FEATURE: "HEART OF NOW" – a film by SABI

wow zak, looks amazing man. im actually writing a piece now thats heavily influenced by the whole relationship thing. i should be done ina few weeks if you have the time to read it let me know. id love to know what you think about it before i pass it off.
 
yeah, whatever you would describe this genre as, it's where i'm happiest. i don't know that I could make an action picture and not want to punch myself in the face every day. it would certainly be the most actionless action film you're likely to see. HEART OF NOW, ELOQUENT GRAFFITI, WANDERLUST are films that I would hope could sit alongside Breaking the Waves, Half Nelson, The Wrestler and other works of that kind.

thank you for making films that you like, rather than what you think might sell.

and, speaking of "whatever you describe this genre as," what did you list it as for festivals that required classification? drama? the reason i ask is that (for the second time) we've got a project that was intended to be horror, isn't really, is more drama, with thriller elements and a lot of horror nods. and comedy. but to call it drama puts it into a group of "serious" films. but it would never stand a chance as "horror" against zombies, gore and screaming teens.

the reason i ask if you classified it as drama was because of the line by (damn forgot his name) that said he thought drama was when the characters cried, but realised it was when the audience cried. i didn't cry watching "i f*cking hate you." it was a much subtler, finer cut into my emotions, rather than a chainsaw tearing in to brutally force tears (like some films do).
 
yeah, whatever you would describe this genre as, .

I haven't seen it but it sure looks like Drama. With a Capital "D".

You should consider comedy, you put up some clip a while back of a mock audition, funniest thing I've seen here. Especially the scene where you kicked the chair out from under him.
 
i've been offered a small domestic theatrical release for late next year. reviewing and negotiating. we'll see if it holds.
 
hard to believe this thread goes back to before i finished writing the film... January 11, 2007. it was shot a year later, and has been in post ever since. wow.

anyway, i'm here to tell you that HEART OF NOW is now being passed around to trusted sources for feedback. final cuts will be made, picture locked. then it goes into post audio. we will begin submitting to festivals this fall, but most importantly, you will be able to see HEART OF NOW early next year.

how? when we have our world premiere (fingers crossed) at a major festival in the spring (sxsw, slamdance, rotterdam, berlin, etc) we will simultaneously announce a theatrical tour and the availability of the dvd. then, during phase two we will make the film available digitally via On Demand, itunes, etc.
 
the edit looks to be hovering around 107 minutes. i would really like to see it under 100, but we've already made HUGE cuts to bring it in under two hours. I think it's safe to say we have cut a third of the scenes we shot. tomorrow, we're shooting our one and only pick-up shot. matt garrett is coming in to shoot it, as is marion kerr, our lead. i'm digging out the old brevis and strapping her on an HVX for one last go.

it's a simple three second insert that happens to fall at the most emotionally crucial moment of the entire film. so, no pressure. maybe we'll document it for the dvd.
 
I am freakin stoked for you! I just saw the redband trailer for Heart of Now! WOW! It is amazing. Great acting and brilliant all the way around. -Matt
 
the edit looks to be hovering around 107 minutes. i would really like to see it under 100, but we've already made HUGE cuts to bring it in under two hours. I think it's safe to say we have cut a third of the scenes we shot. tomorrow, we're shooting our one and only pick-up shot. matt garrett is coming in to shoot it, as is marion kerr, our lead. i'm digging out the old brevis and strapping her on an HVX for one last go.

it's a simple three second insert that happens to fall at the most emotionally crucial moment of the entire film. so, no pressure. maybe we'll document it for the dvd.

Hey Zak, I hear ya on the edit man. We ended up cutting a good 30 minutes out of NGL to bring it to about 108 minutes, and cutting anymore (like you said) would really mess the character progression and flow up.

Looking forward to seeing this film Zak! I've yet to see any of your features yet.
 
I would love to share some screenshots of the insert we did today, but I can't because they'd reveal a major turn of the third act. just let me say, that the insert we picked up today genuinely looks like it was shot a year and a half ago on a dry lake bed in death valley, and not six hours ago on the rooftop patio of a Los Angeles office building.
 
Great news Zak,

Glad to hear the shoot went well.

Editing is something. I, too, ended up cutting even more off my film (from 106 min. to 93 min; this was from an original 122 min. movie). Amazing how much a film and the story can change (and I don't mean just shorter) by strategic (and smart) edits.

Can't wait to see your film.

Todd
 
SCREENING FOR FEEDBACK

wanted to share my own point of view on screening a work-in-progress (WIP) cut... many filmmakers, known and unknown, run WIP cuts at respected, but admittedly smaller and lesser known festivals to solicit feedback on the structure of the film. as a WIP, you're going to see plenty of comments about the state of VFX and raw, unmixed production track, temp music, and so on. and that's to be expected from an audience that doesn't know how to watch a work-in-progress, but man, as a filmmaker I can see real value in wading through all that surface stuff and seeing how the film plays to a theater of people i didn't persoanlly invite there. you can watch for moments where they collectively shift in their seats or where they seem to disengage with the film, and for any unintentional reactions (which can often be very good to have). this is great info to take back to the edit bay for fine-tuning, and I think it's different when you invite people you know to a private screening and no one has to actually buy a ticket. not saying one or the other, i'm saying I'd do both.

My own methodology is this....
  1. EDITOR & ME - we lock a cut we are happy with, possibly with areas we are uncertain about knowing we will get feedback
  2. CREATIVE PARTNER - then the cut goes to my creative partner for feedback and we address his notes
  3. TRUSTED SOURCES - then the film is screened for about a dozen people who have no investment in the picture, creative or otherwise, but are trusted sources of feedback -- trusted industry professionals, collaborators as well as non-filmmakers. and we address those notes, if necessary.
  4. OPEN TEST SCREENING - finally, we run a sneak preview of the film with about 200 people at a few smaller fests and hand out questionnaires that help to focus the audience's feedback. I used to do test screenings for the studios (a simple plan, varsity blues, ugh) and so I know the most important question on there is the first one: "would you recommend this film to others?" with choices running from (A) "definitely would" to (B) "might recommend" down to (D) "definitely not". and if 80% or more of the audience came back with "definitely would", the studios would stop tinkering at that point. not saying i would, but they would. and it is during these screenings that i'm watching the audience moreso than the film for collective feedback that comes thru in the audience's energy. you can sense when they are "settling in" to endure a scene because the film is starting to drag. it reveals specific trouble spots. it's very, very helpful.
  5. CAST & CREW - this is nearly worthless for feedback. this is the first place a 100% finished film plays. and you use the energy of people who are invsted in the film as an advantage by inviting distros, reviewers and anybody else who can help.
And the reason you might want to test screen at smaller festivals is because there is very little coverage outside the festival and you have the benefit of screening as a WIP, something that does not affect your premiere status when you start working your connections to take the finished motion picture to top tier fests. The little guys are a safe venue for helping shape a work-in-progress if that is your goal.

And as the time nears to begin screening for feedback, blog posts like this become more and more relevant.

http://www.filmindependent.org/filmmaker-blogs/1448
INDIE_FILM_Q_%2526_A_WITH_HEIDI_VAN_LIER%3A_Does_it_have_to_be_so_excruciating_to_screen_a_rough_cut%3F.png

May 28, 2009
A: Yes and no.
It hurts to have people see your newborn baby for the first time and tell you it’s ugly, but there are ways of preparing your screening audience for what you need before they open their mouths, and you can actually end up getting helpful criticism from them as a result.

First, let’s establish some “rough-cut categories” so we know what we’re talking about. I simplify this a bit in my book, but this should help.

ROUGH ASSEMBLY

Rough sound, rough picture, temp score, story isn’t even comprehensive, scenes don’t quite work yet.

Audience:

Anyone who can keep their mouth shut, who you won’t want feedback from later. At this point you’re just watching to see if you’ve got everything, and if there WILL BE enough to pull the story together. You don’t want feedback at this stage, but you probably want to watch it with someone to see what NOT to lose.

You need to tell your “audience” upfront, “I DON’T WANT FEEDBACK, IT’S POINTLESS. SHUT THE HELL UP, I HAVE 50,000 THINGS TO DO STILL.”

They won’t listen to you and will still give you idiotic comments like “That scene isn’t necessary,” or “That doesn’t work for the story.” Don’t listen. They didn’t listen to you either when you told them you didn’t need any feedback.

ROUGH CUT

Rough sound, rough picture, temp score, story is coming together a bit more, scenes are in place.

Audience:

People who have edited films before are good here, and I mean A LOT of films. People who have only edited a few won’t really have great input about shaping scenes. But anyone who understands the genre you’re working in can give you some idea of tension or comedy in each scene, and if they’re playing well yet.

At this point you want feedback about scene structure and cuts NOT ABOUT STORY. And you will tell this to your audience and they still won’t listen… so you don’t need to listen to them either. If their comments aren’t “I didn’t understand what was happening in that scene,” or “Where did that character go in the middle of that scene?” or “The joke doesn’t quite play right in that scene,” then DON’T LISTEN.

SEMI-ROUGH CUT

Rough sound, rough picture, temp score, story is in place, and scenes should be in place.

Audience:

Might be good to invite your writer friends over for this one, and people who generally like the genre you’re working in. If you’re making a movie with the same tone as “The Office” or “Parks and Recreation” and the writer you’ve invited can’t stand those shows, guess what? Yep, they really won’t know how to help you.

You can tell people you want feedback “for reals” here. But be aware, the things they have problems with usually aren’t the actual problem… It’s what is leading up to what they consider the problem to be that is the actual problem (The scenes prior, that were supposed to set up the things they’re having issues with. Make sense?)

It’s ok to listen to them, unless they say, “Picture looks like hell, or the music is terrible, or I couldn’t hear what they were saying.” Duh.

ALMOST DONE ROUGH CUT

Picture “lock”, sound close to done, permanent music, story is all there, scenes are working, but you want to find last minute details to fix.

Audience:

Everyone who hasn’t seen the film yet. Can be both industry people and non-industry. Can be people who both like and dislike the genre. Listen to EVERYTHING that everyone says, doesn’t mean you’re going to use it, but it’s ALL helpful.

These days you can linger in this stage for a very long time as HD has made it so you don’t have to technically EVER lock picture with any major trouble. I have it even easier than most, as my husband is Joe Kraemer, film composer extraordinaire, and he also worked in post sound for 10 years and does all my sound. Ok, he’s crabby when I ask him to do it 20x, but he still does it for me. ;)

Here you’ll want to really make sure things are working to their best potential. This is usually right before you send out screeners to festivals.

And you still have time to do some tweaking before you actually screen at a festival, so don’t stress out.

“LEAKED” ROUGH CUT

Locked picture, great sound, great music, everything should be working as best as you can get it.

Audience:

Industry and friends who can help you gets jobs, reps, press, or festivals.

This is a screening where you tell everyone “It’s not done yet, but we’re letting a couple people see it for last minute issues.” No, you don’t really want any feedback, but it can never hurt, who knows if someone will have a great little fix that will really make something that much better. If they’re telling you story issues at this point, or casting problems, which they will, don’t listen.

Also, this is really just a screening for people who can help you. Could be cast and crew who will get excited about it and tell their reps about it. Could be your agents and managers and your reps. Could be people who are connected to other jobs, producers, or press.

FAKE ROUGH CUT

Everything is done and you’re not going to change anything, but you have some issues you can’t fix, and you want to lower people’s expectations.

Audience:

The planet.

I’ve seen people label their film a rough cut to do this for festivals, doesn’t always work, but hey, people do it. I’ve also seen people allude to this in their intro to the film before screening at major festivals. I don’t advise this, but hey, if you’re desperate and you hate your film, what are you gonna do but try and give it the best shot possible, I guess.

FINAL NOTE:

Be sure you stagger the smart people you know throughout your rough cut process. Save people for stages where they can be the most helpful, and don’t take any of it personally, you know, unless they say, “I hate you and your film.”
 
MANAGING EXPECTATIONS ON THE FESTIVAL CIRCUIT

Think about the festival circuit, I went to SXSW this year for the first time to not only learn the lay of the land, but to find out what the benefit of attending a major festival without a film might be. Previously, I had never considered going to a festival I hadn’t been asked to screen a film at, and only recently did I have a slight indication that there could very well be more to the festival experience than nervously awaiting your post-screening Q&A.

So I booked my flight, a hotel room and a rented Chevy Impala and descended upon Austin, Texas. After picking up my film/interactive badge, a couple of illusions I had about the fest were immediately shattered. First, I had no idea how massive it was going to be. And second, the interactive portion of the fest is where I would spend most of my time. I only saw two feature films there, Ry Russo-Young’s YOU WONT MISS ME and Brett Gaylor’s RIP: A REMIX MANIFESTO – both knock-outs.

However, at this point all my expectations were up in the air. I had pre-arranged a few meetings including a chat with Lance Weiler over lunch to catch up on a few things. And throughout the week I had occasion to run into some of the people I had met during POWER TO THE PIXEL in London – like Liz Rosenthal, Scilla Andreen and Slava Rubin.

I was thrilled by the opportunity to meet face to face with familiar acquaintances as well as new ones like Brian Chirls, Roger Erik Tinch of CineVegas, Leora Nevezie of the UK FILM COUNCIL and all the guys from LOST ZOMBIES. But I also made a point of seeking out two filmmakers specifically, HUNTER WEEKS and TODD SKLAR, who I had not yet met in person and who I suspected could clue me in on what the underlying benefit might be of attending festivals and conferences on the scale of SXSW.

Here’s a mini-doc on what I learned from them.

 
Back
Top