Dark Shadows: Keep the Vampire in the Closet

Title: Dark Shadows

Director: Tim Burton

Writer: Seth Grahame-Smith, John August

Grade: C-

Synopsis: A 200 year old Vampire must resurrect his family's failing fish cannery in order to beat the psychotic bitch of a witch who put him in this immortal loveless dread.

Good Movie For: Hippies and fish cannery historians.

My father used to watch the Dark Shadows TV show when he was little. He said it was the scariest thing he had ever seen. I had high expectations for this movie. I love Tim Burton. Or should I say, I used to love Tim Burton. Old Tim Burton. Burton circa Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice days. 

I expected a lot more out of this movie, and I was sadly disappointed. I typically go into movies with a set of expectations garnered to each movie. I didn't go into 2012 thinking "Oh Shit! This is going to win an Oscar! Definitely!" I went in expecting a not so great script, but great visuals. The fact that I am madly in love with Tim Burton and believe that he is my long lost twin made me walk into this movie with extremely high expectations. I should have lowered that shit. 

The story was predictable. Honestly, the best parts of the movie were probably seen in the trailer. There were some hilarious jokes, but hilarity doesn't ensure a good story. It was confusing at first to know exactly what the story was going to be about just by the contents of the trailers. So he's a vampire and he comes back to his bloodline who now live in the 70's. 

There were so many different character storylines crossing so many different ways that I believe there wasn't enough development for all of them. He's trying to get back at his ex, but the family business is failing, but his lost love has come back from the dead, but the crazy self adopted doctor is in love with him, but there's ghosts and a drunk butler. The main storyline I think they should have focused on was the family dealing with their failing business, but that got muddled in all of these love affairs. 

The one upside of this movie was that the locations and the costuming was impeccable. It's very Tim Burtonesque, which I love. Besides that, this wasn't something I would want to watch again. Please Mr. Burton, get back to your old amazing ways, or else I might have to replace you as my favorite.

10,000 Hours: Why writing a shitty scene everyday is better than writing an OK scene every week.

During one very poignant lecture in screenwriting class, the teacher decided to break down how to become a successful writer. It takes 10,000 hours of practice to master a task. Whether it's cooking, the cello, or even writing, putting in that many hours and that much dedication helps to further your knowledge of any task you wish to master.

After hearing this number, I began to calculate exactly how long would it take for me to achieve the Master Ninja status. If I decided to take speed everyday, gave up sleeping, eating, pissing, and shitting, and dedicated every single second of the 24 hours in a day, it would take a little over a year to clock in 10,000 hours. I love sleeping, and my low tolerance for recreational drugs would kill me instead of keep me awake (Advil is strong enough to make me see unicorns), so the whole, up 24 hours thing wouldn't work. If I dedicated 8 hours a day to the 10,000 hours, it would take about 3 and a half years to reach 10,000. My full time job is to be a student, which I might be failing at, but none the less, I don't have 8 hours in a day to allot to writing. After I graduate I plan on the whole writing working day, but as of now, I have to settle for 1 hour a day. Which by my calculations means I will be hitting the 10,000 mark in about 27 years. 

Yes, hours each day may fluctuate, 3 hours here, 1 hour there, 13 hours that one day, but the bottom line in order to achieve this Master status, you need to write EVERY SINGLE DAY. A bit of advice that I struggle with at times, but have gotten the hang of recently. Making sure to write every single day will ultimately help you down the road. You'll be able to write faster, better, and longer. Even if it's a shitty scene every single day, some where down the line you'll be able to grab that one piece of genius from the 100 pieces of shit.

In order to keep on track I've decided to employ a progress chart made popular by the legend, the master, the guru of the world, Jerry Seinfeld. Seinfeld has talked about his "Don't Break the Chain" method. You print out an entire year calendar on a single sheet of paper, or just list 1 to 365. The idea is that each day you accomplish say, writing for an hour, you get to make a cross on the date. By a week or two, you have the makings of a chain. You're compelled not to break this sweet little chain of encouragement so you continue writing for an hour each day. This method doesn't just pertain to writing, but it could be anything in your life that you wish to be active about each and everyday.

The more you write, the better you'll get. Or at least that's what they say. Don't break the chain man. Don't you break that chain. 

Film School vs. Experience

With every blog or podcast or interview that deals with the film industry there are a couple key questions that always seem to arise when people think about making this into a career. From the structure, "How do I write a script?" to networking "How do I get an agent?" to everyone's carnal desire "How do I make it and become dirty rich?". The same questions always rise to the top of these conversations. Another question/debate that seems to follow this pattern is the standings on Film School versus nitty gritty experience. 

People have different answers in regards to this question. I am in film school. I plan on getting a film degree. Am I an advocate for film school? Sure. If that's the path that best suits you. My whole belief on this topic is that some people are meant for film school, and others aren't. I've been privileged to have some experience in both worlds and I've drawn positives and negatives from both. 

I'm not the most motivated person in the entire world, hence why I have ruts in my postings, so having a strict deadline to learn things and to create things helps me get further. That being said, I have learned so much more being on a film set than I have being in a lecture hall. Nothing beats hands on experience. No article or chapter in a textbook beats having to set up this light or move this piece of equipment.

Purely speaking jobs on set wise, real world experience is much better than taking an introduction to production class. If you want to learn more about the business and filmic aspects of things, than school really is the best bet. I've learned devices and different view points on films and styles from lectures and books than I could not have possibly learned working. Having to analyze and dissect a film truly helps when coming up with your own content. I have found that I am able to tap into different perceptions of the world and of people in my own scripts and films because of studying styles from the past.

A major positive about experience is that you are able to actually work, and if you are actually decent as a production assistant than people will ask you to help them again and again on various different projects. Networking is key in this industry, and film school provides something that set work doesn't have, a built in network. Film school allows students to branch out to each other, an aspect that is much harder to do in the real industry. It also provides the chance for students to work in different fields and positions in a set. You could dabble in directing, or cinematography, or screenwriting in school. In the industry you would typically just start off as a production assistant. 

Ultimately there are many pros and cons for each side of this debate. I've decided to be in film school mainly due to the idea that if I'm not lucky enough to break into the industry, I could fall back and teach, something that almost always requires a degree. The film industry is a funny environment. While other careers strive on scholastic competency, film is more about dedication and knowledge of the craft rather than what grade you got on your senior thesis. Film school is not for everybody, but that is a decision that I think ultimately comes down to the person in question. You decide if school is the right choice for you. If not, strap on that leatherman and find the nearest set to work on.

Objectified: How do we make a better toothbrush?

Title: Objectified

Director: Gary Hustwit

Featuring: Naoto Fukasawa, Paola Antonelli, Anthony Dunne, Fiona Raby

Grade: A

Synopsis: A closer look into the world of design. From the aesthetic to the functional. Everyday items that have transformed through time and use.

Good Movie For: Everyone

Lately I've been a sucker for good documentaries. I remember once my teacher in directing class discussing the topic of a good documentary. A good documentary can do many things. Some focus on extraordinary people while others help to grow our knowledge of the world and it's worldly possessions. Documentaries always seemed like such a foreign beast to me. How can something that's educational also be engaging? I used to shun the real life story and instead gravitated towards the reel life story, but I've realize that documentaries convey just as engrossing stories as the written feature.

Objectified helps to shine light on things that we would normally just bypass. Things that are the utmost of importance to our functional ability every single day, that we just forget the importance of. It was amazing how much thought and innovation went into the grip and hand of vegetable peeler. Or how many ideas came up when thinking about how to improve the toothbrush. Everyday things that have been tailored and sculpted to help us live better. The cushioned grip and the contoured edge help to lessen the strain on your bones. A removable head will prevent the cluttering of discarded toothbrushes. This movie was short and straight to the point. Every object in our lives has a meaning and a purpose. Whether it's to help with our cleanliness or assist in the dinner preparation. Every thing around us has been thought up by someone, and improved by many others. This was an engrossing and engaging documentary that makes me appreciate every time I brush my teeth.

The "Useless" Degree

So while I was trolling around on the web of world wide proportions I stumbled across this picture. 

The Today Show had recently discussed the topic of useless degrees. Now there is some sort of mathematical and scientific equation that figures out the median income of graduating students added to the circumference of the earth times the latitude of a straw divided buy Shaquille O'Neal's shoe size to come up with a plausible basis for determining the best majors to strive for in college. 

I have a huge problem with this. I've always felt that a career in the arts or degrees in the arts have been deemed as unimportant in society's eyes. As if being an art major was merely just a dreamers sense of false importance. My main gripe is that some people feel so unaffected by these creative people when in all actuality everything we touch, see, hear, and wear are all products of creativity.

Most of my friends have gone the route towards the holy grail of parentally accepted professions; being a nurse. Stable job, stable pay, always a demand. I get scoffed at for picking a major centered on the arts. "What good is that going to do for you?" "Dreams don't pay mortgages."

They feel so isolated from artists and designers, but in all actuality everything centers around art. A fashion designer designed the scrubs you wear to work everyday. A product designer made sure that your syringes and tools were the most efficient use of materials and space. An architect designed the hospital and the halls that you walk down everyday. If we didn't have people pursuing these "useless" degrees, we'd all be naked in the middle of the woods with caves as our shelter.

I think the biggest irony that I see is that the actual Today Show would not be functioning if it weren't  for the skills of the people whose degrees they call "useless".

I'm just taking this out of context of what I see in the picture. I didn't watch the segment, but this has been a sore spot for me for a while now. Taking into consideration the term "useless" in the picture, the list could be implying that you wouldn't actually need a degree to succeed in these fields. Now that, I sort of understand with the whole film school thing. The other degrees I'm not sure that this mentality holds true. But there has always been a debate of whether film school is the answer for people to break into the industry. That's a topic for another post.

All in all, I'll leave you with this. The products of creativity are all around us, no matter how secluded we believe we are. Every time you change your clothes, or watch that movie, or pick up a box of cereal at the grocery store, art and design are forever a presence in our lives. So it's about time we stop overlooking the art and appreciate it. 

Just Take a Look, It's in a Book: The Hunger Games

Title: The Hunger Games

Director: Gary Ross

Writer: Gary Ross, Suzanne Collins, Billy Ray

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks

Grade: A

Synopsis: Twenty four tributes are sent into a secluded playing field. They must fight to the death until one victor emerges. That victor is allowed to rejoin civilization. 

Good Movie For: Teens, Adults, Parents, Kids. Ok. Maybe not kids. Babies might cry. 

I'm a reader. Or well at least I try to be a reader. I have learned along this wiry road to becoming a scribe that many movies are adaptations of best selling novels (i.e. The Help, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Twilight, Harry Potter, etc.) I had heard some inklings about The Hunger Games from friends and family and finally bought it once the movie posters came out. It collected dust on my shelf for a couple months until about a few weeks before the release of the film. At first I wasn't all that into it. I had sped through the Twilight books and this was just a bit harder for me to dive into. It wasn't until around the half way mark when I couldn't put it down. There's two more books in the series and I'm itching to start reading those.

I think that the main reason why I had trouble connecting with the book and why I wasn't entirely thrilled that the movie was coming out was because the story was so eerily similar to Battle Royale, a movie that I absolutely love! Did no one tell this woman that she's writing a book that's already been made? Did no one tell these producers that Battle Royale existed? With all my hesitation and apprehension I still found myself hooked on the characters and the story, so when it came time to see the movie, I was completely excited.

The movie was great. I had some gripes about it though. Generally they take out a lot of points in the story because it's a film, which is completely understandable. The movie held true to the book, but that brought up a complaint in my mind. The movie seemed too fucking long. Two and a half hours? I mean it was a time well spent, but still, it was pushing it. This stands at the other end of the spectrum with adaptations. When is too much just too much?

Overall I enjoyed the movie thoroughly, but I did have one major redflag. Why in the hell was everything shot with a handheld not so steady cam? I completely understand using handheld filming while inside the battle grounds because the action and movements help to emphasize it, but a tripod could have been used in their home or at the reaping. I understand that it was used to portray some gritty effect to the shooting, but ten minutes in I was starting to feel bouts of motion sickness. Regardless of that though this movie is a great watch, and I honestly would take the Hunger Games series over Twilight any day.

The Film School Lecture: Talent vs. Marketability

This goes along the lines of a post I did a couple weeks ago, based on a lecture that I heard in screenwriting class about how many new scripts are sold each year.

The film industry is a tricky beast to conquer. It praises for unique ideas, yet scolds because of failure to conform. The idea that you need to fit into this mold is not one that is a new concept. The idea of how marketable a person is, many times overcomes their genuine talent as an actor, writer, etc.

This sadly leaves many of the immensely talented people left on the way side due to their lack of popularity. Big names sell tickets.

Case in point the barrage of teen queens who could take a few (or many) pointers from an actual acting class, that are getting leading lady roles merely based on their status and name.

I'm not trying to ride some high horse here. I too have been sucked into the perils of the newest Twilight movie, but sadly, looking at this career wise rather than audience wise, it's a bleak realization.

I watch trailers for new movies coming out and I think "Who in the hell approved this to be made? Oh. My. Jesus."

I sadly can't seem to find the disconnect. Why is a name much more important than talent? That my friends is a tough question to answer. Amazing actors and actresses are looked over just because they want to sell tickets.

Audiences will watch movies if they are good. True, they will watch bad movies too if they can see some abs, tits, and ass. The idea of the smart audience who can tell what a good story is has been eliminated from the equation of making a movie. The shiny name instead has replaced the talent.

Ugh. I digress. Ramble ramble ramble. Although I've come to this sad realization I still strive to make in the industry. But rather than just break in, I'd actually like to change the industry and make the head honchos realize that just like rock shatters scissors, talent will rise above a name.