by Mark Young

One of the first times I remember my desire to make film being kindled was while watching a 20/20 special done on the Sundance Film Festival.  They followed 3 independent filmmakers on their year long journey to make their films.  One of these filmmakers was a young actor/writer/director named Vin Diesel.  Vin Diesel would later become known for The Fast and Furious film series.  At this time Mr. Diesel was making a film called Strays.  The film wasn’t well received by the critics but it did help launch Mr. Diesel’s career.  Watching this TV special was the first time that I realized you don’t need a large studio budget and professional actors to be a filmmaker.  With a modest budget and a lot of hard work anyone could potentially do this.  All I needed was to figure out how to get into one of these film festivals.  But I had one gnawing question, what is a film festival?

This may seem like a question with an obvious answer.  However, there is more to a film festival than merely watching a series of films.  Over the course of this year I plan to write about several specific film festivals from Cannes, to Sundance (which ended this past weekend) to Toronto and the festival that started them all, Venice. I will write about what makes each of them unique, what films have found their start in these festivals, and the origins and history of the festivals themselves.  But for this article I wish to define film festival on a more basic level.  And hopefully encourage you to attend the ones in your local area.

A film festival is a multiple day event where the attendees watch many films; often these films are independent films.  An independent film is simply defined as a film that does not have a Hollywood studio funding the project.  Although the origin of most festivals were ways to introduce people to foreign film making or smaller independent projects there are several that also use the festival format to do early releases of larger films.

The festival format begins with making an entry.  There is paperwork to be filed and travel plans to be made.  Often times in the competitive festivals there are entry fees that will need to be paid to have your film considered in the festival.  In the competitive festivals there will be a time for judging the films and granting awards.  Sometimes these winners will be picked up by larger studios for distribution to a nationwide or worldwide audience.

Often times there are themes to the festivals that narrow the focus of the types or genres of films.  There is the Terror Film Festival in Philadelphia, PA which focuses on the Horror genre.  There are many festivals that promote films from Asian, African, or Latin American filmmakers and countries.  And there are those that focus solely on animation, short films, and student projects.

The film festival has become an important part of the film industry.  Many famous actors, directors, and critics attend the well-known festivals as a chance to promote their own indie projects and seek out new talent.  In the late nineties while Vin Diesel was presenting his film Strays he was approached by a little known director by the name of Steven Spielberg.  Mr. Spielberg saw something in Mr. Diesel's work and knew that he had a role for the young man.  Vin Diesel was cast in one of Mr. Spielberg’s smaller projects, Saving Private Ryan, which came out the following year, and the rest as they say is history.

For a chance to attend a festival this year check out what will be happening in your area with the helpful website below.
http://www.festivalfocus.org/

One of the most successful directors of the 1980’s and easily the most well-known of teenage comedies was director, writer, and producer John Hughes. Hughes was born on February 18, 1950 in Lansing, Michigan. At age 13, he and his family moved to Chicago, Illinois, a city that would later play a significant role in his films. In 1968, he graduated from Glenbrook North High School and moved to Phoenix, Arizona to attend Arizona State University. However, Hughes dropped out of college during his junior year and moved back to Chicago to start a career as an ad copywriter. Also, during this period, he attempted to write comedy, and began writing a story inspired by a disastrous family vacation he had as a kid. His story, titled, “Vacation 58”, landed him a job at National Lampoon Magazine. Importantly, his story became the basis for a film titled, National Lampoon’s Vacation, of which he also wrote the screenplay. The film, which was released in 1983, became a huge hit and put National Lampoon Magazine back on the map (Biography Channel).

            In 1984, Hughes directed his first film, Sixteen Candles, a film about a teenage girl named Samantha Baker, who’s family forgets her 16th birthday. In addition to her family’s forgetfulness, she suffers numerous embarrassments on her would-be special day. The film was highly praised by critics and audiences alike. Furthermore, since Hughes tended to cast “no-name” actors and actresses and his films became successful, he launched the careers of several actors we know today. In the case of Sixteen Candles, he launched the career of actress Molly Ringwald, along with actors John Cusack and Anthony Michael Hall.     

Hughes’s next film was The Breakfast Club, another film dealing with teenagers. The film centers on five high school students, each with very different social backgrounds, who meet up at school for a Saturday detention. The film was unique for the period in that the entire movie took place in one building—the school. As with Sixteen Candles, the film was critically acclaimed and praised by audiences. It was the second time Hughes cast Molly Ringwald and the third time he cast Anthony Michael Hall. After the release of the film, the term “Brat Pack” appeared, which referred to a group of actors that came of age during the ‘80s and were frequently cast together. The “Brat Pack” included Emilio Estevez, Anthony Michael Hall, Robe Lowe, Andrew McCarthy, Demi Moore, Judd Nelson, Molly Ringwald, and Ally Sheedy.      

