Blog Archives - Silent Rogue
 
Melies Moon Landing
            Film is a means of presenting one's ideas, thoughts, and opinions. In its advent it was definitely a “new technological means of communication with the potential to reach a truly mass audience.” Film has been used for many purposes, but it can be said that film has been “increasingly deployed to represent difficult and contentious material.” Whether this “contentious material” represents some social commentary or some sort of message or request, film has a great impact on our lives. It has the potential to change the face of the earth. It has, in fact, been used many times to advance the opinions of its creators – and often, very successfully. This success can be attributed to the fanaticism of the many audiences that cinema has gained. These audiences are what allows films to spread their messages. As such, the main focus of most filmmakers has been to gather up the biggest force of loyal viewers, but this is not as simple as it sounds. With each change in cinema comes a change in its viewers. Each new period of film history must “[reconstruct] its spectator in a new way.” This was very evident in the sound era, when possibly, the most drastic change to cinema occurred. 

            Film brings things into familiarity. When we spend a few hours looking at a screen displaying images of people living their lives, we suspend our own existence and place ourselves into the existence of the characters on screen. Even after the film is over, the fact that we transported ourselves into an alternate universe leaves us with imprints of that world and more importantly with the messages contained within, behind, and in the film. With this familiarity, the audience softens up to ideas that come out of the film, assuming them to be real in the universe of the film. Even though viewers consciously believe that they are separating themselves by validating the ideas in only the universe of the film, the audience becomes unaware to the effects that come along with any suspension of beliefs at all.

            Film affects us in more ways than we realize. It can numb us to death, injury, and gore. It can inspire us to great things; it can produce in us such grief that we feel as if we have lost a brother or mother. Film has capabilities to fashion our lives. We seek to imitate that which we see on others, and film contains people that will be seen by multitudes of people. Even those who resist the initial urge to copy the characters will eventually follow suit as the rest of society deems it necessary. However, forming styles and beliefs are not the only effects, as disseminating beliefs comes into play with many films. Film can be used to produce a strong hatred for something or to rise people to take action against something as well – as in the case of Leni Riefenstahl's propagandist films. But why is film so good at these things? Is it that we simply see films as a source of truth and authority that we must follow? Is it that we see film as something familiar that we identify with (even though the familiarity that we feel may be false)? Is it something else?

            Ever since the inception of moving pictures, people have been captivated by the ability to simulate movement and in effect, life. From its very beginning film has had the ability to spread some message – whether it was one of change, hope, revolution, support, or expectations. It can bring about change in the world through social commentary, propaganda, and exaggeration. However, even with its potential for such impact film cannot exist without an audience to view them. It is the audience that allows cinema to be so effective in communicating its ideals and ideologies. Without first, engulfing the audience into its world, film has no hope of reaching its mass potential. Once the viewer is immersed in the universe created by the filmmakers, then only can the message be presented. As the audience become captivated, they also become susceptible and open to the ideas contained within each film, and in effect they take the content of the film and make it a part of themselves. It is no surprise then, that the introduction of sound films drastically changed the way films are watched. There was no longer the physical participation of reading and hearing the voices of other audience members. Those had been replaced with the voices of the characters and sensual participation that created a three dimensional world that could be imagined without ever being shown. No longer were audiences satisfied with what Gorky defined as a “shadow world.” They vied for a more realistic representation of life, which has continued to this day. Exaggerated acting and extreme close-ups took second place to witty dialogue and diegetic sound. In conclusion, film has been evolving from its very creation into a means of mass communication, and one of the biggest mutations in its genetic code occurred when sound-on-film was invented. Film has not been the same since, and it will continue to change as newer and grander methods of exhibition come into existence.

 
It's been a while since I posted here. I've been focusing my attention on my tumblr since it's a much easier process of regurgitating simple and short thoughts that cross my mind or sharing other images and videos that intrigue me. So, it's time to update this blog again:

I've recently been working on a feature length script about a young doctor suffering from cystic fibrosis who has never been able to get over his ex leaving him for his brother. On the surface, it's a story about this man's relationships and his fight against his progressing illness, but on a deeper level, the film is about the unbreakable bond that is forged between two people once they meet, and the connection that lasts even after years of absence.

The protagonist Grant is obsessed with his memories of Richelle and has never been able to forgive his brother for getting together with her. What's worse is that his family supports his brother and his "true love" with Richie. Upon hearing news of their engagement, Grant becomes possessed by the idea of winning Richie back and struggles to make it happen. At the same time, Grant's personal assistant Cheryl, who has been his rock tries to win his heart over. The changing relationships between these characters forms the focus of the film, but the alienation and reconciliation of Grant and his family also takes a strong role.

In essence, I am trying to create a raw human drama where the characters involved learn to accept and appreciate their stages in life and move towards the future with bright eyes and open hearts. One cannot go through this life alone, but trying to focus on gaining the attention of a singular being while ignoring all others around becomes just as detrimental. Humans need balance, and when obsession or lack of closure begins to come into the mixture, the balance is upset, and an unhealthy situation is established.

By the time I finish this script, I am hoping that it will forge a connection between the audience and the individuals on screen and convey a message of hopeful progress.

I think it is because I have such lofty goals for this script that I have been unable to settle on a name. Normally, I have a title decided before I even start writing, but this one has just been difficult. Temporarily, I have settled on the name "Eye to Eye," but I am by no means pleased with it. I have toyed with ides like "Revolving Door," "Serenity, Courage, and Wisdom," "Grant Repose," and horrible ones like "Moving On," "Heartfelt," and "Relating" without being satisfied by any. I guess I just haven't found the perfect words to describe the entire essence of the film. (I'll take any suggestions you have to offer by the way!)

And with that, I must return to this story of love and growth. I would tell you how it ends, but I'll save it for the actual film release. As always, it's been a pleasure...

s_ro