery and The Pittsford Haunted House. I shot all three tales on location, which was creepy as Hell. I also tried a lot of new things with this film so we’ll see what happens.

I think the found footage genre can definitely survive without expanding into other genres. It has a huge following of dedicated fans just like the slasher genre does. In my opinion, it’s not going away.

Q) What did you use to shoot the film with? How did it handle the job and have you continued to use that camera?

A) I used a Panasonic HMC150 which is a great camera with good low light sensitivity but for doing found footage out in the middle of nowhere it was simply too big and heavy. At the time, it was all I had access to but the Canon XA10 would have been the camera of choice. On my upcoming film, Dead Static, I was able to finally get access to that camera and it definitely made shooting found footage easier due to its small, lightweight design.

Q) One of the biggest problems encountered by indie film makers is the problem with capturing quality sound especially outdoors, what did you use to record sound with and did you have to do any cleaning up in post?

A) I used a variety of mics during production. A Sennheiser ME66 shotgun and a Sony lavalier mic. I also used a Zoom H4n to capture some audio as well depending on the scene. Sound was extremely difficult to say the least. I did have to clean up some audio in post here and there but a lot of sound design went into the film, which also helped.

Q) Thanks to the drop in the cost of quality equipment such as cameras and editing software the over all cost of indie films is dropping. What was the budget for this short film?

A) The budget is estimated to be about $400. It was one of our least expensive films.

Q) Are you a formally trained film maker or did you learn as many of us have learned, through actually shooting and cutting our own projects?

A) I’m a self-taught filmmaker with a strong distaste for film schools. I’m all about education and learning the rules just not the way many people are brainwashed into thinking it must be done. I’d rather read and study at my own pace from all the information that is freely available via the Internet. There are also so many great books out there you can learn from, it’s endless. Why drop God knows how much money into a film school? In this day and age, it doesn't make sense to me.

Q) Being an indie film maker means wearing all of the hats that we cannot find someone else to put on at any given moment. I looked at the credits from your new short film. I see that you were nearly a one person film crew?

A) Yes, and not something I will repeat again. With future projects, at least ones that are shot in a traditional style, I will not shoot unless I have enough help on crew. 

Q) Is there a feature film in future?

A) That is hard to say. The landscape seems to be changing and not into one that seems favorable to that format at least at the independent level. I’d do one if a larger production company or producer was to hire me though. I think at my resource level right now that I would not attempt one but I would love to do a feature at some point in my life.

Q) Any final thoughts or advice for the beginning film maker?

A) Make shorts, experiment and don’t be afraid to fail. Learn everything you can and always work to improve. Patience is key.




     Thank you Owen for doing this interview. I look forward to seeing your next project. If you would like to see and to learn more about Owen's work you can click here..   To conclude I would like to offer your last short film, with director’s commentary. I wish more indie film makers would post versions of their work with directors commentary. There are so many little trick of the trade and shortcuts that are learned during a low budget shoot that you can share through a commentary track.

     Okay that will be it for today. Please take a moment to share this post with a friend and to add me to your google plus. Again I am looking for trailers to post in my trailer park. If you have one for your upcoming film or know of one you can let me know about it by leaving a comment or contacting me through google plus.

Jessie’s Girl, The Interview

          
    My series of post on the subject of Found Footage films continues today. I would like to say that there is good and bad in ever genre of film making. Not since the days of the slasher film has there been a genre that has attracted so many low budget film makers. One could compare the found footage craze to that of the gold rush. Films have been shoot for less than fifty thousand dollars and gone on to make over one hundred million dollars. Those films are the Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity. The problem with this craze has been that far too many film makers have been copying rather than innovating. Films like End of Watch and Chronicle have taken the genre in new directions, but they are the exception and not the rule.

    The interview that I am going to present to you today is with AJ Forehand. She produced a great short film that I really thought stood out from the crowd.

    This is my interview with AJ Forehand. The subject is her Film Jessie’s Girl.


Q) I wanted to do a series of interviews on the subject of found footage style films. As we all know that during the past few years found footage has become a genre all its own. In preparation for this series of post and most likely an ebook to follow on the subject I have watch more than two hundred found footage films during this past year. Your movie Jessie’s Girl was one of the few that stood out regardless of budget. The first question I have to ask for those who have not seen it yet is what is the film about?

A) Jessie's Girl is about a camera. In the beginning of the film, a man named Allan gets a video camera from his friend (he gets it for the purpose of filming his son's birthday party). He immediately begins filming Butterfly from afar, a girl he's never met. He eventually builds up the courage to abduct her. She remains in the back of his van, going through various moments of torture and assault. In the end, after hours of being abused, Butterfly is tied up in the back of Allan's van awaiting her fate. When the true test of courage (and sadism) arrives, Allan underestimates Butterfly, and the camera is the only witness.



 Q) I have argued for a while that the genre will kill itself if it does not explore other areas that horror. Your film is a thriller. Was this a concussion choice or was this where the story took you?

A) That's a good question. In all honesty, the film evolved into what it became without any conscious choice of whether it would be a thriller or a horror film. I knew I wanted a strong female character and a large brute of a guy. I had never worked with these actors before and I wasn't sure how it would all come together in the editing booth, so as the script developed, I just went with it. I wanted to make my audience uncomfortable. By the way, did it have that affect on you?


Jessie's Girl from Amanda Forehand on Vimeo.


 Q) It has been said that cinema is a visual medium. It is an exercise in the art of showing rather than telling. You film stood out from many others because you told a story that was understandable even without the dialogue or sound. I watched it once with sound and then I watched it again on mute. The visual story telling in Jessie’s Girl is excellent. You achieved that and I want to know about the editing choices. Was it totally scripted this way or did it all come together in the editing? I should also ask who did the editing?

A) I edited the film. I love editing and every aspect of it. However, with Jessie's Girl, the script was carefully adhered to. I did not cut any of the dialogue. I work-shopped this script with my film production professor who was trained and educated at USC. From the day I met him, he beat it into my head that films are storytelling with pictures not words. He would say "This is too much dialogue; try to convey the same idea without words." Also, Allan's situation was not one that could be presented through too much dialogue, as it would have been him talking to his self, and though he clearly has some issues, I certainly was not trying to present him as irrational or insane. The scene with Allan's wife was added later and it was to create some inference of a motive, but I'm not sure it did that. It was filmed (weeks later) because in a screening of dailies, my fellow filmmakers said they couldn't see why Allan was doing this and without dialogue, motive was a bit difficult to create.



 Q) If I do not ask the camera question, then I will get a dozen emails asking me why I did not. So what did you shoot the film with and looking back on it was it the right camera or cameras for the job?

A) First, let me make it clear that I wish we had better equipment, but most filmmakers say that. I was still a film student so my resources were more limited. That being said, the film took place in the 90's and I wanted a cheap-camera look. The reason the film was set in the 90s was because it was more practical to gather props that were 20 or less years old (cars, clothes, furniture, TV's, etc..).  I knew I didn't want to make present-day film because I wanted the challenge of a period piece, even if the period was not so long ago. We did our best to stick to it, but there are flaws. The camera was a Panasonic AG-HMC150 AVCCAM. Also, though it appears that Allan is holding the camera in many shots, he never held it once. My DP was in the first scene and plays the character that gives Allen the camera. He's in every single scene, even when Allan steps up in the van with the camera. I really feel that the artifice of film is where the real art is. I love the efforts and allusions that create a world that doesn't exist.

 Q) The two most over looked areas of the film making process by those who are just starting out are lighting and sound. In found footage films this usually becomes a nightmare. The lighting was well done in the case of your film and the sound quality was good. How much time did you spend on these two areas before shooting?


