Evie - Mark Harris

Jack Daniel Stanley said:
Minimalist? Which short were you watching :)

I agree some of the underscore is minimal, but I think the sound design is quite intense and thick - at least watched on my home theater system.

I think perhaps that it's so well integrated you didn't notice it so much? Which is of course the goal.
Click to expand...

uuhhh... Can't it be minimalist AND intense at the same time? Or maybe my definition of minimalist is wrong. It doesn't feel very thick to me, as in- not many layers of sounds. I would need to hear it again to be sure, but it seems like, even in the intense parts, it was one or two choice sound fx/ sampler patches playing to the nines.
It definitely blends well and you don't notice it so much, you feel it; all good things fo' sho'.

Regardless- I stick with my original statement that it was ROCKIN'
 
Thanks for checking it out, all. I appreciate the comments.

I had a couple of specific goals coming into this:

One was to tell aspects of the story in purely visual terms. Thus the color changes to represent story elements.

The other was to illustrate theme entirely through character actions, regardless of what the characters' words are. So there are parts of the short where the words are irrelevant to what's going on. And that is intentional. Perhaps with limited degrees of success, but I like trying to push those skills and try to improve on them when I can.

Tim, you are 100% right about the jump cuts. Those are the result of me not locking the improv down enough prior to shooting. So I had to cut some air out of some parts in post. Lesson learned.

I also wanted to use this as an opportunity to work with the RED and see what I would be in for on set and in post. Aram and Mike knocked it out of the park with cinematography and camera work, I think.

There is a long dolly shot in there of her sitting on the toilet seat in the bathroom, which they got with a combo of dolly and zoom. There was not enough room to get it all with dolly.

Another thing that really solidified for me this time around was that I realized how important sound is to me. As a director, I am more and more gravitating towards rich soundbeds and scores. And at the screening, the sound was so good in the theatre, it shook you to your bones. Exactly the kind of immersive experience I asked the sound guy to give me.

So all in all, I feel like I achieved and learned what I wanted with this and am quite happy with the film.

And even though each shot is pretty specifically chosen, I've enjoyed some of the various interpretations of the story I've heard. And I'm happy that more than one person has told me it's a film they thought about long after watching it.

I would love to hear more from people, like what they think it's about, what they think happens in it, etc.
 
Tim Joy said:
Is this going to be part of a feature?
Click to expand...

No, but the woman and the guy in the TV are characters in the feature. This takes place about 2 years prior to the time of the feature and will likely end up as bonus material on the DVD. I am probably going to start producing more material around the feature as well, as ways to explore other characters' pasts, etc.

I'm curious about how much more you shot, compared to what we see. What I mean is that the cinematography and editing combine superpowers and tell the story so well that I think, 'there must be tons of stuff you cut', OR, was this your vision more-or-less to begin with, in terms of composition, shot selection, and editing choices? I also wonder how much of that was born on the set between you and Aram, or perhaps others? Whatever the recipe, it seems to work, and I wish to someday get to that level with my own work.
Click to expand...

It's mostly storyboarded. We did shoot more in the beginning, I think as we got warmed up and got into a groove. And I did let the cameraman, Mike have some free hand in expressing what he wanted, finding what he wanted, etc. We would play the scenes a few times, so he could find them, and then I would tell him to look at stuff like he was there, almost like another character in the improv. And Mike's very intuitive, so he got into it quickly and was off and running.

But overall I knew what we were going to shoot.

The scene with Thomas, the first "john" is the most improvised of all. The rest is pretty strictly storyboarded.

All in all, we shot about 300 gigs of RED 4K footy, with I guess some 2K mixed in for the 60FPS stuff. So not really a lot at all, I think.
 
Hey Mark,

I've been thinking about your short... pondering what it means...

A couple thoughts...

- I still don't get the guy on the recording/TV thing... don't get that.

- I figured out that the woman only sees color when she inflicts pain on herself, or otherwise has pain in some way.

- My thinking in relation to what I wrote above is that because she has done these terrible things in her life, her life is colorless... and now pain (which is like a punishment) can let her see color... it's like justice?

I might be completely off here, but that's what I sort of got.
 
Tim Joy said:
uuhhh... Can't it be minimalist AND intense at the same time? Or maybe my definition of minimalist is wrong. It doesn't feel very thick to me, as in- not many layers of sounds. I would need to hear it again to be sure, but it seems like, even in the intense parts, it was one or two choice sound fx/ sampler patches playing to the nines.
It definitely blends well and you don't notice it so much, you feel it; all good things fo' sho'.

Regardless- I stick with my original statement that it was ROCKIN'
Click to expand...
Yes you're right. I think in terms of the sound used, the textures / compositions were minimalIST. But execution and use was fairly complex. A single tone is minimalist. but when it's intentionally so loud it almost hurts my ears compared to the dialogue, it's use is isn't minimal, but in your face. I think that's what I was getting at.
 
Sent this PM to Mark, who, in the spirit of discussion, encouraged me to post it here:
Mark Harris said:
Incidentally, I wouldn't mind you posting this in the thread. It's all good criticism I think.

M

Jack Daniel Stanley said:
Posted my raves in the thread. Going into detail about what I question makes it seem like the negs outway the positives, but it's harder to express those ideas succintly while trying to be thorough / clear.

I do think it's unquestionably a strong, confident, throughly engaging piece. (Of course, would expect no less from you under any circumstances.)

My only quibbles are that I'm not sure the ending was satisfying (to me). I don't think Megan had much of an issue with it. Of course I'm thinking a bit more critically than her - we were both swept up in it / forgot we were watching a friend's movie / totally engaged - and that could be all she was looking for. But of course you and I have discussed endings and what is / isn't satisfying to an audience / different audience expectations (film festival, pop corn, mom and dad, filmmakers, etc.), so obviously all that colors my response.

I felt like it was a deep enthralling, original exploration, that didn't go as far as I'd have liked it to in the ending. The 2nd act is so thoroughly explored and examined that I felt a need for an ending that was equally developed / executed. I have no qualms about the outcome or resolution of the piece. Just that it was executed totally over a laptop. OK for the scene / her change to start that way, but I wanted her to go to her dad / his commune - etc. I wanted a climax. It could be a subtle climax, they don't have to have a huge fight. But we see so much human interaction on camera, and the relationship that you've set up is so interesting / conflict rich. And you set it up as something to be resolved, that I wanted all that same type of thing ON camera for the resolution. You have the father and daughter speak on the phone in the setup, but the resolution is even more removed than that. She just watches him on a computer screen. Arc / payoff wise, those seem to need to be flipped. I know you can't because he needs to tell her personal information about her brother etc in the phone call. But, she could pick up the phone and call him at the end, so it would at least be a parallel level of intimacy. So you could have it all as you do now, just end it with the first two sentences of a phone call. "I'm ready" or something. But beyond that I would have liked to see something like him welcoming her through the double doors of a glass highrise building or something (mos) while his internet speech plays over the scene. It could go to color as he welcomes here in or go from color to gray or whatever meaning you would assign.

Also, related to the above (setup and payoff). You introduce the idea of her sick brother and that she wants to see him, and that never goes anywhere. I think you did it to establish relationships and how extreme the divide is between her father and her, but it's kind of like saying "you still have that gun in your boot?" "yep, it's there" in the beginning of the movie to establish that this is the type of guy who carries a gun and then never have it used. But beyond that. It seems to be the central conflict of the first scene. Which suggests its a central conflict of the piece. And yet it's never revisited in any way. It was a bit too interesting / conflict rich to setup this cult leader who won't let his daughter see their ill brother because she won't subscribe to his beliefs (and that's the principle conflict of the first scene) to never have any kind of resolution or revisiting of that.

To pick fine hairs. Some of the dialogue, mostly DJ's opening thing, didn't play as well as it could due to some redundant phrasing and beats. I can't think of a good example to write on the spot, but you know what I'm talking about when you're writing and you use the same phrase or word or couple of words in too close of proximity to each other and it sound off, so you pick another way to say the next sentence or cut one of the sentences alltoghether? I felt some of that in DJ's opening monologue (because it was improved or he was paraphrasing maybe?) But this is such a small thing.

As usual going into detail on what I find questionable (questionable as opposed to outright assertions that something doesn't work), makes it seem that these are greivous affronts to me or something, but actually it's just that discussing these ideas takes clarity and precision and I'm not a good enough writer to do so succintly. I did very much enjoy the short - was moved by it - found it stunning. Up until the ending I was ready to proclaim it as arguably the best thing ever on DVXuser. Withe the ending (and this likely comes down to the personal taste/style thing we've often discussed) it's definiitively one of the best shorts to ever come out of here.

It's quite an achievement. Just going into the details out or respect for you / the work.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Mark Harris said:
No, but the woman and the guy in the TV are characters in the feature. This takes place about 2 years prior to the time of the feature and will likely end up as bonus material on the DVD. I am probably going to start producing more material around the feature as well, as ways to explore other characters' pasts, etc.

It's mostly storyboarded. We did shoot more in the beginning, I think as we got warmed up and got into a groove. And I did let the cameraman, Mike have some free hand in expressing what he wanted, finding what he wanted, etc. We would play the scenes a few times, so he could find them, and then I would tell him to look at stuff like he was there, almost like another character in the improv. And Mike's very intuitive, so he got into it quickly and was off and running.

But overall I knew what we were going to shoot.

The scene with Thomas, the first "john" is the most improvised of all. The rest is pretty strictly storyboarded.

