Butterflies in the Wind in pursuit of happiness

I have good martial arts buyer contacts. Let me know by end of May. There is a market deadline I must meet.
 
Butterflies in the Wind needs to be re-edited along the lines of newer films being edited digitally. It's not so much the look that has to change. The movie was shot in 35mm already.

I need advice as to how to restructure the movie so it looks like an ultra modern movie just produced in Hollywood. Any and all advice will be appreciated.
 
Yes, that would be necessary, I suppose. So I have to pretty much transform the movie into an ADR job; but in addition to that I feel I must re-edit with some new plan for a new look.

Of course, I wouldn't want to have to reshoot new scenes, but if I must reshoot new scenes then perhaps I should even consider that.

But your point is well-taken. Perhaps you feel the movie is fine as it is; except for the sync sound....?
 
I'm having so much trouble getting the output of the 16:9 anamorphic version to convert to PAL that I don't think I'm ever going to do final delivery in digital formats.

It's best to shoot in 35mm and print it to 35mm. Then output can be handled by a post production house -- a one light telecine looks better than all the color correction and looks of digital.
 
honestly Vic, you should just move on to a new project. You've been hammering this sucker for a long time and I think the world deserves another movie from you.

Except this time get some good sound and shoot the whole thing digitally.
 
LOL. I like the way you think, aurant :-) Maybe I should. As for digital, I don't know enough about this thing. What is digital? It's not viable. If it were only a piece of celluloid that I could hold in my hands; let it be digital silver halides suspned in emulsion....LOL Film looks so much better. It's so much easier to shoot.

I'm going to put the call out to camera people who want to shoot a digital movie for me. I want to use several camera crews and do a film in a short time -- a kind of tour de force, or whatever it is....

Where shall I put such a notice? I'm looking for people who want to shoot a movie for credit. Three days maximum shoot.
 
If there was a way to load film inside a digital camera. LOL One of my actors on BUTTERFLIES IN THE WIND came around to see if he could review the take he had just done. So he looked and couldn't see a monitor flap on the Arri 2c.

He asked me, "Why don't you plug the camera into my TV monitor?"

I said, "I don't have the RCA cables."

He said, "I have them."

I said, "No, no ... it won't work; it's different...."
 
Actually, one of the weaknesses of shooting digital is that all the actors gather at the monitor after every take; they want to see the take. And then, of course, they modify their performance. "Oh, I didn't know the camera was that close!" So now the actors are directing themselves ... and each other. "Hey, that was pretty good, the way you did that. ...How did you do that?"

It's amateur time....

It reminds me when the movies were shot on film and directors like John Ford controlled the set and the way his films looked in the end.

An actor walked up to him and said, "I liked that take."

John Ford looked at him and said, "You liked it, huh?" He reached to the camera, opened the mag cover and pulled out the roll of film. "Here." He handed it to the actor. "Take it home with you."
 
filmman said:
Actually, one of the weaknesses of shooting digital is that all the actors gather at the monitor after every take; they want to see the take. And then, of course, they modify their performance. "Oh, I didn't know the camera was that close!" So now the actors are directing themselves ... and each other.
Click to expand...

You just have bad actors! LOL My actors don't do that. They only get a chance to see the dailies if we're watching them at break time. That's it. I don't rewind the footage. I just keep moving. So just tell them no. I shoot digital photography too and sometimes brides come up and ask can they see the pictures, sometimes I let them but 90% of the time I tell them no.
 
for real, though. Hollywood is slowly switching over. and there's a reason for that: cheaper, lighter equipment. ease of use, more flexibility and creative freedom. longer takes, giving your actors a chance to relax and get in the moment.

direct editing...no waiting around for developing...you get an idea, you shoot it, and you edit. You dont like it...do it again...or toss it...it's wonderful

but you know all this, Im sure.

I respect your position, though...film is a tangible thing...I get it...

But who knows, maybe in fifty years, "Film" will make a comeback...like a vintage thing, or a nostalgia thing, like Vinyl records...I doubt it though, digital is just way more flexible for the artist
 
Knowing, My Bloody Valentine 3D and Jumper were shot on RED, Crank was shot on the Canon A1 and HF100s. These are big movies with big stars, and as younger directors move in the switch will happen as they start using what they learned on.

-Nate
 
Here's a suggestion, you may think about it. As you know, the title of the movie is very important, not just for marketing and sparking interest, but actually for the way the audience experiences the movie itself. Your title "Butterflies in the Wind" is a bit "meh" - slightly cliche, not that intriguing. My proposal is to add two letters, and change it to "Butterflies in the Window". It wouldn't take that much, all you have to do is scratch the last couple of letters onto the film. It might throw it off center a bit, but that's OK - it adds character design-wise. Now you have an intriguing title, and "window" always brings out the voyeurs out there, just by the word itself. I for one would wonder what the butterflies are doing in the window - in the wind, they're just getting blown about, meh.

The other thing is you should stop working on this one, and start on the prequel. That not only helps your current film - people want to check out what it's a prequel to - but also makes it easier to produce; you will already have the actors, the story will have more of a foundation, gives you a chance to again see characters who may have been killed in the first movie, etc. Plus, as a prequel, you can give more background to the first movie and thus help it remotely, besides, audiences tend to be slightly suspicious of sequels, so go for a prequel.

I like your attitude and look forward to your further endeavors.
 
OC, I really like your critique; it's constructive, to be sure :-) BUTTERFLIES IN THE WINDOW... Do you have other titles? I'm open to suggestion.

And the prequel thing ... it's got me thinking. Thanks!
 
Nate wrote: as younger directors move in the switch will happen as they start using what they learned on.
Click to expand...
Digital is a great teaching tool, because a teacher can show the students how a scene can be shot and edited all in a matter of a few hours. I'm planning to use digital cameras and editing in a seminar on filmmaking in LA within this year. I'm only going to teach. The seminars are being arranged by others.

I'm going to also teach the theory of directing 35mm films. I agree with you, Nate, 35mm directing has relevance to digital filmmaking.

HiG wrote: But who knows, maybe in fifty years, "Film" will make a comeback...like a vintage thing, or a nostalgia thing,
Click to expand...
If Kodak still makes film and if there are labs that process it. I think the only thing left will be Magic Bullet and the film look plugins.LOL
 
JLS4 wrote: They only get a chance to see the dailies if we're watching them at break time.
Click to expand...
How much time do you devote to this -- in practice? 35mm production technique was better when there was no video-assist. The DP was the only one looked through the camera. The director had his director's finder. Of course, you have the famous pictures of many old time directors looking through the camera as if they were shooting the movie. The fact is, most DPs of the Golden Era hated the director to put his eye on the eyepiece because they wanted it clean. That's why they had the felt covers for the eyepiece. I worked with many of them during the 70s, some of them would get eye rash from too many people putting their eye on the felt covers. But that is a bygone era. Now you have twenty monitors. Everybody and his uncle has a monitor and expresses an opinion. "I would never use her if I were in charge!" LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top