Post Production Remorse

Post Production Remorse and a Couple Other Thoughts . . .

pp

  An article by Shevaun Cavanaugh Kastl

So, I’ve heard it said that one can be in post-production indefinately. Indeed, many films are. I have several on my imdb page that have been in “post production” for YEARS! My own experience as of late has me wondering about this: Is a prolonged post period due to a project floundering? Or due to the incessant nagging of one’s own perfectionism – daring just one last tweak, one final amendment to the finished product to make it even better? We all want to make our creative endeavors a success. We all want high regard and respect for our tireless efforts. So, it’s no wonder that when we say “It’s done,” there is an itch to go back for one more look. I have the itch, and I hate myself for it. I swear at the start of each venture that I won’t be one of “those” people – the Actor who pleads for one more take because they just didn’t “feel it” that time; the Writer who will tweak a scene to death only to crumple up the last six hours of work and toss in the trash basket;, the Director adding a final filter to enhance the look of a five second scene and then change their mind and take it off, then realize they miss the filter. It’s chaos of the creative intellect and a sure-fire sign to “let it go!” And yet, we find ourselves going back for one, last look.
I am not suggesting that if an issue truly needs fixing, one ignores their instincts to make a change (even if the word “COMPLETE” has been uttered out loud) but slipping into a type of POST PRODUCTION REMORSE is dangerous territory. So, how do you evaluate whether making post-post changes is a valid choice or simply, narcissistic indulgence? Anyone . . . ?
I am asking because I don’t know!
But maybe THAT is the answer. If you can’t articulate specifically why something needs to be changed, chances are, it doesn’t. And the urge to fix something, is merely a defence mechanism in an effort to cope with a fear of failure. Because once something is done and put out there for all to see as a finished work of art, the door is held wide open for others to judge it accordingly. No more excuses, or time . . . And that’s scary!
Be brave! (I tell myself) “It’s done!” The proverbial “but..” is invalid. I think sometimes I just need to write it down to you all in order to read later and hope for a conclusion. The nagging might continue, but I’ll need to take up yoga or chanting or something to channel it instead “Eat, Pray, Love”.. And all that..

Which brings me to another pesky issue plaguing me as I struggle with rewrites of a script that has garnered quite a bit of positive praise but I have gone down the rabbit hole.. I speak of course of PERSPECTIVE.
So you wrote a script. It began as a kernel, an idea, then germinated, took root and broke ground with the kind of promise we CHEER in our festive countdown to New Year’s or the bubbles effervescing in our champagne glasses. The promise of RESOLUTION. Strong and strident with those three beautiful words every writer loves and longs to type.. FADE TO BLACK.
And then.. it happens. The wave of notes, thoughts put forth by friends and colleagues. We strive to remain steadfast in our vision but humble and open to “constructive criticism.” We take said notes, thoughts, suggestions, and begin implementation, adjustment, reworking.. And there, we find ourselves, one week into a proverbial New Year’s funk, thoroughly disenchanted what with the promise that seemed to shine so bright mere days prior but now has dulled a bit and in our heady state the clear path to greatness? Those artistic calculations we were painstaking about.. have taken on a sort of spin with all the helpful advice proffered. All in the name of art, right??
This is what we do as human beings. We strive to be masters of our creativity and productivity, and if we fall short or lose our perspective, we take it personally. So, now is the time, more than ever, to take a step back and remind ourselves that the only thing constant is change. And that while it’s wonderful to have plans, sometimes, we need to have the willingness to throw those plans out the window. And sometimes we don’t. Be wary of straying so far from the the original story that got you/us here. I offer no concrete answers in this article, just a reminder from one writer, artist, perfectionist, anal-retentive and certified lunatic to another that you have to cut the cord sometime. And go with the flow because the script is only the blueprint. A design which only exists to it’s fullest potential in your mind. Once you start pre-pro and then shooting and then post, the movie in your mind will change. It has to. It IS the way of filmmaking. If you manage to keep your head and move on to production, it’s a whole new ballgame. It’s not a script anymore. It’s a living thing, that’s changing and growing and we need to grow with it.

