Read the first act of my script "Resonance
It's about a prodigy doctor who copes with the loss of a past love and comes to acknowledge a budding new one all the while dealing with his grave illness.
It's a tragic romance drama with comedy. Call it a dromgedy. It's amazing. READ IT
Let me know what you think or if you want to read more!
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...
The latest film in the Chronicles of Narnia series glides into theaters this weekend, and fans of the book will be surprised to see some major changes. Voyage of the Dawn Treader follows the two youngest Pevensie children and their somewhat annoying cousin Eustace on a sea-born voyage focused on finding seven noble lords banished by Caspian's evil uncle. While the main plot remains the same, some expected changes do occur in what directer Michael Apted chose to focus on (without giving away too much):
First and foremost, the order of some events in the book are shifted and combined in order to fit the story into the time limit. Also, a focus on the relationships between the two siblings to their older counterparts goes beyond anything in the book as does the immense change that seems to overtake the character of Eustace. However, the biggest (and most obvious) change is the inclusion of some themes from the next Narnia book: The Silver Chair.
Lewis's book was a very idyllic stroll through the lands that surround Narnia, but it was too episodic to make a compelling and "edge-of-the-seat" gripping film. That's why Apted opted for the digression (which was originally met with disdain by the Lewis estate).
This move may help the somewhat flailing series to get back on its feet after a pretty miserable performance by Prince Caspian. By taking themes from The Silver Chair, a much smoother transition into the next movie is possible. This is something that has been lacking in the series thus far and just may prove to be the missing ingredient to box office supercess (my term for super-success).
If Walden Media and Twentieth Century Fox want to keep making these movies, they should keep this trend going and really focus on keeping a connection between all the books - especially because the cast of protagonists is too inconsistent for a movie series.
As far as Voyage of the Dawn Treader goes, brace yourselves for a fast-paced, action-packed thrill ride that still manages to connect with the human emotion. With great visuals, a good soundtrack, wonderful production value, and decent acting, this movie will not be a waste of your money!
So, I'm a nerd, and as a nerd, I like Star Wars. And because I like Star Wars, I like Star Wars-related things. That's why, when I came across a video recapping the entire original trilogy in two minutes and forty-one seconds, I was overcome with geek love. Take a look at the following stop-motion, paper cut-out version of the trilogy with its very own original soundtrack entitled "Tatooine" created by the talented Jeremy Messersmith:
Remember that old 1985 movie about the teenager that travels through time, makes out with his mom, and help his dad find some confidence while changing his life for the better? It was called "Back to the Future," and it starred Michael J. Fox as the pseudo apprentice of Doc Brown. Well, you'd be surprised to learn that Michael J. Fox was not the first choice actor for the film. Spielberg and Zemeckis had shot five weeks worth of footage with Eric Stoltz as Marty McFly. Unfortunately, despite his acting ability, the comedic sense the filmmakers were looking for did not translate with Stoltz. That was when Fox was found to replace him as lead actor. Footage of the original scenes with Stoltz was released with the "Back to the Future 25th Anniversary Trilogy" on blu-ray last month. Take a short glimpse at the footage in the video excerpt from the special features below:
So, it's been a while, hasn't it? I took some time to figure out some things in my life, and I'm glad to say that everything is just as it was before. Life is life, and you just live it. So, I decided it's time for me to come back. You might say I had a bit of an identity crisis. You might say that I was unsure of what I wanted. You might even say that I was a lost lamb in a sea of despair. You might say all that and more, and I can't stop you from saying it, but you would be wrong. I am back with a deeper resolve, a more emphatic ooh-rah, a more resounding huzzah. This is my wake up call. Here I am. Back from a bout of amnesia. I am no longer confined by the woes of anonymity in my own mind. Does this mean that I have shaken off the moniker of "Silent Rogue"? Not likely. In fact, I have returned ablaze with passion. Here's to everything I have missed thus far, everything, that I have stated here, and everything that will propel me into the future.
What did I just say in that paragraph above? I really have no idea, but enjoy the funny comic about amnesia below. (Unfortunately, I have no idea who made its since I found no attribution...)
The ever-so-unpublicized RED released in theaters across the nation this Friday, and as expected, very little buzz was created. Well, that needs to stop now. RED was given such a low budget for publicity that it really is no wonder no one has ever heard about this wonderfully entertaining and hilarious movie.
In a film that mashes the action genre with comedy and splashes of romance, a polarizing effect can be created: one will either love it or hate it. However, with RED, that isn't the case. With solid acting, ingenious and creative storytelling, BADASS fight scenes, well-fitting music, good writing, great editing, and deliciously diabolical villains, the audience can easily find itself actually laughing out loud.
RED is an over-the-top action comedy based on a DC comic book that follows ex-CIA operatives who are being killed off by their formal employer because of their knowledge of sensitive information. RED creatively uses imaginative action scenes that don't seem gimmicky like other over-the-top movie (ahem, Scott Pilgrim, ahem). RED knows that it was never meant to be taken very seriously, and it delivers a solid, enjoyable experience that should not be missed.
If for no other reason, you have to go see this movie for the genius performance of John Malkovich as a crazed ex-agent. This was great acting in its highest sense. Malkovich will probably not be nominated for an Oscar for his performance because of the nature of the film, but I would easily cast my vote for him as the comedic performance of the year.
Aside from Malkovich, Bruce Willis performs solidly as the main character; Morgan Freeman is wonderful (and a bit underutilized); Helen Mirren is delightful; and Brian Cox as Ivan is enchanting. (I will admit, though, Mary-Louise Parker can get a bit annoying a the female lead...)
At times morbidly funny and at times pure unadulterated fun, this movie gets a nice solid A-.
Go watch it!
That's right. Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp will be working together for the first time in a remake of the French film "Anthony Zimmer
" called "The Tourist
" set to release this December.
The film recounts the action-filled romance that erupts between a heartbroken American Depp, who goes to Europe for a little fresh air, and a fierce Interpol agent played by Jolie. Set across the backdrop of stunning vistas across Europe, this film also includes some racy scenes between the two A-list actors.
According to wikipedia
(if it can be trusted), "The movie follows the series of manipulations, as characters [realize] that they are merely pieces being played by an unseen mastermind of the game."
In any case, the film should be exhilarating enough to garner a good profit at the box offices. The trailer can be seen below: