You know the one about the guy in the flood? He's at his home when the rescue workers come, and he tells them "Don't worry about it. My prayer will save me."
"Really, because we have a truck right here."
"Nope, this is between me and God."
"Okey dokey!"
Guess what? Despite his prayers, the flood waters rise. He's living on the second floor when some evacuees row up to his window in a boat.
"Hey buddy, need a lift?"
"Don't worry about me! God will save me!"
"Really, because we have this boat you know..."
"I told you. I'm going to pray, and God will save me."
"Okey dokey!"
Finally, this man is living on the roof when a rescue chopper makes it's last pass!
"Hey buddy! Grab the ladder! We're almost out of fuel!"
"Go on without me!"
"Just shut up and grab the ladder!"
"No way! I'm waiting for God to save me!"
'Okey dokey!"
When he drowns and winds up in heaven, he storms right up to St. Peter.
"Where were you guys? I prayed for God to save me!"
"Where were we?!? We even sent a fricking helicopter for your ass!!!"
Sifu Marcus gets all the credit for telling this story to me. Point is, I'm sure that guy on the roof told himself many times that it's different strokes for different folks, you know? In the end, demanding that things happen your way isn't going to get you anywhere. Who cares, so long as they happen?
Seriously, guys! Shut up and grab the ladder!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
8 Sided Ensemble welcomes Matthew David McCallum
Non sibi. It means "not for self", and it's one of a handful of mottos upheld by Phillips Andover Academy. That's where I met Dave McCallum, over half a lifetime ago. Today, I'm welcoming him into the 8 Sided fold as one of our key collaborators.
As an actor, Dave's respect and passion for the craft of acting is more profound than perhaps in any other performer I've met. Unlike the other actors I've known, Dave came into my life when his skill was still protoplasmic. Back then, his passion for theater was his greatest strength as a performer.
Over the years, his mastery of the craft has gradually grown into the quality I'm most keen to rely on as a director. All his success and standing in the community - which is considerable for a man his age - is owing to the many years of hard work Dave has put into himself and the productions he has served.
On the one hand, this makes Dave one of the most reliable, specific, controlled actors I know. His choices are anchored in truth and spontaneity, and at the same time are so constantly accessible to him that he makes the work look easy. His work demeanor comes off as casual, but veteran actors know the difference. Ease comes with a degree of preparation far beyond Dave's years. Those guys know what they're looking at when they see Dave perform - a master craftsman, pure and simple.
Why demand this mastery of oneself at such a young age? Do I know Dave well enough to hazard a guess?
I think it's Non sibi.
I think Dave feels his fellow cast members deserve it, and I think he feels the same way about the playwright or screenwriter.
Think about that for a second. Think about how much work it takes to become the best of the best. That's how much Dave loves the craft of acting, and the people who devote themselves to it.
Now, consider that David's craftsmanship is only half of what he brings to the 8 Sided Ensemble.
When someone sees to the needs and professional demands of others with such mindful generosity - that's the truest sign of leadership. While Dave's impeccable leadership qualities are easy to overlook in the face of his grace as an actor, I was reminded of them just last Saturday. While we were discussing the evolution of our forum as a business tool, it was him that brought the needs of our actors into focus. Rather than dismiss our business goals as uncreative or unworthy, he started finding ways to bring our audience and our movie together by giving the actors what they need. Then, he gave himself a plan to implement his ideas and took up a vital role - one ignored by myself - within our creative community.
Why take on this responsibility? If I know Dave, it's because it's what the actors deserve. It's what the project deserves. Non sibi.
I imagine the pride Andover's founding father, Samuel Phillips, must feel to have played a role in Dave's ongoing evolution as master actor, and as a worthy man... Sam, I know the feeling. Just playing a part in his story gives me enormous pride.
My most profound gratitude goes out to Matthew David McCallum for his support, fellowship, and devotion, as well as for inspiring the values I hold most dear.
As an actor, Dave's respect and passion for the craft of acting is more profound than perhaps in any other performer I've met. Unlike the other actors I've known, Dave came into my life when his skill was still protoplasmic. Back then, his passion for theater was his greatest strength as a performer.
Over the years, his mastery of the craft has gradually grown into the quality I'm most keen to rely on as a director. All his success and standing in the community - which is considerable for a man his age - is owing to the many years of hard work Dave has put into himself and the productions he has served.
On the one hand, this makes Dave one of the most reliable, specific, controlled actors I know. His choices are anchored in truth and spontaneity, and at the same time are so constantly accessible to him that he makes the work look easy. His work demeanor comes off as casual, but veteran actors know the difference. Ease comes with a degree of preparation far beyond Dave's years. Those guys know what they're looking at when they see Dave perform - a master craftsman, pure and simple.
Why demand this mastery of oneself at such a young age? Do I know Dave well enough to hazard a guess?
I think it's Non sibi.
I think Dave feels his fellow cast members deserve it, and I think he feels the same way about the playwright or screenwriter.
Think about that for a second. Think about how much work it takes to become the best of the best. That's how much Dave loves the craft of acting, and the people who devote themselves to it.
Now, consider that David's craftsmanship is only half of what he brings to the 8 Sided Ensemble.
When someone sees to the needs and professional demands of others with such mindful generosity - that's the truest sign of leadership. While Dave's impeccable leadership qualities are easy to overlook in the face of his grace as an actor, I was reminded of them just last Saturday. While we were discussing the evolution of our forum as a business tool, it was him that brought the needs of our actors into focus. Rather than dismiss our business goals as uncreative or unworthy, he started finding ways to bring our audience and our movie together by giving the actors what they need. Then, he gave himself a plan to implement his ideas and took up a vital role - one ignored by myself - within our creative community.
Why take on this responsibility? If I know Dave, it's because it's what the actors deserve. It's what the project deserves. Non sibi.
I imagine the pride Andover's founding father, Samuel Phillips, must feel to have played a role in Dave's ongoing evolution as master actor, and as a worthy man... Sam, I know the feeling. Just playing a part in his story gives me enormous pride.
My most profound gratitude goes out to Matthew David McCallum for his support, fellowship, and devotion, as well as for inspiring the values I hold most dear.
Can Jason Vorhees beat the Terminator?
On a one-on-one basis, I think we can all agree that both Jason and the T-800 have very specific vulnerabilities. Those weaknesses aside, these are killing machines that can take a nearly endless beating... Who comes out on top clearly depends on environmental factors as much as anything.
At the same time, what are we really talking about here?
Terminators are really just an extension of SkyNet, right? And some kind of supernatural entity is backing Jason, right?
Really, this is a fight between Skynet and the evil that fuels the unlife of Jason Vorhees. While we know that Jason's evil comes from Hell, what is it exactly? If we're talking about Satan in the Christian, Revelations sense of the word, fate pretty much trumps anything SkyNet has going for it. If Jason is on life support from some kind of "Hell Dimension" more along the lines of Lovecraft, then we're getting into more interesting areas.
Could SkyNet conquer another dimension? Almost definitely, when you consider that SkyNet places a premium on the development of crossdimensional travel and is making strides. On the other hand, the mere existence of Jason suggests that Hell's crossdimensional influence hasn't come too far, despite having had thousands of years, at least, for research and development.
Is Hell absolute? If not, the smart money is on SkyNet.
At the same time, what are we really talking about here?
Terminators are really just an extension of SkyNet, right? And some kind of supernatural entity is backing Jason, right?
Really, this is a fight between Skynet and the evil that fuels the unlife of Jason Vorhees. While we know that Jason's evil comes from Hell, what is it exactly? If we're talking about Satan in the Christian, Revelations sense of the word, fate pretty much trumps anything SkyNet has going for it. If Jason is on life support from some kind of "Hell Dimension" more along the lines of Lovecraft, then we're getting into more interesting areas.
Could SkyNet conquer another dimension? Almost definitely, when you consider that SkyNet places a premium on the development of crossdimensional travel and is making strides. On the other hand, the mere existence of Jason suggests that Hell's crossdimensional influence hasn't come too far, despite having had thousands of years, at least, for research and development.
Is Hell absolute? If not, the smart money is on SkyNet.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Raise your hand!
Some folks just find self-promotion creepy. If you were the kid in class who kept your hand down so the teacher could call on you when she was ready... As the kid with his hand up, I took your education from you. Why not? You weren't using it!