After The Breakfast Club, Hughes’s next major film was Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, a film about a rebellious high schooler who decides to get his friends together and skip a day of school. As with Hughes’s previous works, (with the minor exception of Weird Science in 1985), the film was highly praised by critics and audiences. The film eventually was the pinnacle of Hughes’s career, and today is regarded as one of the most classic teen films of all time. 

After Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Hughes took a break from the teen genre and shifted to adults in Planes, Trains & Automobiles, a comedy film about a man (Steve Martin) trying to get home for Thanksgiving after accidentally running into an obnoxious stranger (John Candy). The film, which was again based on a terrible traveling experience by John Hughes, was well received by critics and audiences. 

After Planes, Trains and Autombiles, Hughes rolled out two more films in the 80’s: She’s Having a Baby (1988) and Uncle Buck (1989). The films weren’t as well received by critics as Hughes’s previous films, but nonetheless registered well with audiences. Hughes, although he didn’t direct them, also wrote sequels to 1983’s National Lampoon’s Vacation, with Christmas Vacation in 1989 being the most successful.

            After directing Uncle Buck, Hughes, who was impressed with the talent of a young, unknown Macaulay Culkin in the film, wrote a screenplay specifically for Culkin to star in---Home Alone. The film, which was released in 1990, became an instant Christmas classic, and spawned a sequel written by Hughes: Home Alone 2: Lost in New York. Home Alone also launched the career of Culkin, who went on to become the highest paid child actor of all time.

            The last film Hughes directed was Curly Sue in 1991, which received generally negative critic and audience reviews. After the film, Hughes largely retreated from the film industry and from the public in general, even avoiding interviews or photographs He eventually moved to Wisconsin. Tragically, on August 6, 2009, while taking a walk in New York City, Hughes suffered a fatal heart attack, dying at age 59. He is survived by his wife, Nancy Ludwig, whom he married in 1970, and his two children (Biography Channel).

            Hughes used several trademarks in his films. Perhaps most notably, he set almost all his films in Chicago, Illinois, the city he and his family moved to when he was 13. Hughes especially used Ferris Bueller’s Day Off to showcase the city. As previously mentioned, Hughes frequently cast the same actors or actresses, with examples being Anthony Michael Hall, Molly Ringwald, and John Candy. Another trademark of Hughes was to end his films in freeze frame, as is evidenced by Planes, Trains & Autombiles and Uncle Buck (both of which end in freeze frames of John Candy). Finally, an interesting trademark of Hughes was to film close ups of two characters “locking eyes” with each other. Examples of this include Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and Planes, Trains & Autombiles.

BELOW are two examples of Hughes's trademark of shooting closeups of two characters "locking eyes" with each other.

            In conclusion, John Hughes was a brilliant screenwriter and director who really "owned" the 1980s teen comedy genre. He was praised repeatedly by critics and audiences for somehow, without being a teenager himself, knowing what life was truly like for 80s teens. Furthermore, many actors and actresses today are indebted to him for launching their careers and putting them in the spotlight---most notably Macaulay Culkin and Molly Ringwald. Although his career took a tumble in the 1990’s, Hughes left a lasting legacy and will always be remembered for producing so many classic 80’s films that will stand for many generations to come.

Written by Anthony Watkins

WORKS CITED
“John Hughes.” The Biography Channel website. 2014. 27 Jan. 2014.
            <http://www.biography.com/people/john-hughes-476258>.

            Where once film had been classified as the language of sight and sound, in more recent years, movie theaters have found ways to engage our other senses. Although 3D still remains relatively young in its development as a formidable medium through which to capture film, we already stand on the precipice of yet another revolutionary, cinematic movement: the inclusion of 4D experiences. For the most part, 4D refers to immersive film viewing, where people can enjoy enhanced sensory experiences. Similar to the intent of 3D in its early use, 4D came about in an attempt to create a movie-viewing atmosphere unique to theaters, which could not be cheaply replicated at home. Nevertheless, since the tools needed to create 4D experiences remain rather expensive, its adoption into the market has been quite slow, and most 4D films are presented in custom-built theaters at special venues like Disney World.

            Despite this limited and slow release, the notion of enhancing the experience and reality of a film seems to present some interesting opportunities that would very likely appeal to younger moviegoers. Through 4D, a variety of effects can be simulated to replicate rain, wind, car chases, crash landings, and so forth. In addition, 4D has the ability to emit varying smells to aid in a viewer’s understanding of the setting, which seems to provide a rather comical reality to the words of Marty DiBergi, who wanted to capture “the sights, the sounds…the smells of a hard-working rock band” in the 1984 mockumentary, This Is Spinal Tap. Alongside these effects that 4D has to offer, theaters have also begun to develop and expand the notion of 3D audio effects, which allows theaters to virtually place sound sources anywhere within a 3-dimenstional space. This would allow movies to audibly create a sense of depth in any given scene.

            Of all the companies pushing this technology, one of the largest proponents is South Korean’s CJ 4DPlex, which views all cinematic experiences as an evolutionary process of storytelling that seeks to bring joy to audiences everywhere (Fuchs). According to Bruce Greenberg, the Hollywood-based senior VP of CJ 4DPlex, “2D allows audiences to watch the movie, 3D allows them to really see the movie, but 4D now allows them to be immersed with the movie.” Demonstrating their strong trust in the opportunities offered by this technology, CJ 4DPlex has started rapidly expanding its number of theaters. However, similar to arguments against 3D filmmaking, should the advent of 4D screenings be considered a gimmick?

            Without a doubt, 4D theaters seem poised to particularly cater to the experience of viewing action-packed films, as film goer Josh from /Film noted in his experience while watching Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince in D-Box (Sciretta). Ultimately, while watching the movie, Joshua noted that he often found himself waiting impatiently through scenes containing dialogue and hoping for additional action sequences. Personally, I believe that this provides a very clear indicator of how 4D can be a distracting technology that allows the message of a movie to be lost in the “amusement park thrills” of experiences offered by 4D. However, the opportunities that 4D has to offer could be rather exciting if effectively used to enhance a film’s overarching message.

Works Cited

Fuchs, Andreas. "Moving pictures: An in-depth look at enhanced '4D' experiences." Film Journal International. 16 Aug 2013. Web. <http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/news-and-features/features/technology/e3ibaaa998fe66e7ae0a9955035d6362c84>.

Sciretta, Peter. "Are D-Box Movie Theater Motion Seats a Gimmick or a Cinematic Revolution?" /Film. 20 Jul 2009. Web. <http://www.slashfilm.com/are-d-box-movie-theater-motion-seats-a-gimmick-or-a-cinematic-revolution/>.

Thus begins Alfonso Cuarón’s Gravity, one of the most critically acclaimed films to be released in 2013. An eerie space drama, the film, starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, centers on Dr. Ryan Stone (Bullock), a medical engineer on her maiden voyage in space on board the shuttle Explorer. The purpose of the mission is to install a new “scanning system” on the Hubble Space Telescope. The mission is interrupted, however, as Mission Control informs the crew that the Russians have destroyed one of their defunct satellites via missile, resulting in a cloud of debris that has accidentally caused a chain reaction, resulting in the destruction of several satellites (including communication satellites). Houston further informs the crew that the debris is on a collision path with the shuttle, traveling at 20,000 miles per hour. Ultimately the crew are unable to escape in time, and the debris collides with the shuttle, destroying it and killing all the crew members except Stone and veteran mission commander Matt Kowalski (Clooney). Stranded, Stone and Kowalski have to find a way to make it back to earth on their own, and fast, as the satellite debris circles the earth and comes back every 90 minutes.

The Visuals
Without a doubt, the first thing that will strike you and leave you in awe about this film is the ground breaking visual effects. The effects are so complex that Cuarón could not create the film when he originally wanted several years earlier, simply because the current technology did not meet his vision. However, in 2009, with the release of James Cameron’s Avatar, he realized he could now create the film and fulfill his high expectations (IMDB).

Since the beginning of production, Cuarón strongly desired everything to look as authentic as possible. One of the most important areas was the physics. As we all know, there’s no gravity in space. A moving object will continue to move unless acted on by a force. As a result, astronauts move, accelerate, and bounce off objects in unique ways. The daunting task was making sure each of these interactions look and feel as real as possible. Cuarón noted, "It took a lot of education for the animators to fully grasp that the usual laws of cause and effect don’t apply. In outer space, there is no up; there is no down." Ultimately, to achieve this level of authenticity, Cuarón and his team spent over two years pre-visualizing the entire film, shot-for-shot, carefully blocking and timing the shots. Only after this lengthy process was completed did they bring Bullock and Clooney on set (Brody). 

