Documentary Entry 10

The documentary is finally shot and miraculously doesn't look absolutely awful. After several hours of nervous fidgeting, expenses and being yelled at a lot I can safely it turned out just alright.
I gotta lot of (in my opinion) very good shots of the makeup that was used in the film and transformation process (thanks to Anya(please don't kill me) Patton) who spent the money on it and most of it didn't get used.

A few shots dragged on a bit which is admittedly my fault because I was nervous and unsure about what I should be doing until Anya(fussy mother that she is) told me that I should just let the shot linger rather than just have movement for no reason.

The lighting and the set itself played a central part in how good it turned out so credit has to be given where credit is due to both Aidan for the set decorations and Anya for the lighting.

I'm actually proud of the shots of the set most of all especially of the lights that were used admittedly they don't play a massive part in the documentary but I still like them.

As for the actual interview itself this was a less strenuous experience mainly because time was thankfully not of the essence. Admittedly I got lost on the way there because I have no sense of direction and get lost insanely easy but setbacks are setbacks so they need to be overcome no matter what. 

The interview was very relaxed and I played a minimal part in it as unlike with the shoot the camera had zero movement and Glenn simply had to sit and talked while I made sure the camera didn't slip. It took a while but I also had to get footage of Glenn's hands which I did, a whole 5 minutes of footage. 

Overall I enjoyed working on both the drag shoot and the actual interview they were strenuous at times but I'm satisfied nonetheless.

 

Documentary Entry 9

An alternative title for this entry could be: The Embodiment of Fear: Anya Patton. In the space of 4 hours productivity skyrocketed. Shot list have been drawn up and so have storyboards (something I haven't done in at least two years at this point).
We've made a lot of progress in the last few days and I personally feel more confident about my role in this project as a whole. Most of this confidence was originally fear reshaped. Fear of our producer Anya.

With a better grasp on what was expected of me and I had to admit I was ready for it now more than ever. And I also have a better understanding of the theme of the documentary and am actually proud of a point I raised (Anya will back me up on me saying this):

"As eyes are the windows of the soul, hands are akin to the tools of the soul as we can learn nearly everything about a person from their hands. Their gender, their hygiene, how hard they work etc."

I'm actually reminded of a scene from one of my favourite movies Drive. When the main protagonist the Driver meets the mob boss paying for his racing business he decides against shaking the boss's hand saying his hands are dirty (literally he was wiping oil from a car of his hands) the mob boss replies with:"don't worry. So are mine" it's a good line to show the implications of the mob boss's work as there is a lot of metaphorical blood on his hands.

I found myself pleasantly surprised that I get to keep my philosophical style going in this blog. Most of they is due to my own keen interest in that area of media but also thanks to our producer Anya who has found the perfect motivational balance between friendship and absolute terror.

I'll actually tell a fun story relevant to the documentary. Anya asked me a few days in advance to meet up in Belfast on Saturday to discuss my role and what I need done. I was in work and I was already tired when I heard on the news there was trouble in town. I pondered cancelling when a question hit me in the head: What am I more afraid of, An angry Anya or a group of rioters? For those of you with short term memory the question was rhetorical and the answer was the former.

Overall it's been pretty productive since my last update. The documentary itself is being filmed (more on that later) and despite my nerves I finally feel like I understand all this rather than just following orders without question.

Documentary Entry 8

Rodriguez the Sugarman.
Searching for the Sugarman is a fascinating film that drew me in from the word go. It's well shot, the soundtrack is amazing, the people involved in this film are all likeable and the film as a whole draws you into its world with ease.

The film does something that earns it praise: it makes me want to know more about this man Rodriguez, it makes want to know his story from start to finish, to hear his music, to know where he's been and what he did, the film shows all this but it still leaves me wanting more.
The film treats the mystery man Rodriguez like some sort of folk legend and sells the fact that no one knew anything about this man other than that he was an amazing musician.

