Parc Entertainment - A Video Production Company - Birmingham, AL

Knowing Poster

Knowing, the latest Nicolas Cage film, paints a bleak picture of man’s future and delves into philosophical questions pertaining to the order (or lack thereof) of life’s events. Themes of destiny, futility, and spirituality are all wrapped up in a suspenseful plot that’s entertaining, yet entirely predictable.

The film begins in the year 1959. To commemorate the opening of their new school, a group of elementary school students lower a time capsule into the ground. Inside the capsule is a drawing from each student, illustrating his/her vision of the future. However, one disturbed little girl named Lucinda inserts a piece of paper filled with numbers.

Flash forward to present day. John Koestler (Cage) is an MIT professor and single dad with his own set of emotional issues. His son Caleb is handed Lucinda’s paper when the capsule is opened at a school ceremony and John starts to believe that the numbers have accurately predicted world tragedies from 1959 to the present. Only three events have yet to happen and John’s hope is that he can stop each tragedy before it occurs and uncover the truth about the origin of the numbers.

Although entertaining, Knowing has an abundance of plot holes and scenes that feel way too expository. For example, at one point in the film John’s sister confronts him about his fractured relationship with their father. It’s a scene that tries to bring some humanity to Cage’s character, but it seems out of place and forced.

The film also becomes a mixture of several genres. Dramatic and emotional scenes between father and son are followed by moments of intense action; those moments are followed by elements of mystery and suspense; and in the wake of those scenes are moments suited for sci-fi. Some might see this as a case of identity crisis - a movie trying to be too much of one thing without really developing it’s strongest point. Others might see this as a device to hold an audience’s interest and maintain quicker pacing. By movie’s end, however, Knowing becomes a bit muddled by all these devices and the overall impact is weakened.

5 out of 10 stars

Sunday marked the first day of shooting for our latest short film, entitled If Only. We were able to shoot at Cafe Dupont in downtown Birmingham. I want to extend my appreciation to them for their hospitality. Also, I want to acknowledge my cast and crew who worked extremely hard to ensure that the shoot was efficient and productive. Here are a few shots from the first day of filming.

Most people watch the behind-the-scenes featurettes of their favorite movies and see a happy, magical world of glamor. The lights. The cameras. The exotic locations. The smiling faces. Wow, who wouldn’t want to be a filmmaker?

What these documentaries don’t show you is the grueling day in-day out lifestyle of making movies. People get frustrated. The days are long. There are constant physical and mental demands. There are logistical issues. Things go wrong. People lose their cool. Filmmaking is not as glamorous as some make it out to be. For an incredibly honest look at filmmaking, check out Hearts of Darkness - A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse.

As a filmmaker, it’s important to keep everything running efficiently while keeping your team and your actors as happy as possible. Here are a few things to keep in mind for making the set a happy place.

1. Feed the cast & crew. This is probably the most important thing you can do. A well-fed crew is a happy crew. And a happy crew will put forth more effort. Always have adequate snacks and drinks available. And always break for meals.
2. Don’t keep your actors waiting. Nothing is worse than a bunch of actors standing around doing nothing. Make sure the call times for your actors are at the last possible moment. There’s no need to have your actors on set when you’re still setting the lights and the camera.
3. Pad the schedule. On my call sheets, I always try to pad the schedule. I prepare my cast and crew for a long day, so that when we wrap early, they will go home feeling productive.
4. Don’t lose your cool. Things will go wrong. You will get behind schedule. Someone will frustrate you. However, as director, you need to remain professional. No one wants to work for someone who feels the need to yell at everyone and everything. Respect others and they will respect you.
5. Know how to communicate effectively. Your film is your vision. You have to know how to communicate that vision to your crew and your actors. When you have a director who can’t answer questions about lighting, or what lens to use, or where the camera should be, or where the actors should go, you will have people who feel as though their time is being wasted. Soon you will find that you have lost their respect, because you haven’t prepared. Know what you need, where you need it, and why you need it. A director who can communicate clearly and effectively is a director people will want to work with again.

Here’s to having a happy shoot. Cheers.

How one goes through life depends entirely on his or her perspective. One individual might see the tragedy inherent in a specific event, and yet someone else might perceive the same event to be a positive. Is the event itself tragic or comic, or does it depend solely upon your point of view?

Summary

This philosophical merry-go-round is the foundation for Woody Allen’s 2004 film, Melinda and Melinda. The film opens at a restaurant where four friends are in the middle of a conversation about life and relationships. Two of the friends are playwrights. One friend says that life is inherently tragic, but the other claims that life is inherently comic. A third friend sets the plot in motion when he asks the two playwrights to listen to a story and then comment on whether the tale is best viewed as a tragedy or comedy.