This, however, was just one of the major areas the production team had to consider and carefully plan out. Another major area was the lighting. As we all know, light in space comes from the sun. The light rays bounce off everything in their path (Ex: Earth). In this film, however, with the destruction of a crew’s shuttle and our main characters whirling in every direction imaginable, the light reflection will rapidly change (Brody). Ultimately, the actors' facial light has to line up with the sun, earth, and star light. So how does someone change the various possible reflections that will occur? The cinematographer of the film, Emmanuel Lubezki, came up with the solution by inventing a new technology---a “Light Box” (IMDB). The box consisted of 196 panels, each containing 4,096 LED lights. An actor was placed inside the box, and, with computer software, the visual effects team could instantaneously change any LED light to form the correct reflection on the actor's face, costume, and props. As an added bonus, the box could display to the actor the scene they were supposed to be acting in (Brody). The end result of using the light box was only the actor’s faces being real photography---literally everything else in the space environment in the film was Computer Generated Imagery (CGI). As you can see, the visual effects team worked tirelessly to create the final, beautiful product you see in the film. Deservingly so, in this area, the film was nominated Oscars for Best Cinematography and Best Visual Effects.

The Direction
Besides the outstanding visual effects, another area the film excels in is masterful directing from Alfonso Cuarón. Cuarón, a Mexican-born director, is known for his long shots. It’s a trademark he’s used in his last couple films, including his last feature film, Children of Men. Gravity is no exception. Right out of the gate, the film opens with an almost 13 minute opening shot. Yes 13 minutes of one shot…something unheard of in the traditional Hollywood standard. I believe these long shots are utilized especially well in a film set in space, as the camera seems to be “floating” along with the astronauts. Brody notes, “These [long shots] transform audiences from observers to participants in the scenes, living in the tempos of these movies.” Furthermore, since the setting is the endless realm of space, Cuarón expands the use of the long shot by having the “camera, actor, and scene rotate and roll around one another in apparently complete dimensional freedom. This instantly communicates the feeling of true space operations” (Brody). Long shots, of course, added to the complexity of the film, as every scene had to be carefully planned out and perfectly executed, since it's one take. This was another one of the major challenges for production of the film. Besides the extensive use of long shots, there are also several very interesting POV (Point-of-View) shots, including some shots of the camera being inside Stone's helmet. The audience sees exactly what she's seeing, as well as hears her panting breath and low-oxygen indicators beeping. This is another way Cuarón makes the audience not watch the film, but experience it.

A perfect example of Cuarón's masterful directing. In this scene, after a close encounter, Stone (Bullock) enters the ISS (International Space Station). Upon closing the hatch, she takes a deep breath and curls up in the fetal position. You probably already noticed, but this shot resembles the womb. In this scene, it symbolizes a possible "rebirth" for Stone's emotionally-striken character...whether in the end she will change her outlook on life.



The Score
Another major technical aspect that this film excels in is the score. Composed by newcomer Steven Price (only his third feature film), the score succeeds in every way, conveying how space is vast and beautiful, yet brutal. Early on, Cuarón made it clear that the setting was space---a vacuum. There’s no sound. He asked Price to only allow sounds that the astronauts would hear. So how does one go about composing music for the film? Price stated, “I was asked to try and tonally represent things that would ordinarily be sound. You don’t hear an explosion in the film, but you might hear some pulsation in the music that reflects it. The score is doing the job of traditional sound, while the sound crew was able to do an interesting job on their own” (Rosen). For his work, Price received an Oscar nomination for Best Original Score.

The Acting
It’s obvious the film is a technical achievement. However, the film still could not have succeeded as well as it did without a strong performance from the lead actress….and Sandra Bullock delivered. Personally, I haven’t seen many of Bullock’s films. I can’t speak for how well she has acted in other roles. But I can speak for her performance in Gravity. Her character, Dr. Ryan Stone, is a depressed, lonely woman who, although she’s physically alive, really isn’t living. She lost her four-year old daughter in a freak accident. Since then, she has essentially stopped living life. She states to Kowalski early on that every day she gets in her car and just “drives”. When asked by Kowalski what she loves about space, she replies, “the silence”. However, when she gets stranded in space, she is left to ponder her situation and to think about moving on with life. She is repeatedly encouraged by the the always-optimistic Kowalski to not "let go" of life (thus the film's tagline)---to make the most of the time we have been given and to live life to the fullest. She goes on an emotional roller coaster in the film, and Bullock provides the powerful performance necessary for an emotionally distraught character like Stone. Bullock prepared months for the role, and in the end fully immersed herself in her character. She even used the new technology, the "light box", to her advantage. Since the box could only hold one actor at a time, it left her isolated from everyone, mirroring her character's dilemma. Bullock stated, "There was no human connection, other than the voices coming through my little earwig, which helped because it made me feel so alone" (Brody). Many people are calling Bullock's acting in the film “the performance of her career” and the film that will define her as actress. In any case, she received an Oscar nomination for “Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role”. 

In conclusion, Alfonso Cuarón’s Gravity is truly a cinematic masterpiece in almost every aspect. It is without a doubt a technical achievement, embracing new technology and seriously raising the stakes for future special effects films. I think Richard Corliss of TIME summed it up perfectly: "Gravity shows us the glory of cinema's future." The film also showcases one of the most powerful forces on the planet---the human will to live. The motion picture has received tremendous critical and audience acclaim, and has received 10 Oscar nominations. In my opinion, it lives up to the hype. I saw it several times in theaters, including IMAX 3D, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Due to its tremendous success at the box office (grossing $700 million worldwide), Warner Bros. has re-released it in theaters (ComingSoon). On January 31, it will be re-released in IMAX 3D.  If you haven’t seen this film yet, I strongly recommend it, especially in IMAX 3D, as this truly gives you the full, immersive experience.

Written by Anthony Watkins


WORKS CITED

Brody, Dave. “Making ‘Gravity’: How Filmmaker Alfonso Cuarón Created ‘Weightlessness’ Without Spaceflight.” Space.com. 03 Oct. 2013. 22 Jan. 2014. <http://www.space.com/23073-gravity-movie-weightlessness-alfonso-Cuarón.html>.

“Gravity to be Re-Released in IMAX 3D Theaters on January 31.” Coming Soon. 16 Jan 2014. 22 Jan. 2014. <http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=113634>.

IMDB. 2014. 01 Jan. 2014. <http://www.imdb.com>.

Rosen, Christopher. “’Gravity’ Composer Steven Price On The Film’s Incredible Soundtrack.” Huffington Post. 04 Oct. 2013. 22 Jan. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/04/gravity-steven-price_n_4039455.html>.

Fluidity is almost required in filmmaking today and is present in every major film created in our era. Directors, cinematographers and camera operators are forced to eliminate the audience's awareness of the camera while they are viewing a film, and therefore need to discover the most effective way to smooth each shot. To accomplish this, filmmakers have begun to rely on Steadicam's and Glidecam's, motion stabilizers that serve to give the camera operator the liberty to move throughout a scene.

Steadicam, which was the first company to produce these inventions in the early 1970's, changed cinematography permanently, causing a phenomenon that produced films whose versatility and use of space was drastically improved. Before the Stadicam's, movement within filmmaking was restricted to two choices for creating a shot: either setting up a dolly system with tracks and wheels (this process was time consuming and monotonous), or shooting the scene handheld (this created shakiness to the frame). By combining mobility, efficiency and fluidity, filmmaking was changed and dramatically improved.

The first film that effectively used the Steadicam was Hal Ashby's Bound For Glory (1975), which won Haskell Wexler an Oscar for Best Cinematography in 1976 for his use of the Steadicam. Following the success of Bound For Glory, many directors started to implement the machinery to their own works and it's popularity spread. Stanley Kubrick, working on The Shining (1980), which would later become a horror classic, saw the expansive possibilities with the Steadicam and created one of the most famous technical film scenes to date. In the shot, we see Danny, a small child, riding his tricycle through the empty hallways of the hotel, having the freedom to explore and glide in and out of the spaces. (You can view the scene below). Kubrick followed the boy on his journey, keeping the camera low to the ground and maintaining a smooth and uninterrupted shot. This gave the illusion that we were on the tricycle with Danny, flying through the hotel with the same sense of freedom he was given. Kubrick, being one of the most well renowned directors of all time and by using the Steadicam, gave credibility to the usability of the device.

34 years after the premier of The Shining, it is hard to find a movie where the Steadicam or a similar version is not used in production. In fact, to be labeled as a professional in the filmmaking arena, Steadicam is a necessity, as it shows a level of class and perfection that isn't present in cheaper films. A mirroring company that has recently gained some popularity with YouTubers, amateur and student filmmakers is the Glidecam. These glidecam rigs are cheaper and lighter, mainly used for small cameras such as the DSLR's and provide those without a large budget on film projects to create a professional look to their usually amateur projects.

Steadicam revolutionized cinematography in the 1970's and 1980's and has carried over to many beautiful shots and films of today. Amateur or Hollywood blockbuster, Steadicam's give audiences visually appealing cinema and provide a better level of efficiency for the filmmakers. To see what the Steadicam looks like in a modern setting from the filmmaker's perspective, check out the Behind the Scenes video from an action sequence in the film Elysium (Neil Blomkamp, 2013) below.

This week I would like to draw attention to a new release.  The film Gimme Shelter comes out tomorrow (January 24th) and is the most recent film by a little known director named Ron Krauss.  This trailer stood out to me for a number of reasons which I will explain in a moment.  First allow me to explain what I am about to do in this trailer analysis, and if you have not seen the trailer for this film please click this link here Gimme Shelter Trailer and watch before you continue.

