Due to Illness the Feb 9th S/F workshop will be canceled we hope to present the workshop in March.
Stay tuned for details.
Showing posts with label clingman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clingman. Show all posts
Friday, February 8, 2008
Saturday, February 2, 2008
A look at Torture Porn Genre
But, Is It Art?
A Look At The Torture Porn Genre
By Kenneth Holm
Torture porn. Gornography. Both of these words refer to one of the most maligned film genres in today’s film world. I am referring to, of course, the twisted works which depict graphic scenes of violence done onto other people. One only has to look so far to find some sterling examples, such as the "Hostel" series by Eli Roth or any of the "Saw" movie franchise. These movies take violence to a new level of depravity, vividly showcasing large amounts of blood and explicit images of what will happen to a human body when you apply various forms of destruction to it.
This genre started with quite a while ago, with the films of Italian schlockmeisters like Mario Bava and Lucio Fulci. They were the original torture pornographers, depicting brutal scenes of cannibalism, disembowelment, and murder. These films were not seen in the mainstream, however, and were usually relegated to any old theater that made its money showing all sorts of exploitation films. This style of movie gave rise to the "Grindhouse" movement, which was famous for its casual showing of nudity, violence, and buckets of gore. Several cities in America had at least one grindhouse theater, where you could see any sort of film imaginable, from gross-out zombie flicks to soft-core pornography pieces disguised as art. Many of these films tended to be short on production values and long on special effects makeup.
In the 1980’s, the "grindhouse" genre seemed to evolve into many of the modern day slasher films we know and hold dearly. Films like "Friday The 13th" and "A Nightmare On Elm Street" seemed to tap into sadistic reserves when coming up with new and intriguing ways to slaughter its victims. These films began in such a way as to root for the victims to rise up against adversity and destroy the killer. However, something strange happened along the way. The killers we were not supposed to like began to develop personalities. Suddenly, instead of supporting the victims, we began to pull for the killer. We hoped and prayed that the creative reserves of the intrepid writers would not dry up and continue to feed the teenage cannon fodder to our favorite masked or deformed psychopath. This began what is truly one of the most unprecedented moves in history. Now, instead of the good guys, we were identifying with the bad guy. We wanted to see blood, the more the better. We did not care how it happened; we just wanted to see death.
Torture porn has its roots that go even further back than moving pictures can claim to. Originally, there was a French school of theater called Grand Guignol, which aimed to have realistic scenes of blood and carnage. As time went on, Grand Guignol began to go overseas to Britain and even the foundling nation of America. Some of the first scenes of graphic violence are able to be viewed in D.W. Griffith’s "Intolerance", showing two scenes of onscreen decapitation and a scene where a spear can be seen piercing a soldier’s naked abdomen. American films began to adopt this style, going so far as being seen in mainstream theaters with films like "Blood Feast" and "I Spit On Your Grave". Of course, this style was only tolerated for so long, and soon splatter films like these were shunted to the wayside, becoming films in the aforementioned grindhouse" genre.
The first film to be labeled as "gorno" as it is sometimes called was Eli Roth’s "Hostel". In 2005, movie critic David Edelstein called Roth’s film "torture porn" when discussing the current trend in filmmaking. Since then, the moniker has been applied to such films as "Saw", "The Devil’s Rejects" and "Wolf Creek". Earlier films were also deemed to fit the bill, such as Takashi Miike’s "Ichi The Killer" and Virginie Despentes’ "Baise-moi". The things that make torture porn differ from the previous "grindhouse" and splatter films is a marked improvement in production values and mainstream distribution. Unfortunately for those with uneasy stomachs, torture porn has a marked financial viability that ensures that torture porn will be staying for a while. Author Stephen King has even gone on to defend both torture porn and "Hostel: Part II" when he stated, "Sure, it makes you uncomfortable, but good art should make you uncomfortable."
Is it really art, though? Have we as a society digressed to such a point in which entrails and rivers of blood can be seen as the next Warhol or Pollack? I am afraid I cannot answer that question. I do enjoy "Hostel: Part II" but no for the blood and guts. I like the human face it puts on these atrocities. It deals with what kind of person would pay money to kill another. I feel that it does raise some very interesting discussion points. The "Saw" series may have degenerated into a series of movies about how much blood one person can spill and still survive, but the original was a brutal exercise in Hitchcockian psychological horror. It got inside of your head and played around with it. Sure, the traps laid by the moralistic killer Jigsaw were violent and gruesome, but it all had a point to it. There was an underlying statement that said you had to appreciate your life as you have it, otherwise it may be taken from you in a matter you cannot control.