The film emphasises that Rodriguez was a champion in South Africa during the days of Apartheid. His music made him a household name to the people. He played his part in a revolution.
His music drew people to him but they knew nothing about the man behind the music. They wanted to know this man but Apartheid's influence made that impossible. They had one record and even then the government scratched up the vinyls simply to block off that one song.

And then things get interesting, well more interesting. The film basically says that Rodriguez is dead via suicide, specifically by setting himself on fire on stage when a performance was going south, or at least that's what the rumours say.

In an amazing plot twist (yes a plot twist in a documentary based on reality) it turns out Rodriguez is alive and well living an ordinary life. That's right, the man this film made a legend is still alive.
Rodriguez as it turns out is a simply man with a wife and kids, does menial labour and whilst the music scene passed him over he holds no grudge and just sees it as a fun part of his life from a long time ago. Heck he doesn't even know about how a big star he is in South Africa!

There is the moment when Rodriguez and his daughters disembarked from their plane at the Cape Town airport, there on the strange invitation to play there after years of considering himself washed up as a musician. As they were walking on the tarmac, they saw group of limousines and naturally thought they were for some dignitary and they tried to get out of the way. They were wrong, those limos, and the reporters and fans, were for them. In the animated sequence, you can get the sheer astonishment going through Rodriguez's mind at seeing a long dead artistic dream has come spectacularly true after all.

To be honest the film is amazingly heartwarming and one of the last bits in the film has the line American Zero South African Hero. And that one line says it all.

And that right there is proof of this films quality it tells us everything we need to know and leaves us wanting to know more. When a film does something like that nothing needs to be said and those that disagree nothing can be said to change their minds.

Documentary Entry 7

Assessing Encounters at The End of The World is a difficult enough task normally. The additional difficultly of knowing Roger Ebert, a man I have equal reason to hate and respect has said his piece on it makes it what was already a Herculean task now a harder version as somebody else has already done it.

Ebert was a man who had controversial opinions towards things I like particularly video games and there role in art and human emotion, to say we strongly disagreed would be an understatement. But regardless our contrasting opinions there's one thing I'll say about Ebert: he knew what he was doing and if you're not trying to reach Ebert's level you might as well call it quits now.
The fact is I'm not Roger Ebert(at least not in reality) so anything I can say Ebert's already said and done better. Not that I'm not gonna try though I may have utmost respect for the man but he still said things I didn't like.

Right away there's a lot to say about this film. The director Werner Herzog narrates the film and his voice has a certain grab to it that whenever he speaks you as a viewer are drawn to listen. He could be doing the stock check at a supermarket and you'd be drawn into it all (something I call the Morgan Freeman Effect).

Werner has a knack for wonderful shots and it certainly helps he's got an impressive location to work with, he takes what could possibly be the world's worst holiday resort and turns into amazing scenery that takes the breath away.

On top of that Werner's got a unique of invoking emotions from an entity that I wouldn't really expect in a non fiction setting, in this case: a suicidal penguin. The punchline is that the scene with the penguin is surprisingly tragic as Werner makes it clear that this penguin is obsessed with going away from his chums and even if humans did intervene he'd just keep going on a journey he'll never finish.

To reiterate, I'm mourning the loss of a suicidal penguin! (Plus that documentary is 6years old if that penguins still alive now I think we've found the next superior species!)
In the end, Encounters At the End of the World is an interesting experience. It takes advantage of its location and the people in it, it looks amazing for a 3 man project and the narrator clearly cares about the subject dearly and delivers his narration in a way that draws you in from the word go. Overall, very good stuff well worth watching.

Documentary Entry 6

So today I had my first practice session with a camera. One word comes to mind to define it: wreck.

As it turns out not working with a device you actually have zero interest in working with means you tend to forget everything about it. I'll admit I still remember how to do certain things but I don't remember why you do them (though chances are I never learned in the first place).

I get that the rule of thirds exist but I'll be damned if I have a clue why it exists. Yes I understand that it forces a viewer to focus and find that a spot not in the middle but the fact that I had to look up why shows and says a lot.

I get that you don't have your character in the centre of a shot cause it looks really weird but that's about all I get. I follow the rules but I don't really understand them.