When analyzing a trailer there are a number of elements that draw us to a film, one would be the actors who are working in the film.  The second is the emotions the trailer evokes.  Third would be catch phrases or taglines.  There are a number of other subtle elements to movie trailers but in this Trailer Review I would like to focus on the three listed above.

First the Actors.
There were a few surprises with the actors who chose to work in this film.  The first was Brendan Fraser who is known more for his comedic and sometimes silly roles.  I have often enjoyed this actor especially his work in other dramas such as Crash and in the sitcom Scrubs he starred in one of the most emotional episodes of television I have ever seen; the episode was titled My Screwup.  Second surprise casting was the great James Earl Jones.  Mr. Jones is a phenomenal actor who is known for his voice acting as Darth Vader in the original Star Wars Trilogy and Mufasa in The Lion King.  He is also known for his role as Terence Mann in The Field of Dreams.  I was saddened to see him recently reduced to cell phone commercials about texting.  It is great to see him in a more serious role again.  And finally the biggest surprise was that the star in this trailer is the lovely Vanessa Hudgens who became known for Disney Channel's High School Musical.  This role seems to be a great departure for her and yet she looked so completely different than herself that it gives me hope that it will work.

Second the Emotion.
From the opening of the trailer to the end you can see this film is intending to be an emotional roller coaster.  The opening of cutting hair with no music evokes such a grating yet strong feeling that my attention was immediately seized.  It is more than obvious that this is going to be a coming of age story about a girl who has had an extremely rough childhood.  Yet, with that pronounced strongly on the surface I hope it will carry through to more depth and really ask the hard questions.  Apple’s (Vanessa Hudgen’s character) challenge as to where God was when she was suffering is a question often asked and I hope this film will be able to deliver with more than a casual brush off.

Third and Finally the Catch Phrase.
Catch phrases and taglines are terms probably better relegated to comedic forays into the film medium.  However every trailer has some form of this advertisement tool and this one evokes an often over used one, “Based on a True Story.” This particular tagline always begs the question of how much of this film was true?  The scenario of a teen living on the streets and becoming pregnant is one that is all too often plausible.  But, given the details of the story, a wall street father, drug addicted mother, and a chaplain giving assistance I once again find this trailer doing its job of drawing me in.

Gimme Shelter is exactly the type of emotional drama that can stand out in the January season of risky not-quite-blockbuster action films, and lack luster dramas.  I truly hope I am not wrong and that the trailer delivers on the heart string chords it is pulling.


by Mark Young

In his 2008 dark superhero film, The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan, as in his previous movies, pushed his film crew to develop and perform the best stunts possible in order to avoid having to resort to CGI effects. One of the greatest stunts of these in The Dark Knight was a scene involving a moving eighteen-wheeler truck being completely flipped upside down. Initially, the special effects supervisor of the film, Chris Corbould, attempted to convince Nolan to use a smaller vehicle for the stunt, as this would make the attempt much easier. Nevertheless, Nolan insisted on using a full size eighteen-wheeler.

After agreeing to figure out a way to accomplish the massive stunt, Corbould’s crew eventually developed a large, remote-controlled piston to be placed under the truck. Ensuring the safety of the driver, Jim Wilky, was of critical importance, so Corbould’s men reinforced the driver’s seat with several steel bars to protect and hold Wilky in place during the 180-degree flip. During early tests, the piston successfully flipped the truck—remarkably in the right fashion. Corbould quoted, “I couldn’t believe my eyes…it had to go over straight, and it literally deviated off course by no more than six inches.”

The location of the truck flip in the film was a little tricky. Corbould noted, “The road Chris[topher Nolan] chose to do it was right in the middle of the banking district, plus underneath the road there were underground vaults for the banks…there were only two spots over this half mile stretch of road that we could actually do the gag.”

There was, however, one minor special effect needed to complete the scene. The Cinematographer for the film, Wally Pfister, (with whom Nolan collaborates on each of his films) stated, “The only visual effect involved in that scene was to remove the ram that they had built inside the truck that actually catapulted it.”

Because of the gravity of this scene, Christopher Nolan used several cameras to capture the stunt. He noted, “We covered it from I think seven different angles---4 IMAX cameras, 2 Vista Vision ones, a 35…I actually don’t like to use a lot of multi-cam setups, but doing a stunt that is not repeatable like this, you really have to cover yourself and make sure you’ve got it from all angles.”

In the final cut of the film, Nolan used two angles of the truck: a camera positioned on a separate vehicle moving along with the eighteen wheeler, and a camera located inside a cop car that was moving directly toward the truck. Nolan stated, “Much to our surprise we found this to be one of the most effective angles.” 

