Soon after seeing it, I wondered why I couldn’t do something similar for Iapetus, my own science fiction film concept. I set about writing a short screenplay and thinking about ship designs. I also decided to use miniature photography instead of CGI.

Some  of the (film related) things that I remember most about my childhood were space sequences in science fiction. Sure I loved the whizzing adrenalin of a Star Wars dogfight, what kid wouldn’t? – but what I remember most was the Enterprise leaving drydock in Star Trek II, or similar sequences in Star Trek III. The scale and volume of the ship as the camera very slowly moved past it were awe inspiring, it’s reality seemed beyond question.

This has been lost in recent years with the proliferation of CGI. The hard limitations of physical miniature photography: physics, time, optics and budget, made sure that every shot was extremely well planned and executed. Here, the story was king. If a shot wasn’t helping, it was dropped because it was so expensive, and because it was relatively inflexible all the thinking went in at the start.

With CGI the focus seems to have shifted from story telling to shiny effects reels, perhaps because of the enormous flexibility. I still think Jurassic Park is the finest execution of cinematic CGI to date. It’s no surprise that they spent a long time studying animal movements. Walt Disney did the same thing for Bambi, bringing in all kinds of artists and experts to try to capture the natural movement of wild deer. What strikes me in both films, is that the medium was exactly that, a vehicle for the story, not the other way round.

Unlike the creators of C, I’m not adverse to using green screen or digital compositing for these effects, and in fact the approach I’m using demands it (more on this later). Next time I want to post some more detail about the film in it’s current format, as well as some test shots for the space sequences.

Like most modern high budget games, the set pieces are really impressive conceptually, but I never really felt like I got to appreciate them. Things move too fast, the camera whip-pans all over the place. I get the sense of driving quickly by an elaborate shop window display, I’m sticking my head out the window trying to get a better look, frustrating.

Oddly enough, in the action parts I was waiting for a character pause, and in the character pauses I was waiting for more action. Character pause is the right term here because that’s literally what it is, stopping for a few minutes to exchange some dry plot-fuel before ramming instructions for the next sub-quest at the audience. Normally I’m ok with that, but here it’s unsatisfying (see the postscript for why that is).

Thing’s aren’t helped at all by the accursed PG13 violence and language, which makes all the dialogue even more strained (forget believable troopers who don’t swear like… well, troopers). There’s no real sense of peril here, when you don’t see any blood, you don’t feel any danger.

I never really dropped out of my seat and into the world, I was always aware of being in the cinema. That’s hard to get right, but isn’t that really what you want when you go to the movies?

PS: This post really sums up one of the major flaws here, another expensive lesson learned for the cost of a ticket.

Thankfully, very little time is spent on explaining why the ‘Angels’ are here, even the one or two lines of exposition are a little off putting. Instead they decide to focus on the meat of the story, should you accept your logical fate or fight for your gut instincts.

What it made me realise was that getting the emotional punch right cancels out any of the fancy pants special effects: even the really subtle ones here were extraneous (like smart-paper schematics on the notebooks). I think it was also wise to drop any complications to the plot. All I cared about was what the Hero was going to do next, that’s what a good story is all about.

PS: How many filmable Philip K. Dick short stories are left?

I’m a night owl

I’m not saying I enjoy it ’cause its bad, on the contrary I admire this film. Wikipedia tells me the budget is USD 105 million, and I believe every cent is up there on the screen. Some of the sets are awe inspiring, and are very reminiscent of Dune, the action set pieces never feel small. I also like the running time, its got a pleasing number of arcs. That’s very important when you don’t want to be distracted thinking of what film to play next.

As for Vin Diesel, well its the part he was born to play, so its no surprise he’s so fond of the character. Which leads me on to the scene I want to talk about today.

The Setup

• Riddick is on the prison planet Crematoria reuniting with an old friend Kyra, who is running into some problems with the resident rape gang
• He advises them to depart while they still can, unsurprisingly, they decline..

The Characters

• Vin Diesel plays Riddick, the archetypal anti hero
• Alexa Davalos plays Kyra, a tough girl with abandonment issues

The Scene

1. Riddick calmly advises the rape gang to depart
2. They quite rightly point out that he’s only armed with a soup cup
3. Riddick informs them that its actually a tea cup, and yes, that’s all he needs
4. He places it on a suspiciously convenient ledge shaped rock
5. The classic ‘ragged metal cup to the chest’ move
6. Riddick shows them the next improvised killing instrument
7. They key from a sardine tin, nice
8. The bad guys get the message

Amusing deaths and witty one liners are the staple of a solid action movie, and here Chronicles does not disappoint. A character like Riddick is perfectly fit to deliver both, which is a big part of this movies appeal.

Oh I almost forgot..

The fantastically bizarre Lensors..

Apologies to readers

It just occurred to me that the one thing I haven’t posted about yet is any kind of practical plan on how I plan to achieve my rather lofty goal. I have a few ideas that I’ve been playing around with over the years, but the flagship is a feature animation film, currently titled ‘Iapetus’.

The film I plan to see on the big screens will be based around the following points:

• Visually inspirational, but not distractingly so
• Solid intelligent storyline, but not too clever
• Realistic human depiction, but not photographic
• Satisfying conclusion
• Several movements, a solid arc, over about 2 hours running time
• Lots of satisfying action
• Laugh out loud comic violence and black humour
• A solid main character with a human reason to drive the story forward

You’ll note that none of this describes a specific storyline or theme, instead they outline the experience I want the audience to share when they see it. I’m describing the film I want to see, and the reasons I want to see it.

Next up is to create a short clip of one of the more frenetic scenes, currently titled "Bullet Wind". I’ll post some storyboards on that fairly soon, followed by some concept artwork.

Feels good to be finally starting on this.

I may have simple tastes

I love the balance between accuracy and entertainment on show here, tipped just enough towards realism to be engaging, but not so much that you lose the excitement of the movie. This is a film first and foremost, and the story takes centre stage. The depiction of space travel may not represent how it will actually be in about 30 years time, but its how I imagined it would be, and to me, that’s more important.

And nothing conjures the imagination more than a space walk, which is the scene I want to talk about today.

The Setup

• Following the events of the first film, the abandoned vessel Discovery is in orbit near the Jovian moon Io
• A Russian vessel, the Leonov, is dispatched carrying American crew members attempting to salvage the Discovery and determine why her mission failed

The Characters

• John Lithgow plays Dr. Walter Curnow, an engineer who is afraid of heights
• Elya Baskin plays Max Brajlovsky, a friendly cosmonaut

The Scene

• After reaching the vicinity of the Discovery, they must now execute a space walk to enter the rotating ship
• Curnow is an engineer and is terrified of heights, he’s having a difficult time composing himself for the ordeal
• Max on the other hand seems very relaxed and helps Curnow throughout the walk, this is nicely contrasted with a role reversal shortly after they breach the Discovery

Over the eerily alien planetscape of Io the two men set out across the hundred or so metres between the two ships.

1. They leave the Leonov and start toward the Discovery
2. Curnow’s pulse is a little high, he starts fogging up
3. 50 metres..
4. Time for some small talk, Curnow asks Max the Russian for ‘chicken’
5. Ku-RRit-sa
6. 10 metres..
7. Touchdown

The weird sounds coupled with the ragged breathing, that’s what really sells this scene. The blend of Curnow’s rational humanity, and the completely alien environment beneath, and around him. I always felt this depiction of space was a good middle ground between the soundless vacuum of hard science fiction and the whizzing engine noises of video games. Its hosts some elements of humanity, but it still feels quite alien and barren.

Oh I almost forgot..

The disturbing image of the floating foetus..

It’s a slow burn that builds the tension from one scene to the next. Each skirmish the team faces is leading up to the big event, and even if you know that the day will be saved, the anxiety continues to mount. Of course, this is all assuming that the story is executed well.

Sot it is with this weeks movie – The Guns of Navarone

For those who haven’t seen it let me set up the scene I’m going to talk about:

The Mission

• During World War II, 2000 allied soldiers are trapped on a small Greek island
• They cant be rescued as the only access by sea is guarded by massive guns on the nearby island of Navarone
• The team must assault the guns before the ships sail through, and they only have a few days to do it

The Characters

• Gregory Peck plays Capt. Mallory, the team leader. He’s determined to get the job done and takes full responsibility for their success, or failure.
• David Niven plays Cpl. Miller, the explosives expert. A glib college professor who shirks responsibility (he refuses to become an officer despite repeated attempts).
• Gia Scala plays Anna, a local resistance fighter. She no longer speaks after being captured and held by the Germans for a time. She forms a bond with Pecks character.
• Irene Papas plays Maria, the resistance contact and a friend and protector of Anna.

The Scene

• As the team are preparing for their final assault they realise the explosives have been sabotaged
• Miller concludes that its Anna and he makes the case for her execution as a way to punish Mallory for dooming his friend in an earlier decision
• Mallory, after defending his desire to take responsibility (and after Miller once again refuses to do so) prepares to do the dirty business of killing the woman he’s developed feelings for
• Just as he’s about to shoot, Maria shoots instead. After a sombre moment the team are ordered to move out.
• Miller stands motionless and speechless, as he realises that he can no longer set himself apart from the war raging around him, and the awful decisions that have to be made

With the dead body lying face down in the dirty ruined building, and the gunshot still ringing in the minds of the two men, a rage builds in Mallory as he finally confronts Miller about the necessity of responsibility. Miller is frozen and can only listen. Here’s how it plays out:

1. It’s not hard to kill someone, sometimes its harder not to
2. You’re in it now, up to your neck!
3. You got me in the mood to use this thing..
4. By God, if you don’t think of something, I’ll use it on you!
5. I mean it!
6. Go on.

What I love about this scene is the performance from Peck. There’s a real sense of fury as he wrings his hands on the gun strap at his shoulder, pulling his uniform out of shape in the process. That, mixed with the controlled repose as he tells Nivens character that he’ll kill him if he doesn’t shape up (and we believe that he would).

But perhaps even more than that is the way the almost overpowering weight of responsibility, the weight of leadership, is portrayed. The truth that a leader is just a person who resolves to take responsibility for achieving a goal, and then does everything possible, even at the cost of his own conscience, to see it through. I share the sentiments of Nivens character as he looks on, speechless, at the tremendous strength of character required to undertake such difficult decisions.

I hope this whets your appetite to see the film, either for the first time, or after a long time. I know that’s what I’ll be doing as soon as I finish this post.

Oh I almost forgot ..

The hilarious rat-smoke breathing guy..

I was speaking to a friend the other day and he told me something that really resonated with me. After going through his goals and getting really geared up, a load of hassle came his way. Various random things that he had to deal with just popped up out of nowhere. By the end of the day he was feeling worn out, and we were joking that the Universe was trying to see if he was really determined to succeed.

Stream of Noise

The more I thought about it though, the more it occurred to me. These random events are always happening to you. Every day, every week, stuff just happens, good or bad, that you have to deal with. It’s only the fact that you have goals at all that you’re even aware of it.

Brownian Motion can affect YOU and everyone you love

The idea is that without any direction we get knocked around by random events in our lives. Every time something comes along and derails us, we just change direction, speed up, slow down etc. You just shake yourself off and start moving whichever way you happen to be facing.

When you start focussing on a particular direction, you realise how tough it can be to maintain a constant speed and steady bearing.

The science of slacking

I’ve always liked the word entropy, it sounds very sophisticated, but its also quite small and easy to pronounce. Amazingly enough, it’s also quite interesting to boot. My take on it is that there’s a very powerful force in nature that’s compelling you toward a simpler form of existence, which is usually disorderly (messy, untidy and unmanaged, its easy to get into those states isn’t it?).

Brian Tracy calls this the E-Factor or expediency factor – the tendency to do fun and easy things rather than important and difficult things. I think it sums up not only the struggle to become a better person, but it also highlights the most unique quality of humanity that differentiates us from all other animals. Our intrinsic desire to improve ourselves, to grow, to do the difficult things first and get the rewards much later.

So next time you’re browned off..

Give yourself some credit, there’s a lot stacked up against you when you decide to walk a specific path. My belief is that at some point, you eventually build up enough momentum through your own dedication and connections with others that you don’t feel the small knocks and bumps along the way. All it takes is patience and courage, the other other ‘c’ word.

While looking around twitter tonight, I saw something which made me do a double take, and made me finally *get* twitter:

http://twitter.com/TheRealNimoy/status/13135163121

This is Leonard Nimoy tweeting William Shatner.

Is it just me that finds it surreal that those thoughts are now just freely broadcast on the web for all to hear? Is it strange that anyone can tweet someone they would never be able to reach on a phone? Is Twitter the ultimate democracy? and other such rhetoricals..

I think the thing thats really occuring to me is that there has quite literally never been a better time to make connections with people you want to know, theres never been more opportunity to grow.

Ps:

Am I the only one on the web who misses some of the mysique of (proper) celebrity? Im not talking about glossy rag celebrity, but classic movie stars. Isn’t one of the biggest draws of stars the ability to project all your ideal characteristics onto them? It’s like realising your parents are just people, like you.

On the other hand, theres something very empowering to see that celebrities are also people, like you.