Making the Movie


Your Weekend Viewing: The Gunfighter

Since it's everywhere else on the internet, may as well share here too...

Directed by a feature comedy editor, written by a copywriter, photographed by an ace d.p. and narrated by a well-known comic actor. Short of the Week has a bit more info, but sadly no budget number. This looks like it cost a pretty penny.

Shorts are always a big gamble, because there's very little way to make any money back on them. There is a small market on overseas television and an even smaller market in the States for homevideo compilations. The real payoff is if it helps make connections or generate other work. I'll be keeping a lookout for these names in the trades.


Book Review: Avid Uncut by Steve Hullfish

Avid Uncut: Workflows, Tips and Techniques from Hollywood Pros
by Steve Hullfish
Focal Press, $44.95

We have a winner. I have been looking for a book that goes deep -- deep into Avid MediaComposer. Avid Uncut is that book. Avid Agility by Steve Cohen is also quite comprehensive, but it aims and succeeds at being a cheat sheet on this complex and often difficult program. (Hullfish actually recommends Cohen's book as a complement to his own, and I concur.)

I have worked with editors who know the program so well, they can only be described as "Avid ninjas." When I saw that one of these ninjas (the incomparable J.C. Bond of Tony Scott and Tim Burton-movies fame) is interviewed in the book, I knew the author had been talking to the right people. In addition to the usual background on Avid's tools, this book looks at the workflows, keyboards and layouts of real working editors and assistant editors. It covers features, television, documentaries, visual effects and sizzle workflows and techniques. All with plentiful color screenshots.

The biggest win here is the large and helpful section that puts Avid's tools in context from a Final Cut Pro perspective. For all those editors migrating from FCP since the switchover from 7 to X, this is a must-have. For assistants who have to assist these editors, it is a god-send.

What I'd Like To See In Future Editions



Your Weekend Viewing: Aug(De)mented Reality

This highly-creative use of animation is courtesy a person (a collective?) by the name of Hombre_mcsteez.

Judging by the upload dates on his/her/their YouTube page, Hombre_mcsteez averages about one video every year. Animation takes a long... long... long time to do, so I'm betting it's an individual.

Anyway, it's one of the coolest video's I've seen in the last few weeks because it points not only to a (to me in any case) novel use of animation, but also to a new kind of internet video I'm seeing emerge, something that for lack of a better term you might call Vine compilations. (Vine is Twitter-of-video service that forces you to share short loops of video.)

Not that there haven't been compilation videos before, but these sort of thematic gag reels seem to be becoming a genre unto themselves and (to my mind in any case) are a lot more fun to watch than individual Vines or a page full of animated GIFs.

Agree? Disagree? Bueller?


Your Weekend Viewing: Two Video Essays on Spielberg’s Art

After 40+ years of Hollywood career, director Stephen Spielberg is getting dissected in great detail. The first of these I saw was cameraman Vincent Laforet's very practical look at how Spielberg did the blocking for specific scenes. Then, this week I saw two wider and more philosophical attempts to categorize the Bergmeister's techniques.

Tony Zhou sees Spielberg as the last practitioner of the long (but not flashy) single take. He calls it "The Spielberg Oner".

Fandor's Kevin B. Lee, meanwhile, sees the auteur's signature stroke as "The Spielberg Face".

[via reader TC]

I think both make too much out of a pattern that's all-too-common in other directors, but there's no doubt that Spielberg has studied the greats and internalized some of their most powerful techniques. What do you think about these analyses? What do you see as Spielberg's signature moves?


Your Wednesday Links: Absolutely Nothing About Star Wars

Most of these links come from the @makingthemovie Twitter stream. If you'd like to see them as they come, follow us on Twitter.

IndieWire: How Jeremy Saulnier Went From Corporate Videos to Making 'Blue Ruin'

FiveThirtyEight: Statistical Breakdown of Every Blockbuster Since Jaws - The new Nate Silver news site that emphasizes statistical stories also recently had great pieces on the IMDb's worst-rated film and how Mean Girls has impacted our vocabulary.

Filmmaker Mag: "he’s frustrated by what he seems to perceive as the unthinking tyranny of editing" - There might be something to this, but the way it is being reported makes it sound colossally stupid. Film grammar to me is rooted in biological facts of how we perceive information, but, like spoken language, it is also a constantly evolving set of arbitrary structures. If you throw out those signposts, you end up sounding like Nell.

Advice to Writers: Billy Wilder's Rules for Screenwriters

NFS: What Lighting Tools Do the Pros Use? Some of the Most Talented DPs Share Their Favorites

Variety: Jeffrey Katzenberg Predicts 3-Week Theatrical Window in Future

Under The Skin and the Problem with the Adjective “Kubrickian”

Hitfix: Has life in the age of casual magic made moviegoers numb to the amazing? - This essay occasioned much discussion in the filmmakersphere. From what I hear, the new Godzilla will be an answer to the casual magic approach. It will be interesting to see how audiences respond to the Jaws approach of teasing and delaying the payoff.

Playwright Howard Lindsay (Arsenic and Old Lace, State of the Union) advised taking the great lines from secondary characters and giving them to the lead. Keep the hero the hero and the star the star.

What are Martin Scorsese's favorite films?


Your Weekend Viewing: Great Director Fan Films

The first short to check out this weekend is called "Mite" and it's a brilliant extension of The Shining. CG Artist Walter Volbers imagines what Kubrick 'mite' have done if he had use of CGI.

You'll notice the importance of the sound design in bringing the digital images to life.

Another brilliant use of sound design is this "Wes Anderson Mixtape" -- which doesn't stop at remixing sound but also finds cool visual correspondences across the persnickety writer-director's oeuvre.

If you still haven't gotten enough filmmaker tributes this weekend, check out the preview for Vincent Laforet's "Directing Motion" class, which breaks down an entire Spielberg scene from the perspective of the director.


Your Wednesday Links: Under the Scorsese Edition

Most of these links come from the @makingthemovie Twitter stream. If you'd like to see them as they come, follow us on Twitter.

Guardian: How Scarlett Johansson helped me challenge disfigurement stigma - I'm still turning over how I feel about Under the Skin. Some of these anti-narrative films I like, and some, like this one, strike me as indulgent and ponderous. But I can't figure out where the line is. It might just relate to what I had for lunch that day.

Dave Chen Video Essay: Raid Director Gareth Evans' Top 5 Fight Scenes

AICN: Steven Soderbergh Takes A Cleaver To Michael Cimino With HEAVEN'S GATE: THE BUTCHER'S CUT! - And also on the subject of editing, be sure to read No Film School's summary of Thelma Schoonmaker's Tribeca Film Fest lecture on the editing of Raging Bull

Deadline: Time Warner Cable To Netflix: “Here Are The Facts” About Comcast Merger - I know my bias is against the cable companies. But in the interest of fairness, here is their argument. I trust reader judgement to see any bologna.

Deadline's Mike Fleming: Bravo Joss Whedon! For Online Launch Of Tribeca Pic - This is basically a distribution model Louis C.K. already showed works several years ago. But still, between Dr. Horrible, Much Ado and now this, Whedon is definitely one of the most forward-looking filmmakers out there, and deserves some plaudits as a real trail-blazer.

Cinema Blend: The Wolf Of Wall Street Honest Trailer Is Effing Brilliant - And also on the Scorsese tip, Joshua Brunsting argues (persuasively) that Bringing Out The Dead deserves a full Criterion treatment.

Mashable: 8k televisions are real, and they're spectacular - Once again, movie theaters are going to have to step up their game.

LA Times: How Rubin 'Hurricane' Carter rewrote Oscar campaigning

Story is about more than plot.


Avid Error of the Day: Real-time effects not displaying on monitor

When I encounter an odd error message and its solution, I make a note. This is one of those notes. I want solutions to turn up better in searches for other Avid users (and myself). As with all error posts on the site, the casual reader can just skip ahead to other less-technical content.

This is a simple one (maybe even a forehead-slapper), but I think worth throwing out there.

I had dropped real-time mask and timecode effects over a whole sequence and they didn't appear to be effecting the footage in Source/Record Mode, only Effect Mode. What happened? I had toggled off the "Render On-the-Fly" option.

Avid Render On-the-Fly Option Toggle in menu

Solution, toggle it back on. It's something that's set on by default, so I'd never taken notice of it. Turn it off, though, and you will take notice.

Have a similar story of another simple but hard-to-know Avid option getting accidentally toggled? Leave a comment below.


Your Wednesday Links: The Real Box Office Figures

Screen Shot 2014-04-08 at 9.11.27 AMMost of these links come from the @makingthemovie Twitter stream. If you'd like to see them as they come, follow us on Twitter.

Deadline data on how much profit blockbuster films ACTUALLY make - In honor of the NCAA Basketball Tourney, Deadline ran a mock bracket between 2013 blockbusters. The data they used is closer to what studios see, and a rare peek into more realistic profitability numbers than the "dumb" box office numbers that news outlets put out each week. I really wish there was a lot more reporting around these numbers, not just silly brackets.

