Work-in-progress Reflection

Presentation feedback reflection

I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration.

The feedback I received from my presentation was mostly positive, with a lot of praise for the visual world that I had managed to capture. This is something that I found both easy to do and really effective in creating my screen world, as it’s something that from early on I was able to visualise if not yet able to write within it or completely contextualise how and why it exists. Before I had more solid ideas on how the world came to be, I knew how it was, and especially how it looked.

The main criticism I received was my lack of focus or explanation on how this middle-class only society I have described has affected the culture and social norms. I did briefly mention the dilapidation and decay of society, both physically and I suppose symbolically in the breakdown of the relationship between George and Martha, but I haven’t explained well what everyday life is like for people living in this “classless” society. I feel like one of the reasons for this is that it can be very hard to demonstrate a lack of something, particularly when it manifests in a negative way; if we’re portraying a classless society in a positive way, it’s very easy to show everyone happy, healthy, wealthy etc., but the negative view is much more subtle and therefore more difficult to demonstrate and describe. A step I will take to build on this feedback is make sure that both the classlessness of society and the decay that comes with it is apparent in whatever audiovisual work I submit in my final project brief; this will most likely be in the form of a mood reel or teaser that shows this futuristic, modern world that is beginning to wear down and fall apart. Secondly, as I progress through writing more of my screenplay, I must clearly demonstrate this gap of class and then show how easily it is filled (since it is almost necessary that it is filled) when the android turns up at the house of George and Martha; I want to show how natural it is for this class divide to exist, but also how toxic this interclass relationship can be. My script will need further development before I believe this is possible.

In this reflection, I want to explore two aspects of my screen world that I have begun to develop: the texts that have influenced my work aesthetically, narratively and world-wise, and the first few pages of the screenplay that I have begun to develop. The influences, which I briefly covered in my presentation, will explain how I am situating my screen world and how I reached this juncture, and the screenplay will hopefully give some context as to how my world will look and I believe highlight the areas that are weak.

PART ONE – INFLUENTIAL TEXTS

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968): 2001 is probably the most influential science fiction film period, in that it really set a standard of aesthetic and production that countless films, TV shows and other media texts have imitated since. However, the slick white rounded aesthetic employed in 2001 I feel is a real compliment to my screen story; it displays an unmistakable modernity that can be highlighted or, in the case of my screen world, contrasted with images of dilapidation and decay. I’ve also had a look at the work of Eero Saarinen, the Finnish neo-futurist interior designer, who had many of his works featured in 2001 by Kubrick. Apart from the aesthetics, 2001 also provides a score of other influences. The mood of the spacecraft, particularly the silence punctuated only by this dull, unique space drone is something I’d like to recreate in my screen world. A large section of 2001 also chronicles the battle between man and artificial intelligence, with significant distrust and paranoia shared between both parties; this battle will be reenacted between George/Martha and their android assistant.

Moon (Duncan Jones, 2009): Just one look at Moon will tell you how influenced it is by 2001; its long, monotonous sequences of work being done, the sleek white interiors, the isolation of space, a robot companion. However, Moon is perhaps a more realistic version of what the spaceship from 2001 would look like if it was properly inhabited; these white, neo-futurist structures are covered in posters, markings and repurposed by Sam Bell, the protagonist. The future isn’t as glossy and pristine as we thought, but it looks more like home, and more importantly more human. Moon is a much more emotional film than 2001 in that the latter focuses a lot on rather terse, quiet characters, whereas Sam Bell is a richly expressive everyman in a lot of ways. In my screen world, I hope to capture a nice synthesis of the aesthetics and emotions of these two films: Martha and George may begin as fairly emotionless characters through their placidity, but perhaps the imitation of human feeling that the android will bring can evoke some emotional response from them.

Her (Spike Jonze, 2013): I think one of the best things about Her is not its narrative or exploration of artificial intelligence and other technologies, but the world it creates through a set design and colouration that is very contrary for a science fiction film. Whereas most scifi films have a blue, white, grey overlay, Her focuses a lot on pinks, reds, browns and pastels, creating a warmer feel but also imitating a sort of “hipster” upper-middle class that most of the film’s characters seem to be a part of. In terms of how my characters appear, I want them to be more like those of Jonze’s film; working in vaguely creative, well-paid jobs, searching for some purpose beyond their at times menial work, but most importantly wearing all sorts of pastel coloured clothing. The cinematographer said he was very inspired by the Japanese photographer Rinko Kawauchi, who aims to capture the little moments of our everyday, domestic lives through her work (below). I really like the way she focuses on individual objects in this almost nostalgic way that shows both their use and their fragility, and this is something I want to utilise when building the settings within my screen world.

Untitled (from the series: Utatane), 2001

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (Mike Nichols, 1966): I think this is probably one of the quintessential representations of a failing (American) upper-middle class marriage, as the relationships between both George and Martha (full of passion, emotion but ultimately vitriol and a deep sadness) and Nick and Honey (reserved, non-confrontational and ultimately built on false or obscured pretences) is applicable to almost all relationships. I don’t want to use the dialogue between George and Marta specifically for my same-named characters, but instead the delusions they dream up (in the film an imaginary son) to deal with their failing marriage; my husband-wife duo will become increasingly paranoid that the android is out to get them, and conspiring against him will bring them together again. The mess they create in their apartment is something else I”m very interested in using; despite being quite affluent and having plenty of free time, they live in a strange squalor that seems to envelope everything they do. Finally, the final scenes between George and Martha, the melancholy and realisation that nothing can truly make them love each other like they once did, is something I’d like to capture in my climax.

