nashmotionpictures
Active member
I've just completed my first feature and this is to be published in our university newspaper. What do you think about the questions??
It's my first interview so I thought I'll share it with this forum because it has given me a lot. Any advice, blessings, criticisms etc would be appreciated.
1. What aspect of the film medium drew you towards it as a form of
expression superior to others?
Film is an audio-visual medium that gives an artist no restriction as far
as location is concerned and once manufactured, a particular film can be
reproduced on screeners effortlessly. This explains why, for me, it is an
art form superior to most others as far as ease of expression is
concerned.
Of course, every art form is beautiful. I respect every artist. I have
chosen film because I am an aspiring filmmaker and wanted to make a movie!
2. As someone who has no higher formal training in film theory and
criticism, would you contend that watching and reading about films in
one's spare time is all the schooling on the subject one needs before
making a film?
I think filmmaking and film studies are two very different disciplines.
Just as you don’t need to be a scholar of History of Art to be a good
painter, I think you don’t need Film Studies to be a good filmmaker: you
need ideas, technical skill, support from people and some money. I think,
as a budding filmmaker, I should rather focus on developing my mechanical
ability than literary.
But film theory may be beneficial. It’s not easy to tell because on one
hand I’m thinking that it should surely be a motivation to advance your
work, but on the other hand I also believe that the more you go into a
discipline, the more confused you get about what you desire, particularly
in an area like film studies because there are so many different takes on
everything possible. It has got to be different for different people.
Having said that, while I am not on a film studies course at Warwick, I
have been taking modules in the Film Studies department and have done so
prior to University too. So, I would not say that I have no formal
training in film theory and criticism.
3. From where did you obtain funding for The Family Picture and what was
the final budget? Did you find it necessary to cut some corners for
financial reasons?
This was a challenge and a great learning process. We were selected for an
entrepreneurship programme by Ernst & Young and The Prince’s Trust where
we were supported to start off our own small business. We raised cash on
campus through many small events. This funded our film as we went along
and now we hope to make a profit (for The Prince’s Trust) after its
completion by screening it at various places including Film Festivals,
with the location on campus being Warwick Student Cinema.
The final budget of the movie was £5000. Yes, there was often a need to
cut corners and sometimes shoots went over the budget when I used my
personal funds to keep the film going. I am delighted that it has been
completed in the end!
4. How did the concept for The Family Picture initially arise, and how
long did it take from first ideas to completion?
I have always been looking for ideas, writing them down with great
excitement whenever they come to me. The concept of ‘The Family Picture’
appeared when I found myself looking at a photograph of my own family and
thinking to myself how lucky I was to have such wonderful people in my
life. This was in May last year.
In addition, I wanted my next film to spread awareness about a social
subject in society and my ideas for the concept I had fit in perfectly to
make that happen. I did a lot of reading about AIDS and chose to include
it in my film. I also needed to make sure I had something that could be
delivered without being preachy and that was possible too. I started
writing ideas down and they grew. I rejected many and kept some. I wrote
some more and rejected some more. What I was then left with was the
outline of a feature length screenplay, with character arcs and locations,
equipped to set off on its journey. It took me three days after that to
complete the first draft. As I always do, I then referred the project to
some script consultants who came back with praises, criticisms and more
ideas. I wrote many more drafts before I thought it was ready to be shot.
As soon as the first draft was ready, however, I went out to look for my
crew. I was very lucky to find a wonderful team who also added their input
towards the script. And since we were all ready to go, we began casting
and subsequently started filming the next academic year (08-09). So, the
film has been completed from concept to final product in ten months.
5. What would you identify as the central themes of The Family Picture,
and have you chosen to express them explicitly using the characters as
mouthpieces, or interwoven the ideas cinematographically and through
elements of mis-en-scene and narrative?
I believe screenwriting is most effective when you start writing from
‘theme’. So, there should always be an underlying explanation for where
each scene takes the plot. For ‘The Family Picture’, the theme would be
worded something like “struggle and belief will result in the resolution
of problems” and “there are four ingredients needed to make success:
hardwork, honesty, patience and knowledge”. The latter is something my
father taught me at a young age and it is something I personally agree
with.
Since I am writing for the ‘screen’, and later plan to direct my
screenplay, I make sure I express my story visually. So, if you read any
of my scripts, I always have a lot of description: more description than
many others. I like to explain each setup’s lighting, angle of view, depth
of field, camera movement and even colours where possible. I sometimes
make storyboards to go with the script.
But I also think dialogues are very important to keep the audience
involved in commercial cinema because it makes the story and characters
clearer for those who do not watch films very closely. So, I have tried to
keep a balance.
6. In today's postmodern climate, it is seemingly impossible to create a
film which is free of cliche and inherent self-reflexivity. Have you
embraced this fact with The Family Picture, utilising techniques such as
conscious homage and meta-reference, or have you attempted to objectively
present fictitious situations without any acknowledgment of artifice?
Some people call it cliché, some intertextuality and some say as long it’s
good, it’s okay. I think this is something I should leave to the critics
to decide. I just know that I write from the heart, and even if what comes
out is ‘cheesy’, if I think it works, so be it!
7. see 2
8. Who would you identify as the most significant influences, both on the
film itself and your writing/directing?
My filmmaking idols are Ashutosh Gowarikar, Mathieu Kassovitz, Michael
Winterbottom and Vittorio de Sica, among others.
But generally, my writing is highly influenced by the films I watch. I
watch a lot of films from many different countries. I love to study how
different screenplays have been structured and what works and what
doesn’t. Anything that works for me gets stored in my subconscious mind
and comes back to me when I’m writing. Music also influences my work. When
I hear a particular song I like, I tend to think of where and when and how
it could come in a motion picture. After all, I dream Bollywood! But more
often, to be honest, I think music just motivates me to get on with my
script.
I think my directing is highly influenced by the people around me during
rehearsals and on set: the cast and crew. I always try to be approachable
on location and love to welcome new ideas from everybody. In this way, the
scene gets better and better. Of course, direction has to be influenced by
the script too. The most amazing thing is, because I include so much
direction in my script, which is actually considered bad in the
screenwriting world, I find that my actors perform exactly in the way I
want right at the start of rehearsals. I therefore did not have to work on
those details when directing ‘The Family Picture’ and could spend time
being creative with them, making things better.
9. Would you say you strive for a definitive auteur style, or do you
envisage yourself more as a craftsman-as-director: a facilitator as
opposed to artist?
I think auterism is something that is very subjective and at times too
academic for me. I think filmmakers make films and critics (and academics)
try to apply concepts like these. To be fair, there are so many ideas in
films and so many don’t come from the director. Telling what comes from
whom is almost impossible and therefore, in theory, it should be
impossible to draw conclusions on just the director. Filmmaking is a team
effort.
A director is an artist but a facilitator all the same. Maybe it’s a
balance between the two. I try to make sure I am both. In any case, some
time in the future, I would love being called an auteur! But at this
moment I’m a budding filmmaker so I think it’s best to focus on my
technical skill.
10. If you answered the former to the last question, is your style
intrusive and idiosyncratic, leaving an unmistakable Babur-esque stamp
upon the work, or do you favour the kind of "invisible" authorship of
which Bazin would approve?
I should leave that to the critics to decide while I focus on making films
that the audiences enjoy. But I love the idea of a Babur-esque stamp! Why
not?
It's my first interview so I thought I'll share it with this forum because it has given me a lot. Any advice, blessings, criticisms etc would be appreciated.
1. What aspect of the film medium drew you towards it as a form of
expression superior to others?
Film is an audio-visual medium that gives an artist no restriction as far
as location is concerned and once manufactured, a particular film can be
reproduced on screeners effortlessly. This explains why, for me, it is an
art form superior to most others as far as ease of expression is
concerned.
Of course, every art form is beautiful. I respect every artist. I have
chosen film because I am an aspiring filmmaker and wanted to make a movie!
2. As someone who has no higher formal training in film theory and
criticism, would you contend that watching and reading about films in
one's spare time is all the schooling on the subject one needs before
making a film?
I think filmmaking and film studies are two very different disciplines.
Just as you don’t need to be a scholar of History of Art to be a good
painter, I think you don’t need Film Studies to be a good filmmaker: you
need ideas, technical skill, support from people and some money. I think,
as a budding filmmaker, I should rather focus on developing my mechanical
ability than literary.
But film theory may be beneficial. It’s not easy to tell because on one
hand I’m thinking that it should surely be a motivation to advance your
work, but on the other hand I also believe that the more you go into a
discipline, the more confused you get about what you desire, particularly
in an area like film studies because there are so many different takes on
everything possible. It has got to be different for different people.
Having said that, while I am not on a film studies course at Warwick, I
have been taking modules in the Film Studies department and have done so
prior to University too. So, I would not say that I have no formal
training in film theory and criticism.
3. From where did you obtain funding for The Family Picture and what was
the final budget? Did you find it necessary to cut some corners for
financial reasons?
This was a challenge and a great learning process. We were selected for an
entrepreneurship programme by Ernst & Young and The Prince’s Trust where
we were supported to start off our own small business. We raised cash on
campus through many small events. This funded our film as we went along
and now we hope to make a profit (for The Prince’s Trust) after its
completion by screening it at various places including Film Festivals,
with the location on campus being Warwick Student Cinema.
The final budget of the movie was £5000. Yes, there was often a need to
cut corners and sometimes shoots went over the budget when I used my
personal funds to keep the film going. I am delighted that it has been
completed in the end!
4. How did the concept for The Family Picture initially arise, and how
long did it take from first ideas to completion?
I have always been looking for ideas, writing them down with great
excitement whenever they come to me. The concept of ‘The Family Picture’
appeared when I found myself looking at a photograph of my own family and
thinking to myself how lucky I was to have such wonderful people in my
life. This was in May last year.
In addition, I wanted my next film to spread awareness about a social
subject in society and my ideas for the concept I had fit in perfectly to
make that happen. I did a lot of reading about AIDS and chose to include
it in my film. I also needed to make sure I had something that could be
delivered without being preachy and that was possible too. I started
writing ideas down and they grew. I rejected many and kept some. I wrote
some more and rejected some more. What I was then left with was the
outline of a feature length screenplay, with character arcs and locations,
equipped to set off on its journey. It took me three days after that to
complete the first draft. As I always do, I then referred the project to
some script consultants who came back with praises, criticisms and more
ideas. I wrote many more drafts before I thought it was ready to be shot.
As soon as the first draft was ready, however, I went out to look for my
crew. I was very lucky to find a wonderful team who also added their input
towards the script. And since we were all ready to go, we began casting
and subsequently started filming the next academic year (08-09). So, the
film has been completed from concept to final product in ten months.
5. What would you identify as the central themes of The Family Picture,
and have you chosen to express them explicitly using the characters as
mouthpieces, or interwoven the ideas cinematographically and through
elements of mis-en-scene and narrative?
I believe screenwriting is most effective when you start writing from
‘theme’. So, there should always be an underlying explanation for where
each scene takes the plot. For ‘The Family Picture’, the theme would be
worded something like “struggle and belief will result in the resolution
of problems” and “there are four ingredients needed to make success:
hardwork, honesty, patience and knowledge”. The latter is something my
father taught me at a young age and it is something I personally agree
with.
Since I am writing for the ‘screen’, and later plan to direct my
screenplay, I make sure I express my story visually. So, if you read any
of my scripts, I always have a lot of description: more description than
many others. I like to explain each setup’s lighting, angle of view, depth
of field, camera movement and even colours where possible. I sometimes
make storyboards to go with the script.
But I also think dialogues are very important to keep the audience
involved in commercial cinema because it makes the story and characters
clearer for those who do not watch films very closely. So, I have tried to
keep a balance.
6. In today's postmodern climate, it is seemingly impossible to create a
film which is free of cliche and inherent self-reflexivity. Have you
embraced this fact with The Family Picture, utilising techniques such as
conscious homage and meta-reference, or have you attempted to objectively
present fictitious situations without any acknowledgment of artifice?
Some people call it cliché, some intertextuality and some say as long it’s
good, it’s okay. I think this is something I should leave to the critics
to decide. I just know that I write from the heart, and even if what comes
out is ‘cheesy’, if I think it works, so be it!
7. see 2
8. Who would you identify as the most significant influences, both on the
film itself and your writing/directing?
My filmmaking idols are Ashutosh Gowarikar, Mathieu Kassovitz, Michael
Winterbottom and Vittorio de Sica, among others.
But generally, my writing is highly influenced by the films I watch. I
watch a lot of films from many different countries. I love to study how
different screenplays have been structured and what works and what
doesn’t. Anything that works for me gets stored in my subconscious mind
and comes back to me when I’m writing. Music also influences my work. When
I hear a particular song I like, I tend to think of where and when and how
it could come in a motion picture. After all, I dream Bollywood! But more
often, to be honest, I think music just motivates me to get on with my
script.
I think my directing is highly influenced by the people around me during
rehearsals and on set: the cast and crew. I always try to be approachable
on location and love to welcome new ideas from everybody. In this way, the
scene gets better and better. Of course, direction has to be influenced by
the script too. The most amazing thing is, because I include so much
direction in my script, which is actually considered bad in the
screenwriting world, I find that my actors perform exactly in the way I
want right at the start of rehearsals. I therefore did not have to work on
those details when directing ‘The Family Picture’ and could spend time
being creative with them, making things better.
9. Would you say you strive for a definitive auteur style, or do you
envisage yourself more as a craftsman-as-director: a facilitator as
opposed to artist?
I think auterism is something that is very subjective and at times too
academic for me. I think filmmakers make films and critics (and academics)
try to apply concepts like these. To be fair, there are so many ideas in
films and so many don’t come from the director. Telling what comes from
whom is almost impossible and therefore, in theory, it should be
impossible to draw conclusions on just the director. Filmmaking is a team
effort.
A director is an artist but a facilitator all the same. Maybe it’s a
balance between the two. I try to make sure I am both. In any case, some
time in the future, I would love being called an auteur! But at this
moment I’m a budding filmmaker so I think it’s best to focus on my
technical skill.
10. If you answered the former to the last question, is your style
intrusive and idiosyncratic, leaving an unmistakable Babur-esque stamp
upon the work, or do you favour the kind of "invisible" authorship of
which Bazin would approve?
I should leave that to the critics to decide while I focus on making films
that the audiences enjoy. But I love the idea of a Babur-esque stamp! Why
not?