A) We spent a lot of time on sound. In my opinion, sound really divides one film from the next, and I wanted to make sure it was organic. We used a boom mic and a Sony zoom. It was very challenging to create certain sounds of the film, so many of them were done in post. The radio music is all added. No music was playing in the van. The radio DJ came in and recorded his lines- all in one take! There are points where the van sounds like it's running but it's not. The death of Allan (which is brutal if you've heard it) was created with various vegetables and meats. We recorded at the location about a month later. We beat the hell out of some melons with a hammer and a rock. We used a large piece of beef with a bone in the middle and sawed that for the sound of Butterfly sawing Allan's head off. We broke up some carrots and celery for the sound of broken bones. When mixed just right, we had a nice brutal killing. :)

As for the lighting, I'm a big fan of practicals. We studied the language created by cinematic lighting. We understood rim lighting, key lighting, etc. The challenge was to get all that into the set of a found footage piece. For example, in the van when Allan is torturing Butterfly, we had to run a power converter in order to use cinema grade lighting. It had a hum so loud, we had to use pillows to insulate between it and the van. We had a large soft light box, but it was never appropriate for the scene. Overall, the lighting was about half and half between practicals and the film making standard. I think the practical lighting is more organic- especially for a found footage piece. 


 Q) You also managed to do something that I thought was very clever. You took the camera out of the actor’s hands in many of the scenes. Far too many of these films weld the camera to one actor and from that point on it is literally until death do they part. You allowed your camera in many scenes to remain stationary?

A) We actually discussed this point before filming. We wanted the camera to be the character the audience followed, not Allan. We don't see Allan all the time. For example, during the son's party, his aunt actually has the camera for a few minutes. I felt that the audience is forced to consider who Allan is, who his family is, even if it lacks his perspective. The camera can bring two polar opposite moments right up next to each other and as a viewer, we're forced to consider it.



 Q) We all have our favorite film makers. Readers of this blog know that I am a Hitchcock and
 Takashi Miike fan. Hitchcock because of his amazing attention to detail and his constant focus on always putting the audience first. Takashi because of his amazing ability to direct films in every possible genre, from action, to horror, to western to musical. Also, he shows his love of film making by actually directing on average three feature films a year for the last decade. Who are your film making heroes and why?

A) Wow, I'll TRY to keep this short. My film making influences and heroes cover a large spectrum of genres. I am first and foremost a lover of film watching, which led to a love of filmmaking. It's always been clear to me which one came first. For this reason, I can not isolate any one film maker that influences me as a film maker, I can only name the ones who I have watched so much that I am sure I can not deny their affect on my own work. From Stanley Kubrick to Paul Anderson, and Wes Anderson, Rod Serling and Quinton Tarantino or JJ Abrams... I have watched their films dozens and dozens of times. More than I care to admit. Though these names represent the authors of work that I will always be inspired by, I know great films only happen when the perfect combination of film maker, writer, director, actors, editors, etc. get it right. There's no doubt that a poor delivery will make even the most influential director's work cringe-worthy. There are too many greats to name just a few. I could go on forever...

 Q) How did you learn the craft of film making and when did you decide that you wanted to be one?

A) My path to film making is unique. I learned the craft of film making from my first film production professor, David Burkman. I was studying film studies (mostly theoretical stuff) and I was forced to take production class for the major. I learned every aspect of filmmaking in a short semester and realized a lifetime wouldn't teach me everything. So I did the rational thing, and took another class, and another class, and so on. My husband fell in love with using the camera and has become and avid collector and loves shooting EVERYTHING from home movies to short films. He's always coming up with new ideas. I, however, have really gravitated to the pre and postproduction side of things. I still love to write and I love to edit, but the main photography part of filmmaking is really stressful for me. He really took to it like a fish in water. Now my eight-year-old son has a camera and makes his own short movies. He even has costumes and production value (very little though). It's a family affair at this point. No interest in making money- we just love beautiful images that convey an idea or story.


 Q) I suppose that I should return to the subject of found footage films. What do you think that this genre has to offer in the future?

A) I think the found footage film genre's days are numbered, as you might have already theorized. I think it's a new unique way to tell a story. It offers a limited, and sometimes privileged, POV to the viewer. This is turn frees the filmmaker up to tell as little or as much of the story as they wish. The issue I see with it is the limit. The moment people understand something to be found footage; they know many of their questions won't be answered. They know, inevitably, they'll be unable to see a particular moment, and instead they are forced to build the scene inside their own imagination. Though I think it's a genre that commands respect and recognition. I think it may be equalized to the value of a slasher B film. On the other hand, because a found footage film can parallel technological advances in cameras, camera phones, etc. perhaps this is only the beginning. I guess we shall see.


