www.npr.org

         

fuck concept, fuck tricks, fuck moving treadmills.

gimme some real filmmaking, with moood & atmosphere & spectacular cinematography(you know, the kind which kansas thinks can be achieved with merely a good operator & a medium budget :|)

fuck all the kids behind their computers tinkering away at their lil pisses of filmmaking in hope theyll become viral, like the flu.

fucking disese, thats what dsktp flmkng iz

signed: a rantin auld man owning up to the fact hes auld and rantin.

         

Dear legion,

So you think real film making is basically moody / atmospheric stuff that looks beautiful but has no story, no narrative and no underlining meaning or concept? So what your saying is that you would prefer watching a commercial for Dior over any film in the last 100 years? Actually what your saying is fuck Kubrik, fuck Godard, fuck Hitchcock, fuck Cronenberg, fuck Jarmusch, Fuck Herzog, fuck Speilberg, fuck Fellini, fuck Wenders, fuck Van Sant, fuck Scott, fuck Scorsese fuck the Coen brothers, fuck Jonze, fuck Gondrey, even Lynch and Argento two masters of mood and atmosphere can go fuck themselves because according to 'my name is legion' story, narrative and concept is not necessary in 'real' film making.

So according to your bible any director of any importance over the last 100 years can go fuck themselves. Because any director of any importance has always used a suitable combination of mood, atmosphere and cinematography as a tool to portray a feeling or emotion relative to a story or concept which they are trying to convey to the audience.

I don't know what your so called 'real' film making is about. Films constructed simply out of spectacular cinematography, mood and atmosphere without a story or concept??? Sounds a little wafty to me.

As for music videos maybe you're missing the point a little. A music video is not a film. Nor is it an artwork, nor is it a commercial, nor is it the latest trick you can do with a camera or computer. Music videos seem to be in varying degrees, a strange combination of all these things. However a good music video in my mind (like a good film) is where cinematography, mood, atmosphere and technique are used to complement and enhance a good narrative and/or concept.

As for my previous statement I never said 'good operator' I said 'good cinematographer'. There is a great difference.

Whatever though... the core of what I was getting at was that without an interesting narrative or underlying concept I am personally left feeling empty and bored.

On the other hand if something is all concept or all narrative and without a pleasing aesthetic I am often similarly left unfulfilled.

Ideally a balance is struck. Aesthetic, mood, atmosphere, story and concept intertwined, feeding and enhancing each other.

Anyway If your getting old and tired and can't keep up perhaps you should reconsider your lifes ambition of making the ultimately cinematic, moody and atmospheric perfume commercial/music video, take up fly fishing and retire.

Goodluck. x

P.S I find your street slang and abbreviations highly irritating. I hope your filmmaking doesn't follow the same format.

         

couldnt read my way thru the whle lot you wrote hre but instead here's my storyteller's companion to the bible yu were mentnng:

1. cld u plz tell me wht gvs' gerry'z all aboot? couldnt quite follow the narrative/ didn get at the core of that meaningful zen-inflnced filmmakin

2. i choose pen-ek ratanaruang over lynch any given day when it cumz to mood & stuff.

3. i do realize i need to ammend my statement: all i was saying z when dealing with music videos one should always choose style over content. and this came as a reaction to your belittling de thurah's efforts as mere smoke & mirrors.

as greenaway - one of the filmmakers i respect most - had it, if you wanna tell stories, be a writer, not a filmmaker.

and th rzn i write wwtht any wvls is that im a firm believer in the almghty tetragrammaton (do google it) or maybe im using an old hc compyuter with some keys missng.

         

ah ha this argument again. Gimmicks vs. atmosphere. I dunno - doesn't it depend on the artist and song? Do you really want to see Martin de Thurah direct an OK GO video? Do you want to see a Sigur Ros video fearturing a Guitar Hero parody?

         

Lynch would certainly be against this trend.

Didn't Ratanaruang only get the amazing atmosphere down after hooking up with Chris Doyle?

         

Gerry is about two guys who get lost in a desolate wilderness. After days of walking around in circles and in the exhaustion/ delirium of extreme dehydration one of them (Matt Damon) makes a decision when all hope is lost to kill the other one. He considers this more favorable than the agony of dying of thirst. Matt Damon then discovers that he is in walking distance of a major highway. He is rescued.

The film features a beautiful elongated tracking shot through a vast salt plain which conveys the endless monotony and exhaustion as they plow forward trying to find a way out of a vast salt plain.

This simple narrative is actually based on a newspaper article of a similar true story.

         

By the way didnt Lynch say that he was going to only shoot on digital from now on? Doesn't his latest film throw away all of the style and beautiful cinematography of his earlier work?

         

         

Dumb argument. Not at all on topic.

         

@kansas, why did you edit your post, i found it interesting

         

really? I felt it was too harsh. I'm over arguing. I agree to disagree. Although I do think Greenaway and most likely also Ratanaruang would still rate narrative, story and concept equally with mood, atmosphere and cinematography if not more important. Despite Greenaway's quote.

         

what you said about greenaway was right on the nose, that's what i myself feel about his work, but this is all the more reason for me to love it.

anyway, my point was that with the advent of pootube every kid can pretend he's a video maker and i abhore that. i believe that filmmaking ought to be the craft of the chosen few. the film school graduates. except keith schofield. now i said it.

         

Yeah I admire extremism in film making although it doesn't always make for the best films.

Yes you have said it. Are you purposely trying to drag me into an argument?

I don't think anyone wants to see all music videos reduced to $5 tricks shot on a handycam by some half ass who takes up film making because its the flavor of the week. On the oher hand I don't think the idea of the 'chosen few' being entirely made up of film school graduates is quite right either.

Some great film makers never went to film school. David Cronenberg is a classic one. He studied science and english literature. Gus Van Sant went to Design College with David Byrne and Andy Warhol. Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry went to art college as have many other successful music video directors.

Then there are those that went to film school but didn't seem to take to it too well. Actually it seemed more of a hindrance to some people. Werner Herzog famously quit film school stole a camera and shot the feature 'aquirre the wrath of god' in the amazon jungle for something like $15,000 total. There's a good example of extremism for you. (Perhaps some of us who are constantly crying over the depletion in music video budgets should take a leaf out of his book.)

Jim Jarmusch's graduating film was rejected by his film school as his final assessment. Hence he failed. It was only after the success of the film on the festival circuit did the film school decide to give him a degree. Speilberg quit university to pursue a career as a film maker. He actually only went back and graduated in 2002 (or sometime around then) where he submitted schindlers list as his graduating piece. I would safely bet there are many other examples.

Film making to me is basically something you learn by watching and doing not necessarily by 3 or 4 years of institutionalized instruction.

         

actually yes i wanted to drag you into an argument. you could've brought up tarantino as well.

(i didnt know that about jarmusch and i find it amusing, because my own graduation film was rejected by the school board because i didnt want to edit out two scenes. although i got my degree, the film aint allowed to enter the festival circuit. anyway. this is not to pretend ill ever become as good as jarmusch -although except ghost dog and dead man his work seems too intellectual for my taste-, but its nice to know this sort of trivia).

but all in all, be it either film school or art college, i do believe in getting an education, in being able to tell the difference between uccelo and blacksploitation and then use it in your own works. hell, im on a posting spree. lets leave it at that, were way off topic anyway.

         

Anything can be cool if it's handled right. Being prejudice about certain aesthetics on principle only works to limit creativity, me thinks. :)