Asterios Polyp was a very interesting read for me. From the start, I expected it to be really cynical and tragic, but it's like an adult, arthouse version of "Calvin and Hobbes". All the characters are portrayed in a slightly derogatory way, but very superficially. Once you get past the intentional misspellings of the words to read like an exaggerated accent, the characters are all pretty charming and likable. For some reason I was expecting it to be really ugly, bitter, and suicide inducing.
Honestly, the ending was kind of disappointing. With everything that had been put into the story, I kind of wished the message hadn't been so straightforward and, if i'm being honest, sophomoric. I think they disappointment I felt by seeing the characters get wasted in an asteroid impact was intentional, but even then, the concept and thesis feels uninspiring. I will admit that the way the piece was written certainly made me think pretty hard about what was being said. My first impressions of the story were written above.
Overall, I think I'm not terribly impressed with the message of this piece. I think, if a friend of mine made this, I would definitely be very impressed by the sophisticated visual style, and the effort put into making all of the characters really good and lovable. Framing this piece as a hitchcock-esque masterpiece makes me expect more form it I think. What I will say, though, is that where it falls short seems to open a different level of enjoyment for me. It definitely had a thesis and story arch, and the story seemed to focus on it, and that's good. What I like so much, though, is that the objective in writing this story, was to first construct a cast of very deep characters with interesting backgrounds and flaws. They all exist in a very pleasing story that ends with a meteor impact (spoilers).
Sunday, March 26, 2017
Wes Anderson: A very self-conscious man
This week, I watched The Fantastic Mr. Fox, a film by Wes Anderson. I had previously seen two of his works, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, and Moonrise Kingdom. It turns out that a main character in The Fantastic Mr. Fox, Cousin Kristofferson, was voiced by Wes's brother, Eric Chase Anderson. I was surprised by the unconventional casting of a sibling among bigger names, but also not surprised at all. Kristofferson's speaking voice is so typical of the self-conscious, yet extremely brilliant and successful art-nerd. Of the many great artists I've met personally, there is a group of them that could be blood-related, and they all speak exactly like Cousin Kristofferson; Very clearly and confidently, but while still sounding somewhat nervous, vulnerable, and insecure. They always dress themselves like a nerdy cartoon character, but are nothing like the nerd archetype in television and movies; in that they are always extremely popular and well-liked. Even beyond the mannerisms, their voices are extremely similar. In case you thought, by this point, that I had misunderstood the meaning of "voice" in this discussion, here's where I'm going with all this. Wes Anderson's filmmaking is exactly that of the aforementioned group--somebody who is very self-conscious, but very self-aware.
My distinction between self-consciousness and self-awareness may be confusing, so I will explain; self-consciousness is an undue awareness of oneself, appearance, or one's actions. What someone who is very self-conscious will struggle with is feeling everything they do in a very inflated, negative way. They will feel people scrutinizing them very harshly, when really, nobody is looking. Alternatively, what somebody who is very self-aware will NOT struggle with is taking that projected scrutiny harshly. They will have overcome a feeling of insecurity brought on by self consciousness by taking the things they are self-conscious about into consideration, working with them, asking themselves questions, and answering them. They are very rounded and complete, they have become their own reference-guide for the world. They understand how they are really viewed by others, and know that they don't mind all that much.
What this has to do with Wes anderson's filmmaking can be seen very clearly in the visuals. In this shot for example:
The movement of the characters through the frame works with the dialogue and story arch of the scene. Kristofferson (right) begins on the far right side of the frame and talks to a very highly-placed Ash (top). After Ash yells at Kristofferson, he lays on the floor, but is graphically placed underneath the table. This placement makes him look trapped, and beaten (below)
At this point, Kristofferson starts to cry. Ash points his flashlight at him to inspect, and feels some measure of sympathy. At this point, he climbs down the ladder, turns on the trainset and they both reside together at the bottom left-corner of the frame.
Proximity and placement are two principles that are in use here, and this is much of Wes Anderson's style. The characters are in one place at the beginning of the shot, and move to another at the resolution. This approach is actually quite minimal, but also very successful and likable. If I am being quite honest, the ease with which it can be analyzed makes you feel pretty smart. It is in all of Wes Anderson's films. The success of this style, however, is not just the simple novelty of turning anybody into an astute art critic. It is a result of Anderson's passion for effective visuals in his films. He is somebody who aspires to be a filmmaker that uses the medium to its fullest, and does so by concocting a go-to method to compose his shots. This kind self-reliance and confidence is very familiar in the world of cool, smart, successful nerds that I mentioned earlier.
Anyways, analyzing the visuals in a Wes Anderson movie is kind of low-hanging fruit. A common theme among the protagonists in the three movies I watched is that they are all very self-committed and seem to have bloated egos that remain even through the resolution. Seve Zissou is a marine biologist that wants to kill a shark that killed his friend. He puts himself and others at risk to do so. Mr. Fox is a confident criminal mastermind who wants to steal from three extremely wealthy farmers. He put himself and others at risk to do so. comparing Sam, from Moonrise kingdom to the other two feels like a stretch, but he still is technically putting himself and others at risk to pursue his love. All of them include stop motion in some measure and seem equally cynical and Noire. They're all kind of bouncy and goofy, but still dark and profound.