To make matters worse after hearing absolutely nothing for a week (to the point the group had declared the chance of interviewing the subject stone dead) we finally get an update saying that it's okay.

Two things disturb me about this: The first is the short notice and the second is the fact that I'm not ready for this. I can't relearn 3 years of work in a day/possibly 2 days.
In summation I need more time.

I need more time to practice and relearn what I've forgotten going over notes is fine and all but actual practice is needed and the idea that I can learn what I need in a day or two is laughable at best.

Documentary Entry 5

"Think of it as a mask you wear to overcome life's hardships".

I've always been keen on Carl Jung and his works in psychology. As a former student and friend of Freud himself he actually disagreed with his masters theory that the subconsciousness was just a bin for all our negative thoughts. Jung argued that while that was true he felt that the mind held more than that too.

One of Jung's most popular theories was the idea of the "Persona" Jung believed that a Persona was akin to a mask we wore to hide our flaws and insecurities. The quote above is an excellent way of summarising it.

He believed everybody had a Persona that served as a compromise towards the individual and what society expects of a person. However on the other side of the coin was the Shadow.
The Shadow is that which we don't want others to see. The faults and flaws we have that no one else should see. Jung believed that unless we overcame our Shadow we would he consumed by it.

Bit more complicated than "men wish to kill their fathers and sleep with their mothers" ain't it?

To make a long story short, I realised that people who partake in being a drag queen are said to be donning a Persona, this lead me to raise the question( or in this case several):

Are we seeing the true self of the queen? Or a secondary Persona? Perhaps even their Shadow if this is something they partake in a way from the eyes of those who know them? To be honest I don't know the answer it just seemed to be an interesting topic/point to bring up.

Jung wasn't known for associating with homosexuals so I can't say what his opinion was on the matter but from what I can tell he had no problem with and actually believed there's no such thing as a 100% straight individual especially if the bibles story of Adam and Eve is considered. Though a popular theory about why Freud and Jung fell out was because the younger Jung feared that the older Freud would come onto him(something I can't buy to be honest, Freud was too busy painting humanity in the worst possible light for intimacy).

Still as I said before but it's worth saying again, it is a bit more complicated than father killing and mother boinking isn't it?

Documentary Entry 4

Glen or Glenda?: An Assessment

Glen or Glenda? Is a film that's either so bad it's good or just flat out bad. There's no middle ground. At least in theory, the fact is having watched I can say a lot of things about it.
It's poorly written, poorly paced, can't make it's mind up over the message it wants to deliver which isn't good when discussing an issue like transvestism, it's poorly acted which makes the dialogue even worse and Bela "I was Dracula for crying out loud" Lugosi contributes nothing relevant to the plot.

And yet for all that I can't say it's truly horrible. From a film standpoint at least, for all the mass amounts of mess throughout the film manages to keep my interest, I can't say why or how but it does. It might be because Lugosi reappearing and doing something completely irrelevant is far too tempting.

And even without discussing its gender issues (though one could argue for a fifties film it's actually progressive) it's an absolute mess of a film made by a man who was making films to pay off debts from making films.

The movie raises the theory that because Glenn's mother used to favour his sister Sheila over him, the psychiatrist believes that Glenn started wearing Sheila's dresses to attract the attention and affection of his mother.

It also mentions at the end of the film that transvestism is something that can be cured (which seems very backwards as Ed Wood was known to dabble in transvestism even fighting in the Second World War during its bloodiest battles in bra and panties).

I know it might be contradictory to say this considering the above but outside of that scene at the very end the film handles the rather sensitive subject rather well. Well for the time it was made at least, the film uses the justification that a transvestite is not a homosexual as if to say being homosexual is worse than being a transvestite.
 It's not great justification by today's standards but the fact is it was the best Wood can manage without earning the scorn of every moral guardian everywhere.

"Glen is not a homosexual. Glen is a transvestite, but he is not a homosexual." So not only is it offensive it's also redundant dialogue too.

To add another layer to its offensiveness the film actually includes a scene where a male character undergoes a sex change to become a female and it's shown that he has to "learn" how to be female and also has to "unlearn" being male. The implication being that a woman once a man is unable to do the things he was capable of doing once before. Then again the 50s so it's probably a case of values dissonance or similar justification like the above.

In the end Glen or Glenda is poorly written, badly directed, visually unpleasing, horribly acted, has a message that's all over the place at best and downright bipolar at worst and offensive in at least 3 different ways. Still despite all that it's at the very least fascinating and probably only offensive because of the way the world has changed since.

Whatever message the film has gets lost in the shuffle of mediocrity. And yet it's still very fascinating. For all that can be said about Ed Wood you can safely say while he never made a good one he did make fascinating ones. And maybe that's a good thing all of itself?

Documentary Entry 3

Below I have two interviews featuring drag queens that discuss the issue in different ways. It's just to help me specifically as a cameraman but can benefit both an interviewer and director as well.

Example 1:

This one is very basic but it does what it sets out to do: give an interview. A few things do bug me, the interviewee, Starry Nadeshko never talks to the interviewer directly and is always addressing the camera. The image below is something that the viewer sees a lot of.

The second gripe I have is the interviewer who focuses mainly on his notes and this is especially prevalent near the end, a good interviewer should make eye contact with his interviewee. As a result the cameraman has very little to work with and the audience loses interest, it isn't as bad since the video itself is short but it needs to be called out on.

That aside it's a good interview and for just over 5 minutes covers a lot of ground about drag queen life. It covers it's topics well and for what seems to be a very small time product at the very least

 

knows what it's doing.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sNSl2SCMvQ8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DsNSl2SCMvQ8

Example 2
This second one is actually played for laughs but it looks a lot better than the first one and a lot more happens. There's action for starters. Opening with a performance by our drag queen shows what we're in for. The interview itself is staged whilst the drag queen is a proper persona.



Props to the host Kate who plays the ditsy blonde perfectly and her reactions are priceless. When compared to the first interview it's less insightful but more interesting simply because stuff is happening.

Since it is for comedy rather than for seriousness it isn't the best video for insight but it's actual style is what I personally would look for in an interview. It actually has a few of the things mentioned in the previous entry.

Overall both interviews work well and do what they were supposed to but the second one seems better from a visual standpoint making it the one I'd draw from. The first one looks dull but it's strengths come from the interview itself so it might be best to use it for interview inspiration.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=AXn9TFRs-9w&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DAXn9TFRs-9w

Overall both interviews work well and do what they were supposed to but the second one seems better from a visual standpoint making it the one I'd draw from. The first one looks dull but it's strengths come from the interview itself so it might be best to use it for interview inspiration.

Documentary Experience Entry 2

Documentary Experience Entry 2

Another week another update. Well my teeth are no longer causing me trouble so nows as good a time as any to start doing things.

The main discussion topic in my case was how to film it. We have a 7 part layout of how we want it to be shown and the structure of the interview has been settled.
It starts off with our interviewee going about his normal life getting ready for his job etc. Then it goes to him getting ready to perform.

We then cut to him talking about his civilian life and then his drag life. He speaks about his dislike of his normal life. Next is his performance and it finally ends with a bit on the future.
We will have two perspectives first the normal life and then the drag queen life or as Anya referred to it as, the Man and the Queen respectively. I have to admit I quite like it as it gets the point across and won't confuse the audience.

Since it was finally decided that the video will focus on the double life aspect of being a drag queen. In preparation for this I've decided to look into real life events where the two lives clash like in the article below:
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/08/30/brighton-drag-queen-betty-swollocks-convicted-of-benefit-fraud/

On a side note I was disappointed my teammates didn't get the joke in the name there and I had to explain it to them. I must admit the names are pretty clever at least.

It was previously suggested that family members or friends be featured in the film but two points where raised, firstly they might not want to and secondly the film would be a bit overcrowded for 5 minutes if we tried to cover all the topics. In that sense it's for the best especially if it's a secret hobby unknown to the family, I may only speak for myself on here but something (intuition I reckon) tells me that opening that can of worms is something we really shouldn't/don't want to do.
As preparation for the interview being filmed it's decided that group meet up at some point during the week we are off so we know more about where we should be at.

Since I consider myself at my best when I follow orders I know this training will go down well. I'm excited even if things have been a wee bit rocky at first. Still failure breeds success ( not that this is a failure by any stretch) and there's always something to learn regardless of how good you think you are.

Documentary experience entry 1

DocumentaryExperience

I've decided it would be more efficient to use this blog for preserving details about my documentary as it means I won't have to keep track of another batch of passwords. I've been assigned the role of cameraman for our protect about drag queens with a theme on hands. I have to admit I don't know much about drag queens but since my teammates suggested and agreed with it I reckon it's safe to say they know what they're doing.

That's not to say  I'm not gonna pull my weight around no the opposite in fact I'm a cameraman and a professional ( in a work ethic sense I mean) so I know I'll be ready to do my part when said part needs done.

I'll have to admit I haven't updated this in two weeks but with good reason. I had a meeting with a dental surgeon one Thursday and then I was getting my braces removed the Thursday after that. Makes me regret missing that appointment back in august.
The point is I'm aware I might have missed something during the last two weeks but I'm fully prepared to pick up whatever slack I missed. I can only hope the others have some good news to tell me. Especially considering were working on a project where the main subject is kind of a mystery.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas: A review.

Fear and loathing in Las Vegas

Introduction

I'd like to take a look at the cult classic Fear and loathing in Las Vegas. When it was originally released it was panned by critics at the time who declared it nothing more than a really trippy movie. Of course like a lot of movies out at the time that weren't well received this has been vindicated by history, so much so that most people don't know it's based on a novel of questionable fact/fiction status. 

Plot

Fear and Loathing has a type of plot that makes zero sense on a first viewing and somehow even less on a second viewing. Hindsight does not help make this easy to understand. 

Then again this is intentional considering other than a few changes in pacing everything you see happened in real life according to the book of the same name this film is based on by Hunter S Thompson. And if what we see onscreen is true then it's a wonderful case of reality is unrealistic.

Both main characters are destructive drug abusers who openly admit that what they do is wrong but do it anyway. As the film itself puts it: "the tendency is to push it as far as you can". 

And boy do these two push it.  This is especially true of Dr. Gonzo who rampages through everything and everyone they meet. This starts off funny but by the final twenty minutes that humour becomes horror and Duke does nothing to stop him and that's probably for the best. Again this was based on a real person.

The film is a journey for both characters, a very destructive journey that shows the changing times from the free loving 60s to the Nixon run 70s and a world were neither Gonzo or Duke  fit in.  

Misc

One of the best things about this film is the random cameos by actors who you're gonna remember from other movies. Like Toby McGuire playing a blonde haired hippy who appears at the start of the film and runs off in fear. Hindsight makes this movie a lot of fun. Your'e also going to spot Christina Ricci playing a potentially insane artist obsessed with Barbara Streisand(again potentially real person).

Benicio Del Toro gained 40 pounds to play a proper film version of Dr.Gonzo and also burned himself with a cigarette in multiple places developing blood poisoning just to be an accurate portrayal.

As for Johnny Depp, he was good friends with Hunter S Thompson the man that Raoul Duke is based on. Being friends with Hunter he was able to style himself to look like him. In fact Thompson himself shaved Depp's head with a straight razor whilst wearing a miners helmet. I don't know what was going through his head but I'd love to find out.

Conclusion

I love this film. Pure and simple I adore everything about this film. The way it looks, the cast, the bizarre imagery throughout, the sheer quotability of every word out of Raoul Duke's mouth. An absolute treasure of a film that I recommend every single person see as long as your mind can handle it.

This is a movie that must be seen at least twice, since the first time you watch it, you will not understand what kind of movie you just watched. Was it a comedy? Was it a political movie? Was it meant to be serious? Was it meant to just make you laugh? What the hell happened in the last third of the movie? These are all perfectly valid questions..... I don't have any answers.