Inside THE RED ROBIN: The Making of the Feature Film: July 2011

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Ulcers and indies. How making an independent film isn't good for your stomach lining. Catchy

Okay, this may seem like a joke for a title of a blog. But behind it there's no humor really. If I don't have an ulcer, I'm on my way to getting one. Perhaps before making a film filmmakers should have prescription heartburn medication. I know many times over the course of the last 6 years I have really needed something to assuage the indigestion and burning inside I have felt from the process.

I don't want this blog to be a "whiney" tell-all because making a movie is worth it. I can't shake the dream of watching this in front of an audience. I want my sons to look back on this one day and say "Dad chased his dream, so can we" That's a really important lesson I want to impart on both of them instead of, 'dad chased his dream and quit' I have never quit in film...many other things in life but not my creative pursuits. Boy, is this testing me and my endurance and stamina for bullshit.

First thing I would tell filmmakers trying to make a movie is forget about being a filmmaker for a very long time. You're now going to become a businessman. A hustler. A producer. You have to forget the art and learn to speak, walk, dance like a hustler. You are trying to raise money and that doesn't happen in the confines of your imagination. That happens in the real theater called "THE WORLD" and it's a back breaking, mind-numbing, all or nothing process. You can't kind of get fucked trying to raise money. Prepare to be fucked alot. Obviously if I mean real fucking I wouldn't say this because I am married.

Being a producer means being a hustler and chasing...your tail a lot of the time. Really existing in the greatest Catch 22 of all time: need a cast to get financing, need financing to get a cast. So how does someone with no money and just a script go about getting any of this? I mean, how do you attach a cast of known actors when you are unknown and everything about your package remains unknown to Hollywood, therefore, carries a major scarlet letter with the initial N for NO. Now you have a very long hill battle with people in the business of seeing that N change into a P for possibly to a C for cool. It's not easy and it means you have to build a credible package. You need to start having your film aligned with enough credible people above-the-line, that is, that it becomes possible you to join the poker game. Why do I call it a poker game? Because you need a good hand and plenty of times you will have to bluff to stay in each game, whether that's getting an agent to pass a script to an actor or a potential investor to read your script. Bluffing may seem like lying and to a degree, and all producers know this, we're often hovering somewhere in our dream pursuit between truth and fiction. I'm not saying you have to out and out lie to get your movie made, but you sure have to be comfortable with the art of hyperbole. If you're not, you shouldn't be producing any movie. Like any kind of sales, you are on the frontline and you better have good showmanship like PT Barnum. If you can whip them up into a frenzy with no package, that may be enough to improve your hand. Chances are, like everyone else, you need something to keep these people on the phone. A great story will interest almost nobody at first. They want to know and by they I mean the money and the actors(reps), who the hell thinks this project is cool. If they don't see anybody on your guest list or roster, then you can just about forget about getting to play. If you repped an actor and a small project came your way with no attachments of other actors, no discernible marquee producers, you wouldn't spare a breath even if the story got great coverage. I know this because a major boutique agency read my script before we had even one significant attachment...and the coverage was the best I'd ever gotten. And nobody in that agency got off their asses to try and help me make this movie. It was a small film, anyone could tell that by reading...small as in no CG effects, no franchise potential, no tentpole movie, and certainly no video game or sequel potential. Like "Black Swan" without Aarronofsky or Portman. Just a good solid script. I'm not saying it's not enough to write a great script. There are forces out there that can see that get made. I'm talking about being your projects own producer and making your movie from absolutely nothing but your determination and 120 pages of a script you sweat your soul to write. If you have no intention of raising the money and directing this film, okay, time to find a lit agent...some of these ideas may not be so bad though for your intention. I mean, if you can get a reputable Producer to attach or even a recognizable actor, these are all things that can help get you through formidable hurdles called the gatekeepers.This is really for those of you who, like myself the last 7 years, who are determined to make your film your way but not with a credit card, your friends Iphone....but a known cast of actors and a budget you can afford more than just craft service potato chips and beer.

SO I 've said you have to hustle. And here's another hard pill to swallow. If you do this, be prepared for a very LONG HAUL. Again, the average project takes years, sometimes decades to get made in Hollywood--most never get made at all--so you have to be realistic here. If you think it's going to be an overnight or 2 year process, you better go back to doing your own smaller projects with your best friends serving as the cast. It's anything but a short process. It's unpredictable how long. Even as I write this, I am going on 7 years and still not sure whether it's going tohappen when it's NOW supposed to. Many film people become TV people because they would rather see stuff get made than have 1000 dinners, lunches and breakfasts talking about that Oscar potential film they want to make. There's something gratifying about getting to produce and see what you've laboured on not for 10 years but maybe a few months. TV is a here and now medium. Film is a then and maybe but probably not. Again, I'm not saying you can't go out and do this on the cheap and be the next Kevin Smith. Making films has few to no obstacles anymore. But raising money and a marquee cast is still what I'm talking about. Oh and if you're a banker or hedgefund investor who has decided to finance their own feature...or you have a rich Uncle, none of this applies to you...except you will still have to have something on paper that is quasi-readable....but the truth is you're path may be more difficult getting major names...but if you have the dough you can get names...b c and d....Your long haul may be 2-3 years but you will have a movie made at the end of the day because you have the key ingrediant that everyone wants---money. You have money you can get names onboard and pay a great crew and have a handsome film. Yes, I would've been envious a few years ago, but I wouldn't trade my blood/sweat equity and the lessons, contacts, and journey I've experienced for anything less. It's much more gratifying to earn the car than to have someone just buy it for you. This is very true. If you can pay for everything you probably wont' do much except for write the check and have a nice seat ont he set. But if you have to be the person who makes this magic happen from nothing, a journey this will be filled with upsetment, victories, lessons, and ultimately the immense satisfaction that you did this without a silver spoon or rich uncles bank account. Not that there's anything wrong with rich Uncles. Wish I had a few, however, it's like my dad said, you get things easily you don't appreciate them, you i

About The Red Robin

“The Red Robin” focuses on the dynamics of a family whose dying patriarch stands accused of a shadowy past by one of his children. Every aspect of the filmmaking, from the acting to the visuals and editing, are tinted by a traumatic incident from the family’s past that remains unknown to them. As the director of the film, I plan to visualize the damage this buried incident inflicts on the Shellners, how it twists and subverts their reality, and its combustible ability to reap havoc on their lives over the course of one night. The palette of this film could best be described as “Cinema of the Traumatized” and this expression should live and breath inside every frame. Inside the house, the interior design hasn’t been updated for decades with browns, yellows and beige colors popular in the 70’s—though a sanctuary at one time, it’s now tired and depressing. One can’t step foot in the Shellner house without feeling the weight of the world, as if an albatross of despair looms over everything and everyone. Though the story is set in the present, the visuals will have the fragile graininess of aged film from the seventies and the colors desaturated and muted, representing the time which the incident happened. The faces of the Shellners are photographed “unglamorously,” with practicals, giving expressions a raw, real and sallow look drained of all inner/outer beauty. When the accusations of abuse are leveled against the father, the images will retain their yellowish pallor but shot with higher contrast, more areas of darkness to heighten the mystery and confusion. Only when the resolution comes at the end of the film does the image feel contemporary and the faces return to some state of health as if the narrative is able to move out of its trapped past. The camera work will also reflect the emotional burden trauma has had on this family. In the beginning of the story, the action will be kept eye-level, framed in unobtrusive wide shots with little movement, lending a heaviness to the image. The coverage will be minimal and some entire scenes may consist of 1 angle to convey that life has all but come to a halt. Editing will be dictated by the sparce shooting style and will therefore be paced slowly. Many compositions in the house will feature family members framed against enormous windows or the majestic fireplace, giving the image a weight that suggests something unseen is crippling our characters. After the story takes its first dramatic turning point with the son’s accusations of his father’s past, the visuals will become increasingly agitated, unhinged. Similar to movie’s like Roman Polanski’s “Repulsion” which depicts a woman’s mental breakdown inside her modest flat, trauma works its way into the psyches of the family and the sanctuary of home becomes alien, threatening and even dangerous. While the accusing son, Tommy, hunts for the truth escalates and mental state become manic, the camera will mimick his psychology with less steady shots on the tripod, abrupt pans and tilts, erratic zooms, focus-adjustments, and compositions that are busier. Eventually, as Tommy’s siblings begin to have “memory relapses,” the cinema of the Shellner’s becomes “agitated” Camera angles are more assymetrical, exaggerated, closer, and depth of field compresses. Beyond the literal visuals taking place in the house, there’s also the mental “flashes” that Tommy experiences throughout. These are the traumatic “pinches” that give the viewer a sense of his mindset but are also pieces to the underlying past which haunts the family. Because Tommy accuses his father, Nathaniel, of performing government mind control experiments on the children, these flashes should resemble an actual filmed tests. The performances of the family members are equally impacted by trauma. When the story begins, there’s a heaviness to nearly every minute behavior of the characters. Their speech, movements and reactions.are slower than “normal.” Though they don’t realize it, they are paralyzed by their past and not just their present predicament. When one of the children, Tommy, invokes claims of his father’s horrors, the characters undergo a full-fledged identity crisis. With each character experiencing some terrifying recall they don’t understand, they become unhinged, even foreign to themselves, and unpredictable in their minute to minute reactions. The notion that their family history could be a big lie is must be reflected in their behavior. At the same time, there must be a devotional love for their father which complicates their emotions and makes shifting alliances difficult, if not, impossible. Even Tommy struggles with his own premise as it undermines a view of his father as his savior and that must resonate in every nuance of his performance. The patriarch, Nathaniel, will be directed to succeed at saving his children at all costs, no matter what kind of slandering takes place. He rescued and adopted these children from horrible lives and he will not pass until he’s assured they are ok. His frustration with Tommy is tempered with his compassion and he never pulls out daggers to combat what he’s convinced is mental illness. His weapon is his undying dedication even as he struggles with his final hours of life. Movies like Thomas Vinterberg’s searing drama, “The Celebration” and Mike Nichol’s classic, “Whose Afraid of Virginia Wolfe” have inspired me as successful examples of small stories with high emotions told on a large cinematic canvas. Both taking place in one night and in one location with families that undergo seismic conflicts based in trauma, these movies bear mentioning for their wonderful ensemble casts and performances that take us convincingly through some difficult psychological terrain. My approach to directing “The Red Robin” puts the same emphasis on having a cast that can take us to the very edge and back without over-acting and melodrama. Because there are 6 children and 2 parents in a very confined space, the actors must know their parameters and pitch and be careful not to overwhelm each other. As the director, I will make sure that the combustion never becomes theatrical or over-the-top and there’s a realism to the performances and shooting style that keeps us believing. I will encourage my cast to adopt the maxim “Less is more” knowing how easily high emotions in small space can transport us to the stage. Though there’s an abundance of dialogue in the script, I will emphasize silence, restraint and a style of acting that keeps the audience guessing what our characters are thinking and going through.. “The Red Robin” is most engaging at the level of keeping the audience in the dark, taking them out again, then putting them back just when they think they have figured it all out. I would like people to come away from this film not only be entertained by the thrilling plot twists, but moved by the story about a family struggling to cope with a great loss and suffering.

Inside THE RED ROBIN: The Making of the Feature Film

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Ulcers and indies. How making an independent film isn't good for your stomach lining. Catchy

Links

Category