Technology and story-telling

[dvazp]

I'm a little bit concerned because it seems there are a lot people on this forum who do not make a living from film/tv production and yet are willing to spend thousands of hard-earned dollars on technology they think will make them into great filmmakers.

I find it very shocking and very sad. You have all heard this before, but technology is not the most important thing to making a great movie. The most important thing is having something to say. I recently saw an amazing film directed by 19-year old Ryo Nakajima which was made on a budget of about $10000 and which has been winning awards at film festivals around the world. That budget is for everything from actors to props to equipment. It's less than what most of us would spend on a camera/edit suite combination.

My advice would be: if you really want to make films don't spend thousands of dollars on equipment promising to make you the next Spielberg or Scorsese. Think about what you've got to say, develop a story and work around your limitations. You don't need an expensive camera or a professional editing suite. You need creativity and a story, and if you don't have that no technology can help you.

Btw, go to the film's webiste at http://peijafilm.nightfall.jp/ You can contact the director and he'll send you a copy of the film.

 

[Richard Lackey]

I've got a great directing book sitting on a shelf that I picked up last night that I haven't read for six years. It's called "Directing, Film Techniques and Aesthetics" by Michael Rabiger. I started reading through it, and within the first few pages it said exactly what you have just pointed out. I think it's a very important point.

Too much excitement about the tools, but perhaps not enough excitement about good storytelling.

This is however a technical forum not a filmmaking or scriptwriting forum, but that said, I was thinking that the Red and Scarlet could potentially result in a lot more really bad indy films, only shot in 4K, and a lot more disillusioned would be filmmakers wondering why the camera hasn't propelled them to superstardom.

A camera is a camera, doesn't matter what it is, who made it, what it shoots. If the story isn't there, the best camera (and even the best cinematography for that matter) won't make a shred of difference.

There have been a number of these discussions on Reduser before I think, not sure that they ever get anywhere.

To be fair though, I think there are a large number of seasoned professionals who are loving this camera and telling great stories, they just tend not to be so vocal on Reduser... they are too busy making movies.

 

[P Andersson]

the trailer of the film he mentioned was interesting to watch

http://peijafilm.nightfall.jp/e_trail/e_trailer005_21Lg_Prog.mov

 

[wardovision]

why be so concerned about it? If the stories are weak then no one will see the film. Doesn't mean they can't have an excellent piece of equipment. I find it odd that the 'Scarlet needs to be more' camp keeps going back to this. Like they're the only ones able to grasp the concept but the same principle applies to million dollar budgets.. IF anything that film is an excellent example of the other side of the fence. Just imagine what less fortunate gifted individuals will now be capable of. Finally those with vision have a quality product they can afford to deliver that vision.

Actually the more I think about it I believe some people might feel threatened with what Scarlet brings to the table. Scarlet is ground breaking and sure to bring a lot of hidden talent out of the woodworks possibly costing others a paycheck.

 

[rarthur]

Not to mention that fact that the people not making great films, but still buying the equipment are what make the equipment available in the first place! Manufacturers are not going to make only 325 cameras for those who are really going to tell a great story. If EVERYONE was making great movies on incredibly accessible equipment, it would make it that much harder for the so-called gifted filmakers to get attention (as I'm assuming you consider yourself). "Good" is incredibly subjective anyway. I think you're under the assumption that all the people of whom you speak have aspirations of a major theatrical release. There may be some guy in Terra Haute who's church production makes his congregation think it looks like a "Hollywood Movie" and that's what he's looking for. Let's also not forget that your first story is never going to be your best. I'm sure even you made a few horrible films when you were first starting out. Are we only allowed to shoot those stories on a Bolex?

 

[Andrew Madu]

I'm a little bit concerned because it seems there are a lot people on this forum who do not make a living from film/tv production and yet are willing to spend thousands of hard-earned dollars on technology they think will make them into great filmmakers.

How can what another decides they wish their vocation to be, and in whatever direction they wish to pursue it, effect the quality of your own life experience?

I find it very shocking and very sad.

May I recommend a book for you to read, 'A New Earth: Awakening to your life's purpose' by Eckhart Tolle.

My advice would be:

Everything is exactly as it is meant to be at precisely this very moment.

Some will buy cameras, some will not. Some will go to film school, some will not. Some will become directors, some will not. Some will have fun, some will not. Some will...ad infinitum!

 

[WesVasher]

Thank you Dukeswharf!

This is like going on a BMW forum and telling everyone they should be driving a Ford Taurus because they aren't professional drivers. Uggg.

The topic of a high quality camera not improving your storytelling has been absolutely beaten to death here ever since the Red was born.

 

[Yannick Hagman]

That's seems to be a very good piece, I will see if I can visit this film somewhere. However, Arthouse is not the only form of film. Of course storytelling is highly important and there's a lot of only stylish-looking contentless rubbish especially if you look at music videos out there. But who cares? You always will stand out if you have something to say. Because soon everyone can make good looking images.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Democratization always bring up lots of junk.

Of course everybody will buy a Scarlet and shoot palm trees put some music and call themselves directors.

It's up to who really want to make films to study, and plan, and dedicate themselves to something they believe to come up with a great film.

I could only buy an FX7 and I will make the best films I can with it till Scarlet comes out or till I have the money for Scarlet (whatever comes first).

If you're a really dedicated professional It doesn't matter if you have a BMW or a Ford, you'll make it happen.

 

[Matthew Bennett]

My personal list in what needs to be in a film to make it 'great'

1. Perfect direction/storytelling
2. Perfect acting
3. Technically flawless sound recording

I think if any of these three elements are not present in the film then it has no chance of being great. I also think that if these elements are all present and perfect, then you can conceivably have poor lighting, shots, etc, and the effect of the story will still be the same.
Now, if you have good directing/storytelling, then the shots will have to at least be clear and concise insomuch as what they are presenting is 'well told', ie the right angles, movement to tell the story. But they don't necessarily have to be well lit, or hi-res.

That said, I also have the greatest respect for cinematography, and believe that the DP should truly 'be at one' with his machine. There is never a downside to being obsessed with technical issues. Just as long as you remember the first three things that have to be delivered in a 'great' movie, then everything else will be fine, its all just levels of excellence after that.

my .02

 

[Aiden Cornwell]

I'm a little bit concerned because it seems there are a lot people on this forum who do not make a living from film/tv production and yet are willing to spend thousands of hard-earned dollars on technology they think will make them into great filmmakers.

I find it very shocking and very sad. You have all heard this before, but technology is not the most important thing to making a great movie. The most important thing is having something to say. I recently saw an amazing film directed by 19-year old Ryo Nakajima which was made on a budget of about $10000 and which has been winning awards at film festivals around the world. That budget is for everything from actors to props to equipment. It's less than what most of us would spend on a camera/edit suite combination.

My advice would be: if you really want to make films don't spend thousands of dollars on equipment promising to make you the next Spielberg or Scorsese. Think about what you've got to say, develop a story and work around your limitations. You don't need an expensive camera or a professional editing suite. You need creativity and a story, and if you don't have that no technology can help you.

Btw, go to the film's webiste at http://peijafilm.nightfall.jp/ You can contact the director and he'll send you a copy of the film.

If a movie or Doc is shot in HD or 2k and is ok or good it has a shot of getting some sort of distribution. If the same product is shot on a hv20 it has far less of a shot of being picked up.

Yes if something is truly amazing regardless of what it is shot on it will be picked up.

However with that said even the micro budgets that get shot normally use a Camera that is within a $1000 of Scarlet.

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

ofcourse the RED cant save a bad script or bad acting or lighting...

It wont make you an overnight Tarantino, or Chris Doyle or whomever you adore... BUT it does give you the opportunity to learn/use proper 35mm lenses and DOF. - a very important aspect of visual storytelling. Perspective and Focus. Mastering that will make you a much better storyteller, which is the essense of film... telling a good story.

As for resolution and all the other technical stuff... consider it a pleasant side effect

 

[Matthew Bennett]

I recently saw an amazing film directed by 19-year old Ryo Nakajima which was made on a budget of about $10000 and which has been winning awards at film festivals around the world.

Btw, go to the film's webiste at http://peijafilm.nightfall.jp/ You can contact the director and he'll send you a copy of the film.

Just watched the trailer - looks beautiful

1. Great directing
2. Flawless acting
3. Flawless location sound

4. Image looks great too! (but not really necessary IMHO)

The trailer fits the bill! (in my value system)
Plus its about something, "In this world", you know, the guy actually is ambitious enough to say "this is how it is in our world, this is how I see it and I'm going to show you". That's difficult to do 'cause you have a lot of responsibility at that point, not to be an idiot or a bullshitter.
Good on him.

Also, the Japanese are sort of born with an innate sense of 2d design for frames, that helps.

 

[dvazp]

I'd just like to say I don't consider myself a great filmmaker. I don't think I have the talent and I'm still learning as an AP on documentaries. I do have ideas which I'm confident are good, but I don't know how to tell them yet. That's why I was so impressed by 'This World of Ours', precisely because I know I can't do it.

And that's why I would have to think long and hard before even considering buying expensive pieces of equipment.

 

[Ayz Waraich]

At the end of the day the red's like any other film related technology. With it, some people will tell good stories and make memorable films, and others... well not so much.

Everyone has the right to try, and everyone has the right to fail, pick themselves up, and try again.

I'm not sure what it matters if someone wants to bet the farm that owning a RED will make them a good film. I cringe thinking about some of the things I invested money in when i was first learning, thinking it would somehow improve my storytelling abilities and magically make a film good.

That's part of the process of learning your $hit.

Oh, and I also agree with pretty much everything Matthew Bennet said in this thread. Word for word. I thought about regurgitating it and making it sound like I'm smart -- but i'm too lazy. So refer to Matthew's post instead. Well said, sir.

EDIT: BTW, I don't own, reserve the right to own, or plan to own a RED anytime soon. But I do plan to shoot something with it in the near future.