Written by Anthony Watkins

SOURCE
The Dark Knight Blu-Ray disc


BELOW are three screenshots of the truck flip sequence. In the middle picture, you can see the piston that flipped the truck. (It's positioned at the bottom right corner, just in front of the yellow taxi cab). In the third screenshot, it is more clearly seen as it stands out in the smoke. This piston was digitally removed during post-production. (only special effect used in the sequence)

Here is the full truck flip sequence presented in the film. The piston was digitally removed, but the smoke from it is still visible in the final cut.

            As the market for mobile devices increases and their capabilities become greater and more affordable, the world of cinema finds itself asking a previously inconceivable question: will we ever reach a point where feature length movies can be shot on mobile devices? Considering how far mobile technology has come in the last several years, this certainly seems to be a very probable path. In fact, at the 85th Academy Awards, the movie that won the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature, Searching for Sugar Man (Bendjelloul, 2012), featured some scenes that used an iPhone equipped with the “8mm Vintage Camera App” because the film ran out of funding before its completion. Before that, Olive (Khalili, 2011) made headlines in December 2011 when it became the first feature film to be shot on a smartphone and released to cinemas. Shot with a Nokia N8 attached to a 35mm lens adapter, the filmmakers were able to obtain a very crisp picture that rivals the quality obtained in other independent films.

            However, the selling point for mobile devices is not the quality but rather the convenience. Since a large number of people own smartphones, the ability to also film on these devices presents people with a far cheaper alternative to renting or purchasing professional cameras, which has become a popular option for film students with a very limited budget. Given the “Do It Yourself” capabilities of shooting movies on mobile devices, filmmakers are certainly in an interesting period of time where they can easily share their stories with the world. As a matter of fact, some apps like iMovie allow users to edit videos on mobile devices and when finished, the movie could be uploaded to YouTube for distribution. That means that a smartphone has the potential to be the sole device used throughout the preproduction, production, and postproduction stages.

            But with this added convenience, are filmmakers sacrificing the quality of their work and producing a great deal of mediocre material that lessens the professional elements and theories associated with filmmaking? In some regards this seems to be the case, but with the added flexibility of mobile devices, many people are allowed to have a voice in an industry that was previously solely functional through massive studios. This ultimately allows more people to creatively express themselves through the visual medium of storytelling. In all, while capturing footage from mobile devices has not been widely incorporated into mainstream cinema yet, the opportunities that this medium offers seem interesting and could be poised to radically alter the film industry in upcoming years.

            Although 12 Years a Slave was not the first movie in recent years to depict the struggles of those who endured the shameful legacy of slavery and injustice in America, it may very well be the most successful at exposing the true horrors of bondage, stripped down and directly addressed. Written by John Ridley and directed by Steve McQueen, 12 Years a Slave tells the true story of Solomon Northup (Chiwetel Eijofor), a free man from upstate New York who was kidnapped and sold into slavery when two men enticed him with a lucrative touring gig as a fiddle player for a circus. Where once Solomon had a sense of equality and a family around him, in one unfortunate chance encounter, he loses his identity and is forcibly removed from a life of comfort. Ultimately, this dichotomy between freedom and bondage observed through one man’s eyes is what allows the film to thrive as a meditative and somber reflection on the dehumanization surrounding American slavery (and slavery as a whole for that matter).

             With 12 Years a Slave, Steve McQueen continues to establish his auteurship as an unflinching director who tackles difficult topics pertaining to humanistic elements. In his debut, Hunger (2008), McQueen exposed the depths of dedication and despair that people are willing to endure in order to get their message across, while in his second film, Shame (2011), McQueen exposed the corrosive and damaging effects of sexual addiction. In 12 Years a Slave, McQueen focuses on the range of personas that humans exhibit to others, which is evident in the disparity between the “compassionate” and the sadist slave owners that Solomon encounters. Moreover, 12 Years a Slave forces viewers to observe humankind at its most debased state and witness the terrible dehumanization that occurs when one group believes that they are superior to another. With that said, Solomon’s trials and tribulations should not be interpreted as a message from McQueen that solely seeks to inform his audience of the horrors of American slavery, but also as a call to action to react to evil in the world and reach out to those in need.