Sometimes we become so attached to our material that it’s hard to think of it in any other way. I recall being in the midst of our 3rd rough cut of Conversations With Lucifer, experiencing more than a little separation anxiety from what I played and replayed in my head at the computer all those months prior to filming. It was a slow-learning process to relinquish my white-knuckle hold on the reigns and allow my team to offer their fresh perspective on that project. And it’s worked. I heard it said once by a film maker on a panel at the L.A. Shortsfest that POST is the fun stuff – that you get to experiment, and mix and match scenes and shots, and, basically, play. As a student of theatre, where the actors follow a pre-determined arch every night, cutting up the “flow” of the script makes me nervous. But again, PERSPECTIVE. It’s a film that will be viewed, and may need to be re-sequenced in order to translate on screen; or enhanced with an image taken from a reaction in between takes for that matter. And I agree now – it is fun and exciting. And the film in my head transforms into something I could never have forseen. And that is thrilling each and every time I am blessed enough to do it.
So, to conclude this entry, and as we approach another New Year, and I struggle to maintain perspective and stay true to the script I am reworking right now, I will offer my own New Year’s resolution for 2017 . . .
To take the first step and then go with the flow; to be open and gentle with myself as I push and pull (as we do) and know that more will be revealed have I only the courage to be patient and watch my blank canvas fill with the colors of life . . . a life I create and stand by for better or worse.

If you feel this is a informative article please share this:

Permissiveness in Film: Erotica or Pornography

An article by Shailik Bhaumik

54d3977a85a67_-_esq-dreamers-de

 

Admiring a beautiful woman, Boris Pasternak, the famous Russian poet once said that to fathom the secret of her charm is tantamount to solving the riddle of life. The secret of beauty is the secret of life, which has puzzled man for centuries. Debates concerning it have never stopped throughout the history of mankind. Beauty is the pleasant which comes through the sense of hearing and sight, which is pleasant according to other senses, that is, the sense which have to do with food, drink and sexual intercourse and all such things. And the law of beauty is art.

Eroticism is one of the oldest subject matter of art. It is found throughout the world and throughout time, and yet it is one of the most controversial subjects in the history of art. In western culture eroticism is an art form invented by the Greeks in the fifth century. Nude was not the subject of art, but a form of art. To the Greeks, the body expressed above all their sense of human wholeness. In varying cultures around the world, eroticism becomes a means for telling a story or to symbolize an idea.

Cinema is a synthetic art form of 20th Century, so eroticism obviously comes to cinema naturally. If we go back to the history of cinema we will find that the first films containing nudity were the early erotic films. Production of such films commenced almost immediately after the invention of the motion picture. Two of the earliest pioneers were Frenchmen Eugène Pirou and Albert Kirchner. These films were promoted as erotic and artistic, rather than pornographic. Several early films of the silent era and early sound era include women in nude scenes, presented in a historical or religious context.

Several Hollywood films produced in the 1910s and ’20s, which contained only brief nudity, created controversy. Various groups objected to these features on moral grounds, and several states set up film censorship boards, arguing that such content was obscene and should be banned.

Europeans were more relaxed about nudity in film than the United States.  Sex and nudity found their way into modern  mainstream and artistic work also, such as  Alessandro Blasetti‘s La cena delle beffe  had Clara Calamai in what is credited as being the first topless scene in an Italian film. It was soon followed by similar scenes in the Italian films La corona di ferro (The Iron Crown, 1941) and Carmela (1942). Other noteworthy European films which contained nudity include Ingmar Bergman‘s Summer with Monika (1953), Jean-Pierre Melville‘s Bob le flambeur (1956), François Truffaut‘s Shoot the Piano Player (1960), The Awful Dr. Orloff (1961), Contempt (1963) by Jean-Luc Godard, Luis Buñuel‘s Belle de Jour (1967), and Isadora (1968).

All genres of Italian film of the 1970s and early 1980s featured abundant female nudity in a clichéd form, most of it for the local market, but some for the international market. The Italian-produced Last Tango in Paris (1973), directed by Bernardo Bertolucci, was one of the first commercial films to openly contain nudity, and led to the boom of other fashion erotic films, such as the French-produced Emmanuelle (1974) and the Frenco-German production Story of O (1975) by Just Jaeckin, the Franco-Japanese production In the Realm of the Senses (1976) by Nagisa Oshima, and the Italian-American produced Caligula (1979) by Tinto Brass.

In the recent past, it has been observed that strategies for viewing the type of sexually explicit art film made by Postmodern directors Catherine Breillat, Abdellatif Kechiche, Tinto Brass, Alain Robbe-Grillet, Pedro Almodóvar , Virginie Despentes, Nagisa Oshima and  Paul Verhoeven has changed significantly.To contextualise the relevant debates, political work on pornography is placed in dialogue with recent deconstructive gender theory and postmodern philosophy. While this hybridisation of theory problematises what pornography is. Studies on recent “Extremity” films demonstrate that the cinematic medium may call into question our habitual ways of seeing sexuality. This is done by means of denaturalisation of the sexual spectacle (Romance, 1999) or generic collage and the dislocation of ideology from genre.