Overall, I think Wes Anderson Stands out and has very likable films for the reasons I mentioned above.
My distinction between self-consciousness and self-awareness may be confusing, so I will explain; self-consciousness is an undue awareness of oneself, appearance, or one's actions. What someone who is very self-conscious will struggle with is feeling everything they do in a very inflated, negative way. They will feel people scrutinizing them very harshly, when really, nobody is looking. Alternatively, what somebody who is very self-aware will NOT struggle with is taking that projected scrutiny harshly. They will have overcome a feeling of insecurity brought on by self consciousness by taking the things they are self-conscious about into consideration, working with them, asking themselves questions, and answering them. They are very rounded and complete, they have become their own reference-guide for the world. They understand how they are really viewed by others, and know that they don't mind all that much.
What this has to do with Wes anderson's filmmaking can be seen very clearly in the visuals. In this shot for example:
The movement of the characters through the frame works with the dialogue and story arch of the scene. Kristofferson (right) begins on the far right side of the frame and talks to a very highly-placed Ash (top). After Ash yells at Kristofferson, he lays on the floor, but is graphically placed underneath the table. This placement makes him look trapped, and beaten (below)
At this point, Kristofferson starts to cry. Ash points his flashlight at him to inspect, and feels some measure of sympathy. At this point, he climbs down the ladder, turns on the trainset and they both reside together at the bottom left-corner of the frame.
Proximity and placement are two principles that are in use here, and this is much of Wes Anderson's style. The characters are in one place at the beginning of the shot, and move to another at the resolution. This approach is actually quite minimal, but also very successful and likable. If I am being quite honest, the ease with which it can be analyzed makes you feel pretty smart. It is in all of Wes Anderson's films. The success of this style, however, is not just the simple novelty of turning anybody into an astute art critic. It is a result of Anderson's passion for effective visuals in his films. He is somebody who aspires to be a filmmaker that uses the medium to its fullest, and does so by concocting a go-to method to compose his shots. This kind self-reliance and confidence is very familiar in the world of cool, smart, successful nerds that I mentioned earlier.
Anyways, analyzing the visuals in a Wes Anderson movie is kind of low-hanging fruit. A common theme among the protagonists in the three movies I watched is that they are all very self-committed and seem to have bloated egos that remain even through the resolution. Seve Zissou is a marine biologist that wants to kill a shark that killed his friend. He puts himself and others at risk to do so. Mr. Fox is a confident criminal mastermind who wants to steal from three extremely wealthy farmers. He put himself and others at risk to do so. comparing Sam, from Moonrise kingdom to the other two feels like a stretch, but he still is technically putting himself and others at risk to pursue his love. All of them include stop motion in some measure and seem equally cynical and Noire. They're all kind of bouncy and goofy, but still dark and profound.
Overall, I think Wes Anderson Stands out and has very likable films for the reasons I mentioned above.
Friday, March 17, 2017
GOOSE FATHER SHORT FILM
VISUAL CUES PRIORITIES
1.
Introduction to Gilho
being lonely in his apartment
a.
Establishing shot
of apartment
b.
Camera focuses on
family photos
c.
Gilho going about
his lonely life.
d.
Advertises his
need of an assistant.
2.
Wuesong is introduced with the goose in front of
Gilho’s apartment.
a.
Cut to Wuesong
making breakfast for Gilho.
b.
Scene dedicated
to conversation between the two men
c.
Reveal Wuesong’s
past and the reason as to why he has a goose.
3.
Gilho and Wuesong
go out on a Kareoke night
a.
Show friendship
between the two men.
b.
They both get
tipsy with the alcohol intake.
c.
Gilho and Wuesong
almost kiss, but Gilho slaps him.
d.
Wuesong runs away crying.
4.
Gilho returns to
his sad apartment and skips work because of sad events
a.
Parallel editing
between Gilho and Wuesong
b.
Gilho stares at
the sunset outside his balcony
c.
Wuesong walks
around the city with his goose with no destination in mind
d.
They both miss
each other.
5.
Gilho goes out
with friends at a Korean bar
a.
Show Gilho having fun with friends, but clearly still
has wuesong in his thoughts.
b.
Gilho returns to
the apartment with one drunk friend (Taeyeong)
6.
Gilho and
taeyeong surprisingly finds Wuesong inside the apartment cooking a meal.
a.
Taeyeong screws
with the goose until the goose bites him
b.
Wuesong panics
and patches him up.
c.
They decide to go
to sleep.
7.
Wuesong wakes up
in the middle of Daeboreum (full moon night)
a.
He finds his
mother on the balcony
b.
Intimate moment between boy and mother.
c.
Gilho wakes up as
well and is surprised to see the goose was really his mother all along.
d.
Gilho and Wuesong decide to kiss in this magical
moment and the screen fades to black.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)