Dunkirk (2017) – dir. Christopher Nolan
There are some truly spectacular moments (the opening sequence for one), but I couldn’t help but find Dunkirk to be largely dull.

I felt Nolan wasn’t able to find the right balance in the way he structured the film. The air sequences didn’t have the same level of urgency as those at land or sea.

Harry Styles can act, but the motivation to cast him felt disingenuous and proved to be more of a distraction than anything else.

The ending was far too Hollywood for my liking (the newspaper article – really?), though I’ll give Nolan the benefit of the doubt as he was probably bound by studio constraints.
– Letterboxd Review

Some additional thoughts:

• More ambition! 70mm, yet there are too many close-ups in the boat and jet.
• Despite its length, it felt long and didn’t have the ‘punch’ I was expecting, and that I’m sure Nolan intended.

A Quiet Passion (2017) – dir. Terence Davies
After watching the lush Sunset Song at MIFF last year, and having the privilege of hearing Davies talk in person, this was something that I’ve been eagerly anticipating. Some of the sequences are magnificent, Davies is still an innovative filmmaker and his formal ideas are executed with grace and precision. It’s hard to not to think about Love & Friendship (which was painful to watch), but this is how you get that right, Whit Stillman. Davies has so much to say about the introspective nature of the artistic process and found Dickinson as his muse. Cynthia Nixon is perfect. Ranks second in my favourites of this year behind Personal Shopper.

Last semester I focussed on observation and approached it in a filmic sense from a D.I.Y perspective. The formula was simple; I shot “what grabbed my attention” on an iPhone. It was about using cinema as a way to capture spontaneity. It was a solo effort and I learned plenty of valuable lessons over the course of the semester. I am satisfied with what I achieved, but I’ve moved on.

I wanted to continue with Paul this semester because I want to refine my filmmaking skills. More than anything, I want to settle on a filmmaking process, an approach, a formula, that I can reliably execute each time I produce work. Paul has certain filmmaking principles to adhere to, and I felt I didn’t take up enough of them last semester. It wasn’t out of neglect, rather it was more that I used the semester to develop the skills by myself, through self-experimentation.

I don’t know how to use an EX3 properly, nor how to best record sound. I want to develop these skills so I can focus more on executing my own formal ideas at a more frequent level.

Basically I want to find out what works, but also what is effective and economical. I feel when you have an understanding of what works, then, and only then, you can develop its possibilities. I want to be innovative and try something that I haven’t done before. What exactly is that? I don’t know – it will be much clearer as the semester goes on.

Is this too much to ask? Am I being unrealistic? Perhaps, but I’m aware, as Paul says, that filmmaking is an endless learning process. But I want to nail down a core, a fundamental idea of technique and a skillset that makes use of it.

I overthink about everything that I write, shoot, and produce. Sometimes it can be a good thing; clarity is gained and I have a rich understanding of how I want approach something. But lately it has become a problem; my productivity has lowered because I’m too trapped in my own mind wrestling the process, the ideas, the purpose of it all. Therefore it was refreshing to start the semester with a project where Paul encouraged us to not overthink, but simply do.

30 (or so) seconds, an action. Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about action, movement, kinetics. When we were assigned this task, I thought back to a quote from Brian De Palma that has always stuck with me:

“Motion pictures are a kinetic art form; you’re dealing with motion and sometimes that can be violent motion. There are very few art forms that let you deal with thing in motion and that’s why Westerns and chases and shoot-outs crop up in film. They require one of the elements intrinsic to film; motion.”

I was home in my room, studied where everything was placed, got out my phone, placed it on a shelf, and hit record.

Every so often I look through my DVD’s and arrange them into categories. Films I want to watch, films I want to watch with my girlfriend, films made by favourite directors, and so on. A lot of time (too much) is spent studying how I’ve ordered them.

I stood there for a bit, looking at the DVD’s. What stands out? What do I want to watch? After 20 or so seconds I took one DVD (48 Hours, Walter Hill) and placed it into my watchlist. I briefly question the decision, but it’s final. Shot over.

I could have done the whole point-of-view, close-up of the DVD’s, close-up of my hands taking a DVD, cut back to my face reacting, etc. But that bores me. I just did what felt right and tried not to think about it.

It wasn’t until we watched our sequences in class that I realised I was happy with what I did. My shot was somewhere in the middle of Paul’s compilation, and the build-up was terrifying. I hate watching my work. But when I watched it, the ego went away. I realised I have developed an aesthetic. It was totally natural, I didn’t have to think about it. I’m at a stage now where I can shoot something on instinct. That’s not to say that it will work every time, but that I can trust myself, and that my first instinct is often my best. I found the one long mid-wide-ish shot worked on a lot of levels, mainly tone and tension. It lacked pretension because it wasn’t trying to be anything.