Silver Nihilism

Today I acted in my friend/colleague Genevieve Ewing's mockumentary about escapism.

I was dressed in silver clothing, covered in silver paint and glitter spray (including my former hair, now more like a war helmet), and looked something like this.



I was meant to be a performance artist, aka one of those silver and/or other metallic colored weird statue people who kids and old ladies are afraid of. Somehow I connect these people to France.

Having had a conversation about nihilism with another friend of mine at 9.30 in the morning, I ended up adding that into my improv. Niezsche may have been mentioned.

It was awesome. On occasion it's nice to forget about writing, directing and producing, though most of the time I do decide to stay behind the 5D for a reason...

Danny & Daisy: Five days of Hell vs. Heaven

We shot my third short film between the 9th and 13th of September.

It was amazing, definitely one of the best experiences of my life. But as the title of this post suggests, the times did vary between excellent and not so excellent, as on any film shoot, I'm sure.

It consisted of less than 15 hours of sleep, in total. At least 3 red bulls per day. About 8 packs of Marlboro Menthols. No food.

Not the healthiest profession, perhaps, but despite all this crap I did have the time of my life. I got to do what I love. I usually shoot my films over 24hours, but this time we did 5 days in a row, filming for the best part of each day, everyday. Although all my cast & crew were my friends beforehand, these kind of shoots always leave people a big, newfound happy family. It always feels we've been on holiday together. I love these people as much as my job. They make it possible, afterall.

Book Adaptations. Book Schmadaptations.

So today I went and saw 'One Day', directed by Lone Scherfig (don't worry, I have no idea who that is either). 'One Day' is the film adaptation of David Nicholls' novel of the same name. I enjoyed it.

I've been thinking about book adaptations a lot lately, with so many coming out and my plans to find a book so good that I want to adapt it (Douglas Coupland's 'Girlfriend in a Coma' is at the top of my list at the moment). Lets take the big one first, 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt. 2', based on the (now) franchise, originally written by J.K.Rowling. What a woman. Anyway, I guess the test I do with these films, to decide whether I like them or not, is whether they have the same effect on me as the book did. I still haven't decided whether I liked HP. It did make me cry, just as the book did. Well not just as, cause the book sort of threw me into a double misery, firstly as it's, well, sad, and secondly because it was the end of HP. The film made me weep quietly for a bit, and I thought it was because the film was sad, but to be honest afterwards I realised I was just crying because I was reliving the events in the book. The film wouldn't have made me cry if I'd never read the book.

Then there was 'Never Let Me Go', based on Kazuo Ishiguro's novel, earlier in the year. Now this time I hadn't read the book beforehand, and I despised the film. I didn't get it. I just didn't get it. For those of you who have seen it, why wouldn't main characters Kathy and Tommy just try to escape before all of Tommy's organs get harvested? Why do they act like complete pussies and go looking for Madame? Then I read the book. I adored the book. I understood why they went looking for Madame. I found myself confused- had the film really been that bad? I re-watched it. I despised it more than the first time. It's one of those where you have to have read the book to understand the film. This just means information was badly conveyed. The film was, quite frankly, a bad book adaptation. In my opinion anyway. A book adaptation needs to be good as a film. As in it needs to stand separate from the book. The book made me cry hysterically. The film just left me with questions. And irritation.

Then there was 'Norwegian Wood', based on now one of my favorite author's novel of the same name. Haruki Murakami. Now this was something else. Aside from an adaptation, it was a beautifully directed and shot Japanese arthouse film. Unlike the two aforementioned films, it stood on it's own. As a film. An absolutely beautiful film. I ended up with a beautiful novel, and a beautiful film. I tested it- the film had the same effect on me as the book did. I was very pleased indeed.

So then, 'One Day'. Just like 'Norwegian Wood', it had the same effect on me as the book did. When I read the book's final chapters, I was in a train. I solidly wept IN PUBLIC for at least 15 minutes. It was tragic, and, come to think of it, very embarrasing. Earlier on today in the cinema, I wept. I wept like I had done with the book. So that passed my test too. A great adaptation.

Having said all this, adaptations do leave me with a handful of questions without answers. When I feel an adaptation has the same effect on me as the original book, does the effect occur just because I'm reliving the book's events? Because I've been through it before? Would it have the same effect on me if I hadn't read the book? Can you enjoy an adaptation without having read the book? Is the adaptation good as a film?

Book adaptations are tricky.

What have I done today towards my film, to be shot in less than 6 days now? I went and got my zippo fixed at the tobacco shop. I love the old tobacco shop owner. Such an adorable old man. He fixed it for "20p for the charity box. I'm collecting for the blind". I gloriously lit up two cigarettes with it. As I went in for the third, the zippo was broken again. So, in one word, what have I done for my film today? Nada.

Danny & Daisy: 1 Week to Go. Whiskey or Apple Juice? Cigarettes or Herbal Crap?

Right, so this summer I graduated. 2:1 honors, BA Film, University of Southampton, whatever. I attempted the whole looking for a job thing for a while, managed to get something with REAL fundraising. Ended after a week. So that went well.

All through this blood-sweatn'-tears job hunt I was slowly but surely doing preproduction for my third short film, 'Danny & Daisy'. Even though I was technically unemployed, it sure as hell didn't feel like it, and still doesn't, especially with a week to go and whatnot.

I'd describe 'Danny & Daisy' as an LGBT art film. It's about two young people fed up with today's socially constructed gender and sexual norms. The film follows their journey from the dark place of trying to conform to finally breaking boundaries and becoming themselves.

Producing a film is the most soul destroying thing I've ever encountered in my life. Yet, as a piss-broke emerging (or something) filmmaker, I have no choice but to produce my own stuff. It's the writing and directing I love, which makes the producing worthwhile. And obviously there's the end product. But yes, it has taken 3 months to produce a 30 minute short film.

Over the summer I've auditioned actors, rehearsed them, bought props and costumes with whatever money I could lay my hands on (no looting, yet), scouted for locations, written and re-written the script, organized filming equipment, confirmed a crew and now with a week to go I think I've done everything. Almost everything.

Now with little left to-do (I'll probably realise a million things I haven't yet done tomorrow), I've found myself facing an ethical dilemma. Is it okay, or rather politically correct, to feed my actors whiskey and cigarettes during filming in search for an authentic effect? I myself am no new-comer to the world of Cigarettes & Alcohol (oh Oasis, I love you), but is it really cool to make my cast drink booze at about 8am just so I can get an authentic reaction out of them? Way back when I had my first cigarette, I remember it being addictive straight away (should insert a 'not proud of this habit' here somewhere). Will I be responsible for my cast's future empty-wallets and cigarette-craving tantrums? Their, god-forbid, cancerous lungs? I mean there are alternatives... Apple juice. Looks like whiskey. Doubt it'll make them gasp out of disgust though... Herbal fags? Now these might actually be worth it. I don't even know what they are, my friend Robbie (Danny) suggested them as an alternative. He is the one who sprung me in this ethical hurdle.

Something to ponder over the next few days. 7 days to go. God help me.

Introduction

If you've ever produced a film, I'm sure you can appreciate how sometimes you're just in the need of a word-vomit about your work but, quite possibly, have no more willing ears to listen to you whine about costumes, locations, rehearsals, test shoots, equipment and so forth.

This blog is my metaphorical toilet for this chunder, where I'll write about my progress as an emerging film writer, director and producer.

I've made two short films to date, 'Triumph' and 'John F. Smith'. By some miracle the former won an award in California (I'm based in the UK), and the other is in consideration at festivals at the moment. I'm currently in preproduction of my third short, 'Danny & Daisy'. Here's a link to my imdb page with an extremely embarrassing photo of me (the same as my blog profile picture, actually). Or more like the badass me. Or even more like the wannabe-badass-me. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4381824/