            This emotional weight is greatly enhanced by the film’s strong performances, particularly from the solemnly powerful lead actor, Chiwetel Eijofor. Since Chiwetel is onscreen for the vast majority of the film, the plot and events that take place in 12 Years a Slave are all seen and experienced through his character’s eyes. Moreover, although the physical burdens for Solomon are obvious onscreen, the expressions from Chiwetel alone succeed in communicating his internal struggles to survive and remain hopeful. In addition to Chiwetel, Michael Fassbender’s acting as Edwin Epps intensely illustrates the skewed mentalities that some people adopt to justify their actions. In one scene where the Epps plantation encounters a plague that destroys much of its crop, rather than entertain the notion that his own sins may be to blame, Epps believes that his slaves are a “Godless lot” who have cursed his land. In another scene, Epps justifies a violent assault on one of his slaves by claiming that he is guilty of no sin since they are his property and “a man does how he pleases with his property.” While Chiwetel and Fassbender both have excellent performances in the film, Lupita Nyong'o's acting as Patsey dominates the latter half of the film in a surprisingly powerful way. Although tragically tortured by her environment, Patsey's strong will and dreams of liberty are portrayed in a heroic manner, and are likely responsible for Solomon's continued drive to return home.

            Despite Solomon’s story being one ridden with nightmarish events that are very difficult to watch, by the end of the film, 12 Years a Slave shines as a beacon of hope for an end to social inequality. Early into Solomon’s unfortunate journey, he is presented with the option to fight or passively survive. However, Solomon knows that survival cannot be enough and states, “I want to live.” Through this statement, Solomon not only declares his independence, but also acknowledges that through the humanistic embrace of actively pursuing equality, true freedom can be achieved; this theme shapes the focal humanistic element that McQueen’s third feature film seeks to address.

My favorite color is red. So when I first heard about the Red Digital Cameras that are fueling the digital cinema expansion, I was intrigued.

While cinema has been around since the early 20th century and has thrived off the Industrial Revolution and the expanding artistic values of our culture, filmmaking was originally restricted and uncontested to a single process, focused around cellophane film reels. There were intense changes to film style and techniques throughout the first century of the medium's existence, namely the inclusion of sound and color, but film was recorded through film reels for decades without change. That grainy watermark on the moving picture was a trademark of cinema, and created a sense of nostalgia for audiences and a pride of an art for the director. Then the Digital Revolution arrived.

Instead of the images being recorded on a roll of film, beautiful pictures were captured through a lens onto a digital chip inside of the camera. The data is then stored in the camera's memory, and is available to be reviewed at anytime. Before, filmmakers were required to wait a full day for the film to be developed, only to be shown the shots the following day. This anticipation and monotony to the whole process of film production was eliminated by the use of the digital platforms and codecs.

Let's get a quick overview of Red, the recent innovator of this digital transformation.

So how has this camera  helped change the cinematic playing field? The first film shot completely with the Red camera was a small production called The Red Canvas (Kenneth Chaminoff, 2009), which was about a Martial Arts tournament. While this film was not well known, within three years the Red's were making their marks. Oscar nominated and highly celebrated film District 9 (Neil Blomkamp, 2010) was shot completely on the versatile cameras, particularly to help create the found footage effect for the story. The Red's lightweight handling allowed for Blomkamp to move quickly through the scenes, replicating a camera man character that was added to the story. The adaptability also gave the director better flexibility for action sequences that were the focal
point for much of the film. 

Although the Red Digital Cinema Camera Company was highly anticipated for the filmmaking and digital worlds, and was projected to be significant for the improvement of digital filmmaking, the process was expedited by famous filmmaker Peter Jackson, who, as a producer for Blomkamp's District 9, pushed him to use the Red One's. Jackson has also used the Red Epic Camera on his most recent project, the highly anticipated The Hobbit (2012, 2013), even shooting the footage at 48 frames per second rather than the typical 24 frames per second. The Red Digital Cinema Camera Company has sparked an innovative revolution for the digital cinematic world, causing people to jumpstart and grow these digital styles. 
    
Other significant films and productions that have used the Red One and/or Epic cameras:    

• Antichrist (Lars Von Trier, 2009)   
• Sanctuary; the first North American television series to use the Red One exclusively   
• Leverage; television series that did not use any traditional film   
• Director Steven Soderbergh has shot multiple films, including Che (2008), The Infomant! (2009), Contagion (2011), Haywire (2012), Magic Mike (2012), and Side Effects (2013), using a Red.  
• Beginners (Mike Mills, 2010)   
• God of Love (Luke Matheny, 2010), an Oscar winning short film   
• David Fincher shot both The Social Network (2010) and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) on Reds  
• Louie; a television series by comedian Louis C.K. that used his own Red One camera
• Justified; a television series that used a Red Epic camera on the third season   
• Much Ado About Nothing (Joss Whedon, 2012)
• Upcoming film Transformers: Age of Extinction (Michael Bay, 2014) will be shot on the brand new Red Dragon Digital Camera

It'll be interesting to see how the Red Digital Cinema Camera Company continues to improve and renovate this digital cinematic world. The film industry is being changed by the Digital Revolution, and the Red cameras are at the forefront.