It is a reaction against formulaic/conventional/low risk/boring filmmaking that continues to be made and does nothing/says nothing/ and is meaningless /pointless and does nothing to further the art of filmmaking in this country.
It goes against directors with no vision/style.............writers who just write shallow blah............producers who don't look for the bizarre(and support it) and actors who's commitment to the art/craft of performance is small and shallow and who have no inclination to take a risk and put their guts on the line.
Its about frustration with a BORING film culture. (maybe its a boring time/society!)
Doyle: I liked the disparity. For example, when you are with the grader — or what they call the colorist now, I hate that term — the person is there looking at the footage and says, “Well what you see now, once it goes through the printing process it will be a little more green.” I love that, the random factors. This sense of anticipation, what you put in, has a certain authenticity, but what is going to come out has a look of its own. I think this is the big challenge now. I work so often with younger people, and they treat the film likes it’s a commercial. I don’t want to see a Big Mac in the middle of my screen. It’s weird. They are so obsessed with perfection. One: perfection doesn’t exist. Two: the imperfections of an image are what give it energy. Like, look at your beard — you should have shaved a little bit over here. It’s the same thing. You’re working with your beard everyday, and occasionally you say, “Oh shit I have to trim it.” Life has to be like that, and a film has to be like that, and the real danger at the moment is that we can do anything, but when there is nothing to say, there is still nothing. If it doesn’t add anything, why would you do it? This is an interesting space that we are in. People say, “Oh, there is a cable in the edge of the frame,” and I respond, “Well, aren’t you watching the actors?” There is no need to stamp out imperfection.
No comments:
Post a Comment