All in all, we shot about 300 gigs of RED 4K footy, with I guess some 2K mixed in for the 60FPS stuff. So not really a lot at all, I think.
Click to expand...

Wow. Even more impressive that most was planned out.

So after trying this.. dare I say, 'Zak' approach to filmmaking, will you continue the technique for the feature? or some sort of hybrid approach that you developed through this process? Do you think it works best only for specific genres like this? Drama, and maybe comedy in particular?

I thought that DJ was some self-help guy and she found his number on the lamp post or something. He's her Dad? Didn't get that at all.

Jack, I think you make a good point about the ending, and that's where I felt that this might be a prelude to a feature or part of one, because by the end she really only JUST figured out for herself that she's lost. To me it was perfect for a short- it was satisfying and tied things together, but left me wanting more.

Can't wait to see the feature.
 
Tim Joy said:
Wow. Even more impressive that most was planned out.

So after trying this.. dare I say, 'Zak' approach to filmmaking, will you continue the technique for the feature? or some sort of hybrid approach that you developed through this process? Do you think it works best only for specific genres like this? Drama, and maybe comedy in particular?

I thought that DJ was some self-help guy and she found his number on the lamp post or something. He's her Dad? Didn't get that at all.

Jack, I think you make a good point about the ending, and that's where I felt that this might be a prelude to a feature or part of one, because by the end she really only JUST figured out for herself that she's lost. To me it was perfect for a short- it was satisfying and tied things together, but left me wanting more.

Can't wait to see the feature.
Click to expand...

The feature is very scripted and very storyboarded. And as mentioned above in the convo with Zak, my take is that I like to use improv to develop, but when it comes time to shoot, I like to know what's going to happen. :) Within reason. Happy accidents in performance are welcome, as long as the actor knows his character enough to stay on track. And I always like to give actors some leeway in the lines(cause the **** I write ain't Shakespeare), but as a director I am leaning more and more toward a film being largely a series of photographs. So I like composition, and specific meaning in the shots.

I think improv works great for comedy, and I've done comedies before with a lot of improv. I think it can work for anything, if it's reined in. I've encouraged Zak before to do something like a murder mystery using his techniques. I would love to see it applied more to genre stuff.

As for her father, I actually asked Jack to post his PM here for that reason. The guy in the TV is not her father, but I found it very interesting to think about when Jack said it. Part of the problem is it's me doing the father on the phone and my voice is too close to DJ's probably. But it's also good that there is that idea in there somewhere because she goes from one manipulative father figure to another by the end. That's what makes it a tragedy in my eyes. She thinks she's out, but really she's just switching abusers. It's like some horror films in that sense too.

But I dig shorts, because I can be comfortable enough to leave some things to interpretation, I can experiment a little more and push things more than I would dare in a feature.

Also why I like your stuff Tim. "Again to Return," which screened at the LA screening. Also the anti-de-Presence, I think was the other one I liked.
 
Brandon Rice said:
Hey Mark,

I've been thinking about your short... pondering what it means...

A couple thoughts...

- I still don't get the guy on the recording/TV thing... don't get that.

- I figured out that the woman only sees color when she inflicts pain on herself, or otherwise has pain in some way.

- My thinking in relation to what I wrote above is that because she has done these terrible things in her life, her life is colorless... and now pain (which is like a punishment) can let her see color... it's like justice?

I might be completely off here, but that's what I sort of got.
Click to expand...

You're pretty much right on. But I would say it's as much about what's been done to her as what she's done. But yes, the color represents the emotional deadness. And she learns that violence is a trigger to feel, which I think says something about where she comes from.

But I think you have a good thought there. I said before this is a tragedy, so it seems like a punishment one of the Greek Gods would have handed out: "only feeling alive when you feel pain."
 
Tim Joy said:
...
I thought that DJ was some self-help guy and she found his number on the lamp post or something. He's her Dad? Didn't get that at all.
...
Click to expand...
I think that's something I accidentally read into it.

I thought that was DJ on the phone not Mark. So I had a completely different movie going on in my head.

My GF thought that too though and we both know Mark and DJ on film and in person. I think with the phone filter it is too close to tell. Mark, better fire yourself and recast a tenor I think since it's just V.O.

Yeah I thought he was her Dad. She wouldn't accept his cult. He had the brother who was ill and maybe even withholding treatment due to the cult's beliefs. She went to the John's house, saw he was into her Dad's cult, knew what was going on. That added a resonance to that scene. Tried everything else, then decided to join her dad's cult because she was desperate, or thought it would work even if it was wrong.

I will have to cleanse my mind and try to come back to the short clean (as per DJ's instructions) and watch again.
 
Nah, that's my point. I kind of dig that. That's a totally interesting story in itself.

I do need to recast that VO, but at the time I was out of actors...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top