From that point, the film follows two parallel stories, centering on Melinda, a young woman trying to get her life back together after a series of bad relationships and self-destructive behavior. One story follows a dramatic interpretation, and one follows the conventions of a romantic comedy.

Commentary: The Premise

The premise of following parallel stories is engaging, although cliched and formulaic. This movie would not seem quite so original had it been produced as a stand-alone tragedy or comedy. But because both story arcs are shown side by side, the film is much more interesting. I think most people enjoy contemplating how life’s course can be set in one direction or another by events outside their control. It’s fun to imagine what if? scenarios, thinking how things could have been different, if only…

Commentary: The Dialogue

The dialogue in the film is a number of things - snappy, clever, poetic, and philosophical. Allen allows his characters to speak what many of us only think. The danger of doing so, however, is that a lot of the dialogue is too on-the-nose and expository. It doesn’t ring true for real life. Characters (Melinda especially) engage in reflective and introspective monologues that are often tedious. At times it feels more like a stage play than a film, but perhaps that’s the intent, considering that we are seeing this story through the eyes of two playwrights.

Commentary: The Comedic Interpretation

Of the two “Melinda” stories, the light-hearted, comedic tale is much more interesting, due to the talents of the actors on screen. Will Ferrell plays Hobie, a struggling actor married to an up-and-coming director played by Amanda Peet. Ferrell’s Hobie is charming and innocent, and he falls for Melinda (played by Radha Mitchell) when he realizes his marriage is going nowhere. Peet is equally likeable as the ambitious work-aholic filmmaker, striving to lock in the extra money to get her first feature into production. The dynamic between Ferrell and Mitchell is fun to watch, and the dialogue between the two rings truer than the dramatic counterpart of the film.

Commentary: The Dramatic Interpretation

The weaker of the two stories is the dramatic interpretation. Here, the characters are far less interesting, the dialogue far too stilted, and the acting too melodramatic. Aside from Mitchell’s performance, the ensemble around her was flat, stiff, and too over-the-top. Mitchell’s portrayal as the emotionally disturbed and suicidal Melinda really carried this portion of the film.

Final Thoughts

Overall, Melinda and Melinda explores some very human themes in very conventional ways, but presents them in a unique way.

5 1/2 out of 10

Collection DVD

Our short film Collection, produced in 2007, is now available for purchase online. Collection tells the story of Jason Burke, an introverted high school student whose world is shattered upon hearing the news of his older brother’s vicious and mysterious murder. The only lead authorities have to pursue is a series of numbers carved into the victim’s neck. Now Jason must cope with the loss while reconstructing the events of that fateful night.

In a post last summer I mentioned SnagFilms as a great place to find free documentary film content on the web. Recently, Hulu has gained popularity among online video watchers. On the site you can watch movies, current TV shows, classic films, and a host of other clips — all for free. And the quality of the videos on Hulu looks great.

Now the two sites have teamed up. A press release on the SnagFilms website announces that SnagFilm documentaries will now be made available on Hulu. Here’s an excerpt:

SnagFilms brings the best nonfiction films to the web audience, promotes viral web distribution through virtual movie theater widgets, and engages viewers to assist in charitable and community efforts. “SnagFilms was created to make more great films available to the broadest possible audience. Now with Hulu we can delight viewers on one of the Internet’s most-visited video sites with a growing set of documentaries from our large library, and deepen the already broad set of entertainment choices that Hulu offers,” said Rick Allen CEO of SnagFilms.

I look forward to perusing the site for solid documentary content. Now it’s just finding the time to watch the films.

Recently I watched the film The Prime Gig
on IFC - a story centered on Pendelton “Penny” Wise (Vince Vaughn), a smooth-talking small-time phone scam artist who wants to score some big money. As the film opens, Penny is working in a low-level telemarketing office with other sales people who are trying to scrape by. It’s obvious from the start that Penny is a big fish in a little pond and he knows it. He wants more. He wants a bigger challenge with a bigger payoff. Through his connections, Penny hears about an opportunity with Kelly Grant (Ed Harris), a well-known figure within their world. Penny knows that if he can get on board with Grant that he will earn more in one week than most people do in six months.

The Prime Gig follows other grifter and con-artist films and I fully expected the plot to be a tangled web of double-crosses, leaving me guessing until the very end. However, the difference with The Prime Gig is the fact that it’s focused more on the Penny character, not an ensemble cast or a multi-layered plot. I don’t mind the strong focus on character, but this premise lent itself beautifully to the type of plot one comes to expect from this genre and it didn’t capitalize on the opportunity.

The first act of the film was very promising, but there was nothing in subsequent acts to really heighten the tension and propel the story to a new level. After hooking the audience, the story seemed to level off. And the subplot between Penny and his good-for-nothing bum of a friend went nowhere.

Julia Ormond did a wonderful job as Caitlin Carlson, a sexy and strong love interest for Penny. The script developed her character really well. The same can’t be said however for the mysterious Kelly Grant. Ed Harris did what he could with what was given to him, but I really wanted more from this character. Grant was set up early on as an antagonist for Penny’s character, but the conflict never did build.

Overall, The Prime Gig is a film with great promise that goes flat less than half way through.

3 1/2 out of 10

It’s dark, disturbing, and violent, and paints a bleak picture of the human race. It’s a superhero film driven not by wall-to-wall action, but by the flawed and dysfunctional psyches of the few who don the masks to save humankind from themselves. This is Watchmen, the film based on the infamous graphic novel
of the same name. It’s a somber story that attempts (and succeeds) to tear down previous preconceptions about superheroes and the type of people they are.

The year is 1985. the US has won the Vietnam War. Richard Nixon is still in office. And the Cold War is at its height. The Soviets and the Americans are on the brink of total destruction via nuclear war. Cynicism rules the day and costumed vigilantes are a thing of the past. Members of the group, known as the Watchmen, can only reminisce about days gone by, as they try to lead normal lives. But the status quo changes when one of their own - The Comedian - is brutally murdered. That leads another of the Watchmen, Rorschach, to find out why The Comedian was killed. This leads ultimately to a much larger plot that threatens the lives of millions.

The challenge of weaving twelve volumes of comic books into a single film was no doubt a daunting task, because it’s important for the unfamiliar viewer to understand these characters, their history, and their world. Otherwise, the story can’t engage the audience. The incredible opening credit sequence was a tool used by the filmmakers to condense some back story and yet provide important exposition at the same time. This was done beautifully.

The trade off is that when you must rely on so many flashbacks to orient your audience, you also run the risk of bogging down the pace of the film. This is exactly what happened with Watchmen. There were so many flashbacks and so much backstory that there didn’t seem to be a solid enough story arc to propel the film forward. There was no momentum. The flashbacks were offset with lengthy, dialogue-laden scenes from the present where Watchmen characters like the diestic Dr. Manhatten contemplated the human race, their nature, and their fate. Other characters like Nite Owl and Silk Spectre would digress into discussions about the “good ‘ole days” of Watchmen crime fighting. And woven into all of those elements was Rorscach’s investigation into The Comedian’s death.

Visually, the film is incredible. There are wonderful special effects from beginning to end. The fight scenes are intense and bloody, and makes The Dark Knight looks like a church picnic. Director Zach Snyder definitely had a strong vision for this film and he communicates this nicely. Watchmen is not a typical superhero movie where everything is black and white and flawless costumed heroes adhere to a high moralistic standard. These “heroes” cross the line. They’re violent. They’re disturbed. They have emotional and psychological issues. They struggle to know the truth about right versus wrong, which leaves everything in a messy gray. For its commentary on humankind and our plight, the film succeeds. However, it fails in its pacing and the overall story arc.

4 out of 10

Everyone involved in the production industry here in Alabama is keeping his fingers crossed for this bit of legislation to pass. Here’s a brief report from NBC13 News.

Ever since Changeling
was released last fall, I have wanted to see the film, for a couple of reasons:

1. The premise sounded intriguing
2. Clint Eastwood films always deliver substance - a strong story, wonderful performances, and emotional themes.

I finally had the chance to see the film a couple of weeks ago and found that the story connected on a number of levels. Changeling tells the true story of Christine Collins - a single mother living in LA in the late 1920s, whose only son suddenly disappears. What follows is an expose of corruption within the LA police force and the strong-willed determination of Christine to find the truth about her son.

The driving force behind the film is Angelina Jolie’s portrayal of Christine Collins. Critics of the film have argued that Jolie does a disservice to the actual Christine Collins by playing some scenes with intense emotion and angry outbursts. Critics say that the real Mrs. Collins was calm, collected, and strong. However, I found nothing in Jolie’s performance that gave any hint that this woman was weak or submissive. I became thoroughly invested in her plight and cheered her on when she stood up to an authoritative system that saw women as hysterical and vulnerable.

In filmmaking, a balance must be maintained between developing character and moving the story forward. If you ignore the story for the sake of character, the film can become a meandering mess with no direction. If you ignore character and go for the story, the movie will disconnect itself from the audience and no one will be interested in what happens to the characters. Eastwood walks this line perfectly in Changeling. He knows when to slow down and take the time to explore Christine’s character, and he knows when to ramp up the story and hold the audience’s interest.

Once again, Clint Eastwood delivers a strong, emotional film that delves deep into the human condition of pain and loss. The more I see from this director, the more I am engaged and inspired.

8 1/2 out of 10