What defines a filmmaker? A subjective question that has been bothering me since the day the cinematic world railed my attention. Through out the period of three months in this course, I was searching for an answer, you could say a definition of what I am, not only as a filmmaker but as well as a person. I wanted to push the boundaries and explore my strengths and my weaknesses, figuring out where I stand in my knowledge and practicality in film. This was the second time I was only ever involved in an actual film production. The first ever film production I was involved in was quite a success in the standards of a student film. The half-length featured film gain more than 8000 views on YouTube and the recognition of some popular YouTube filmmakers in Malaysia. The whole filmmaking process was a long, tiring and grueling one, thus making me feel proud as a person because was I able to push through the tough times. For some reason though, I felt proud but not accomplished if that makes any sense. To explain things better, I believe this was due to my role and involvement with the creative aspect of the film. It was not my story, I wasn’t the writer, director or cinematographer, merely a camera assistant, therefore to which I believe made me feel as if I was a laborer in the team. It hindered my satisfaction on the idea of becoming a filmmaker, but to be fair, I think wasn’t ready to take on the role of a director due to my inexperience and lack of knowledge in film/cinema. It has been two years since then, I took up this course for a reason, maybe as a mechanism of proving to myself that I have grown in the filmmaking aspect. I wanted make another film, but this time being part of the creative process and finding that core, that value as a filmmaker in myself. To gain a sense of where I stand, there are three significant events in the past three months, to my belief played a huge role in shaping my ideal goal.
Chapter 1: Visual Planning
Movies, video essays, trailers, documentaries, photography & visual experimentation were my inspiration on the planning of the visual for the film. The script was set and I felt it was my duty as cinematographer to bring out the best of the story. It was a huge process of trials and error on defining how the tone of the film will be. For myself, I haven’t reach a certain level where I have a signature style of my own that defines me as cinematographer, therefore doing test shoots were crucial as it allowed me to experiment and grasp a hold of what aesthetic suits the story.
The setback in this process was when I had a realization that the script doesn’t feel like the conventional narrative consisting of the three-arc structure. Therefore, this actually created quite a challenge on my hands as I really take serious consideration into continuity in the film but as the end product shows, something has change. It broke my perspective of how films could be view allowing me to breaking down the scenes, each visual aspect planning to be a scene of it own. Satyajit stated, “That cinema is a language, an enormously potent and flexible language, a language that can be used in just as many different ways as you can use the language of words.” (Satyajit, R pp95)
In a scene from the script, a timelapse sequence was required. Figuring out the idea to fulfill the director’s vision was a tough challenge because ideally there was a lot of uncertainty of how this scene was actually pictured and no definitive description was on the script. Finding the solution started out with a small LED lamp, my left hand, a pillow and a chair (basically household items). After taking the pictures, I then move on the edits, playing with the opacity and overlapping the clips. The end results was satisfying and therefore allowing the creation of the final product as shown in the second picture.
Shooting a small test scene of my own was crucial to helping define the tone of the actual film itself as it allowed the exploration of using lighting, shadows, framing and silhouettes. It was an eye-opener because it enabled me to understand the mood a certain detail can create.
Zhou (Every Frame A Painting) describes, “It’s not the big scenes, the epic shots that define the characteristic of a filmmaker, but the little ones. Placing two characters in a room, having a conversation. The way a filmmaker displays the small scene is a huge portrayal of how insightful he or she is as a storyteller and artist”.
Chapter 2: Shooting Days
To begin, it was a very interesting experience for me as it taught me the art of compromising. Late actors, time shortage, environmental disturbance, these are the ingredients that lead me to the point of stress and anxiety. Majorly, most days were a constant race against time due to the punctuality of a certain cast member, which eventually puts more pressure on me to get the visuals needed before the end of the day. The sound team was also struggling due to the environmental noise cause by passing by students and outdoor constructions. We had to take what we could get and move on. Therefore, it is essential we had back up plans for the problems we were facing, which we did, due to our early preparation a week before. It made me appreciate more the concept of preparation and teaching me a lesson on the necessity of it. Corliss described how Alfred Hitchcock made a religion out of routine: everyday the same dark suit (he had dozens of identical one), the same lunch in his office, and, when he traveled to Paris or New York, the same room in the same hotel. For Hitchcock, familiarity bred order, and order allowed him to control the shape and substance of his films. (Corliss, M pp 13) A lesson which is applicable in my filmmaking philosophy.
Chapter 3: Editorial Process
In many ways, this was the process that I felt defined me as a filmmaker because it allowed me to reach a sense of epiphany of the choices that had been made before hand and will happen after. Even though, my involvement with the filmmaking process isn’t a lot, but due to class exercises over the years, I believe I have caught an understanding to the process of editing videos. It was never my acknowledgement to follow a specific type of cutting for this film, as over the years, editing has taught me more on the reliance of instincts and what feels right or natural in frame. There is a catch though, like sports, one must learn the basics before playing in the real match.
After finishing the final cut, I viewed back the film and start to question myself, why did I cut the film in this paramount? It wasn’t a question that defined if the film looked good, but a question of my perception to cinematic world.
Martin Scorsese, David Fincher and Alfred Hitchcock, these are the directors that I believe has made a huge impact on my choices in the process of filmmaking. A part of the sequences in my film has influences from the sound concept from Raging Bull, which is called ‘The Art of Silence’(a sensation when a heighten sound fades to silence), made me question the reason for my decision in the edits. The answer was tension.
Hemmeter described how silence is both the problem and the solution in the quest for full articulation of truth in melodrama. An absence of sound, tableau silence in melodrama was not at all an absence of communication: it was an intense presence, a direct communication. Death is the dramatic truth for which Hitchcock’s modernist film require a hyper articulate language in which both screams and silence express the same message: horror at the mystery of death, its denial of identity, and affirmation of chaos and loss. (Hemmeter, T pp 35)
To sign off, in the process of creating a film with different people of different walks of life for the past three months, it could be said that my ideology on film still dwells in a dark gray area but my awareness allows me to understand that the filmmaking is a process of ever lasting evolution, that not all films are supposed to be a “certain way” but understanding that development, growth and collaboration is key to reaching the pinnacle of cinema/film understanding. To find my signature, my cinematographic language, is to lean to Nietzsche concept of ‘madness’, where he describes the special ones, the ones that dwell in the little world of exceptions, “the evil zone”, in spite of the fearful pressure of the morality customs of all mankind has live for, throughout history and all the novelty that has been repressed in favor of a rule, in spite of all this, new and deviate ideas, evaluations, drives again and again broke out. Madness is the very fountain of culture. Madness allows ways for new ideas to come. (Abrams, pp 77-78)
Bibliography
Abrams, J. J.. (2007). The Cinema of Madness: Friedrich Nietzsche and the Films of Martin Scorsese. In M. T. Conard (Ed.), The Philosophy of Martin Scorsese (pp. 75–92). University Press of Kentucky. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jcjcq.8
Every Frame A Painting. (2014). Martin Scorsese – The Art of Silence . [Online Video]. 14 March. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUrTRjEXjSM. [Accessed: 8 June 2016].
HEMMETER, THOMAS. “HITCHCOCK’S MELODRAMATIC SILENCE.” Journal of Film and Video 48, no. 1/2 (1996): 32-40. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20688092.
Mary Corliss. “Alfred Hitchcock: Behind the Silhouette.” MoMA 2, no. 5 (1999): 12-14. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4420362.
“THE ART OF SILENCE.” In Satyajit Ray on Cinema, edited by Ray Sandip, by Ray Satyajit, Chaterji Dhritiman, De Arup K., Mukerjee Deepak, Mukhopadhyay Debasis, and Benegal Shyam, 92-96. Columbia University Press, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/ray-16494.18.