I recently saw that a film festival was offering directing classes to its attending filmmakers. Directing is one of the positions on a production team that few people really understand. Many books have been written on the subject, but few address what really happens between the director and his actors.
The best way to understand directing is for me to put it in relationship terms. The actor, who is exposing great vulnerability during each shot, needs comfort and confidence from the director. She needs to understand and trust that he will protect her performance and make sure it is not bad.
To accomplish this one element of directing, he can call on a couple dozen techniques. The three most common are:
1. Say something to the actor before and after every take.
The actor is unable to see herself or know how to feel about her performance until she takes her cue from the director. He must give her some form of honest feedback. If she did a poor job, then he needs to carefully explain that what “he” attempted in that shot didn’t work and mention that he’d like to try something a bit different. Actors are used to performing variations, so this response would be acceptable.
2. Don’t ask the actor to repeat what she just did.
If the director tells the actor to redo what she just did, she won’t know what he is referring to. Actors do movement, exude emotions, speak dialog, and about a couple dozen other things that spring from the moment, their history, and listening carefully to the other actors. Instead, the director must affirm the previous performance and suggest some action verbs that might help draw out additional emotions or visuals.
3. Give the actor permission to do business.
If the timing is a bit off with the actor’s interaction with a prop or form of touch involving other actors, telling the actor to do something earlier pushes the actor out of the character and into a robotic nightmare. Instead of saying, “pick up the mirror earlier,” the director should affirm the moment and state, “It’s okay, if you feel led to pick up the hand mirror a bit earlier.” This direction keeps the focus on the character and not the prop.
When the actor is allowed to create their character and are continually managed with the above techniques, they are free to be more creative and find a performance that is unique and screen worthy. In fact, the once vulnerable actor might receive a film festival award for best acting, with few people knowing that it was the director who made sure her award winning performance made it to the screen with confidence.
The best part of directing well is the relationship built between the actor and director during the shoot. Both will be keeping a look out for another story worth their collaboration.
Yesterday I reviewed who my blog readers were and which of my blog entries were most read and responded to in 2011. I learned that my blog is followed in 138 countries with the greatest reader populations being in the United States, Philippines, and Canada.
1. Talented Collaboration
The most read post was “Talented Collaboration” about the need for Christian filmmakers to emulate secular filmmakers in the area of project collaboration.
2. Truth Be Told – A Fox TV Movie Review
The second most read post was “Truth Be Told – A Fox TV Movie Review”. The film was one of the movies funded by P&G Productions in an attempt to bring wholesome programing back to families.
3. Game Time: Tackling the Past – Review
“Game Time: Tackling the Past – Review” was the third most read post and included my interview with Catherine Hicks (“7th Heaven” and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home”).
4. Top 100 Grossing Movies Objectify Women
“Top 100 Grossing Movies Objectify Women” came in fourth and quoted the latest statistics from Parents Television Council and a study done at the University of California.
5. Desperation and Frustration
And, the fifth most read post was “Desperation and Frustration” and covered how to develop a movie character using moments of desperation and frustration.
Since my readers have leaned more toward these types of posts, I’ll be adjusting what I write to meet the reader’s desires. In 2012, I will be shifting back from three posts a week to two. I will also, in keeping with what my readers are interested in, change the categories of posts to Filmmaking, Screenwriting and Reviews.
I am also changing my blog to better meet the needs of my readers, which will include a new look and the opportunity to obtain training materials, wholesome programs, and more interviews from the industry. So, please be patient with our dust as we construct the new site and make sure you tell your friends about us once the site launches. The URL will remain http://cjpowersonline.com
Happy New Year!
CJ
I’ve read numerous articles that point out how our society, with a plethora of social media, has become more isolated than ever before. The more we engage in social media, thinking that we are actually connecting with people, the more isolated we become.
If these comments are true, we are faced with a new requirement of our future leaders. The number one skill they may need to employ is inspiring people to become engaged in making a difference one step at a time. Persuading the common worker away from instant success and building toward longevity will not only become a requirement, but the only safeguard to protect the business.
Fighting this very skill will be a group of stockholders who are convinced that you can squeeze just a little more revenue out of the corporate fabric for this quarter, without a single care for the next. And, with some of the fat corporations out there, they are probably right. However, when the squeeze is put on, the upper levels of fat are seldom touched, as the cutbacks typically fall down the chain.
Unfortunately, what is good for workers and unity is many times the opposite of short-term quarterly results. But, the good news is that happy employees innovate, which can bring about the next growth trend for the business. Engaged employees will always create greater opportunities than anyone pushing for a quick quarterly result.
When I look back over history, I find that one person was behind every great innovation. I also see incredible corporations that pop up around innovators who can stabilize and streamline the ideas for consumption and profitable growth. So, if that is typically the case, why aren’t corporations spending time encouraging every employee to innovate?
The 2012 leader will be the one who trains his teams to make small innovations to streamline their departmental processes. Once that pattern develops, several of the employees will start to make creative suggestions that, if heeded, will lead to the next generation of products. This process will continue to grow until there is a think tank of individuals who brainstorm a decades worth of innovative products.
The 2012 leader will see this innate value in his people and will do everything in his power to encourage this type of growth. Not only will he be a thought leader, but also he will find ways to make his employees more important to the company than he is. Each person under his leadership will become more valuable than the corporation can afford to keep.
But he won’t be discouraged by it, as he will have built such a community that no one would want to leave. Only the corporations that don’t build value into their employees will see high turnover. After all, we all want to be a part of something incredible, something bigger than us – All while being a very important part of it.
Take a look at where you work. Does the top person in charge hold you in higher esteem than himself? Do they see more talent in you worth developing than you see in yourself? Or, do they drain you at every quarterly opportunity and never refill your emptiness?
The answer to these questions will tell you whether or not your leader is suited for 2012 and beyond, or just for this quarter. And, if its just for this quarter, you probably are viewed as a disposable product that the corporation consumes to move forward, rather than its future innovator.
At least you’ll know where you and your boss stands concerning the future and his perceived value of you.
Few people are aware that I’ve been on camera since I was 11 months old. My first live performance was at age 7 and the show amazed and amused the audience. By age 9, I directed my first play and fell in love with directing, causing me to spend more time behind the scenes.
However, I still acted in a few productions like Toby Tyler and Peter Pan for two successful runs. Calamity Jane launched my singing and dancing abilities and Godspell allowed me to spend some time behind the scenes when I wasn’t performing on stage.
Once at college, I found myself crossing back and forth between acting in television shows for the Wisconsin Television Network (WTN) and directing for ABC and CBS affiliate stations. I starred in a variety special for WTN, made numerous appearances as a fill in anchor at WLSU-TV and appeared in my first feature “Foolin’ Around.”
After experiencing work on a feature, I shifted behind the camera and spent far more time as a cinematographer and director. I racked up hundreds of credits over the years, but realized that staying in touch with acting made me a better director. So I got back into acting to improve my directing, and the next picture I directed gifted me with three awards for best directing.
One of the films I acted in got enough of a buzz going that I landed a small part in “The Dark Knight” as an extra, where I was able to meet Christopher Nolan and cinematographer Wally Pfister. I learned a lot about filmmaking in my brief few minutes with them and I had a great time acting in the six short scenes that took 14 hours to shoot.
Maia Films, who took on a challenge by the IFC Media Lab to make a short film under very specific requirements and time constraints, made the film that launched my opportunity to be in “The Dark Knight.” I played a sniper in the film titled 3-1-2, where my character was hired to do a job, but found himself in a battle for his own life. Here is the short film.
Product placement has been around since James Dean combed his hair with an ACE Flex pocket comb and sales quadrupled. Sony, Coke and other big boys immediately jumped on the product placement bandwagon.
“Risky Business” and “Men in Black II” gave a boost in sales to Ray-Ban sunglasses. “Back to the Future” promoted several Pepsi products. “You’ve Got Mail” promoted AOL and Starbucks. And, “Cast Away” successfully teamed with Fed Ex and Wilson.
Satires and Parodies also jumped into the product placement game with “Wayne’s World” and “Josie and the Pussycats.” The latter, having 27 products placed within the film, a parody of massive proportions.
Michael Bay (Transformers, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor) and partner Scott Gardenhour (Pearl Harbor, Jumper, Coyote Ugly) teamed together to create The Institute, a multi-platform media company that integrates creativity with brand marketing. They believe in innovation and finding the right balance between products and story, to drive consumer demand.
Filmmakers have always been in need of funds and Brand Managers have always needed story to promote their products. Frankly, it makes sense for the two to come together in a way that enhances the story and doesn’t detract from it. Bay’s Institute is already exploring numerous stories that promote products by drawing the audience into the story that encourages them to accept the product without any real consideration.
Corporations love this new approach as it demonstrates their product in a good light and helps the future buyer remember the product in conjunction with the great feelings the film attributed to it. The key is making sure the right storytellers connect with the right products, to ensure a seamless partnership that everyone accepts without feeling pulled out of the story and into an ad.
This same innovation works in reverse, as Bay made a couple commercials with memorable stories that brought a smile to the viewers face and introduced him or her to a specific product. The Levi product story promotes future dreams and the Audi story promotes a more nostalgic look at love and making the wrong choice.
The more integrated the product is within the story, the greater the ability of the audience to receive the related feelings through future associations – A strong selling point for any product. However, to avoid the story turning into a bad job of product placement, it must be done in an artistic and creative way that moves the story forward.
When successful, everyone accepts the reality of E.T. eating a Reese’s Pieces. Hershey saw its sales go through the roof with a 65-85% increase in sales. To this day, I’m sure Mars is still wondering why that executive turned down Steven Spielberg’s request for M&Ms to be in the film.
When story and product match up well, all parties win big. The key is finding the right product that fits the right audience with the right story. Anything less than that makes the sad attempt appear to be a parody without effort, which is a lose/lose scenario for all involved.
What type of story would you tell and to what audience? Is there a product that naturally fits the story and the audience? Most independent filmmakers can’t place products in their stories because they don’t take the time to use the science that determines what audience the story is geared toward, let alone what product fits it.
Independents love to throw ideas together fast enough to shoot something, rather than planning a story that properly integrates a product with its symbolism and theme. But for the filmmaker who can figure out this new process, they will be in filmmaking for years to come, while others scrape for enough funds to shoot their next picture.
