Finished

Okay, I came back from the post house yesterday with the finished version of the film.
The colour-correction was done in FCP and Colour on Digibeta. I dream about having it done as digital intermediate, but that is a step to far for a film that has not yet been accepted into a film festival.
Luti and John at Portobello Post corrected the colour, but also fixed some of the mess the lab made, with dirt and noise.
They desaturated the colour, so it is quite white with hint of blue, almost colourless. It has the quality of fine paper.
It comes down to this:















Hard to believe that all that work comes down to a couple of reels of S16 footage and 4 Digibeta copies of the finished work.
So I will be posting less about this project and more about the Tidal Barrier project. Still, I will update this blog as I hear about film festivals.

Update

Okay. We are getting close. Last week Roland finished the final sound mix. And Wednesday or Thursday I am taking it for grading. And that will be that. I will have 5 copies made on Digibeta, hoping that some festival somewhere will want to show it. And then probably a 100 copies on DVD, for cast and crew, and to apply at festivals.
And speaking of festivals, I just sent a copy off to the Tribeca Film Festival in New York. I am don't know much about this festival except that it was backed by Robert DeNiro. So we will see. It would just be great to have an excuse to visit New York.
And I just discovered that I have missed the deadline for Rotterdam by a couple of months. This process really has been drawn out, hasn't it? I need to accelerate it on the next project, which is progressing to the casting stage.
And note: if you have not seen, or even if you have, try not to miss the Tsai Ming-Liang retrospective at the NFT. http://www.bfi.org.uk/whatson/southbank/seasons/mingliang/

Berlin (and the second cut of sound)

So Roland sent me his latest mix by FTP, and I was able to see and hear it together on Sunday night. There were a few minor problems or questions.
One of the off-camera sounds (when he awakens in the morning and leaves the bedroom, we hear him open and shut the door) came across too much like a BBC sound effect.
Another question came in the form of the mix. The background texture are subtle, but perhaps too much so. The volume difference between the voices and certain sounds effects, such as the alarm clock, and the background atmosphere was too wide. Or so it seemed on my system. This all gets rather complicated when you go from one system to another.
But outside of that I have to say I was again very much surprised at my own film. Or rather after hearing it again at least it was a question. Is it good or bad? I just don't know. I think right now all I see is what it could have been, instead of what it is. So...
I am sending it off the Berlin Film Festival tomorrow. Yes, I know, this is the Berlin Film Festival, and they only accept 10 short films a year. What are my chances? But I can hope that they would at least remember rejecting me. You do have to enter these things, big or small. In mid-November I will send it to the Tribeca Film Festival in New York.
In these places you will quickly find out where you stand.

Sound design - II

On Sunday I went to Roland's to hear the first cut of the sound design. I have to say it was the same disquieting (sorry) experience I had on my last film when I first added the composer's music to the cut. It had became another film, like a child who has grown up, someone new, something else besides the parent that raised him.
It also lifted the film, brought it to another level.
It fixed or solved or completed ideas I had from the beginning, but which I had forgotten were there.
I would have to describe from the end: when the male character leaves the flat and goes into the world, the sound too pushes out and expands outward. The sounds of London are a whole universe, layer after layer of textures, close, far and near.
(And Roland experimented with something that I still can't decide upon: as the picture goes from him, looking out, to the close landscape, to the far landscape, the volume increased abruptly. It was odd at first, but then added to the expansion and widening affect).
Then, if one thinks backwards, some of these same sounds are heard inside the flat, in the silences between the couple, far in the background, a voice, children playing, the roar of traffic, so subtle you would not be certain you heard them (I could be imagining the whole thing).
And in the beginning, in the title sequence there is a low hum, and behind it, again very subtle, a birdsong, as if the means for their reconciliation were at close at hand.
Roland wanted to add a few more layers, that particular London white noise, heard from afar. Then he will post the next cut for me to hear. It's getting close...

Sound design

Just a quick post-production update.
As I have completed the final edit, the next stage is the sound design.
So on Sunday I will deliver the edit to Roland. It should be complete at the end of the week.

The last edit

On this past Sunday evening I watched the final edit.
What did I think? Well at this stage I felt I had finally gained some objectivity. Perhaps it was that this was the first time I watched the edit alone (I have a projector and a screen in my flat, so watching the edit is very much like being in the cinema by yourself).
So, with my eyes clear all I could see is where it is weak, and what I could have done.
For the most part, this revolved around that point in the story where a reconciliation of some kind has already occurred between the man and the woman.
The worst part? I used dialogue. What more could I have done with something physical between them? Here, it comes to me as writer, and that I really needed to push further.
It is in the moments of the script that I am happy/satisfied with, but not truly taken with. It is easy to miss the weaknesses when you probably more pressing problems in the script. But this where the difference lies between good and great.
So now I must apply this lesson to the next script.

The final edit - update

Just a quick update...It is down to the final edit. From the 7 different version Emma and I came up with over a week ago I have chosen three, edited it into the existing edits and burnt to DVD.
Tomorrow David, Lara, and perhaps JC will come and give feedback. I need to decide which of the three works the best.
More when I return from San Sebastian, Spain at the end of the week.

The pickups - photos

So the shoot is done. It went very well.
My friend Morten was in London for a visit and kindly snapped a few photos of us putting it together.
I brought the footage down to the lab and it will be ready Tuesday.











JC and Boyd setting up.











Meanwhile Nichola was prepping Emma upstairs.











Emma and I discuss what we were going to do. We had a lot of material from the Saturday rehearsal.











And so we were ready to line up the shots. Here I prove to JC that I do know which part of the camera to look through.











We had the rough edit on DVD so we could match shots. And also playback the dialogue for Emma to work against.











A few more rehearsals...











JC gets his reading.











And we're ready to shoot.

Thank you Emma, JC, Boyd, Nichola and Morten for your hard work. It was a lot of fun.

Pickups

I am preparing for the pickups to be shot this Sunday, and one of my issues is the term, 'pickups'. In regards to the way I have always thought about shooting this, and Tidal Barrier words like 'pickups' and 'inserts' do not do justice to the thought and significance of these shots. (I have seen the word coda to describe Ozu's 'inserts', better).
But on...
The scenario:

She is in the living room, on the sofa, reading the paper, enjoying the weekend. He is off camera, speaking to a male friend. We do not seem him until later.
At first the conversation is somber. He is getting the friend's help in moving some things. It changes quickly. After the move? They will go out for drinks, and take up where they left off, before the relationship began it is implied. Then they begin to recount past exploits, which is of course only of interest to them.
All through this she remains in the living room, until she finally stands, goes into the kitchen and retrieves the vacuum cleaner.
So what she is doing this whole time? It is 1.5minutes. This is such as simple situation, and that is why I found so many different things I could do with it.
One idea:
She is neutral. Could be somber but from here can't be sure.
She is at the edge of the frame, extended out (her legs), looking down at the floor (which is out frame).
We hear him off camera. Low and somber.
Then his conversation changes, picks up.
She remains where she is, then leans over and picks up something. Dirt?! Is this what was taking her attention all this time? Yes, and now. At least this is what has been distracting her.
She leans back, takes furtive glance in his direction. Is this annoyance?
He carries on, boasting, and she looks annoyed.
A change of pace. She changes her position, takes up a magazine. Begins to read. For a time succeeds.
Then it is too much. He is too distracting.
The spell is broken. He crashes into some pots. She is startled, looks his way, then quickly away again. A moment she looks in front of her.
Then turns away from him.
Is she laughing? Yes, to herself, or at him.
Enough of this.
She gets up and goes off.

And I have several other different versions and and elements to explore. And only 5 minutes of film. Some hard choices...

Update

Just a quick update. The pickups are scheduled to be shot Sunday Sept. 16th. I will rehearse with Emma in the morning and JC will join us in the afternoon.
Development and transfer will happen the following Monday, and the final edit should be complete mid-week.

Post-production update III

Production and post-production for Reconciliation moves along slowly.
The shooting of the pickups are planned for the second week of September. I am presently looking at camera rentals. And hoping to meet up with the actor, Emma, this coming week.
I have to say that I am very excited about this one shot. Looking at my hacked version of the edit I feel that it will really add another dimension to the Reconciliation.

Post-production update II

Just a quick update on post-production.
Work has been moving slowly. Roland, the sound designer has been busy so I have not been able to meet up with him.
And there was the question of the pickup. I was having trouble picturing it, so I hacked together a version of it by repeating a shot from 5b (she on the sofa). Crude, but effective. It would seem to work, and better than what I currently have.
So I have decided to try for it, depending upon equipment and Emma's availability.
And then there is the online edit. My needs are simple. Drop in the sound, match the shots up, and then give it an overall feel. Put it back to Digibeta. I really would like to have someone do it. I really believe in what a colourist can bring to it, but I don't know anyone. Some investigation...

Feedback

I have been very fortunate to receive very good feedback from friends and colleagues last week. I don't mean complimentary (there were a few of those), but quality.
I suppose that in itself is a compliment. If you really have something, people can discuss and debate it. At one point Nic and Robert began to truly argue.
I did complete the two new rough edits and showed them on the previous Saturday to Nic and Robert. The 4th edit was an accumulation of the feedback from Edits 1 and 2 (I never did show Edit 3) and but for one question is the most successful.
More on that question later... but some highlights.
Once everyone bought into the construct of the film they were all for pushing it as far as possible. So...
No dialogue. I cut a two-line sequence in Scene 3, even when it supported some basic exposition. No one felt it was necessary.
This left dialogue in Scene 7. This made sense as the moment where he has decided to stay with her at least for that day.
Yes there is Scene 5 where he is on the phone to a friend, but this is not dialogue as we only hear his part of the conversation. What's more, his dialogue does not drive the story forward. It is important more for other reasons. The tone of the conversation, which is upbeat. Also that he is forming or reforming a relationship with someone else. And up to this point the only connection to the world outside their relationship.
The gesture. I used a physical gesture at three points.
Scene 6, as he has finished packing his suitcase, he moves from sitting on the bed, frozen, and leans forward, and turns to peer out the door. But too far, so that he supports himself on his hands. It is very strange, which is what Phil and I were looking for. It is an aberration, those moments when someone does something they don't understand.
We cut from this to the blackout and then a corresponding gesture of her in the kitchen, twisted, and turned towards the window. It is awkward. She could easily find a more comfortable position but she does not. Finally, after a time she turns to the sink and the dishes she was cleaning.
At the end of this scene, once he has indicated to her that he is going to stay, and goes out, she turns back to the sink, leans forward, and exhales. This is the only moment that caused any debate. Rooven felt it was over dramatic, and I agree it could be read that way. I shot an alternative sequence, where she simply registers he is staying. David agreed too that the gesture was dramatic, but felt it was mitigated by the oddness of the gesture. After all, she doesn't break down crying. It was Robert who helped decide it. He pointed that the alternative was clear, not dramatic, but also not very interesting because it was clear. The gesture on the other hand was ambiguous. Some saw it as dramatic, others as odd. It was an open text. It was more suited to the film.
The blackouts. First, the one second blackouts (thank you Mr. Haneke) were successful. Most found them odd the first and second times, but then accepted them and looked forward to them. In the 5th edit I played with the length of them. The majority were 1 second, but I extended the first to 4 seconds. I felt that since it was such a short film I needed the audience to understand and accept the blackouts quickly. And I also extended the blackouts around Scene 7, the kitchen scene, as this was the critical scene. What was odd was that no one noticed any differences in the amount of time, even though it changed the rhythm of the edit.
And finally, there is the question of the pickup, that is shooting a different angle in Scene 6, as suggested by JC. More on that later.

Update and photos

I finished two rough edits last week and have been gathering feedback.
Tomorrow I will do two new rough edits, based upon what I have learned so far.
And finally, some photos from the shoot. Orginating format is Super16mm. These images are captuered from the DV dub (offline edit).
Cinematographer: Jun Keung Cheung
She: Emma Ashwood
He: Phil Hayden











Scene 1. She (Emma Ashwood) hasn't been sleeping.












Scene 3. And they survey their lives together.












Scene 4. More is unsaid than said.












Scene 5. He (Phil) does talk a lot, but there is no, or very little, dialogue, in the sense of an exchange by way of words.
Instead what is important here is the tone it adds to the whole.












Scene 6. I was more interested what we understand about others through body language and gesture...












Scene 7. ...and how they suggest other ways of connecting, here two people.












Scene 7. And it develops as well.












Scene 8. The film ends by opening out into the city, the first time that the story has looked outward instead of inward.

Post-update

I have finished three different versions of a rough edit. This week I will be inviting some people around to watch on it my projector and get some feedback. I will update you when this is done...

Editing begins

The news is that the transfer to Hard drive was done on Thursday and I began the edit this weekend. I was quite looking forward to it, until I began the tedious task of syncing the sound and picture.
But that done, I began the edit this morning and finished it an hour ago. I have two slightly different edits. Some of you may think this quick, and it is. But then again, I spent a lot of time thinking of the shots, I did two complete workshops, and shot and edited one of them...I have already made this film twice.
(I have to say that so far my experience of film is fantastic. I have the developed roll next to me on the desk, which is quite sexy. I am working an offline, DV dub, and even that looks fantastic. It would very hard to go back to video after this experience.)
I will look again at the edits with fresh eyes tomorrow. Perhaps I will create another alternative. I will see. But once complete, on Wednesday perhaps, I will burn a DVD copy and then garner some opinions.

Post-production update

Some information on the current state of post-production for Reconciliation:
I had the film developed and transferred to Digibeta at Todd AO in Camden. I am now looking for somewhere to have a transfer done from Digibeta tape to an external hard drive (I don't have the kit for such a transfer, eg, a card to ingest Digibeta via a deck).
Ideally this would be the same place where I could get a online edit done in August. The other option is to do the colour myself in Combustion and then find somewhere to just do the final master, but I like the idea of making some contacts in the post-production world. Also finding someone who really knows what they are doing, instead of muddling through by myself.
I will do the offline edit in Final Cut Pro on either a MacBook Pro (laptop) or a borrowed MacPro, with a SATA Raid for the media.

Production update

Another update.
We completed shooting, this past weekend, June 9th/10th. I can't imagine it going more smoothly.
JC and I had spent the Thursday before going over shots.
I found the final crew member, Nichola, makeup, the Thursday before.
We shot 7 of the 8 scenes in one flat. We had an exterior for Scene 8, which we picked up in the courtyard outside the flat. Ed, who provided us with transport, found us a rooftop in Bethnal Green for our second location. Here we shot the last part of the film, 8b, a montage of shots of London seen by the male character from high up in his flat.
The shoot went over two days. This meant we shot 4 scenes, per day, with perhaps 5 set ups per day. This made for a very easy day, but allowed the actors, JC, the DOP, and myself to be comfortable with the performances and satisfied with the framing and angles.
JC asked for one light, but in the end didn't use it. He told me he was quite determined to shoot with all natural light. The stock he chose was Fuji Reala 500D. Plenty fast.
The natural lighting, the fast stock, the stringent shooting style, and the preparation with the actors meant the whole shoot went off without any major problems.
I will post some photos from the production as soon as possible. And update you on the beginnings of post-production.

Reconciliation - Production update

I just wanted to send out a quick word about the Reconciliation project.
We are in pre-production, with the principle shooting taking place June 9th/10th. That is one week from today.
Tomorrow I have another workshop with the actors, Emma and Phil. I have my art director Lara out in the shops gathering the props and costumes we need, and Jun, my DOP is busy thinking of the shots and angles, as they do.
I still have some holes. Makeup, sound, and a second location.
I will try to post again closer to the shooting dates, and then upload some photos of the actual production.

The feedback

Once I finished the edit I was finally able to gain some objectivity.
I began writing notes, where the story was week, where the directing fell down. Still, I knew needed some help deciding if what I was trying to communicate was coming across. I mean the basics. Was it clear he was leaving? Was it too subtle? This has always been my downfall. So I was looking forward to my friends coming over with fear and anticipation.
I called Ana, the designer, David, the photographer and Nic, the DOP. All of them I thought would be honest and have something intelligent to say. I also expected them to tell me the truth. None of them suffer fools.
They had some criticism. Certain things just plainly did not work. The gesture that he makes once he finishes packing was a failure. It looked too much part of the packing. It was not the gesture out of nowhere that I intended it to be.
Some of the shots were clunky (actually I think the worst shots happened just before lunch, and towards the end of the day, as my blood sugar was getting low). Partly this was lack of preparation, but some just failed. I could not solve them. The kitchen scene for example. I was so busy trying to get everything in one shot it became really weak. I realised, without foundation, that I was trying to keep everything in the frame. By accident there were shots wher the characters broke the frame. Some of these shots were the most popular.
A key observation: all wanted the film to be shot in black and white. Why? Colour was a distraction from a film where every detail was critical. Shooting on a small DV camera meant everything was in focus. Clashing colour, and background images which had no meaning were distracting. I took from this that I had to be extra careful in the art direction, and that the costume and props had to be in subdued colours.
But overall I was genuinely amazed at what I had managed to communicate. Not just the basics. Some of the larger ideas that I thought were only obvious to me.

The shooting style - 2

I had written that scenes were conceived with a certain pace in mind. But in shooting during the workshop I found something else I could use: in the scenes the couple shared I created a pace for each of them that was often at odds with each other. For example, in the lunch scene it opens with her fussing about over the food, and he frozen there. When she sees his look, not understanding what it is about, she becomes despondent, and slows. He picks up his pace, begins eating, as if he could banish his thoughts by moving quickly enough.
What else can I say about the shooting style?
For every part of the story there is one shot. There is no establishing shot. Only one point of view in the edit you are not able to choose from this or that. You better get it right. This is where a producer would be pulling his hair out, if I had one. For of course there is no coverage.
One scene does not lead obviously to the next. This is not conventional drama. It is an open text. Why something happens is open to interpretation.
In effect the shots accumulate, add one on top of another. Since there is no establishing shot there is way to go back, so to speak. Only forward. This creates a momentum which would normally have been created by the plot, eg. he shoots his wife, now he is running from the police.
All in all I would say I am very glad I have chosen Haneke's contrivance for this experiment. It has helped clarify my thinking of the shooting style. That is how this whole blog started after all.

The shooting style - 1

I have written some about the shooting style of Reconciliation already, but from the workshop I have had more time to think about it, and refine my understanding of it.
For the workshop I needed to not only have the actors push against what I had written, but test the shooting style (which is essentially Haneke's). In preparation I planned every shot. The day before I went through each scene, planning it out, checking it with the DV camera, and the director's viewfinder. There were practical considerations. I needed to know how much I could get into a shot. Could I shoot that scene in one shot? Would both characters fit into one shot?
I went back and examined Haneke's 71 Fragments. Perhaps this should have been obvious from my early viewings but I did not notice the significance of several things:
There is no establishing shot. Since the story is about fragments this is only right. He might provide numerous shots of a location, the scene in the armoury where the gun is stolen is an example. He shows the thief, inserts of him breaking the locks on the pistols, light coming from a ventilation shaft, from which the thief hears the sounds of someone walking by, the ammunition cabinet, and so on. But he never knits these shots together. He never shows you where this is or that is in a room. All you can know you must take from the eyeline of the actors.
A scene is generally told from one point of view. That is from one character's point of view. Sometimes he swaps points of view, but it is swap. And it never goes back.
This forced me to reconstruct certain scenes in the story. This was awkward, but I find these contrivances force you to be more creative.
Rhythm is created by jumping from one set of characters to another. I have already written about this, and come up with a practical solution: I had written certain fragments with a certain speed in mind. I even thought of writing pace into the script, like a score.
More on this...

The workshop

I have a lot to report, and hopefully can make up for my long silence.
I have been very busy with this small project, the short film Reconciliation.
I have been through numerous drafts, of course. Fine-tuning the script. But three weeks ago I came to a dead-end. I could not go forward without some intense feedback. So I arranged a workshop with Emma Choy and Phil Evans. These two actors helped me back in December, workshopping the Tidal Barrier project.
They spent the day at my flat, working our way through the script. I had decided beforehand that I wanted to conduct this workshop a little differently. Most often I begin workshops discussing with some intensity the script, before getting it on its feet. This goes back to my training at the Drama department, University of Alberta, in Canada. That school was known for the intense preparation of a script by the actors, directors and the rest.
But this time I wanted to do it differently. We spent an hour over breakfast, talking about the script, but quickly we put the story on its feet. We set ourselves up, had a short discussion about what we were doing, and then I shot it on a small DV camera. Then there was my reaction, with the actor feedback, and then we tried to refine what we had done. And I shot it again. We spent the day and worked our way through the whole script. Not by chance the script takes place over one day, and our working day conformed with shooting day. We finished at 5:30 and I had 95% of my shots.
During the week I captured the footage and began to edit towards the end of the week. I made up for missing footage with the some stills I had taken previously for location scouts, especially those shots I had taken from Hampstead Heath. I added a few sound effects and ambient tracks, as it became apparent that the sound was going to be crucial to making this work.
By the next weekend I had finished the cut and was ready for some feedback.
I will write more about all this:
The feedback. The shooting style. And where it goes from here.

April update

Update
Where have a I been?
My regrets that I have not been writing these past few weeks. I just decided that if I had nothing to write that I was better silent.
I have not been idle. I have been busy developing the short film, Reconciliation.
First I have approached an actor to play she. We had our first meeting last week and she already asked me some tough questions, which I was not yet prepared to answer.
The questions revolve around a scene I wrote involving he, in the bedroom, as he packs to leave. His actions (that is packing) are detailed. This begins as one of the everyday scenes, of surface-reality. But then I needed some decisive action from this. In the last draft he fills the suitcase with precision, but then, without pausing empties it again. My actor queried this. Myself, I have never been certain that this was right. I think I was trying to show how his decision to stay was directly connected to his action of parting. Or something like that. It really didn't make an sense.
So I began to think of something else that is happening in the story, in that they are parting, but they are not acting normally. That is they are not acknowledging this event. I put some of this down to pride, but more fundamental is the idea of alienation and disconnection. From what? Nature? Themselves? I am not sure, I only knew there is an imbalance. And that is what I needed to show in this scene in the bedroom. So I thought of the idea of the gesture, a movement, that follows hard on his precise, detailed packing. It comes out of nowhere. An aberration.
(The idea of movement sits comfortably with me: movement was a large part of the work I did in theatre. I was always interested in the emotional values possible with movement)

Reconciliation and Haneke's form

I have been busy revising of the short scripts, Reconciliation. This is the short in which I am borrowing Haneke's form, from 71 Fragments, of one or more shots or fragments(some short, some long), which are then closed by a cut to black.
I am just realising the limitations of the form for a short. In 71 Fragments, Haneke as a number of character sets that he alternates with. This means that he can easily create texture and rhythm by moving from one set of fragments to another. In each fragment he has another set of characters, a different location, and potentially a different pace.
Because I want to keep the focus sharp I am sticking to one location, which means I feel there is no place to go. I just had a scene in the kitchen - what now? I have already been in the living room, kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, even the the closet!
In a feature this is not a problem.
I know, I know, I suppose I was really asking for it, taking this on.

I have now revised the script three times. Where is it going, despite my problems with pace and texture?
One addition I made, in part to defuse the drama, but also to make the story more focused, was to make it clear near the beginning that this is the day he is planning to move out. It was important that the audience is not left wondering what the events of the day are about, or how they will resolve themselves dramatically (it is clear in the title afterall).
I have already posted previously about how I have explored surface-reality in the story - packing, emptying a closet, vacuuming, doing the dishes. But my worry was that I also presented the couples estrangement in these everyday scenes - waking together (or rather not) in the morning. That these parts are not surface-reality, and may become drama.
I am now less worried about this. I might rationalise these elements as what Schrader calls disparity, the second element in the transcendental style (which leads to decisive action). I am happy with the story and I suppose the irony of the title, and how the reconciliation happens, in the mundane - he takes out the trash. I was most interested in how our lives are truly lived in these kinds of events.
Finally there is Schrader's final element, the transcendent:

3. Stasis: a frozen view of life which does not resolve the disparity but transcends it.

From the reconciliation - he, taking out the trash - to the macro view of the world, London at dusk, with lights coming on in flats just like this one.

The final codas of Ozu's films are reaffirmations of nature; they are the final silence and emptiness.

This is the first time we have left the flat, and looked at the world beyond the couple and their flat.

A short film

I promised I would describe the new scripts in more detail, and try to explain how they related to the feature.
One script, with the working title of Reconciliation, will borrow the form, without shame, from Haneke's 71 Fragments. Principally these are the short fragments, of one to many, which are followed by a short cut to black, and which constitute a scene, in loose terms. Reconciliation, at present is made of 8 scenes. At present I am uncertain the number of shots per scene, but my aim is to keep these to a minimum, if not 1. I am also thinking of Haneke's Code Unknown, which followed the 1 shot = 1 scene convention, but he allowed for some complex camera movements, such as the elaborate opening sequence in the Paris street, which are out of the question for a budget such as mine.
Besides these conventions, the rule is that there is no cutting on action, in the conventional sense, a minimal of dialogue (two sentences, 1 each), which consequentially means I rely on visual storytelling, and compression and minimalism, so that little will mean more.
I am interested (have always been interested) in structures that allow for cumulative and amplifying affects, to create an impression, as opposed to linear narratives. I was taken, many years ago, on seeing Buchner's Woyceck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woyzeck).
What is this story about? As the title indicates, it is about reconciliation, in this case between an estranged couple, on the verge of separating. It is set over 1 day, starting the morning and ending in early evening, in which they never speak, and find that reconciliation comes in the mundane, everyday events, not in grand gesture. In fact I think I am using an anti-grand gesture. And finally, that this anti-grand gesture leads a sense of the transcendent, for him at least. Their reconciliation is not romantic, but is found in an accommodation with the natural world.
I hope this doesn't sound terrible pretentious. I will have to be careful I am honest.