One of the most recent examples of this is a film that is not in distribution yet. I was fortunate enough to see the film "Seed" at the It Came From Lake Michigan film festival this year. The director, Dr. Uwe Boll, is best known for making movies about video games. However, with "Seed", he created what I consider to be one of the most disturbing films I have ever set eyes on. He takes a dark, violent world and looks at it with an unflinching eye, refusing to turn away from it. While most films of the torture porn genre have rapid cuts in the main torture action, "Seed" watches with us with a steady glare. It shows us not only violent acts, but what their consequences are on the main characters. I am sure that many critics will label this as an "also-ran" entry into the torture porn oeuvre, but I would hesitate to do so. Yes, it does show violence in an extreme way, but not with the often-nauseating levels of gore that others feel is necessary. The story actually needs the violence to work the way it does.
Now, most modern films could be filmed without the levels of violence that they have. The earlier horror film entries from such sources as Hammer Films or Alfred Hitchcock show that blood is not needed to scare. Surely, the denizens of the dark are much more frightening than someone being eviscerated with a power drill. The fear of what you do not know will always trump blood in my book. However, torture porn not only shows extreme acts of sadism, but it almost encourages us to delight in them. I attended a screening of "Saw II" when it arrived in theaters, and was both intrigued and disgusted by the almost sexual reaction the crowd was having to the violence. In a society like this, it is almost no wonder why violence and rape statistics have gone upwards as these films continue to proliferate their messages of destruction. I am sure that there is a defendable point when it comes to the torture porn genre, but I cannot see it. As long as these movies continue to rake in box office monies, there will be more and more blood arcing it way across movie screens near you.
In closing, let me say that I, in no way, condemn or applaud the efforts of these filmmakers. Just because I do not enjoy these films does not mean that they will not titillate some of you out there. I just hesitate to condone films like these and defend them as art when they do not serve a purpose. Yes, movie fans, art does have a purpose. If a movie can elevate you as a person, it could be considered art. If a movie urges you to become a better person, this too could be considered art. However, just because a movie can make you throw up your designer lunch does not make it art. True art does not have to be comfortable, but it does need a purpose other than trying to one-up the previous guy.
A Look At The Torture Porn Genre
By Kenneth Holm
Torture porn. Gornography. Both of these words refer to one of the most maligned film genres in today’s film world. I am referring to, of course, the twisted works which depict graphic scenes of violence done onto other people. One only has to look so far to find some sterling examples, such as the "Hostel" series by Eli Roth or any of the "Saw" movie franchise. These movies take violence to a new level of depravity, vividly showcasing large amounts of blood and explicit images of what will happen to a human body when you apply various forms of destruction to it.
This genre started with quite a while ago, with the films of Italian schlockmeisters like Mario Bava and Lucio Fulci. They were the original torture pornographers, depicting brutal scenes of cannibalism, disembowelment, and murder. These films were not seen in the mainstream, however, and were usually relegated to any old theater that made its money showing all sorts of exploitation films. This style of movie gave rise to the "Grindhouse" movement, which was famous for its casual showing of nudity, violence, and buckets of gore. Several cities in America had at least one grindhouse theater, where you could see any sort of film imaginable, from gross-out zombie flicks to soft-core pornography pieces disguised as art. Many of these films tended to be short on production values and long on special effects makeup.
In the 1980’s, the "grindhouse" genre seemed to evolve into many of the modern day slasher films we know and hold dearly. Films like "Friday The 13th" and "A Nightmare On Elm Street" seemed to tap into sadistic reserves when coming up with new and intriguing ways to slaughter its victims. These films began in such a way as to root for the victims to rise up against adversity and destroy the killer. However, something strange happened along the way. The killers we were not supposed to like began to develop personalities. Suddenly, instead of supporting the victims, we began to pull for the killer. We hoped and prayed that the creative reserves of the intrepid writers would not dry up and continue to feed the teenage cannon fodder to our favorite masked or deformed psychopath. This began what is truly one of the most unprecedented moves in history. Now, instead of the good guys, we were identifying with the bad guy. We wanted to see blood, the more the better. We did not care how it happened; we just wanted to see death.
Torture porn has its roots that go even further back than moving pictures can claim to. Originally, there was a French school of theater called Grand Guignol, which aimed to have realistic scenes of blood and carnage. As time went on, Grand Guignol began to go overseas to Britain and even the foundling nation of America. Some of the first scenes of graphic violence are able to be viewed in D.W. Griffith’s "Intolerance", showing two scenes of onscreen decapitation and a scene where a spear can be seen piercing a soldier’s naked abdomen. American films began to adopt this style, going so far as being seen in mainstream theaters with films like "Blood Feast" and "I Spit On Your Grave". Of course, this style was only tolerated for so long, and soon splatter films like these were shunted to the wayside, becoming films in the aforementioned grindhouse" genre.