The images and shots presented by a film can provoke a wide array of feelings, emotions and sensations within viewers. An emerging class of films in France has come to the forefront to challenge the traditional norms of what compromises the experience of watching a movie.

The portrayals of rape, incest, murder and mutilation are explored in depth, presented in such a manner that is so raw and unforgiving that the films even cause audiences to become physically ill. A new body of directors is leaving a mark on cinematic history in France, possessing a far different vision compared to the directors who were associated with the previous New Wave movement. Directors such as Claire Denis, Bruno Dumont, Francis Ozon, Catherine Breillat and Gaspar Noe, release highly polarized films known for their unflinching and often grotesque portrayal of issues, inciting a now stronger focus on what is and is not permitted on screen (Palmer 22).

While the “New French Extremity” refers to a stylistically diverse group of films and filmmakers, it has been described as a crossover between sexual decadence, bestial violence and troubling psychosis. This Extremity movement has roots in art house and horror cinema.

Catherine Breillat  is one of the pioneers in “New French Extremity” movement. She made her first film “ A Real young Girl” in 1975. Not until 1999 with “Romance” was her international reputation established. Since then she has made film almost annually, including “Fat Girl” (2001), “Brief Crossing” (2001), “The Housekeeper” (2003), and “Anatomy Of Hell” (2004). All of Breillat’s films focus on sexuality from the point of view of a woman. All are sexually explicit, and all of the films portray the obstacle, women face, such as men in pursuit of sexual satisfaction. The challenges for Breillat is to avoid being aggressively pedantic or exploitative about her subject. She has to succeed as a film experience. These are notable challenges, given the way in which Breillat pursues her focus on women and their sexuality. Characterization plays role and is implied through what appears to be an obsession with sex. Conventional plot focuses only on the sexual act, such as the commercialized sex in “ Anatomy of Hell” and the making of a film in “Sex Is Comedy” (2002). The consequence is a conscious sidestepping of the conventional narrative tools. This does not make Breillat’s films any easier to watch; on the contrary, it makes the films all the more brave but difficult to provocative.

The most recent film “Blue is the warmest The Color (2013)” directed by Abdellatif Kechiche, created a buzz in the world cinema. The controversial film, which deals with warfare of sexuality, wins Palme d’Or at the 66th annual Cannes Film Festival in 2013. With its much-talked about sex scenes, Blue … has thrown open a critical yet myopic debate about authority, sex, porn, and the male gaze. A cause célèbre at Cannes last year, Blue entered the festival with a rush of anticipation, and in a matter of right place and time, its story of the passionate yet doomed relationship between two young Frenchwomen screened as France’s Parliament voted to legalize same-sex marriage. But Blue…. threw a lightning rod into that discussion, with many feminist and queer critics finding it a troubling if not altogether prurient film.

Apparently some critics even timed the movie’s most provocative scene—in which Adèle and Emma tumble and groan, kiss and scissor each other—pegging the scene anywhere between seven and 20 minutes. Tellingly, no other sex scene was measured, although many last just as long; Blue’s sex scenes last, on average, around 10 minutes. That a lot of people were uncomfortable, taken aback, or struck by what Kechiche was doing in that scene—showing in tantalizing detail what we’re rarely shown in film—is due both to its novelty (a 10-minute chess scene would have felt conspicuously long) and its subject. It would have been a shock if audiences were not upset, angry, or perturbed.

Of course, sex is messy and unpredictable, vivid and exhilarating—sex scenes should reproduce this anarchy of feelings. That Blue is the Warmest Color has been attended by claims of pornography, voyeurism, and sexual gratuity is testimony to the unruly power and dimension of sex, as well as to the legitimacy of these critiques. Typically, sex is suggested, not shown, in films—and where it is shown, women’s orgasms usually occur too quickly and the sex lasts briefly, while audiences rarely see a man going down on a woman, let alone a woman going down on another. And yet the sex in Blue … can appear too plotted and coached;

Sex is infinitely more complex and more dangerous: sex poses questions, renders tangible sensation; it incites and disturbs. A sex scene will turn one on, or else make one feel ashamed, as if he watched something he shouldn’t had. And yet, filmmakers have long used sex to explore these feelings and effects. The history of cinema is marked by art house and transgressive films that have boldly used sex as its subject and story: Last Tango in Paris; The 120 Days of Sodom; Pola X; The Idiots. Released in 1978, Nagisa Oshima’s In the Realm of the Senses remains, in its uncensored version, banned in Japan. Even today, its depiction of unsimilated carnality would cause audiences to blush. In 2003, Vincent Gallo’s The Brown Bunny drew ire and boos from the crowd at Cannes.

The presence of nudity in film is invariably noted by critics and censors. Today, though nudity in film is much more common, its presence in dramas is still expected to be justified on artistic grounds.

Whether or not an instance of erotic film is obscene depends on the standards of the community in which it is displayed. Similar difficulties in distinguishing between erotica and obscenity have been found in every legal system in the world.

There’s substantially more overlap between the aesthetic and the erotic than the erotic and the pornographic. Unquestionably, erotica and pornography both present the human organism in a manner that’s sexually compelling. But the aim of the pornographer is hardly to help his or her audience rejoice in the human form or in some way honour physical intimacy, or the joys of the flesh. Rather, the objective is to “turn on” the viewer. It’s less evocative or suggestive than exhibitionist. The unabashed goal is simple and straightforward: titillation and immediate, intense arousal.  If the subject a film is portrayed in a manner that focuses on their inner and outer radiance, their fleshy vitality, and the work itself seems to manifest a passionate and powerful affirmation of life and the pleasures of this world, then it is regarded as a Work of Art.

If you feel this is a informative article please share this:

Monthly Selection- November 2016

FILMS OF THE MONTH  -  NOVEMBER, 2016

CATEGORY - NARRATIVE FEATURES:

BEST NARRATIVE FEATURE : TRAIN STATION

DIRECTED BY YOSEF KHOUWES  FROM VENEZUELA

AND 39 DIRECTORS

FROM DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD: ONE BUCK

DIRECTED BY FABIEN DUFILS 

USA

SEMIFINALIST:

DEMON HUNTER, IRELAND

ZARB, INDIA

THE WANDERING, UNITED KINGDOM

CATEGORY - DOCUMENTARY FILMS:

BEST DOCUMENTARY FILM : A CAPTAIN UNAFRAID

DIRECTED BY CHARLES O' BRIEN 

IRELAND

CATEGORY - SHORT FILMS

BEST SHORT FILM : 248

DIRECTED BY LEONARDO CORALLINI

ITALY

OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD : THE PERVERT'S PUZZLE

DIRECTED BY SREENU ROMI

INDIA

SEMIFINALIST:

I WITNESS , INDIA

MIADOPAY, TAIWAN

I, PROFESS, KOREAN

YOUNG BLOOD, FRANCE

DAY OF ASHES, ECUADOR

CROISSANT, SPAIN

THE NIGHT OF ALL THINGS, SPAIN

LUNCH BREAK AROUND A SMALL LAKE IN A BIG CITY, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

FOR ONE, FRANCE

CATEGORY - EXPERIMENTAL FILM:

BEST EXPERIMENTAL FILM : STORY FOR AN EMPTY THEATRE

DIRECTED BY CESARE BEDOGNE AND ALEKSANDR BALAGURA

ITALY

OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD: CORONA-BIRTH OF AN OLD MAN (AFTER HEMINGWAY)

UNITED STATES

CATEGORY - WOMEN’S FILM:

BEST WOMEN’S FILM : BIRTH~WEAVING LIFE

DIRECTED BY ARISA WAKAMI 

JAPAN

SEMIFINALIST:

THE YEAR I DID ACID, CANADA

THERE'S ALWAYS TOMORROW, SINGAPORE

CATEGORY - ANIMATED FILMS:

BEST ANIMATED FILM : AGRINOUI

DIRECTED BY ALEXIS CHAVIARAS

CYPRUS

OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD : SHEEP AND WOLVES

DIRECTED BY  MAXIM VOLKOV

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

SEMIFINALIST:

THE SNOW QUEEN 3, RUSSIAN FEDERATION

CATEGORY - STUDENT’S FILMS

BEST STUDENT’S FILM : LEAVING GREECE

DIRECTED BY ANNA BRASS 

GERMANY

OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AWARD : 

SEE NECESSARILY TRUE

DIRECTED BY RURL-YANG JIANG

TAIWAN

THE HESITANT MAN

DIRECTED BY PIERRE SABROU

FRANCE

GOES WITHOUT SAYING

DIRECTED BY PIERRE SABROU

FRANCE

SEMIFINALIST:

IMPAIRABLE, UNITED STATES

THE LETTER, POLAND

FEAR IN A HANDFUL OF DUST, SWEDEN

THE NEXT DOOR, UNITED STATES

LEAFLESS AGAINST THE GRAY SKY, UNITED STATES

MARIANNE, UNITED KINGDOM

THE GOOD SON,  UNITED KINGDOM

THE PERSIMMON TREE, TAIWAN

TO MONSTER,  TAIWAN  

MEMORY, TAIWAN  

51.7HZ, TAIWAN

AFRO CRAB, TAIWAN

FALLING BÉBÉ, TAIWAN

FADE TO WHITE , ISRAEL

YOUNG BLOOD, FRANCE

ANY EXIT, GERMANY

LONG LIVE EMMA, POLAND    

FANNY PACK, UNITED STATES

DREAMSCOPE, UNITED STATES

CATEGORY -  FAMILY/CHILDREN FILMS:

BEST FAMILY / CHILDREN FILM: THE GREAT ADVENTURE OF MANEL AND THE MAGIC TOOTHPICKS

DIRECTED BY XAVIER PIJUAN

SPAIN

SEMIFINALIST:

BIG BOY, RUSSIAN FEDERATION

I AM NOT A MOUSE, UNITED KINGDOM

POLKA DOTT,UNITED STATES

CATEGORY - YOUNG FILMMAKER

BEST YOUNG FILMMAKER  : PRAXIS

DIRECTED BY I-JEN CHIU

TAIWAN

SEMIFINALIST:

FACADE, CANADA

BORIS & BABETTE, NETHERLANDS

CATEGORY - DEBUT FILMMAKER

BEST DEBUT FILMMAKER : 93 NOTOUT

DIRECTED BY ARUDRA SARAVANAKUMAR MATHAIYAN

INDIA

SPECIAL MENTION AWARD: THE ALLEY CAT

DIRECTED BY MARIE ULLRICH

USA

SEMIFINALIST :

THE 11th COMMANDMENT, UNITED STATES

CATEGORY - MUSIC VIDEO

BEST MUSIC VIDEO : COLIBRIA

DIRECTED BY CAMILO COBA

ECUADOR

SEMIFINALIST:

FROM ALL OF OUR LOVE THIS WAS LOST , UNITED STATES

FEAR OF HEIGHTS , ISRAEL

CATEGORY - FILM ON NATURE AND ENVIRONMENT

BEST FILM ON NATURE / ENVIRONMENT / WILDLIFE : A BRIDGE BETWEEN TWO WORLDS

DIRECTED BY PASCAL GÉLINAS

CANADA

CATEGORY - FILM ON WOMEN

BEST FILM ON WOMEN : SHACKLE

DIRECTED BY DEDIPYA JOSHII

INDIA

CATEGORY - TRAVEL FILM

BEST TRAVEL FILM : PACIFIC MERMAID

DIRECTED BY ALEXIS BARBOSA

CATEGORY - HORROR FILM

BEST HORROR FILM : HULDRA - LADY OF THE FOREST

DIRECTED BY OVE VALESKOG 

SWEDEN

CATEGORY - LGBT FILMS

BEST LGBT FILM : TWIN STARS

DIRECTED BY MEHMET TIĞLI

TURKEY

CATEGORY - SILENT FILM

BEST SILENT FILM : LA VIE D'UN CLOWN 

DIRECTED BY VIRA BURMENKO  

CANADA

CATEGORY - MOBILE FILM

AWARD OF RECOGNITION : THE TALES OF KNOCK NA SHEE (EPISODE ONE) 

DIRECTED BY KAREN LAM

IRELAND

CATEGORY - FILM/VIDEO POSTER

AWARD OF RECOGNITION : THE LETTER

 

CATEGORY - DRONE FILMS

BEST DRONE FILM : BYZANTINE

DIRECTED BY JORIS FAVRAUD 

FRANCE

CATEGORY - COMMERCIAL/ADVERTISEMENT

AWARD OF RECOGNITION : ENERGYCUP

DIRECTED BY PETER WIECZOREK 

POLAND

CATEGORY - VIRTUAL REALITY

BEST VIRTUAL REALITY FILM : MISFITS

DIRECTED BY DAVID BETTERIDGE

UNITED KINGDOM

CATEGORY - ONE MINUTE FILM

AWARD OF RECOGNITION : ROUGH ROAD

DIRECTED BY PAUL KELLY

UNITED STATES

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you feel this is a informative article please share this: