These are some photos I took, and there’s also a slideshow below with some more pics. Additionally, there’s a 45 second film made by Lynch that loops at the exhibit.

The Tilton Gallery is located at 8 East 76th Street in Manhattan. Official site: http://www.jacktiltongallery.com

             _________________________

  S L I D E S H O W

The good folks at Unified Field asked me to be D.P. and shoot the video for one of the key exhibits: Cornelia van Varick. Cornelia was a young girl from a wealthy family, who lived in Brooklyn in the year 1700. An inventory of the family’s estate exists to this day, and because of that, historians have been able to piece together significant moments from her life.

The idea was to shoot an actress (playing the role of Cornelia van Varick) on a dark stage, which would later be projected into the center of a miniature model replica of her house from that time. Additionally, there would need to be subtitles above her head. The exhibit would stand like a large dollhouse, and when a kid walked up and pressed the ‘start’ button, Cornelia would appear and describe her life in detail. About three or four times throughout the playback, she would walk off stage – or simply disappear – while her voice-over would continue, describing various objects in the house, or traumatic moments in her life, which would illuminate with lighting cues matched to her narration.

So while the actual script and camera work was fairly simple, the planning had to be meticulous. We had to shoot it with the proper ratio (her size x frame size) in mind, so that she wouldn’t look too big, or too small, when projected in the exhibit. I also had to consider space for the subtitles, for which placement had to be precise, so that they would appear in the exact intended spot. I also did all the post-production for the project, which including color grading and sound mixing (we used a lavalier microphone on her during the shoot). The edit had to be timed correctly with the lighting cues, as well.

Overall, I learned tremendously from the shoot, and I’m very thankful for the opportunity to have done it. Here’s a brief video compilation of Cornelia van Varick, starting with about 20 seconds of raw footage, as we shot it, which then morphs into the final version which is currently being projected at the Museum today. We shot at Sun Studios in Manhattan, and I kept it dark because I knew that meant less ‘clean-up’ in post later. You’ll also notice the final crop and sound change (from camera audio to lav audio). I used the Canon 7D, since projection was meant to be on a small-scale, with some serious lights (mainly, a Joker Bug 800 and a 400, plus a 4×4 Kino Flo for fill).

VIDEO:

Final Exhibit [PHOTO]:

The synopsis: a civil war vet stumbles onto an alien in a cave, and is transported to Mars, where he becomes part of a war between nations and falls in love with a princess. The movie is a little like The Phantom Menace meets Avatar. The effects, the acting, and all the creatures reminded me of those films – but in a bad way: as if George Lucas got his hands on Avatar and decided to digitally revise the film. I don’t know how other people will feel about Taylor Kitsch, but I don’t think it was a good casting call. Overall, I didn’t care about any of the characters one bit. The entire movie was clichéd and very derivative of past sci-fi films that have come before it. More than anything, it’s just poorly made. There’s some spotty humor in the first half-hour that never really comes back again; there’s bad editing; bad music; and nothing that will surprise you at all.

Apparently, it’s based on a book written 100 years ago by Edgar Rice Burroughs (who also wrote Tarzan). John Carter is the first of an eleven book series (the book is actually called A Princess of Mars), and Disney has licensed the rights to make the first three or four, I believe. I haven’t read any of the books, but I’m guessing that there’s a good reason that no one has attempted to make them into films until now. In the Q&A following the screening, Mr. Stanton heavily marketed the fact that these are old books that preceded films like Star Wars and Star Trek, obviously compensating for the fact that John Carter is very clichéd and familiar. He also drove home the point that he was a fan of Burroughs’ books since he was five years old, and even showed us a sketch of an alien that he had done when he was of that age. Again, all marketing, and sadly, none of that changes the fact that John Carter is simply a bad movie.

The love story is a bore. It’s so predictable and ridiculous. In the theater, there were people laughing at serious moments in the movie. That’s always a bad sign. From what Mr. Stanton said, the books were written in an near-encyclopedic manner, describing the details of Mars, for example, and capturing the essence of exploring new lands. That sounds like a fascinatingly good read to me, so I can understand why John Carter has such loyal fans. But the rest of it, including all the character development and dialogue, was made-up for this Disney film. Still, I think some fans of the books will like it, for the main reason that they are attached to the world created by Burroughs, and will be delighted to see it come to life. But besides that, I can only see kids under the age of 18 getting any real enjoyment out of this movie.

One of the stranger things that Andrew Stanton said in his Q&A after the film was that when he showed up to set, he realized that whether he was present or not, “they” were going to shoot that day. So, if he “got drunk and couldn’t make it in, the production would go on”. He also said that he came to the set with “ideas”, and that the crew was amazed that he had such input on making the film. I get it – it’s a massive production, but I don’t think James Cameron would ever say anything like that. As a director, you want to be in control of your film. Obviously, that was not the case here, and probably a big reason that John Carter is so underwhelming.

Thankfully, I saw it in good ol’ fashioned 2D, and I would suggest you do the same. Don’t spend your money on the 3D version, because it was shot in 2D and then converted in post. It’ll look dark and unnatural. By comparison, Avatar was shot in 3D, and Cameron also compensated by asking theaters to turn up the brightness on playback.

This was Mr. Stanton’s first live-action film. Unlike Brad Bird’s turn on Mission Impossible last year, it didn’t turn out so well. But that’s okay, because Andrew Stanton has proven himself at Pixar (where he’s also a V.P.), and he’s now back in a more comfortable environment, directing the sequel to Monsters, Inc. Unless you’re a fan of the John Carter books, or under the age of 18, I would recommend you stay away from this movie. If you’re looking for sci-fi, Ridley Scott’s Prometheus seems much more promising (trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVdhZ714Bnw), and I would wait for that. John Carter is also ‘tracking’ poorly, meaning Disney knows it’s not great and is being very careful about pre-release word-of-mouth. You might want to wait until it’s released, and then take a look at the reviews for an honest consensus.

GRADE: C

TRAILER:

Official Site: http://disney.go.com/johncarter

I saw this movie a few months ago, and I’ve come to appreciate it much more in retrospect. It’s not an easy movie to watch. It’s NC-17 for a reason, and deserves that rating (there’s a lot of male, full-frontal nudity and sex scenes). It’s for adults who want to see a mature film about a man (played by Michael Fassbender) living in New York City with a sex addiction.

For the first hour or so, you meet Fassbender’s character, Brandon, and see just how addicted to sex he is: he has emotionless sex and masturbates constantly. He’ll sleep with a prostitute, and then immediately open his laptop to some porn. He’ll take breaks during the workday and help himself in the men’s room. It never stops, and it consumes his thoughts day-and-night.

Carey Mulligan does a great job as Sissy, his distraught sister, who ends up crashing at his apartment, much to the displeasure and annoyance of Brandon. Their relationship is complex, and it’s tough to tell who is suffering more, Brandon or Sissy: she’s a struggling singer whose life is falling apart, and he’s a sex addict whose life is falling apart. However, Brandon takes Sissy for granted, and continually rejects her emotional pleas for love. His addiction blinds him from seeing exactly how much support she needs.

There are many moments during the first hour which were a bit tedious (such as static shots of conversation from behind-the-back), and I often found myself wondering why we were being subjected to watch this. But in the last half hour of the film, the director, Steve McQueen, beautifully showcases just how far Brandon has fallen. After his sister’s attempted suicide, he suddenly becomes conscious of his own despair, and the awful state of his life weighs heavily on his mind. He feels trapped by his addiction, and wanders the streets of New York, aimlessly looking for sex. When he can’t find women, he goes to a gay men’s club. We feel the impact of the first hour, and Harry Escot’s score is integral in driving this point home. The strings first appear at the very start of the film, then the bulk of the film has no music, obviously a reflection of the emotionless, unsatisfying sex that Brandon is having. But when Escot finally brings the score back in, at the end, it’s a very powerful effect. You’re struck by how much you’ve been affected by the first hour of the film.

Director Steve McQueen spoke at the screening I attended, and he said that he thought the film worked because it forces the audience to bring their own experiences to it. I agree with that statement. To some extent, we all know what it feels like to have some sort of sex addiction, and this movie is all about the emptiness you feel from that. It works very well.

Shame is a unique character study. It’s not about a story. It’s about understanding Brandon’s feeling of being addicted to sex, and then empathizing with him when he bottoms-out. Fassbender’s performance is worth all the hype, too. When I walked out, I didn’t think I liked the film much. I guess part of that has to do with the shock-factor of seeing this theme portrayed so vividly in a movie. It took me a while to think about it, digest it, and understand it. Still, because of the mature content (and the fact that it’s a character study) I would recommend this only to the serious movie buff.

GRADE: A-

TRAILER:

Official site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/shame

You can buy her four song EP on iTunes and Amazon now. I highly recommend it. Her full-length album will be out on Jan 31st.

Catch her on Saturday Night Live (NBC) this weekend.

Check out her videos below. You can also find plenty of her live performances on YouTube.

VIDEO GAMES:

BORN TO DIE:

OFF TO THE RACES (audio only):

Official site: http://lanadelrey.com

Surprisingly, I did not enjoy this movie. How Lars Von Trier can go from Antichrist to this, is not necessarily beyond me; it does actually feel like a natural progression. But Melancholia is just so tedious and slow in parts. I was hoping for much better.

I get it. It’s an honest movie about severe, manic depression, starring Kirsten Dunst as Justine. The first half is all about her wedding reception, which is taking place at her sister’s estate. She tries very hard to keep it together, but as the night progresses, her depression overpowers her will, and her wedding slowly falls apart. Towards the end of the night, Justine is so out-of-control and lost, that her new husband has no choice but to abandon her. The second part of the film focuses on the relationship between Justine and her sister, Claire, played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. Justine’s depression continues to suck the life out of her, and as the film saunters along to the end, we see how it has changed their relationship. All the while, Justine’s world is increasingly bleak, to the point where suicide seems inevitable, even though you know this is not where the movie is headed…

While all of this is going on, a planet named Melancholia is passing dangerously close through the Earth’s orbit, with the possibility that it could collide and lead to total annihilation. This idea displaces the thought of suicide within Justine. Did I mention Melancholia is a blue planet? And yes, everything that happens in regard to this metaphor is way too obvious, including the tee-pee closing scene.

There were things that I did like about this film. Namely, that it does do a good job of showing the effects of depression. The mood is perfect, and it’s very well shot. I liked a lot of the symbolism, too, including the convergence of Justine’s and Claire’s characters. At one point, Claire’s husband (Kiefer Sutherland) kills himself by overdosing on medication that was intended for all of them (in case they found out that Melancholia was indeed headed for the destruction of our planet). But instead of sharing the medicine, he takes it all himself, leaving Justine and Claire to fend for themselves in the final hours before doom. That’s classic Von Trier, and as the audience, you realize that you were blinded from the real truth of what was really going on, because the film’s skewed angle of view was so overwhelming. He also shows us a very narrow vision of the world, which feels appropriate in the context of the film.

Unfortunately, the movie is drag. It’s gets boring too often, and honestly, it’s just not a fun film to watch (thematically). Don’t go looking for any solace or comfort here. There are no answers. If there’s a lesson to be learned by this film, it’s that Von Trier’s particular approach does not make for practical, audience-based movie watching. In my opinion, that’s a major flaw, because he’s not fiddling around and experimenting like Stan Brakhage, after all.

Kirsten Dunst won best actress for her work in Melancholia at Cannes this year. But that doesn’t make it a good movie. See Antichrist instead. That’s Von Trier’s masterpiece.

Grade: C

TRAILER:

Official site: http://www.melancholiathemovie.com

I’m a David Fincher fan, but not a fan of every movie he’s made. I think he’s one of those very good movie directors that will always give you your money’s worth, even if you don’t like the film – like Spike Lee, or David Lynch. It’ll always be an interesting, fun ride.

My favorite Fincher films are The Social Network, Se7en, and Zodiac. Dragon Tattoo isn’t as good as any of those, but it’s a decent thriller. It looks great, and sounds great, but overall, it feels a little ‘flat’. The “oh shit” moments didn’t awe me the way they did in Se7en, for example. I found the story interesting, but not compelling. It didn’t involve me to the point where I felt the need to keep track of who every single character was (there were a lot). But I still had fun along the way.

The best parts of the movie involve the girl, Lisbeth, and when you’re learning more about her. My wife read the book, and from what she told me, there are some interesting changes that were made in the film adaptation. I think some of the small details that were omitted would have better helped me connect with the movie. Apparently, the book is much clearer about Lisbeth’s hate for men-who-abuse-women. This is essentially what fuels her, and in Fincher’s version, some of that motivation is lost, such as in the scene where she rushes off to chase after Martin on her bike. It also explains the look on her face when she accepts the case, because she is being asked to help find a “killer of women”. The hints are there, but with a better understanding of her character, these scenes would have been more effective.

About Harriet: she is an unfortunate, soulless coward. She knew about Martin (and his father), yet ran away and stayed silent for years while countless girls were tortured and killed. Nice. In the book, this fault is addressed (Lisbeth hates her for this), but in the movie, there’s no acknowledgement made of  it at all. It’s a choice, but I would have said something about it in the film.

The score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is reminiscent of The Social Network, but not close to being as good. The Social Network score was ambient, yet melodic; it was very catchy and probably the best score I had heard in years. Dragon Tattoo is mostly just ambient noises. It adequately works to set the mood and tone, but that’s about it. Cool sounds, but nothing special.

There are a lot of good things about this movie. It’s just not overwhelming. I like it’s bleak, cold nature. I also really enjoyed the final twenty minutes, after the main plot climaxes, which resolves by highlighting the relationship between Lisbeth and Daniel Craig’s character, Mikael. (Another difference from the book is that at the end of the movie it appears as though Mikael is “with” Erika, but in the book, it’s noted that Erika is married, so when Mikael is walking off with her, it’s not quite the same effect.) I found this ‘coda’ to be more engaging than the other parts of the film. It left me curious to know what happens in the next two installments, so I’ll probably watch the Swedish films in the near future. I’d also like to compare Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth to Noomi Rapace’s performance. Noomi also played Lisbeth in the TV series that followed the Swedish films, and she currently co-stars in the new Sherlock Holmes film.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is an R-rated film, which I appreciate. The R-rating means it won’t make as much money at the box office, but it’s true to the graphic, adult nature of the book. If you don’t want to go to the theater and see a rape scene, stay away from this film. But if you watch a lot of movies, especially if you follow Fincher’s films, you should see this.

Grade: B

TRAILER:

Official site: http://www.dragontattoo.com/site

We ended up with about 150 good shots. These are a select few. There’s also a manual slideshow below with some additional photos.

     _________________________

     S L I D E S H O W

     [click to scroll through photos]

I saw a screening of this film last week at MoMA, and I can see why Roger Ebert picked it as his best of 2011. It’s a great film, set in Iran, about a family caught in the crisis of a murder charge. If you want to know more about the plot, you can check out the trailer below, or read the Wiki entry (which also contains spoilers).

This is a fascinating movie on many levels. For one, seeing an honest, intimate portrayal of life inside Iran is incredibly interesting. This is not war-torn life as seen on CNN. This is not a movie about the military, or women’s rights. The Iranian family portrayed is surrounded by a different culture than the one that we live in, and, I think, getting a glimpse into that day-to-day life is a major part of what’s fueling the West’s interest in this film. For example: when Razieh (the caretaker) asks her imam if it would be a sin to change the Father’s soiled pants; or any of the court scenes, in which murder cases are tried and ruled upon in tiny, closet-like rooms by a judge who has virtually no accountability (besides his own instincts). These scenes help create constant, riveting tension.

A Separation is a very well made film, written, produced, and directed by Asghar Farhadi. The acting is excellent all-around, especially Peyman Moaadi (Naader), the protagonist, who is very authentic in the role. I also loved Sarina Farhadi as the daughter, Termeh. I thought she did a great job with the subtleties of playing a young girl under tremendous emotional stress and pressure, yet unable to show it. The fact that all the characters feel so deep – and real – is a testament to Mr. Farhadi. Apparently, he likes to rehearse extensively, until the actors are 100% familiar with the ins and outs of the character they are playing, and it absolutely pays-off in this film.

Technically, I did notice a few problems with the lighting and color grading that is, occasionally, a bit inconsistent. Some shots are a little flat and seem to beg for some key light or vignetting. I don’t think most people would notice, but unconsciously, it can make certain moments look a tad unexciting. Maybe Sony will fix this at some point. Either way, it’s minor, and doesn’t take away from the strengths of the film.

In his review, Ebert mentioned that people will likely be talking about this film for years to come. I agree. It transcends it’s locale and culture. This is a movie about truth, and the complications that often accompany it. It’s a very social film, and in the end, Mr. Farhadi deftly shifts focus from Naader to Termeh, leaving her as the central character.

I thought the final scene in the movie was a perfect note to end on. So much is said, without anyone having to say it. If we had seen Termeh make her choice, it would have reduced the film to a ‘result’, and whether she decided to stay with her father or her mother is not what A Separation is about. Plus, I think it’s obvious that she would have chosen her father. Is there really any question about that? After she stood by him so many times in the film? Why didn’t Naader and Simin get back together after he was vindicated? Why did they carry through with the divorce? Why weren’t they speaking to each other? At one point, while waiting, Simin looks at Naader longingly. I would guess that it has to do with Simin’s total lack of support and trust of Naader while he was on trial. I don’t know about you, but I would consider that ‘irreconcilable differences’. Taking everything into account, there’s no doubt in my mind that Termeh would have gone with her father.

By the end of A Separation, Naader is a changed man, more confident in himself. He’s also leaned more about the truth. See this movie.

Grade: A-

TRAILER:

Official Site: http://www.sonyclassics.com/aseparation

It’s 19 minutes and 18 seconds long, so I don’t expect people will watch it instantly. If you have watched it, thank you, and if you haven’t watched it, maybe this blog entry will pique your interest. It does contain spoilers, but who really cares?

The working title of this film was The Robbery. We shot it on-location in Queens, NY, over the course of 12 hours. Considering there were no rehearsals, and, besides Peter and Lauren, none of the actors knew each other or had met before, I think it turned out well. But because it was filmed in such a rush, I wasn’t able to give the actors much direction, so the fact that it turned out to be so close to what I had initially imagined, is a testament to the people in it.

It’s certainly a slightly more experimental film than you’ll find in a cineplex theater. The feel and mood of the film changes often. I love the dancing in it, which was all choreographed by Stephanie Danielson. I suggested some songs and she came up with these fabulous routines within a day or two. We shot the dance for the opening credits a week or two before the other ones within the movie (the latter two were filmed during the main 12 hour shooting span). Essentially, they stand-alone, and I find them interesting to watch irregardless of what happens before or after. That’s one of the reasons the film changes it’s aspect ratio during those sequences (including the opening credits), switching between 1:85 and 2:35.

In the past, I’ve made a film or two in which “nothing happens”. Well, something happens, of course, but not what an audience would expect, I guess. I completely understand this gripe, but at the same time, I’m a fan of the avante-garde, so it’s okay with me. I’d probably be down to watch a film about a hallway with a flickering light. To some extent, this film, The Sunnyside Murders, might have too much happening in it, but I like the pacing and it seems to work fine, as far as I can tell.

I think a lot of people will find this film unsettling for two primary reasons. One, being Stephanie’s character arc. I think she, as a person, ends up in a different place by the end of the movie (besides winding up dead, of course). But what exactly her revelation is, remains ambiguous. Her moment of catharsis is obviously the death scene, just after she is stabbed by Bob. As she is dying, she evolves, but the audience is left to make up their own minds about how exactly that might be, or rather, what she learned. People want clarity in those matters, I know, but I preferred to leave it open-ended in this film. I find those kinds of things force a certain level of self-consciousness from the viewer, because he or she must project many more of their own ideas and thoughts onto the film in order to completely understand it. A certain amount of people won’t do this, and will likely feel alienated by other similar moments in the film.

The second reason this might be an unsettling film, is because there’s very little “heart” in it. In Hollywood, you might insert a scene of the main character helping some old woman load groceries into her car, or cross the street. In The Sunnyside Murders everything just happens, and you’re never really asked to like any of these characters.

I shot this with the Canon 7D, with the help of some key people listed in the credits. I couldn’t be happier with the way it looks. The night stuff was shot in the dark, and we used a few $4 flashlights from Home Depot to light it on the sidewalk. Nothing was storyboarded; it was all run-and-gun style. Of course, being in New York City helps (light-wise), but trust me, I couldn’t have done it without the ISO of the 7D. It was also freezing that night, apparently – that’s what the crew tells me. I didn’t notice it as much, because I was too immersed in getting the shots, but looking back, I’m amazed that all of these fine people showed up and stuck around to film this with me until the end.

I love the score by John King (http://www.mettaaudio.com). I met him during my year in Indiana (1999-2000), and it’s been a blessing to know such a talented composer, willing to help me for nothing in return. While he was writing the music for this, he had his second child, so he was forced to leave it about 25% incomplete, and we never had a chance to tweak it. I extrapolated from what he had already given me and was able to finish the score by arranging his tracks in different ways for the scenes that needed music. It also helped that I had already planned on using some pop songs for the dance sequences. All things considered, I think the score turned out excellent.

If I was to submit this to film festivals, I would need to officially license all of the pop songs (fat chance), or replace them with same-tempo songs by lesser-known, independent artists (that grant me permission to use their music). I would also want to go back and dub (ADR) all of the dialogue in a studio to give it a “tighter”, more professional sound. As it stands, about 50% of the sound is “live” (recorded on-location with a Zoom H4n), and while it sounds okay, New York City is a noisy place, so it’s not as clean as I’d like it to be. There are lingering artifacts in the sound.

I had a great time doing all of the post-production on this, including the fire effects and the “montage” sequences. The sound mix was a monsterous, time-consuming task for me. I was a sound engineer for years, having engineered records for artists such as Alicia Keys and Jay-Z, but mixing a 20 minute film – and getting it to sound good – was far more challenging that I ever thought it could be. (I’m still not confident that it sounds good, actually.)

I didn’t do anything arbitrarily, and it all means something to me. If it ends up meaning something different to you, that’s a-okay. It’s certainly not a perfect film – far from it – but I think I’m getter better with each one, and close to hitting my stride.

I don’t believe in intellectualizing your own work, and I certainly don’t want to place any self-importance in this, so if you take the time to watch this 20 minute film, thank you. I know that’s a sizable investment, and hopefully this blog entry helps bolster that experience for you.

If you want more info on the actors:

Stephanie Danielson:
http://www.stephdanielson.com

Peter Ganim:
http://www.peterganim.com

Lauren Fortgang:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2473063

Dan Chen:
http://dramalaw.com

From the crew:

Christopher Camp, aka Logrithmic, is a filmmaker in his own right, and turned me on to the Canon 7D. I highly recommend checking out his videos at: http://www.logrithmic.com

Sumeet Bharati, co-producer, is also a singer, and about five years ago, she had a popular song out called “Agony” featuring a Jamaican artist named Elephant Man: http://www.sumeetmusic.com