June 07, 2005
I interviewed director Greg Harrison this morning about his upcoming InDiGent feature November. We had a really wonderful and wide ranging conversation about the film and filmmaking in general - but when I got home and began to transcribe it all, I realized that for some reason the first few minutes were missing from the tape. It really upset me, because these minutes contained discussions of the script and screenwriting and the nature of abstract narrative and Alain Resnais and all sorts of fascinating stuff. The rest of the interview is there, and when I get it online you'll be able to read about the production schedule and budget and miniDV aesthetics and editing and experimental effects and even how many lights were in their grip kit (three); all good material, but that those first five minutes are missing is really disappointing to me.
I saw November last week, and it was a wonderful surprise (a surprise in that I didn't know a single thing about it). It's fairly experimental - moreso than the trailer (which exaggerates its Antonioni influences) might suggest. My friend Tony mentioned that it reminded him a bit of a Carver short story - and while, as far as I know, Carver never dealt with narrative and stylistic abstractions in his prose, he was a master at peering with uncommon focus into what otherwise might be considered mundane vignettes. That's what this film does, quite well. It hits NY and LA in just over a month and rolls out from there, and I'll have my own review, and the interview, up before too long.
I'll also have my Batman Begins review up soon. Nolan's film is about what I expected; like the first Spiderman film, it's a decent and respectful treatment of a pop-culture icon with a lot of big problems; and it's basically a set-up for what I imagine will be a pretty outstanding sequel.
Filmmaker linked to two essential reads yesterday. First is Anne Thompson's story on how IFC is following Mark Cuban's example and opening a Manhattan theater which will exhibit their productions and acquisitions while simultaneously selling the DVDs in the lobby. Beating Cuban to the punch, their cinema opens on June 17, and Thompson wonders if they'll risk releasing their potential sleeper hit, Miranda July's Me And You And Everyone We Know, in this experimental fashion. Personally, I don't see it happening with that picture; but I'll bet they will do it with Von Trier's Manderlay, which they just acquired the rights to. Based on a.) the prestige/infamy associated with Von Trier and b.) domestic box office returns for Dogville, it strikes me as a good vehicle for this distribution method.
The second link is to Mark Cuban's own lengthy explanation of this trend he's pioneered. The sentence that stuck with me the most out of all of it? "We will tailor the movies we develop to fit Landmark Theaters customer base." It was a great (if still slightly trepidatious) relief to read that.
All these thoughts on distribution - these and others - have been swimming through my head, fluttering like moths to lamplight to all these various projects of mine in their various stages of completion (certainly including but definitely not limited to Deadroom). I think I'll go write something else now (I've been working on a narrative poem in between renders), and sign out with one more valuable link: documentary filmmaker/computer historian Jason Scott explaining his reasons and methods for releasing his film under a Creative Commons License. It's highly applicable to all of the people reading this who...might find it...um...applicable...etc...
Posted by David Lowery at June 7, 2005 12:50 AM
Comments
Let me clarify the Carver comment. Carver utilized every word in a story. Harrison utilized every minute for the movement of his narrative much like Carver does. Very few narratives try for this being more concerned with minutes or word counts. (Minutes and word counts being the measurable that money is exchanged upon.)
In terms of the "narrative and stylistic abstractions" you are entirely correct. Carver never played with metafiction. He certainly is not a post-modernist.
Posted by: atcooper at June 7, 2005 11:24 PM
I couldn't have said it better.
And incidentally, to all you people who bought the Criterion box set of Altman's Short Cuts, make sure you read the book that came with it; it's an extra feature that's better than the feature itself.
Posted by: Ghostboy at June 8, 2005 02:04 AM