 

[John Caballero]

All the pros out there don’t worry about a thing; you are trained, working and ready for the new technology. All the people that are new to filmmaking don’t worry about a thing either because you have a year to get up to speed. Go to a film school if you want. Buy books, read trade magazines, search the internet. Just start practicing with a cheap camera you can pick up or one that you can borrow or once in a while rent. Do not listen to anybody that tells you you shouldn’t or couldn’t. Just politely tell these people to mind their own business.
And people dishing out “advice”, do not worry about anybody else or the money they might spend or not. Everybody has to do what they have to do. If you make it big in the business fine, if you don’t make it big that is fine too, at least you gave it a try. That way later in life you won’t have to say: “what if”.
Showbusiness and filmmaking are about dreams and make believe. If you save a few thousand bucks and put them on the Scarlet it is perfectly OK. It is your money, nobody else’s. With this wonderful new technology coming out newcomers are at the right place at the right time.
“Advisers”, concentrate all your worries on yourself. Don’t mind what the neighbor does or doesn’t do. We all have a year to save money, learn everything we need to know about the new equipment, have constructive discussions about it, start friendships and alliances between members of this community and be positively ready for Scarlet.

 

[michael zaletel]

I'm a little bit concerned because it seems there are a lot people on this forum who do not make a living from film/tv production and yet are willing to spend thousands of hard-earned dollars on technology they think will make them into great filmmakers.

Dvazp...

I honestly don't think anyone on "this" forum thinks technology will make them into great filmmakers. Give this group more credit.

However, until you've had a stock house or network reject your otherwise highly creative "prosumer" footage on the basis of technology, you can't really appreciate what low-cost access to high-end gear means to all the aspiring filmmakers out there.

-shooter

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I'm a filmmaker who gets great response for my visuals even when making a movie on a miniDV camera. I know for certain that Scarlet or RED would enable me to reach the visual level that I'm aiming at.
I push my DVX100 to it's very limit and even cheat with some advanced noisereduction techniques and stuff.

I'm actually stalled in my creative thinking because I see images that comes out about 50% of what I imagined, not because I wasn't able to see it on set but because the technology held me back and gave me less of what I need.

So, as an "amateur" or semi-professional filmmaker I don't see a problem with me buying this or the RED ONE. Even so, when I have it I will probably work with it also, earning money on freelance projects (which I do know but not as much as I need to live by it).

I believe in a balance between directing actors and creating visuals. Every director that can bring life into the characters through the actors while still having great visuals are in my opinion the best filmdirectors in the world.
There are some that are very good at directing actors but lack the visual eye and I don't think that is enough for being a filmdirector. For theatres perhaps but not film.
So, if you are an "amateur" but seriously aims for working as a professional in the future, then I don't see any problem with trying to learn and get a chance to work with these kinds of cameras.
Especially when you care for the visuals and have an eye for it.

Why should I keep doing movies on worse cameras just because I'm not yet called a professional filmmaker? It makes no sense to me, there isn't a line between them, there's only a line between those who are bad and those who are good and even that thing is blurry.

What I love with RED and this forum is that there are professionals and amateurs under the same roof. It's about people who LOVE film and comes together through that love, not how they make their living.

 

[Steve White]

Scarlet is priced at a point that all you need to get one is some disposable income and an enthusiasm for beautiful imaging technology.

Don't assume that everyone wants a Scarlet for creating narrative works. There are a lot of image enthusiasts out there who just want the best quality of what they want to shoot - be it their baby's first steps or an ant hill.

If they can afford a Scarlet they should be allowed to buy one. Same goes for Red One really, it's just at a higher price point.

So don't be judgemental about the users and their money. They earned it being professional at something, and they deserve respect.

 

[Rohclem]

i am dreaming ...

i am dreaming ...

when i was a boy, i dreamed of becoming a film director. perhaps my dream has been conceptualized because of my active participation on our school drama. i would have wanted to go to a film school or take broadcasting/ communication or theater arts to fulfill my dream. but my parents wouldn't let me. i was from a poor family from a third world country. when you are poor, being artistic is not an option. during my time and where i came from, it's only the rich parents who have the priviledge to waste money in sending their children to this kind of school. i said waste because filmmaking is not being considered as serious career that would pay the bill. so i became an xray technologist instead. yeah, it doesn't pay much but at least i'm sure that i'm gonna receive a pay check at the end of the month. my dream still lingers in my whole being. it always haunt me in my sleep. then, few years ago, i was fortunate to come to the UK to work in the NHS. the brits pay good money for medical jobs. now that i'm a bit settled in life, i am now having a glimpse of the light at the end of the tunnel. but i don't have time to queue to beg a film production to hear my pitch. i rather work overtime to buy/rent things needed to do my own film at my own pace. with digital film equipments becoming really affordable these days, i think i'm gonna fulfill my dream sooner than i thought. right now, i am just shooting with a cheap gs500. i did 2 shorts with it just to practice the process of making film. i am now working on a script for my feature film. i'm not in a hurry and i will definitely wait for SCARLET.

and with regards to this thread, technology gave me hope to fulfill my dream in story-telling. THANK YOU, JIM. you are GOD's sent, indeed.