 Q) Are you working on any projects? Do you plan on shooting a feature someday?

A) I am always working on something. A writer writes. A filmmaker makes films.  I have written several pieces, three of which are features (a sci fi, a drama/ thriller, and a comedy). Just last night my husband and I had a great idea for a sci-fi romance. We live, breathe, dream, and speak films. It's who we are.

    Thanks again for taking the time to do this interview. Good luck with all of your future projects.




 

Found Footage, The Camera 87 Interview

               

This will begin my series of post and interviews on the subject of what is know as found footage films.
I realize that found footage has gotten a bad rap because far too many film makers look at it as a easy way to produce their first feature or to make a quick dollar. These movies are churned out at the same rate that they use to churn out Ninja movies in the 1990's.

    The Found Footage genre has produced so quality films and will continue to do so. With these post I hope to explore the pros and cons of the genre and to encourage better film making.

    The film maker that I am going to be interviewing is named Kyle Van Dongen. Kyle is the film maker behind the found footage film Camera 87.  If you wish to know more about Kyle and his work you can visit   here.



Q) I suppose the first and most obvious question is what is your film, Camera 87, about?

A) Camera 87 is about a young man who witnesses a mysterious object landing, or perhaps crashing, near his house. Determined to be the first person to get it on video, he drags his girlfriend into the forest to help him investigate. Before long, they find evidence of an alien intelligence, but as the night goes on, they realize it isn't here for a visit.

Q) During the last few years the found footage film has become a genre of film making all its owns. The cost of producing them as compared to shooting all other types of films have made them a go to for the beginning film maker. Why did you choice found footage?

A) I've always enjoyed found footage. I think titles like Cannibal Holocaust and the Blair Witch Project are among the greatest horror films of all time. The only problem with the genre is that very few entries seem to come up with a satisfactory explanation for why the protagonist doesn't just put down the camera. The format works, for a time, but when the shit hits the fan and our heroes are being chased by zombies or giant monsters, the movies tend to lose a bit of credibility. Oddly enough, this is what made me want to do found footage. I came up with (what I believe to be) a compelling reason for the characters to keep the camera and figured I'd put it out there. Whether or not that's what people remember about Camera 87, it's the idea that got the ball rolling.

 Q) It seems that no one has figured out the best way to write one of these films. How did you script the film?

A) I wouldn't say nobody has figured it out. I think the Blair Witch Project and the first Paranormal Activity told great stories. The trick, I'd say, is to make it feel natural. The allure of the genre is that, when it's done right, it feels real. It's a tricky line to walk because on one hand a real person might break up a sentence with a lot of "uhs" and "ahs" or they might tell a joke that falls flat, but if you do that too much, it becomes unwatchable. The same can be said for story structure - you want the action to ramp up, and you want to hit the important beats, but then maybe it feels too scripted. For Camera 87 I decided to put my trust in the actors. I wrote the script line by line as I would for any other movie, but I encouraged improvisation and last minute rewrites as long as the flow of dialogue remained in tact. As for the overall story, I tried to leave the extraterrestrial's actions vague and open to interpretation. I think that element of mystery makes it scarier and also, hopefully, more convincing.


Q) There is a debate on the best type of camera to use for a found footage shoot. The Dslr has become popular for all types of indie shoots, but I have always believed that the best tool for this job is the camcorder due to length of recording, the ability to record quality sound and basic battery life. What did you record Camera 87 with and why?

A) I used my good old Canon XH A1. The main reason for this was that I let my actors shoot the movie. Since neither of them were experienced camera operators, I put the camcorder on automatic and told them to focus on framing and forget about the more technical aspects of cinematography. This would never fly in a traditional film, but the idea here was to make it look like some average Joe was shooting, and what better way to replicate that effect than to simply give someone a camera set to auto focus? Also, as you mentioned, the battery life was a definite plus! The only real issue I had to contend with was a severe lack of lighting. Most of the shoot was done in the middle of the forest, at night, so I mounted a small, but powerful, flashlight into the camera's microphone holder and kicked up the gain. The result is grainy and sometimes way overblown, but I think it's appropriate for the genre.


Q) If you did another found footage film would you record with a different device?

A) I can't say for sure, but probably not. The XH A1 was perfect for the job. There might be other camcorders that might work better, but I certainly wouldn't use a DSLR.


Q) Most film makers run into problems with sound on a standard shoot. Were there any problems on this shoot and what did you use to record sound with?

A) Sound was definitely an issue and it's the one aspect of the film I'm a little disappointed with. Camera 87 is mostly comprised of long shots that run anywhere from a minute to four. During these scenes the actors are walking and looking around, which is visually dynamic, but makes it nearly impossible to keep a sound guy out of frame. I decided to rely on the XH A1's onboard mic and while it performed admirably, it wasn't always in an optimal position or even facing the actors at all. I leveled the audio the best I could in post, but refused to do any ADR since I wasn't confident in my ability to mix it in without being noticeable.


Q) Actors have more power on a found footage shoot because they have to carry so much of the story. How did you approach working with your actors? Did you rehearse them longer that you would on a normal film shoot or go straight to the filming?

A) I sort of answered this earlier, but not exactly. As I said, I allowed for a lot more improvisation and was very open with changes. I can't count the number of times somebody said "who would say this?" or "why would I do that?" but in the end, most of their objections were valid and I think the film is stronger as a result. As for the second part, we skipped rehearsals and went straight to filming. The reason being that there were only four of us and we were all committed. We'd get together on weekends, at everyone's convenience, and get done whatever we could. Nobody really minded if we spent a whole night trying to finish a scene as long as we got it right. I'm really fortunate to have had such cooperation and I believe the shoot was a lot more relaxing and entertaining as a result.


Q) Your film would fall into the sci fi area of found footage films. Most of these films fall into the area of sci fi or horror. I believe that the genre is going to have to expand into comedy, drama and action. A movie like End of Watch which did a great blending found footage with standard may be a blue print for the way this genre will find growth. I guess the question is can this style of film making be taken into new areas?

A) This depends on the criteria for "found footage". There are a lot of great movies and television shows (in a wide variety of genres) presented in a "documentary style" and in many ways, that's not very different. Some of the more recent found footage horror movies are even starting to lean more in this direction: George Romero's Diary of the Dead, although it was terrible, was edited from multiple cameras with voiceovers and music. I think it still belongs in the found footage genre, but stylistically, is it really any different than say, the Office? In a way, the only real differentiation to make is that in most found footage movies claim that the video was lost and then recovered. That sort of thing wouldn't work with a comedy so we get a mockumentary. I think the style has already branched out, it just goes by a lot of different names.

Q) What got you into the indie film making world? Also who are the film makers that you follow?

A) I got into independent film making because I love movies. It's a simple answer, but that's the truth. I've been shooting little shorts since I was in grade school, but I didn't get really serious until high school when I started meeting experienced artists from the local film community. I'm fortunate to live in a very arts-oriented city - it's a good environment and seeing other people's work really helps motivate you to get out there and create. As for the second part: I obviously admire the greats like Kubrick and Spielberg, but I tend to gravitate more toward directors who had less money to work with. Names that come to mind are Roger Corman and Ed Wood. I think there's a lot to learn from people who can make something from nothing. I also really admire James Rolfe who is popular on the internet for doing the Angry Video Game Nerd videos. He seems really passionate about film and by looking through his body of work you can actually see him grow from a high school kid shooting on VHS in his backyard to making a million dollar comedy epic. It's pretty inspiring.


Q) What is your next project going to be?

A) I've just finished up a short horror film called "Sweet Scarlett". It's a modern retelling of the story of Little Red Riding Hood done in the style of a slasher film. I'm thinking of trying my luck at a festival or two, but it'll make its way online eventually. I haven't begun to think of what I'll do next - my problem isn't that I don't have any ideas, but rather, too many of them!



Thank you again Kyle for taking the time to do this interview. I look forward to seeing and posting about your future work.


That will be it for today guy, please take a moment to share this post on facebook and to stumble us on stumbleupon .