Questions about getting started

[jghenderson]

I don't even know what this means.



Are you saying that music is purely experiential and has no story?

This is what I'm talking about, OP. Every decision a filmmaker makes should be about the best way to get the story out to the masses. When you direct actors, or camera, or whatever, it has to best serve the story. The management of assets is to be able to tell the best story while optimizing time and budget. Story is not just a block, it's the building, everything else is just a block.

Consider this, have you ever left a movie saying, "man, the grips did a wonderful job on that film," or "I loved the Rap version of Elizabeth where the whole movie was shot looking at her left big toe."
I am oversimplifying, but you get my point. How can anybody call themselves a director and not serve the story as the principle thing? Even commercials are mini movies that focus on the product in the context of people's lives and how it fulfills a need...

I am flabbergasted.

I don't think you would define a piece of Mozart by "story". It goes straight to your heart and touches you, without need for interpretation. Story need symbols (such as words) and facts to be translated intellectually by your brain so you can understand them. Now of course there are songs that tell a story, but in principle Music has no need for story. I believe Film is the same way. The images and mood of film can bypass any need for symbols and go straight into you, directly translating experience or emotion.

I recognize that if you want to be a successful filmmaker and not just an experimental one, you need to know story. But if you fail to recognize what is inherent in the medium and focus only on how to tell a story, your work will risk becoming merely recorded literature.

 

[Melvin Harris]

I don't think you would define a piece of Mozart by "story". It goes straight to your heart and touches you, without need for interpretation. Story need symbols (such as words) and facts to be translated intellectually by your brain so you can understand them. Now of course there are songs that tell a story, but in principle Music has no need for story. I believe Film is the same way. The images and mood of film can bypass any need for symbols and go straight into you, directly translating experience or emotion.

Story needs symbols?!?!?! What?!?!?! A still image can tell a story. What is going on here? If that is the case your argument is logically faulty on its face because music is notated as well as improvised. Mozart wrote his music down, using symbols...

I'm just going to bow out of this conversation. I do not agree with this at all. I am a multi instrumentalist and a vocalist as well as a filmmaker and have been a "professional" musician since I was 12. Mozart, Beethoven, Mahler, Britten, Faure, I've heard a lot and performed a lot. Theme and variation, the movements of a symphony, the crooning of a tenor sax, the piano and horns in A-Train, every one of these songs have structure, movement, an inciting incident, complications, themes; Hell, for all of jazz's innovation it is deeply rooted in structure and moves almost in acts.

No, I do not agree, but for what ever reason, I will not convince anyone otherwise. I know, whatever my credentials, others are more impressive. If I have met a composer, or a conductor, or a performer, then someone else is his cousin and didn't hear it like I did. If I make a dime, somebody else makes 15 cent. I get it, but the above point is wrong.

I'm sorry.

Bottom line: Music, notated, transcribed, or improvised from a theme, is always a story otherwise we wouldn't be transported anywhere; we wouldn't see what we see.

Tell Keith Jarret he is not a storyteller, tell Yo-Yo Ma he isn't saying something...

 

[myzz]

Haven't had a chance to reply until now, but thanks so much for all the replies that have poured in the last few days.

El Director:
Thanks!

gonzo_entertainment:
Thanks for sharing, I visited your website and read a bit there as well, interesting stuff!

PopcornFlix:
Thanks for the tips!
The "10 minute film school" videos have been in my browser favourites for a long time, absolutely love them.
I don't necessarily love Rodriguez's movies myself but I respect the hell out of him as a director.
Loved the clip you linked as well, great tips/thoughts!

Patryk_Rebisz:
Thanks!
If there's one thing I'm absolutely certain about in my life; it's that my dream of becoming a director isn't misguided or coming from the wrong place. I won't bore everyone with the details though.

pharpsied:
Thanks for all the tips!
I tend to agree a lot regarding the importance of story. I've noticed the past few years even in video games how my taste has changed solely based on just that. I used to be able to appreciate a lot of games that just gave adrenaline kicks and were "cool" in gameplay, but these days I'll really only spend the money if it's something a long the lines of Mass Effect or Dragon Age (didn't like the sequel though); games with heavy emphasize on story.
While I'm very interested in doing commercials/shorts rather than full-length features, I still want to tell a story. Even a short commercial for lingerie for example, where the focus lies on the product and the visuals/atmosphere, I still think it's much more interesting and ultimately effective if it tells some form of a story.

That being said I'm sure film can be very abstract as well. But even then I think that it can always be argued that there is some meaning, some story or emotion, behind it. So I guess to a certain degree that the meaning of the word itself can be subjective.
But I do have a tendency to sometimes appreciate art, in whatever medium, in a simple manner. To not read beyond the "attraction/intriguing" part of it. To some I guess that would equate me to a simpleton or an orc from warcraft going "ohh, shiny", but that's fine with me.

 

[Melvin Harris]

@myzz- clever, you are...
Do this and be great at it...
And as a side note, Mass effect 3 is going to be the truth for the very reason you described.

 

[GH2user]

I'd just like to throw in a quick thought about story. While of course story is important, I personally think Film is by nature much closer to music than it is to literature or theater or whatever. Obviously to succeed in this industry you have to be able to tell a story, but don't ignore the possibilities of film as a purely visual, experiential medium.

+1

Film is like visual music. In fact, sometimes when I'm writing and just getting ideas, I'll compose some rough music for the scene before I even start shooting. Sometimes I'll even catch myself playing a song for somebody and saying "see, this is what the scene is going to LOOK like" only to realize that they probably think I'm nuts...

For me, a scene with visuals that don't reflect the performances looks like notes being played together that don't form a chord. That's why I STRONGLY suggest learning cinematography for yourself. Otherwise, it's not going to be YOUR movie... it's going to be someone else's that you just happen to be in charge of. If you ask me, and other disagree (read my "industry" thread), not shooting/editing your own movie is the equivalent to hiring a musician to write you a song, someone to record it, and then saying it's your song... because YOU hired them and told them what you "wanted it to sound like".

Music is also usually the first thing I hear when envisioning a scene. It sets up the whole tone and tells you what the lighting and color grading should look like. Again, a movie where the music and overall colors/lighting don't match gives me the feeling of a "sour note".

Cinematography is the chords of the movie. Editing is the rhythm/percussion. The performances are the melody. You need to be a master of them all to properly compose.

 

[Melvin Harris]

Film is like visual music. In fact, sometimes when I'm writing and just getting ideas, I'll compose some rough music for the scene before I even start shooting...

You mean before you start writing the story?

For me, a scene with visuals that don't reflect the performances looks like notes being played together that don't form a chord. That's why I STRONGLY suggest learning cinematography for yourself. Otherwise, it's not going to be YOUR movie...

I agree.

If you ask me, and other disagree (read my "industry" thread), not shooting/editing your own movie is the equivalent to hiring a musician to write you a song, someone to record it, and then saying it's your song... because YOU hired them and told them what you "wanted it to sound like".

I disagree. Bernie Taupin and Elton John have created some of the most enduring songs ever. Bernie, to my knowledge, has never recorded the vocals to any one of the songs he has written for Elton John. Elton did not write the lyrics. Credit is not disputed and the music is no less Bernie's and Elton's. The Cinematographer/Director relationship is there and works for good reason. Money is the only reason not to try it.

Cinematography is the chords of the movie. Editing is the rhythm/percussion. The performances are the melody. You need to be a master of them all to properly compose.

And story is the sheet music that holds all of that stuff, the staves that contain the notes and symbols, the key signature that gives tonality, and the time signature that gives tempo.

 

[vincent6805]

Myzz...seems like you started a good dialogue. You've shown that you can create interesting conversation in a chat room...That's creative. If I were you, I'd just do what you would have done when you were fifteen. There are dozens of young wanna bees at coffee shops, all eager and willing to shoot anything for some footage, for a reel. Make a fifteen minute short. Make a lot of them. Edit on your Mac...This is good practice. If you really come up with a good hook, go to kickstarter.com, check out how others get their projects funded. I began in the film business a long time ago, right after John Wayne said to me, "Anyone that can make old sick people laugh, should be on stage." Well, that was my push...My acting coach, Darryl Hickman said that perseverance is one of the most important things to have. Talent is great, passion is awesome, but so many talented and passionate people just can't persevere. I'm still here, and so many of my talented peers have gone by the wayside. Stay the course.

 

[Melvin Harris]

Myzz...seems like you started a good dialogue. You've shown that you can create interesting conversation in a chat room...That's creative. If I were you, I'd just do what you would have done when you were fifteen. There are dozens of young wanna bees at coffee shops, all eager and willing to shoot anything for some footage, for a reel. Make a fifteen minute short. Make a lot of them. Edit on your Mac...This is good practice. If you really come up with a good hook, go to kickstarter.com, check out how others get their projects funded. I began in the film business a long time ago, right after John Wayne said to me, "Anyone that can make old sick people laugh, should be on stage." Well, that was my push...My acting coach, Darryl Hickman said that perseverance is one of the most important things to have. Talent is great, passion is awesome, but so many talented and passionate people just can't persevere. I'm still here, and so many of my talented peers have gone by the wayside. Stay the course.

+100

 

[GH2user]

You mean before you start writing the story?

Yea, fo sho. I definitely agree with you about music telling a story. I think in film, it tells even more of the story than the visuals and performances.

For me, the order of importance is music/sound design > visuals/cinematography > editing > performances/acting. Although, to make something really great and memorable... you need everything to be good. But still, you can save allot of performances and get away with using sub-par actors by using cinematographic tricks and the right music cues and editing. There's a good editing movie I watched once where they filmed one guy, doing nothing, with no acting or expressions... and then cut it 3 differnt ways with three different sound tracks and other footage. Then, when they showed it to an audience, they perceived it as three different performances.

So when I hear directors saying crap like "I'm an artist, I only work with drama and performances..." I call BS on them. It's totally, IMO, a scapegoat for not having any quantifiable skills... besides taking credit for the cinematographer's/editor's craft that they're grossly underestimating. I don't even know how people like that started getting work in the first place. Must just have been a "right place, right time" kind of deal. Film is a visual/aural medium above all else. If you want to "only work with drama and performance", then live-theater might be a better suit for that person.

P.S. I'm not implying that anyone here has that attitude, I'm just saying "you" in a general term.

 

[Melvin Harris]

So when I hear directors saying crap like "I'm an artist, I only work with drama and performances..." I call BS on them. It's totally, IMO, a scapegoat for not having any quantifiable skills... besides taking credit for the cinematographer's/editor's craft that they're grossly underestimating. I don't even know how people like that started getting work in the first place. Must just have been a "right place, right time" kind of deal. Film is a visual/aural medium above all else. If you want to "only work with drama and performance", then live-theater might be a better suit for that person.

P.S. I'm not implying that anyone here has that attitude, I'm just saying "you" in a general term.

Ok, I'm with you. I wonder about "quantifiable skills" though, what do you mean? Directing is so subjective. Sometimes it's only through relationship with a DP that certian shots born, so I am interested in what you mean by that. Not adversarially, but with genuine interest...