What these numbers do omit is a discussion of the risk and how it is distributed across a studio's slate. Disney had an unexpectedly big hit with Frozen, but they also had some recent celebrated misses with Lone Ranger and John Carter. (Or were they misses? My guess is those movies made back quite a bit of the upfront losses in ancillary revenue. Can't know without seeing the numbers...)

BuzzFeed: How many bad movies have you seen? - A far-from-comprehensive but still broadly inclusive list of cult crappy cinema.

538 crunches the numbers on female characters in Hollywood films - Far-from-rigorous but still interesting way to point out Hollywood's double-standard. Indies who are passionate about this topic should be making female-centric films and looking to capture the money that is being left on the table.

Cinescopophilia: The Amazingly Tiny one-cam Camera That Shot Scarlett Johansson in Under the Skin - Also related to that film, Seth Madej's essay "Scarlett Johansson's Boob Problem" Photos taken on the set of 2001: A Space Odyssey

Marlon Brando / Don Corleone before and after photo. - One of the great movie makeups.

Digital Rebellion: CinePlay aims to be alternative to QuickTime Pro

Film Comment Interview: Longtime Scorsese collaborator, editor Thelma Schoonmaker

Don't be afraid to test your films with tough critics. Don't be afraid to make changes that you believe will improve the film, even if other people suggest them.


All About Movie Test Screenings (with Free Questionnaire Download!)

Movie theater by Bonita Sarita, on Flickr

Billy Wilder on audiences: "Individually, they're idiots. Collectively, they're a genius."

I'm not sure when Hollywood began running test screenings, but I know it goes way back. In 1942, two preview screenings of The Magnificent Ambersons (written and directed by Orson Welles) went over like wet blankets and RKO, the studio, lopped 40 minutes off and re-shot the ending. Likewise, the recent World War Z had a third act that tested poorly and was completely re-written and re-shot. One might conclude not much has changed.

Criticisms aside, there is a scientific method to modern test screenings, which are more often aimed at figuring out how to market the film than how to re-edit it. The two main companies that make a business of running audience-recruitment screenings -- and make no mistake, sample quality is more important than sample size -- are NRG (a division of Nielsen, expensive) and MPG (geared toward indies).

What is the standard format for a test screening?

Rent a theater, show an audience a cut, have them fill out a questionnaire.

Depending on what you want to test, you gather an appropriate audience. If you want to see how the movie plays among suburban soccer moms, you need to get out to the soccer fields and offer free orange wedges.

You can get good and useful opinions from friends and family, but it is hard to know how much bias they bring. You definitely know they bring bias. Sometimes, they over-compensate by hating on your movie much more than the general public. This is a very real phenomenon. The screening companies even try to screen out anyone who works in the film industry. (Although the recruiters they employ don't try too hard, since they are paid based on who shows up to the screenings.)

Any way, I hope you don't need a lot of convincing to imagine that the best test screening audience is one that A) Doesn't know the filmmakers; B) is not a wanna-be filmmaker; C) approximates more or less the type of audience that the actual marketing for the film will pull in.

That last reason is why you'll see screenings advertised as "GENRE starring ACTOR A and ACTOR B about BASIC PLOT DESCRIPTION" -- e.g. A thriller starring Arnold Schwartzenegger and Zach Galifinakis about a father and son trapped in an avalanche.

Free Questionnaire Template

While the screening companies are tight-lipped about their methodology, I've come across a sample questionnaire that looks very similar to ones I've seen at screenings.

- .docx version
- Google Docs

You will have to customize it, obviously, to your film and what you'd like to know. John August's favorite test screening question is, "Given a pair of magical scissors, is there anything you’d snip out?"

What are the top two boxes?

The top two boxes are the two "Yes" answers to "Would you recommend this movie to your friends?" I have heard that the rule of thumb is that movie is ready to release when it scores 80 or more on the top two boxes, meaning 80%+ of the audience would recommend it. Word of mouth is still the holy grail for movie marketing.

If your film doesn't manage to score what you wanted with your target audience, then maybe it's time to rethink the film -- or the target audience.

What are the limits of audience testing?

"What is wrong with audience research? It doesn't work. If it worked, there would be no flops." - David Mamet

Audience testing is a guide, but the ultimate artistic decisions to hear or ignore it will determine whether it mauls a masterpiece (as in the supposed case of Magnificent Ambersons) or whether it rescues a turkey (as in the supposed case of World War Z).

Happy screenings!

'Movie theater' image Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 Generic License  by  Bonita Sarita