PART TWO – SCREENPLAY ANALYSIS

Click here to read the first two pages of my screenplay.

This is a very rough draft I’ve put together of the opening scene of my screen world, meant to introduce our two main characters, the immediate and larger world they live in and the current state of affairs in their life, perhaps most importantly highlighting the absurdity and irony of their situation.

The first section of this sequence is heavily inspired by our work surrounding the screenplay of Frozen River; it is a huge chunk of action text, but I wanted to really engage with that idea of the camera focusing specifically on different parts of the kitchen to give a real sense of place. I think I’ve outlined quite a bit in my presentation and what texts influenced me that setting and set design is really important to my screen world; therefore, I believe a good section of my screenplay should be dedicated to building these places and their little details. Although, if I come up with or am presented with a way to do is more subtly, perhaps through the storytelling itself, I’d be open to changing it as it feels slightly clunky at the moment.

I really struggled to portray the dullness pervading the two characters in this scene; I tried to keep them monotonous and monosyllabic in their first interactions with each other, but the nature of the scene doesn’t allow me to communicate too much through their person-to-person interaction since the dialogue is more focused on the delusional nature of their world. However, in future scenes I plan to make this more evident.

Finally, I’m not entirely happy with George’s “monologue” but I believe it does what I intend it to do, even if it is slightly clunky and verbose. In this scene I really want to portray the hypocrisy of both the characters and the society that has created this situation. This unnamed off-world colony is supposed to be a symbol of ideals that futurists hold so dear, such as innovation, excitement, peace, order and functionality. However, as demonstrated by our characters (their surroundings, their interactions, George’s dinner), none of these ideals are actually being met by the people who still diligently, yet with great boredom, espouse them. The society they have dreamt about has not really functioned in its real world application.

This week we’ve spent a lot of time talking about genre, and its relation both to our focus of world and to the more general storytelling technique and the plots it produces. During our discussion on definitions of genre on Thursday, Stayci mentioned a theorist by the name of Blake Snyder who dismissed the idea of genre as they don’t actually tell you what a film is about, what happens in the story. Instead, he suggested the concept of 10 story types, which are essentially semi-formulaic tropes that span across genres. The Golden Fleece story type, for example, chronicles the quest for a clearly defined prize, physical or otherwise, that is hard to achieve, and follows our character/s on a journey of self-discovery and internal change. The Fool Triumphant, in contrast, pits an underdog character of seemingly poor character/skills (pathetic, you might call them) pitted against and eventually triumphing over the establishment.

When thinking about what we discussed regarding genre this week, I felt that many of the films we put in specific genres or grouped together were often only cosmetically similar. The setting of their world/story was very similar, similar character cropped up again and again and even filming techniques, colouring and soundtrack recurred between films of a particular genre. I particular found the definitions in Dancyger and Rush (2013) problematic as although generally what they said about films of particular genres was true, you couldn’t envision a particular story just by reading their descriptions. Everything was very vague and gave you no sense of what the plot of a film might look like.

I found Snyder’s story types very interesting because upon reading them I could instantly a) imagine what sort of story they were referring to and b) recall dozens of films I’d seen that fit that story type, despite the individual story types seeming very specific. This is what I think is so powerful about them for describing story rather than traditional understandings of genre; despite their specificity, they’re instantly recognisable and salient to almost every (mainstream) film. For example, two particular films came to mind when I was reading about the Golden Fleece story type: O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2004) and Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle (2004). The former is very explicitly a version of Homer’s Odyssey, and thus it’s no surprise that it borrows story elements from the Greek myth of Jason and the Golden Fleece. However, to call O Brother an epic or an adventure would be incorrect; although it mimics the schemes of these genres at times, it is more of a comedy and period satire than anything else. These terms don’t capture what the film is really about; however, if you frame it in terms of the Golden Fleece, you gain a much clearer idea of what actually goes on in Coen brothers’ film. Harold & Kumar is even further from what you’d imagine a Golden Fleece tale to look like; one can safely say that it is a stoner comedy. However, it features two protagonists (Harold and Kumar) on both a physical quest for a known goal (White Castle) and a mental journey of self-discovery (what they want to do with their lives), throughout which they face a variety of obstacles which they must overcome (the police, their family, their neighbours, Neil Patrick Harris, being high). Despite the Golden Fleece seemingly being a story type most commonly ascribed to adventures and epics, it is actually one of the most common story types in stoner comedy (Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny, Pineapple Express, Dude Where’s My Car?, Friday etc.)

However, there is one thing that these story types seem to lack, which, despite how interesting and useful they are to screenwriting in general, is the most important thing to our practice this semester: because they can encompass so many different stories, they rarely can tell you what sort of world said story will take place in. Because the Golden Fleece can be used to describe an historical epic, a modern-day adventure or a film about two dudes smoking weed, it means it can’t be used to indicate what sort of world this journey will take place in. However, personally I am able to imagine elements that are in many ways unique to the world (setting, tone, logic, pacing, history) when I hear a genre. If something is science fiction, 90% of the time it’s going to be set in space, the future or have some brush with extraterrestrials or advanced technology. If something is noir, it’s going to sombre, pessimistic and feature lots of rain and dark colours. Genre should be used as a basic template for the world we want to create; however, when we get into the specifics of our characters and story, I believe story types are a lot more useful.