While my research practice will be highly subjective and will be a learning process on my own perspectives of creative control and ownership, it is still important for me to research how other screenwriters and directors work together, how different writer-directors work to create their visions, and their opinions/experiences with creative control & the collaboration of filmmaking.
During my research I came across a name that was unfamiliar to me; Alex Garland an interview in which he discusses his experiences working as a novelist and screenwriter collaborating with directors, while also reflecting on his experience directing his first feature film (which he also wrote) Ex Machina. The interview is available online: http://www.indiewire.com/article/why-ex-machina-writer-director-alex-garland-doesnt-consider-himself-a-first-time-filmmaker-20150408 Garland has previously written The Beach, 28 Days Later, and Sunshine which were directed by Danny Boyle. His work is primarily science-fiction based, which is probably why I hadn’t been aware of his work, as I am not a fan of science-fiction.
When asked if he originally intended to direct Ex Machina, he replies with a definitive no. Explaining that he wrote the script not for anyone else except himself and having a sense of ownership of it, then led to a natural progression of him directing the film. “A film like this, to make it in the way that it was written, requires a certain amount of creative freedom.” From this quote, it becomes a bit clearer that perhaps he wouldn’t have trusted another director with his material, “It requires license to have conversations that go on a certain amount of time, or nobody saying, ‘you know what needs to happen now, is a car chase.’ ”
It’s interesting that despite not having directed any films previously, Garland feels as though he has been working as a filmmaker “for years”. He explains that he felt somewhat confident that he could “nail his vision” due to his experience collaborating with other directors and also having a crew around him that he had worked with for a long time.
Garland reveals that in the past he has made himself become involved in the production of his scripts, whether the directors liked it or not. He believes in collaboration, and that the neurotic idea of a director taking credit for their “vision” is not the way he likes to work – he values the collaboration of the people he works with. “We present films in a director centric way – I’m not very director centric and never have been.”
His way of working as a collaborative filmmaker came from working with director Danny Boyle, who was very inclusive in the entire process, ensuring that Garland was involved every step of the way. He took this experience with him and used it when working with other directors, despite their wishes for him not to be as involved. He would invite himself to the actors’ rehearsals and make sure he was a part of the process.
He also discusses working with actors and the notion of “getting performances out of actors.” His discussion struck a chord with me as to how actors can create a whole other meaning behind the dialogue written on the page, and how this may alter or even enhance the writer’s vision. He describes the actor as a collaborator, and that they will bring a performance to the film because of the director allowing them that collaborative freedom. “As a writer I got very used to that because I saw actors create meaning in lines that I never thought or intended.”
“Here’s the thing. As a reduction, I came from books, I came from sitting on my own and writing a novel. Now, that word auteur means author. That is an act of authorship. And it’s kind of miserable because you don’t have a lot of people to talk to or hang out with or share problems with. The exact thing that attracts me to film is the collaboration. That’s single truest thing I can say about that, is what I enjoy about it. When somebody looks at this film, such a large part of what they’ll respond to is the obvious stuff, the performances and stuff. But the production design, the way it’s shot, they’re harder to see. Part of the beauty with those guys is that they do it beautifully but don’t draw attention to what they’re doing so it doesn’t get in the way of he drama or the characters or something. All I’m really doing is acknowledging that.” Perhaps my experience during my research practice will be completely different from Garland’s, or maybe it will lead me to a better appreciation for collaboration and insight from different creatives.
Garland’s experiences are very interesting, however I still want to continue researching different people’s perspectives on the idea of creative control.
My movie is born first in my head, dies on paper; is resuscitated by the living persons and real objects I use, which are killed on film but, placed in a certain order and projected on to a screen, come to life again like flowers in water.
– Robert Bresson
This quote really resonates with me, as I have always been told by media teachers even from high school that a film is made three times; when it is written, when it is filmed, and when it is edited. I have found these statements to be true with previous projects I have worked on, where the finished product is always different to the original vision that had been written by the screenwriter.
There are a lot of reasons as to why this may be the case. One could be that the screenwriter may not be actively involved in the filmmaking of the script, and therefore other people’s creative vision and interpretation differentiate from the original. Another reason could be due to the revision of the writer-director, who may decide to refine ideas or his/her vision through the processes of filming and editing. It could also be due to a lack of streamlined pre-production where planning of each step of the filmmaking process isn’t fleshed out completely. Filmmaking is inherently a collaborative process, and working with other people means that they will come up with different ideas and suggestions as to how to best film or edit the script in question.
I don’t want to look at these variables as negatives, but rather keep them in mind when putting my research proposal into practice. It’s important to be aware of how a vision can change over time, and to remind myself that it is not only okay, but exciting to adapt and change my perspective on how to film and edit a scene. The whole process of filmmaking is fluid, and changes are made constantly; rather than being afraid of this happening during my practice, I need to embrace it and reflect on it.
As I have said in previous reflections, I have always thought that my method of working would be restricted by working on something I had written and envisioned. The last thing I want is to not be able to think creatively and think outside of the box. To ensure this, I need to embrace the concept that ‘a film is made three times’ and allow my vision to change throughout the processes; reflecting on what factors may influence that.
The more I think about having a DOP film my scenes for my research proposal, the more I become more reluctant. Despite my previous reflections saying that working with a DOP is the way I want to go so that I have less to worry about on the day of shooting, and directing them to shoot the shots I have planned, I think I have changed my mind.
I still want to get a sense of my style of filmmaking and methodology of working, and I’m becoming more aware that in order to do this, I need to step out of my comfort zone and be confident behind the camera. Gabby’s research proposal really struck a chord with me as I can relate to her wanting to gain a confidence with directing and filming. Her presentation really made the penny drop for me that in order for me to get the most out of this process, I need to step up and get behind the camera.
I asked myself how I would feel to have a DOP film the scenes I am planning for my investigation. I wondered how I could accurately test my theories of ‘ownership’ if I didn’t film the scenes myself? Sure, plenty of famous directors use DOPs, however as this is a reflective course, I want to be able to reflect upon my own style of filming which require me to get behind the camera. This helped me decide that in order to have a better understanding of creative control, I would need to film the scenes myself.
The next natural question is then what camera should I use? I definitely want to use either the EX3 or Z7. I have used both of these last year, and I don’t really have much of a preference right now. It would be a good idea to experiment more with the cameras in class, or even out of class to decide which I would prefer to work with for my investigation.
After discussing with Amy what we were thinking to work on for our research proposals, we came to an understanding and agreement to work together. As Amy needed a script to film her scene, and I was thinking of how having my script directed by a different director would inform my research proposal, we discussed how we could help each other out.
Both Amy and I were excited at how our agreement would benefit each other. I was quite excited to think of how we could compare each other’s interpretations of my writing, and whether my ownership of the text would be hindered by my vision or more creative due to it. I also thought about how I might feel having a different director work on filming my script, and whether I would agree with Amy’s choices and be thrilled by them, or feel as though my vision had been lost.
This will inform the second part of my investigation, in a sense examining the roles and working methodologies of the writer-director VS the director. It will be interesting to see how much collaboration Amy wants to have with me as the writer and her as the director. In my mind, it would be best for us to not discuss our directing choices at all until after the fact so that we don’t influence each other’s work.
The weekend exercise gave us an opportunity to implement our method of working as individual filmmakers. The script I chose to film was the stairs scene which I didn’t get a chance to film during the semester.
I chose to use the stairs in my house as they have a nice curve to them, and I immediately had some thoughts on how to frame the actors in the space nicely. Using my tripod from home and a DSLR I borrowed from the techs, I began pre-producing with the camera and figuring out my framing. As I was pressed for time with the availability of my parents, I didn’t write down a shot list or storyboard. In hindsight, this was a downfall as I found that it was difficult to remember what shots I wanted to cover the scene, as well as the positioning of the camera in comparison to the actors. Therefore, for my future exercises, I will ensure that I allow myself to have enough time to transpose the pre-production done on camera onto the page; in the form of a shot list and floor plan.
The first challenge I faced was needing three actors for the scene and trying to get three people who were all available at the same time. I managed to convince my parents and my brother, but then at the last minute my brother had to work. Due to this, I had to step in and perform as one of the characters.This proved to be quite a challenge as I had to try and coordinate directing, operating the camera and performing.
This exercise really reinforced that I need to have a good crew, with a DOP that I can direct my framing to, a sound recordist to ensure good sound is recorded, and possibly a 1st AD to help me run the whole shoot. This exercise made it apparent that I can’t do everything on my own and I need the support of a whole team to help me.
One of the questions I have been asking myself throughout the semester is to do with the texts I have been working with. As I have mainly worked with scripts this semester compared to prose, I have written in previous reflections that I have found this to be restrictive in my ability to interpret scene coverage and have preferred to work from prose. However, I have judged this based on working on only one or two prose texts compared to the many other scripts over the semester. I don’t feel as though that is enough practical research to judge my preference of prose over script and feel like there may be many other factors that have made me feel limited or more creative whilst filming the exercises (eg; time management, production roles, pre-production VS none, etc).
I initially also thought that when it came to my own investigation that I would not use my own scripts or writing and would use other people’s work. This was due to the fact that when I write I visualise what I would like the scene to look like, which I thought may make me biased and less creative with my shot construction and scene coverage. I was convinced that I wouldn’t be able to detach myself from my original vision and see what other possibilities there are in covering the scene. Whilst this may be true, I haven’t tested this theory as of yet. It may be that my ownership of the text actually gives me free rein to create really interesting framing and coverage.
This is something that I am interested in investigating and testing. The relationship between film text and interpretation, and also how ownership may effect camera coverage and creativity of framing. Will I feel more creative and able to interpret a script or prose that has been written by someone else? Will working from prose give me a more interesting set of shots than working from a script? These are questions that I am interested in investigating and testing and if I decide to head in this direction I will ensure that I use the exact same constraints so that the difference in film text is the main factor tested.
This week’s task was to shoot two exercises (one script & one action description); one being a single-shot (no hand-held) and the other being shot-to-edit.
Beginning this task I thought it would be very difficult for us to get both exercises filmed in the time frame, however I was wrong. It’s possibly due to the fact that we have had more experience now with working together and filming these exercises that we worked quite efficiently compared to earlier weeks.
For the single-shot exercise, I was in the support team. The executive team was quite large compared to our small group of four in the support team, however no-one suggested that we make the teams even. As the executive team was so large, the discussion over their roles took up quite a bit of their time as many of them didn’t want to act as they had acted a lot in previous exercises. After some time, it was decided that both the director and DOP roles would be shared by two to three people. With that being decided, they began to position the actors and frame up their single-shot.
As there was quite a lot of them in their group, we in the support team didn’t have much to do with the filming of their scene, but rather advised them on what we thought looked like a good frame. Watching and listening to them discuss what worked and what didn’t work was interesting as there was little argument over what looked good; everyone seemed to come to the same conclusion. Their framing gave foreground and background to the scene due to the positioning of the actors and the way in which they were directed to move within the frame. The tightness of the frame around Marie ensured that the audience’s eye was kept to the action unfolding between the two characters, rather than a wider frame which may have distracted the audience with unnecessary information. Originally, there was a discussion amongst the executive team about implementing a pan, however that was decided against once they had established their frame. This was a good decision as their frame was well composed and a pan would have only detracted from that in this case.
It was then my group’s turn to be in the executive team, filming the action description in a shot-to-edit style. During the previous exercise, Tom and I began discussing how we would like to cover the scene, and we agreed on the first shot of being over-the-shoulder of the person doing the crossword (foreground) with the person pacing in the background. When it came to filming, our team used the camera to pre-produce our shots and decide on what frames we liked a part from the shot previously discussed.
Tom had some really interesting ideas and communicated them well which made it clear that he should direct the scene. We worked quite quickly as there was no dialogue and also Tom’s clear vision for the scene. As a result, we had many interesting shots from different angles that we could experiment with to cut the scene together in post-production. During editing, I decided to use three out of the four different shots we filmed on the day; the over-the-shoulder shot of me, the close-up of me, and the pacing medium close-up. I decided against using the opposite shot-reverse-shot as I felt as though it didn’t add anything to the scene, and the close-up of my reaction was a better way to demonstrate the action.
As part of my preparation for my final scene for the semester, I want to continue my research through practice via more filming exercises. I have found that the more restrictions placed on the exercises, the more I thrive creatively. Therefore, going forward, I want either to be set challenging exercises by someone or set them for myself.
I feel as though no matter how much pre-production I do, the most beneficial way to research shot construction and framing is by actively filming. The exercises set so far have challenged the way I think as a filmmaker, and as a result I often analyse film or TV scenes and find the shot construction most of the time, quite boring or tame.
I do think that analysing more found scenes will also be beneficial for me in thinking about framing and how to cover a scene in an interesting or unique way. However, adopting these practices and experimenting with the camera itself has been the most valuable tool for me as it is sometimes difficult to put yourself in the filmmaker’s shoes without having a camera in hand. Both of these exercises that we have utilized in the past will be something I continue to do moving forward to my own scene, however focusing more on being behind the camera and continuing research by practice will inform the majority of my pre-production.
One of the main questions I have going forward is if I want to DOP for my own scene or not. Although I would like to be behind the camera for my own scene, I also think that it may be a bit too much to take on considering I will be directing as well. This has led me to lean towards allocating someone I trust and have confidence in to DOP for my scene, while I direct.
However, despite having a DOP, I still will ensure that I look through the viewfinder before calling action to ensure that I am happy with everything about the frame. I think this is probably a better option for me as I will be available for the rest of the crew and actors to ask me questions as the director, and allowing someone with the skills to film the shots. This will ensure that I can review everything happening on set, while still being able to look in the viewfinder and adjust the camera if I feel it is necessary. I will also actively review the clips after filming each shot – if time permits.
I already have some idea of who I would like to crew for me, based on who I have worked well with in the past exercises, as well as who I think will bring their creativity, interesting perspectives, support, and commitment to the project. Having a good and organised First Assistant Director is also highly important for me, as I know from previous experience how much they can assist on the day and ensure everything runs smoothly. I have a couple ideas of who I would like to fill this role, and I hope they will be happy to come on board.
In terms of casting for my scene, I found Paul’s advice on choosing actors based on their interesting characteristics (eg; walk, face), to be a good point. Rather than worry too much about how experienced they are, I will be looking more for professionalism and commitment to the project above everything else. Their willingness and excitement for the project is more important to me than their acting experience, as it is an experiment and their eagerness and commitment is of high importance. I will also be looking for people who bring creative ideas to their performance and can work in a collaborative team, whilst also being able to take direction.
I think it will be highly useful to have rehearsals before filming as in previous film shoots, when rehearsals haven’t been done it has slowed down production and means that there is a lot of discussion and explanation with the actors on set. Having one or two rehearsals where the actors can meet and interact with one another, can ask the crew any questions they have, and I can guide them in what is expected of their performance means that less time is wasted on the day of filming. It ensures that everyone is on the same page, even though there may be changes on the day.
The rehearsals may even inform the storyboards or shot lists as when viewing a practice of the performances, I may get new ideas of how to film the scene. Or the storyboards and shot lists may inform the rehearsals – all of this pre-production will work hand in hand to create a picture of what the finished product will look like.