Monday, July 14, 2008
Something I knew going into making "Getting Lear" was that I would have to interview members of the cast multiple times, and sometimes ask them the same questions during different interview sessions. The objective behind interviewing the cast members more than once was based on my desire to have them comfortable -- being themselves -- in front of the camera.
My first attempts at creating a comfortable environment were undone by my insistence that they answer every question by re-stating the question and then proceeding with their answer. This was both awkward and a conversation killer.
My reasons for making them repeat the question was to create the illusion that the filmmaker was not in the room and make each answer a clear response to a particular question asked by no one in particular.
This gigantic misstep grew out of my not wanting to inject myself into my own film.
After recently having sat on a film festival selection committee, I was very familiar with the "filmmaker as subject" genre of documentary that is pervasive among novice doc filmmakers.
More times than I can count I encountered docs about the filmmaker confronting some family issue, or crisis, or demon, with a camera being used as the tool for healing. More often than not, the results are self-indulgent and the opportunity to tell an interesting story is missed.
Personal doc filmmaking, like good memoir writing, requires a strong voice and an even stronger sense of story.
Perhaps the blame for these personal films falls evenly on the shoulders of Michael Moore and Morgan Spurlock, but the origins of this type of doc goes back to Ross McElwee's 1986 masterpiece "Sherman's March."
All three of these filmmakers are masters of their own voice, and are more than willing to play the fool in their own films.
Having said that, I should also add that Fred's film "Average Community" (that I'm co-producing) is (in my biased opinion) a film that succeeds at allowing the filmmaker to be a part of the story because it is from his VHS footage of twenty years ago that he unravels the mysteries of time and uncovers the truth -- by reconciling the fuzzy VHS images of his youth with the reality of today -- powerful stuff.
TO BE CONTINUED...
Something I knew going into making "Getting Lear" was that I would have to interview members of the cast multiple times, and sometimes ask them the same questions during different interview sessions. The objective behind interviewing the cast members more than once was based on my desire to have them comfortable -- being themselves -- in front of the camera.
My first attempts at creating a comfortable environment were undone by my insistence that they answer every question by re-stating the question and then proceeding with their answer. This was both awkward and a conversation killer.
My reasons for making them repeat the question was to create the illusion that the filmmaker was not in the room and make each answer a clear response to a particular question asked by no one in particular.
This gigantic misstep grew out of my not wanting to inject myself into my own film.
After recently having sat on a film festival selection committee, I was very familiar with the "filmmaker as subject" genre of documentary that is pervasive among novice doc filmmakers.
More times than I can count I encountered docs about the filmmaker confronting some family issue, or crisis, or demon, with a camera being used as the tool for healing. More often than not, the results are self-indulgent and the opportunity to tell an interesting story is missed.
Personal doc filmmaking, like good memoir writing, requires a strong voice and an even stronger sense of story.
Perhaps the blame for these personal films falls evenly on the shoulders of Michael Moore and Morgan Spurlock, but the origins of this type of doc goes back to Ross McElwee's 1986 masterpiece "Sherman's March."
All three of these filmmakers are masters of their own voice, and are more than willing to play the fool in their own films.
Having said that, I should also add that Fred's film "Average Community" (that I'm co-producing) is (in my biased opinion) a film that succeeds at allowing the filmmaker to be a part of the story because it is from his VHS footage of twenty years ago that he unravels the mysteries of time and uncovers the truth -- by reconciling the fuzzy VHS images of his youth with the reality of today -- powerful stuff.
TO BE CONTINUED...
No comments:
Post a Comment