Get comfortable with self-promotion. Even if you're one of the lucky few who "gets discovered", your career will belong to the person who discovers you. Passive agression gets you nowhere in the end, ladies and gents.
Get comfortable with self-promotion. Even if you're one of the lucky few who "gets discovered", your career will belong to the person who discovers you. Passive agression gets you nowhere in the end, ladies and gents.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Star Wars Fans
Today, I came across another battleground in the ongoing online war between Star Wars fans who feel George Lucas slighted them with the prequels, and the Star Wars fans who feel that a true fan stands by the prequels regardless. On this particular forum, the prevailing opinion was that anybody who bashes the prequels is an ingrate - a rebel and a traitor!
Well, I have a few things to say about that! Finally, I give you my take on Star Wars fandom.
While I never suggested George Lucas owed me anything, the idea that I owe him something is just as absurd.
You know I'm working towards making movies with the kind of fan base Star Wars has. While popular opinion is by no means an indicator of what I should be doing with a given franchise going forward, it does offer a perspective into which approaches are working now, and which ones aren't.
Nobody says Lucas should be blindly following the fans. I think the fans want visionary leadership behind the franchise. While they'll never admit it, they want to be surprised.
At the same time, it's foolish to turn a blind eye to which risks pay off and which ones don't. Look beneath the complaints. Often, you'll find the roots of dissatisfaction run deeper than you think. This was a lesson I learned in the last Sam Bailey reading, actually.
As an example, I think everyone will forgive Sam Raimi Spiderman 3 so long as he tries something new. Even if the new things doesn't work, at least it's not the old thing that didn't work.
Personally, I think it was clear the prequels weren't working pretty early on. While Lucas shouldn't have used popular opinion as a measure of what he should be putting into his films, it might have made a pretty great barometer for him in terms of what big problems to address in the second and third installments. Yes, there was less Jar-Jar and more light sabers - but that was small thinking. What people really wanted was more drama, less mugging.
If I ever find myself putting myself before the need to make great movies, I hope my fans will send me a wake-up call. God, I hope they care that much.
Well, I have a few things to say about that! Finally, I give you my take on Star Wars fandom.
While I never suggested George Lucas owed me anything, the idea that I owe him something is just as absurd.
You know I'm working towards making movies with the kind of fan base Star Wars has. While popular opinion is by no means an indicator of what I should be doing with a given franchise going forward, it does offer a perspective into which approaches are working now, and which ones aren't.
Nobody says Lucas should be blindly following the fans. I think the fans want visionary leadership behind the franchise. While they'll never admit it, they want to be surprised.
At the same time, it's foolish to turn a blind eye to which risks pay off and which ones don't. Look beneath the complaints. Often, you'll find the roots of dissatisfaction run deeper than you think. This was a lesson I learned in the last Sam Bailey reading, actually.
As an example, I think everyone will forgive Sam Raimi Spiderman 3 so long as he tries something new. Even if the new things doesn't work, at least it's not the old thing that didn't work.
Personally, I think it was clear the prequels weren't working pretty early on. While Lucas shouldn't have used popular opinion as a measure of what he should be putting into his films, it might have made a pretty great barometer for him in terms of what big problems to address in the second and third installments. Yes, there was less Jar-Jar and more light sabers - but that was small thinking. What people really wanted was more drama, less mugging.
If I ever find myself putting myself before the need to make great movies, I hope my fans will send me a wake-up call. God, I hope they care that much.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Did Transformers kill the art of cinema?
No, and those who suggest that art and entertainment are mutually exclusive damage their credibility with me.
This blog is for you, Mr. Cynicism is Cool.
Look, people liked Transformers because it made people feel something. Awe, I'm guessing.
If you can give people that feeling of awe, and offer it in a more sophisticated way - a way with even more value - you will be even more successful. Was that extra value necessary for Transformers in terms of it's immediate success? Clearly not. What about the long-term success? Time will tell.
Those films that are the most successful are those that connect with the most people.
Those films that connect with the most people right now will not necessarily be the same films that connect with the most folks in the long run - although they may well be. If you look at art through the ages, you'll see. Shakespeare was popular in his day, and Van Gogh was not. Both are considered influential artists today.
Insisting that film is not art because it involves commerce is ridiculous! All art involves commerce. Today, corporations are financing some of our art. In Shakespeare's age, it was the Crown doing the financing. Big difference? Not fundamentally, no.
Frankly, insisting that film is less of an art form smells of cowardice. Herald the death of art in film, and I'm thinking you don't have the craft to bring layers and depth to a story with vast emotional appeal. At least, that's what you're afraid of. What better place to hide than in the success of others?
If you really believe that, tell it to the Nolan Brothers. Tell it to David Fincher. Tell it to guys like Alexander Payne and Danny Boyle. Tell it to Joel and Ethan Coen. Better yet, tell it to Chaplin. Tell it to Kubrick. Tell it to Steven Spielberg.
If you want a sympathetic ear, I guess you could tell it to Michael Bay. At the same time, I'm not sure he cares where his movies will be doing in a hundred years. Still, making so many people feel so much awe is an accomplishment worthy of note. Let's not overlook that.
What do you call it when an inanimate object inspires feelings in people? Strong feelings, even?
You call it art.
Don't worry about whether the art of film is drowning in the engine of whatever evils the world is offering up this week. Worry about how you're going to reach people emotionally, in a way that measures up to the best this community has to offer.
Don't hide the flaws in your own art behind the excuse of commerce. Man up, own your mistakes, and improve your craft. And for the love of God, quit blaming your insecurities on Michael Bay.
This blog is for you, Mr. Cynicism is Cool.
Look, people liked Transformers because it made people feel something. Awe, I'm guessing.
If you can give people that feeling of awe, and offer it in a more sophisticated way - a way with even more value - you will be even more successful. Was that extra value necessary for Transformers in terms of it's immediate success? Clearly not. What about the long-term success? Time will tell.
Those films that are the most successful are those that connect with the most people.
Those films that connect with the most people right now will not necessarily be the same films that connect with the most folks in the long run - although they may well be. If you look at art through the ages, you'll see. Shakespeare was popular in his day, and Van Gogh was not. Both are considered influential artists today.
Insisting that film is not art because it involves commerce is ridiculous! All art involves commerce. Today, corporations are financing some of our art. In Shakespeare's age, it was the Crown doing the financing. Big difference? Not fundamentally, no.
Frankly, insisting that film is less of an art form smells of cowardice. Herald the death of art in film, and I'm thinking you don't have the craft to bring layers and depth to a story with vast emotional appeal. At least, that's what you're afraid of. What better place to hide than in the success of others?
If you really believe that, tell it to the Nolan Brothers. Tell it to David Fincher. Tell it to guys like Alexander Payne and Danny Boyle. Tell it to Joel and Ethan Coen. Better yet, tell it to Chaplin. Tell it to Kubrick. Tell it to Steven Spielberg.
If you want a sympathetic ear, I guess you could tell it to Michael Bay. At the same time, I'm not sure he cares where his movies will be doing in a hundred years. Still, making so many people feel so much awe is an accomplishment worthy of note. Let's not overlook that.
What do you call it when an inanimate object inspires feelings in people? Strong feelings, even?
You call it art.
Don't worry about whether the art of film is drowning in the engine of whatever evils the world is offering up this week. Worry about how you're going to reach people emotionally, in a way that measures up to the best this community has to offer.
Don't hide the flaws in your own art behind the excuse of commerce. Man up, own your mistakes, and improve your craft. And for the love of God, quit blaming your insecurities on Michael Bay.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Don't be a wuss-puss! Be mean!
Every so often, a filmmaker has to fire somebody. There's a whole lot of gray area between a flagrant abuse of the film and "creative differences", and it can be hard to know what to say when you're giving some guy the pink slip...
Whether it's deliberate or accidental, any issues that come up within a production team are the result of miscommunication. I recommend talking to him about what he did. If nothing else, you could use the practice.
Naturally, it's scary and uncomfortable. At the same time, dealing with these things is part of being a leader. While not every person in film is a leader, a director can't afford not to be. Use this opportunity to get a little more comfortable with confrontation, and the practice of claiming your space.
Keep in mind that this person will have reasons for their actions, and those reasons may even be compelling. At the same time, when the actions themselves make a person untrustworthy, it's time to terminate that relationship.
Just make sure you're transparent about why you're doing it. Don't hide behind creative differences, even if that's actually the reason. Always fess up to your actions.
On my last film, I had to tell the costume designer that any recommendation I gave would be overwhelmingly negative, both because of the problems they caused my production and because of how different my costume was from the designs he showed me. After I expressed my dissatisfaction, this person called me two or three more times, hoping he could persuade me to welcome him back into my community.
Each time, I had to explain that they completely failed to meet their professional obligations, as well as the agreements we made in pre-production. Each time, their heart was broken.
At the same time, I can look at myself in the mirror. This person was hoping that I would look past their poor performance and lazy work ethic to see the good, worthy person inside... I do. At the same time, film doesn't record good intentions. Instead, it recorded the results of their unconscious attempt to sabotage my production.
How much would it help that person, if I went out of my way to help them feel ok with that?
No. He needed to know. As a leader, it was my responsibility to tell him.
While it was only a short film and the stakes were relatively low, that's exactly what made it such good practice. Someday, it will matter. When it does, I'd better be damn good at these kinds of confrontations.
Whether it's deliberate or accidental, any issues that come up within a production team are the result of miscommunication. I recommend talking to him about what he did. If nothing else, you could use the practice.
Naturally, it's scary and uncomfortable. At the same time, dealing with these things is part of being a leader. While not every person in film is a leader, a director can't afford not to be. Use this opportunity to get a little more comfortable with confrontation, and the practice of claiming your space.
Keep in mind that this person will have reasons for their actions, and those reasons may even be compelling. At the same time, when the actions themselves make a person untrustworthy, it's time to terminate that relationship.
Just make sure you're transparent about why you're doing it. Don't hide behind creative differences, even if that's actually the reason. Always fess up to your actions.
On my last film, I had to tell the costume designer that any recommendation I gave would be overwhelmingly negative, both because of the problems they caused my production and because of how different my costume was from the designs he showed me. After I expressed my dissatisfaction, this person called me two or three more times, hoping he could persuade me to welcome him back into my community.
Each time, I had to explain that they completely failed to meet their professional obligations, as well as the agreements we made in pre-production. Each time, their heart was broken.
At the same time, I can look at myself in the mirror. This person was hoping that I would look past their poor performance and lazy work ethic to see the good, worthy person inside... I do. At the same time, film doesn't record good intentions. Instead, it recorded the results of their unconscious attempt to sabotage my production.
How much would it help that person, if I went out of my way to help them feel ok with that?
No. He needed to know. As a leader, it was my responsibility to tell him.
While it was only a short film and the stakes were relatively low, that's exactly what made it such good practice. Someday, it will matter. When it does, I'd better be damn good at these kinds of confrontations.
Public Enemies
Friday night I saw Public Enemies, which was great and very, very Michael Mann. This was definitely a fetish movie of his. Performances were honest, terse, and matter-of-fact, and the Thompson submachine guns were properly rigged with vertical clips instead of ammo drums. Those round drums tend to jam, and were never as popular with gangsters as they are with production designers. Amazing period locations and sets were totally taken for granted with actor-centric, steadicam and handheld shooting. Michael Mann, you can play coy. We all know you're a total slut for that period shit. It's all far too specific. We see your filthy mind. Give that man a bank vault with a thousand gears, give him boxes and boxes of vintage firearms, and he pretends not to look... Sure, buddy. Sure. You were rubbing your nipples the whole damn time, and we fucking know it. Play it cool, slut. Your secret's out.
God, I love Michael Mann.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Get your acting website done 50% OFF!
Generally, I offer actors a professional, custom Flash website for only $300. For a total of $400, I throw in my extensive web marketing consultation, worth $250 on it’s own…
Ever hear that one person’s misfortune is another person’s windfall? Today, I left a week’s worth of groceries on the bus!
To the first actor who responds to this message at tennyson@8sidedfilms.com, I will slash those prices in HALF!!
Only the first respondent will get the special discount, but don’t assume this offer is already gone! Send me an e-mail, and get yourself online for a fraction of the cost most professional custom web designers will charge you.
For references, check out:
http://www.christieinsley.com/
http://www.gerardmarzilli.com/
…and e-mail me at tennyson@8sidedfilms.com for the exclusive “Tenny left his groceries on the bus!” 50% OFF SALE!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)