The first film to be labeled as "gorno" as it is sometimes called was Eli Roth’s "Hostel". In 2005, movie critic David Edelstein called Roth’s film "torture porn" when discussing the current trend in filmmaking. Since then, the moniker has been applied to such films as "Saw", "The Devil’s Rejects" and "Wolf Creek". Earlier films were also deemed to fit the bill, such as Takashi Miike’s "Ichi The Killer" and Virginie Despentes’ "Baise-moi". The things that make torture porn differ from the previous "grindhouse" and splatter films is a marked improvement in production values and mainstream distribution. Unfortunately for those with uneasy stomachs, torture porn has a marked financial viability that ensures that torture porn will be staying for a while. Author Stephen King has even gone on to defend both torture porn and "Hostel: Part II" when he stated, "Sure, it makes you uncomfortable, but good art should make you uncomfortable."
Is it really art, though? Have we as a society digressed to such a point in which entrails and rivers of blood can be seen as the next Warhol or Pollack? I am afraid I cannot answer that question. I do enjoy "Hostel: Part II" but no for the blood and guts. I like the human face it puts on these atrocities. It deals with what kind of person would pay money to kill another. I feel that it does raise some very interesting discussion points. The "Saw" series may have degenerated into a series of movies about how much blood one person can spill and still survive, but the original was a brutal exercise in Hitchcockian psychological horror. It got inside of your head and played around with it. Sure, the traps laid by the moralistic killer Jigsaw were violent and gruesome, but it all had a point to it. There was an underlying statement that said you had to appreciate your life as you have it, otherwise it may be taken from you in a matter you cannot control.
One of the most recent examples of this is a film that is not in distribution yet. I was fortunate enough to see the film "Seed" at the It Came From Lake Michigan film festival this year. The director, Dr. Uwe Boll, is best known for making movies about video games. However, with "Seed", he created what I consider to be one of the most disturbing films I have ever set eyes on. He takes a dark, violent world and looks at it with an unflinching eye, refusing to turn away from it. While most films of the torture porn genre have rapid cuts in the main torture action, "Seed" watches with us with a steady glare. It shows us not only violent acts, but what their consequences are on the main characters. I am sure that many critics will label this as an "also-ran" entry into the torture porn oeuvre, but I would hesitate to do so. Yes, it does show violence in an extreme way, but not with the often-nauseating levels of gore that others feel is necessary. The story actually needs the violence to work the way it does.
Now, most modern films could be filmed without the levels of violence that they have. The earlier horror film entries from such sources as Hammer Films or Alfred Hitchcock show that blood is not needed to scare. Surely, the denizens of the dark are much more frightening than someone being eviscerated with a power drill. The fear of what you do not know will always trump blood in my book. However, torture porn not only shows extreme acts of sadism, but it almost encourages us to delight in them. I attended a screening of "Saw II" when it arrived in theaters, and was both intrigued and disgusted by the almost sexual reaction the crowd was having to the violence. In a society like this, it is almost no wonder why violence and rape statistics have gone upwards as these films continue to proliferate their messages of destruction. I am sure that there is a defendable point when it comes to the torture porn genre, but I cannot see it. As long as these movies continue to rake in box office monies, there will be more and more blood arcing it way across movie screens near you.
In closing, let me say that I, in no way, condemn or applaud the efforts of these filmmakers. Just because I do not enjoy these films does not mean that they will not titillate some of you out there. I just hesitate to condone films like these and defend them as art when they do not serve a purpose. Yes, movie fans, art does have a purpose. If a movie can elevate you as a person, it could be considered art. If a movie urges you to become a better person, this too could be considered art. However, just because a movie can make you throw up your designer lunch does not make it art. True art does not have to be comfortable, but it does need a purpose other than trying to one-up the previous guy.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Next Raido show 1/28/08!
Tonight at 7:PM CST we have: Jen Tonon (writer/producer/actress; "Super Tromette Action Movie Go!") - Jen is a musician/visual artist/theatre geek who has recently unearthed a crazy urge to make retarded and sometimes pointless movies. STAMGo!, however *has* a point. What that is, we're still not sure, but it's there! An avid fan of all things cheesy, cartoony, and horrific, Jen hopes to bring together all three in this film with loads of help from director Steven A. Grainger. Look for it in 2008! www.stamgo.com"
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Damaged
Read below about a Film project shot in Green Bay, WI
Green Bay, Wisconsin is an unlikely place for a film community to pop up, but that’s pretty much what happened. The Independent Filmmaker’s Guild started up in December of 2004 and making it possible to network with other non-professional, wannabe movie makers. The possibility of getting something done tends to get easier when you find there are plenty of people ready to help- even something as crazy as making a movie.
When I tried to make my first feature in 1996, an ill-conceived, poorly written comedy that nobody understood, there were only a few thousand things that could go wrong. Most of them did and the movie sits in a back closet of my house, on ¾ inch tapes- a format I can’t easily upload to my mighty Mac and edit at a leisurely pace. What’s the diff anyway; the movie would still stink and instead of being a curiosity it would be confirmation that my skills, whatever they might be, hadn’t taken up residence yet.
It also cost me a butt-load of money that I couldn’t afford to throw away- and that was before I had a wife and two kids.
Paul Rinehard was responsible for that debacle, but only in a roundabout way. I’d worked with him on one of his films, "All You Can Eat," the year before and realized that it wasn’t impossible to make a movie in Titletown. Paul even managed to find a distributor for "All You Can Eat," driving the idea that there might be a payday at some point too. I don’t blame Paul for those ideas getting into my head- he didn’t put them there- but it sure did irritate me for a long time that he was able to finish with a coherent picture and I was left with a whole bunch of… well, poop.
What was I to say when Paul asked me to produce a movie for him? I can’t say I jumped at the opportunity. Not that I doubted him in the least, it’s just that I had a project of my own I’d hoped to get started with in the next few months. Either that or move to Florida. I couldn’t decide which would be a better use of my funds.
Eventually I gave Paul a straight answer: "Maybe." I just needed to read the script. I did and thought it showed lots of promise. Paul and I spent months getting it ready to shoot, with Paul doing all of the hard work. I made suggestions and even helped steer a thing or two, but all the writing was done by Paul- even the bad jokes that sound like something I would have said.
Casting is the area that I take the most pride in on this film, mostly because I got exactly the cast I wanted. I either coerced or convinced Paul that I knew the perfect actors for his movie.
Tiffaney Dantinne was someone I knew from IFG. I knew she was talented and knowledgeable about filmmaking. When I knew she could do better than her first audition (early morning after a weekend bender I’m guessing) I suggested she audition for Paul with another actor. She did much better and earned the part.
I went to college with Shad Bever and always wanted to work with him on something. He’d ignored my advances for over a decade and probably only accepted this role because he found out I wasn’t directing the movie myself.
Sadie Rinehard didn’t get her role because she was Paul’s daughter, she got it because she did a great audition.
Barb Alloy and Kathy Hardtke were two ladies that Paul and I had both worked with before and were hoping to bring into this dysfunctional family. Fortunately they were both willing and able.
There was a lot of discussion about the overall look and feel of the film. Paul and I both believed that for DAMAGED to work it had to be unsettling from beginning to end. I’m a big fan of "N.Y.P.D. Blue" and the style of camera work that Greg Hobblit brought to it that first season. I’d also enjoyed Paul Greengrass’ hand held camera work in "The Bourne Supremacy," and believed that the style would work for our movie as well. The rapid fire editing would make Peter Hunt hold on for dear life, but it was exactly what we needed for this movie to work. It certainly didn’t make it easier.
Most of the feedback has been positive, though you’ll always be able to find dullards who lock everything down on a tripod. Me? I love the Bogen, but not for this movie. DAMAGED is meant to be a disturbing experience. We never want you to be a fly on the wall- we want you to be in the room with the psycho killer, looking for a shadow to hide behind.
Shooting started in October of 2006 and lasted for five weeks. We did have one minor hiccup- one of the people who was raising money for us wasn’t delivering. The money that he assured us would be available was going to make the whole shoot easier… if it actually was available.
A week before we were going to start Paul asked me if I thought we should wait for the money. I decided to not wait, mainly because we had a schedule and the actors and crew were fired up to get started. I didn’t want to throw out a speed bump, even if it meant I’d be paying for the shoot from my own pocket. It’s a good thing we started without the money since we’d still be waiting.
The shoot went remarkably well, possibly the smoothest shoot I’ve ever been involved with. The weather cooperated with us and Paul’s house remained standing while we shot there. My stepmother left town for a weekend and we "spilled blood" in her bath tub- a grizzly shot that appears in the movie for about three seconds.
Our cast and crew came through in spades; top notch work from every single person. Craig Knitt and I split the shooting (with his new Canon XLH), Scott Willems recorded the sound for us and Paul’s sons were our P.A.s.
Post production lasted five months longer than we wanted. Chris Opper and I edited 95% of the movie, then Craig came in and polished it up, added the bells, whistles and special effects. Robert Graf added a few digital effects that I defy you to find- they blend so seamlessly into the practical video. The result is a movie we’re very proud of.
The premiere was held on August 26, 2007 at the Meyer Theater in GreenBay. The first twenty-five people that showed up were at least sixty years old- hardly the audience we imagined. By showtime we had 240 people, half a dozen of which didn’t remain until the end credits. We took it as a sign that we’d done something right.
So now it’s a year later, we have a great movie and I’m broke. I’m sure fame, fortune and gainful employment are not too far away but so far a commercial sale has eluded us. But then it’s only been four months since we premiered. I’m sure Kevin Smith sat on "Clerks" for years… right?
No… Oh well. I think we have a better movie.
Green Bay, Wisconsin is an unlikely place for a film community to pop up, but that’s pretty much what happened. The Independent Filmmaker’s Guild started up in December of 2004 and making it possible to network with other non-professional, wannabe movie makers. The possibility of getting something done tends to get easier when you find there are plenty of people ready to help- even something as crazy as making a movie.
When I tried to make my first feature in 1996, an ill-conceived, poorly written comedy that nobody understood, there were only a few thousand things that could go wrong. Most of them did and the movie sits in a back closet of my house, on ¾ inch tapes- a format I can’t easily upload to my mighty Mac and edit at a leisurely pace. What’s the diff anyway; the movie would still stink and instead of being a curiosity it would be confirmation that my skills, whatever they might be, hadn’t taken up residence yet.
It also cost me a butt-load of money that I couldn’t afford to throw away- and that was before I had a wife and two kids.
Paul Rinehard was responsible for that debacle, but only in a roundabout way. I’d worked with him on one of his films, "All You Can Eat," the year before and realized that it wasn’t impossible to make a movie in Titletown. Paul even managed to find a distributor for "All You Can Eat," driving the idea that there might be a payday at some point too. I don’t blame Paul for those ideas getting into my head- he didn’t put them there- but it sure did irritate me for a long time that he was able to finish with a coherent picture and I was left with a whole bunch of… well, poop.
What was I to say when Paul asked me to produce a movie for him? I can’t say I jumped at the opportunity. Not that I doubted him in the least, it’s just that I had a project of my own I’d hoped to get started with in the next few months. Either that or move to Florida. I couldn’t decide which would be a better use of my funds.
Eventually I gave Paul a straight answer: "Maybe." I just needed to read the script. I did and thought it showed lots of promise. Paul and I spent months getting it ready to shoot, with Paul doing all of the hard work. I made suggestions and even helped steer a thing or two, but all the writing was done by Paul- even the bad jokes that sound like something I would have said.
Casting is the area that I take the most pride in on this film, mostly because I got exactly the cast I wanted. I either coerced or convinced Paul that I knew the perfect actors for his movie.
Tiffaney Dantinne was someone I knew from IFG. I knew she was talented and knowledgeable about filmmaking. When I knew she could do better than her first audition (early morning after a weekend bender I’m guessing) I suggested she audition for Paul with another actor. She did much better and earned the part.
I went to college with Shad Bever and always wanted to work with him on something. He’d ignored my advances for over a decade and probably only accepted this role because he found out I wasn’t directing the movie myself.
Sadie Rinehard didn’t get her role because she was Paul’s daughter, she got it because she did a great audition.
Barb Alloy and Kathy Hardtke were two ladies that Paul and I had both worked with before and were hoping to bring into this dysfunctional family. Fortunately they were both willing and able.
There was a lot of discussion about the overall look and feel of the film. Paul and I both believed that for DAMAGED to work it had to be unsettling from beginning to end. I’m a big fan of "N.Y.P.D. Blue" and the style of camera work that Greg Hobblit brought to it that first season. I’d also enjoyed Paul Greengrass’ hand held camera work in "The Bourne Supremacy," and believed that the style would work for our movie as well. The rapid fire editing would make Peter Hunt hold on for dear life, but it was exactly what we needed for this movie to work. It certainly didn’t make it easier.
Most of the feedback has been positive, though you’ll always be able to find dullards who lock everything down on a tripod. Me? I love the Bogen, but not for this movie. DAMAGED is meant to be a disturbing experience. We never want you to be a fly on the wall- we want you to be in the room with the psycho killer, looking for a shadow to hide behind.
Shooting started in October of 2006 and lasted for five weeks. We did have one minor hiccup- one of the people who was raising money for us wasn’t delivering. The money that he assured us would be available was going to make the whole shoot easier… if it actually was available.
A week before we were going to start Paul asked me if I thought we should wait for the money. I decided to not wait, mainly because we had a schedule and the actors and crew were fired up to get started. I didn’t want to throw out a speed bump, even if it meant I’d be paying for the shoot from my own pocket. It’s a good thing we started without the money since we’d still be waiting.
The shoot went remarkably well, possibly the smoothest shoot I’ve ever been involved with. The weather cooperated with us and Paul’s house remained standing while we shot there. My stepmother left town for a weekend and we "spilled blood" in her bath tub- a grizzly shot that appears in the movie for about three seconds.
Our cast and crew came through in spades; top notch work from every single person. Craig Knitt and I split the shooting (with his new Canon XLH), Scott Willems recorded the sound for us and Paul’s sons were our P.A.s.
Post production lasted five months longer than we wanted. Chris Opper and I edited 95% of the movie, then Craig came in and polished it up, added the bells, whistles and special effects. Robert Graf added a few digital effects that I defy you to find- they blend so seamlessly into the practical video. The result is a movie we’re very proud of.
The premiere was held on August 26, 2007 at the Meyer Theater in GreenBay. The first twenty-five people that showed up were at least sixty years old- hardly the audience we imagined. By showtime we had 240 people, half a dozen of which didn’t remain until the end credits. We took it as a sign that we’d done something right.
So now it’s a year later, we have a great movie and I’m broke. I’m sure fame, fortune and gainful employment are not too far away but so far a commercial sale has eluded us. But then it’s only been four months since we premiered. I’m sure Kevin Smith sat on "Clerks" for years… right?
No… Oh well. I think we have a better movie.
Green Bay, Wisconsin is an unlikely place for a film community to pop up, but that’s pretty much what happened. The Independent Filmmaker’s Guild started up in December of 2004 and making it possible to network with other non-professional, wannabe movie makers. The possibility of getting something done tends to get easier when you find there are plenty of people ready to help- even something as crazy as making a movie.
When I tried to make my first feature in 1996, an ill-conceived, poorly written comedy that nobody understood, there were only a few thousand things that could go wrong. Most of them did and the movie sits in a back closet of my house, on ¾ inch tapes- a format I can’t easily upload to my mighty Mac and edit at a leisurely pace. What’s the diff anyway; the movie would still stink and instead of being a curiosity it would be confirmation that my skills, whatever they might be, hadn’t taken up residence yet.
It also cost me a butt-load of money that I couldn’t afford to throw away- and that was before I had a wife and two kids.
Paul Rinehard was responsible for that debacle, but only in a roundabout way. I’d worked with him on one of his films, "All You Can Eat," the year before and realized that it wasn’t impossible to make a movie in Titletown. Paul even managed to find a distributor for "All You Can Eat," driving the idea that there might be a payday at some point too. I don’t blame Paul for those ideas getting into my head- he didn’t put them there- but it sure did irritate me for a long time that he was able to finish with a coherent picture and I was left with a whole bunch of… well, poop.
What was I to say when Paul asked me to produce a movie for him? I can’t say I jumped at the opportunity. Not that I doubted him in the least, it’s just that I had a project of my own I’d hoped to get started with in the next few months. Either that or move to Florida. I couldn’t decide which would be a better use of my funds.
Eventually I gave Paul a straight answer: "Maybe." I just needed to read the script. I did and thought it showed lots of promise. Paul and I spent months getting it ready to shoot, with Paul doing all of the hard work. I made suggestions and even helped steer a thing or two, but all the writing was done by Paul- even the bad jokes that sound like something I would have said.
Casting is the area that I take the most pride in on this film, mostly because I got exactly the cast I wanted. I either coerced or convinced Paul that I knew the perfect actors for his movie.
Tiffaney Dantinne was someone I knew from IFG. I knew she was talented and knowledgeable about filmmaking. When I knew she could do better than her first audition (early morning after a weekend bender I’m guessing) I suggested she audition for Paul with another actor. She did much better and earned the part.
I went to college with Shad Bever and always wanted to work with him on something. He’d ignored my advances for over a decade and probably only accepted this role because he found out I wasn’t directing the movie myself.
Sadie Rinehard didn’t get her role because she was Paul’s daughter, she got it because she did a great audition.
Barb Alloy and Kathy Hardtke were two ladies that Paul and I had both worked with before and were hoping to bring into this dysfunctional family. Fortunately they were both willing and able.
There was a lot of discussion about the overall look and feel of the film. Paul and I both believed that for DAMAGED to work it had to be unsettling from beginning to end. I’m a big fan of "N.Y.P.D. Blue" and the style of camera work that Greg Hobblit brought to it that first season. I’d also enjoyed Paul Greengrass’ hand held camera work in "The Bourne Supremacy," and believed that the style would work for our movie as well. The rapid fire editing would make Peter Hunt hold on for dear life, but it was exactly what we needed for this movie to work. It certainly didn’t make it easier.
Most of the feedback has been positive, though you’ll always be able to find dullards who lock everything down on a tripod. Me? I love the Bogen, but not for this movie. DAMAGED is meant to be a disturbing experience. We never want you to be a fly on the wall- we want you to be in the room with the psycho killer, looking for a shadow to hide behind.
Shooting started in October of 2006 and lasted for five weeks. We did have one minor hiccup- one of the people who was raising money for us wasn’t delivering. The money that he assured us would be available was going to make the whole shoot easier… if it actually was available.
A week before we were going to start Paul asked me if I thought we should wait for the money. I decided to not wait, mainly because we had a schedule and the actors and crew were fired up to get started. I didn’t want to throw out a speed bump, even if it meant I’d be paying for the shoot from my own pocket. It’s a good thing we started without the money since we’d still be waiting.
The shoot went remarkably well, possibly the smoothest shoot I’ve ever been involved with. The weather cooperated with us and Paul’s house remained standing while we shot there. My stepmother left town for a weekend and we "spilled blood" in her bath tub- a grizzly shot that appears in the movie for about three seconds.
Our cast and crew came through in spades; top notch work from every single person. Craig Knitt and I split the shooting (with his new Canon XLH), Scott Willems recorded the sound for us and Paul’s sons were our P.A.s.
Post production lasted five months longer than we wanted. Chris Opper and I edited 95% of the movie, then Craig came in and polished it up, added the bells, whistles and special effects. Robert Graf added a few digital effects that I defy you to find- they blend so seamlessly into the practical video. The result is a movie we’re very proud of.
The premiere was held on August 26, 2007 at the Meyer Theater in GreenBay. The first twenty-five people that showed up were at least sixty years old- hardly the audience we imagined. By showtime we had 240 people, half a dozen of which didn’t remain until the end credits. We took it as a sign that we’d done something right.
So now it’s a year later, we have a great movie and I’m broke. I’m sure fame, fortune and gainful employment are not too far away but so far a commercial sale has eluded us. But then it’s only been four months since we premiered. I’m sure Kevin Smith sat on "Clerks" for years… right?
No… Oh well. I think we have a better movie.
When I tried to make my first feature in 1996, an ill-conceived, poorly written comedy that nobody understood, there were only a few thousand things that could go wrong. Most of them did and the movie sits in a back closet of my house, on ¾ inch tapes- a format I can’t easily upload to my mighty Mac and edit at a leisurely pace. What’s the diff anyway; the movie would still stink and instead of being a curiosity it would be confirmation that my skills, whatever they might be, hadn’t taken up residence yet.
It also cost me a butt-load of money that I couldn’t afford to throw away- and that was before I had a wife and two kids.
Paul Rinehard was responsible for that debacle, but only in a roundabout way. I’d worked with him on one of his films, "All You Can Eat," the year before and realized that it wasn’t impossible to make a movie in Titletown. Paul even managed to find a distributor for "All You Can Eat," driving the idea that there might be a payday at some point too. I don’t blame Paul for those ideas getting into my head- he didn’t put them there- but it sure did irritate me for a long time that he was able to finish with a coherent picture and I was left with a whole bunch of… well, poop.
What was I to say when Paul asked me to produce a movie for him? I can’t say I jumped at the opportunity. Not that I doubted him in the least, it’s just that I had a project of my own I’d hoped to get started with in the next few months. Either that or move to Florida. I couldn’t decide which would be a better use of my funds.
Eventually I gave Paul a straight answer: "Maybe." I just needed to read the script. I did and thought it showed lots of promise. Paul and I spent months getting it ready to shoot, with Paul doing all of the hard work. I made suggestions and even helped steer a thing or two, but all the writing was done by Paul- even the bad jokes that sound like something I would have said.
Casting is the area that I take the most pride in on this film, mostly because I got exactly the cast I wanted. I either coerced or convinced Paul that I knew the perfect actors for his movie.
Tiffaney Dantinne was someone I knew from IFG. I knew she was talented and knowledgeable about filmmaking. When I knew she could do better than her first audition (early morning after a weekend bender I’m guessing) I suggested she audition for Paul with another actor. She did much better and earned the part.
I went to college with Shad Bever and always wanted to work with him on something. He’d ignored my advances for over a decade and probably only accepted this role because he found out I wasn’t directing the movie myself.
Sadie Rinehard didn’t get her role because she was Paul’s daughter, she got it because she did a great audition.
Barb Alloy and Kathy Hardtke were two ladies that Paul and I had both worked with before and were hoping to bring into this dysfunctional family. Fortunately they were both willing and able.
There was a lot of discussion about the overall look and feel of the film. Paul and I both believed that for DAMAGED to work it had to be unsettling from beginning to end. I’m a big fan of "N.Y.P.D. Blue" and the style of camera work that Greg Hobblit brought to it that first season. I’d also enjoyed Paul Greengrass’ hand held camera work in "The Bourne Supremacy," and believed that the style would work for our movie as well. The rapid fire editing would make Peter Hunt hold on for dear life, but it was exactly what we needed for this movie to work. It certainly didn’t make it easier.
Most of the feedback has been positive, though you’ll always be able to find dullards who lock everything down on a tripod. Me? I love the Bogen, but not for this movie. DAMAGED is meant to be a disturbing experience. We never want you to be a fly on the wall- we want you to be in the room with the psycho killer, looking for a shadow to hide behind.
Shooting started in October of 2006 and lasted for five weeks. We did have one minor hiccup- one of the people who was raising money for us wasn’t delivering. The money that he assured us would be available was going to make the whole shoot easier… if it actually was available.
A week before we were going to start Paul asked me if I thought we should wait for the money. I decided to not wait, mainly because we had a schedule and the actors and crew were fired up to get started. I didn’t want to throw out a speed bump, even if it meant I’d be paying for the shoot from my own pocket. It’s a good thing we started without the money since we’d still be waiting.
The shoot went remarkably well, possibly the smoothest shoot I’ve ever been involved with. The weather cooperated with us and Paul’s house remained standing while we shot there. My stepmother left town for a weekend and we "spilled blood" in her bath tub- a grizzly shot that appears in the movie for about three seconds.
Our cast and crew came through in spades; top notch work from every single person. Craig Knitt and I split the shooting (with his new Canon XLH), Scott Willems recorded the sound for us and Paul’s sons were our P.A.s.
Post production lasted five months longer than we wanted. Chris Opper and I edited 95% of the movie, then Craig came in and polished it up, added the bells, whistles and special effects. Robert Graf added a few digital effects that I defy you to find- they blend so seamlessly into the practical video. The result is a movie we’re very proud of.
The premiere was held on August 26, 2007 at the Meyer Theater in GreenBay. The first twenty-five people that showed up were at least sixty years old- hardly the audience we imagined. By showtime we had 240 people, half a dozen of which didn’t remain until the end credits. We took it as a sign that we’d done something right.
So now it’s a year later, we have a great movie and I’m broke. I’m sure fame, fortune and gainful employment are not too far away but so far a commercial sale has eluded us. But then it’s only been four months since we premiered. I’m sure Kevin Smith sat on "Clerks" for years… right?
No… Oh well. I think we have a better movie.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Great news
Theatrical Runs Offered for Wisconsin Productions Marcus Theatres, one of the largest chains in the country, to provide screensMILWAUKEE - Jan. 11, 2008 - Wisconsin's new 25 percent tax credits for the film, television and video gaming industry just took effect Jan. 1 making it one of the most attractive packages in the nation. In what may be a first in the country, a Wisconsin-based movie theatre chain has significantly upped the stakes by offering feature film productions shot in Wisconsin guaranteed theatrical runs on some of its screens. This innovative arrangement was made between Milwaukee-based Marcus Theatres and Film Wisconsin, the state's film office, as a way to support building a film economy for the state and encouraging filmmakers, especially independent producers, who most stand to benefit by bringing their projects to Wisconsin under this arrangement. "This innovative agreement demonstrates the very kind of creative thinking that makes Wisconsin the ideal place for the film industry and, for that matter, any other creative sector business," said Lt. Governor Lawton, who chairs the Wisconsin State Arts Board. "It will allow us to display the beauty of our great state and the talent of our people on the big screen - 600 big screens in six states, in fact - and it will lift Wisconsin into view regionally and nationally as the new 'Third Coast.'" "The value of our incentives combined with the pledge of theatrical runs by Marcus theatres significantly increases the desirability of shooting in Wisconsin, said Scott Robbe, executive director of Film Wisconsin, the state's film office. "It's becoming an increasingly difficult and arduous task to bring a project to the screen. By offering filmmakers a guaranteed commercial theatrical run for their work, coupled with our incentives and our untapped potential as a film location, we anticipate a significant influx of creative projects coming to the state. Theatrical screenings give a project enhanced credibility and visibility and provides greater marketing legs for auxiliary markets." In a letter to Film Wisconsin, Bruce J. Olson, president of Marcus Theatres, wrote in part: "Marcus Theatres will provide the foundation bookings that may lead to multiple playdates from other theatre circuits in major markets across the Midwest and U.S. . . .the number and play dates will be determined by the final quality and appeal of the production."While retaining the right to refuse screening a film, Marcus Theatres "will make all reasonable efforts to accommodate the filmmakers request for bookings" on film receiving a G, PG, PG-13 or R rating. Marcus Theatres is based in Milwaukee and is the 7th largest theatre circuit in the country, operating 600 screens in six Midwestern states, including Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota and Ohio.FILM WISCONSIN (www.filmwisconsin.net) is non-profit, public-private partnership organization based in Milwaukee and dedicated to nurturing and sustaining Wisconsin's film and media industry. Film Wisconsin advocates for the statewide industry in the global marketplace, provides information and resources on the industry, and is a technical assistance organization for individuals and organizations engaged in film, television, advertising, documentary, corporate video, video gaming and still photography production interested in doing business in the state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
