Thanks for reading!

I started editing about two weeks after we wrapped, so at this point I’ve been working on the project two or three days a week for the past month and a half.  I’ve had several people look at successive versions and revised based on their input.  The film has come a long way as I’ve explored more and more options, but about two weeks ago I realized that I needed to work with an editor.  Cedar Daniels, (The Third Wave), generously agreed to work on the project.

I don’t find that I’m overly attached to specific material, but because I’m so intimately familiar with the story, my perspective of the film is distorted.  This realization came primarily out of my back and forth with different people who watched my film.  I would show a cut to someone and they would say, “You really should think about changing such-and-such,” and when I went back to look at the film, their comment would highlight something that now appeared as an obvious problem, but something I wouldn’t have seen beforehand.

In the opening scene, Nathan, the older brother, comes into the room and tries to get a book away from his younger brother Joe.  The film revolves around the relationship of these two boys as they learn to survive in an abusive home, and Joe needed to be really scared in the opening scene to set the tone for the film.  A friend of mine watched an early cut and responded to the first scene by saying, “One brother wants to get a book away from the other one and then they talk about football, so what?”  To me there was a strong sense of fear in the scene because I knew what was going to happen later on, but as is obvious from the description above, there is no sense of danger inherent in the action.  By going back and re-editing the scene I was able to create the tone I wanted, but I wouldn’t have seen the problem if not for my friend’s input.

This is one example of a problem that appeared in a variety of ways simply because I bring so much information to the film that the audience doesn’t have.

I could continue the editing process by going through the cycle of getting feedback and re-editing as many times as needed.  Even now that I’m working with an editor, I’ll still need feedback from people unfamiliar with the material.  However, the advantage of working with an editor is that I can shortcut the cycle.  In effect, he is a filmmaking-savvy audience member capable of correcting the problems I can’t see.  Not only will editing move faster, but I’ll end up with a better, more polished film.

There were a lot of things I liked about my script going into this process, but I felt it could be better.  The story didn’t feel as compelling or engaging as I wanted it to.  It was tight, but a bit predictable.

In terms of re-writing, I felt I was at a bit of a dead end. I felt that every element of my script was so connected to the whole piece that unless I overhauled it, it would be difficult to improve.

During my second meeting with my mentor, Laurie Collyer, we talked about my script and how I might go about improving it, and Laurie suggested that I do a complete re-write as an exercise.  She thought it might free me up to continue improving on what I had.

The idea of writing an “exercise” script allowed me to get past my attachment to the interconnectedness of the previous draft. The resulting draft wound up involving the same location, characters, and subject matter, but was very different and significantly better. I allowed myself to completely re-imagine scenes with the knowledge that if they didn’t work I didn’t need to use them in the final version.

Rather than taking the best elements of the exercise script and melding them into the older draft, I did the reverse. I ended up taking the moments in the older draft that I thought held the essence of the story and constructed a new narrative around them. The end result was a more natural and compelling story.

During our recent Cinereach advising workshop with Writer/Director Tze Chun (Children of Invention), there were some very useful takeaways related to casting and working with children.

Tze talked a lot about how, when casting a role, it’s critical to keep in mind the specific demands of the part. A very natural young actor who doesn’t have a great deal of acting ability can work well for a role that doesn’t contain many highly emotional scenes. If the character needs to display a great deal of strong emotion, however, more acting ability is necessary even if this means sacrificing naturalness to some degree

Directing Child Actors Workshop with Tze Chun

When I entered the casting process and had to begin making decisions, I took Tze’s advice and looked for the right balance of acting ability versus naturalness.  We auditioned 20 actors for the two open roles and had four, two actors per character, come in for callbacks.

At callbacks, I was careful to go over the most emotionally subtle parts of the script several times to see what each actor could bring to the moments. In this script there are no highly emotional scenes that call for crying, or throwing a tantrum, so I decided I could err on the side of naturalness over acting experience, while making sure that the actors were skilled enough to understated and convey the emotions of the scenes.

Also critical to me, was looking at the chemistry between each pair of actors. My two actors will be playing brothers and the story hinges on the subtle interactions that make up their relationship.

Now that my film is cast, I am looking ahead at how I will work with my actors in rehearsal and on set. In my discussions with my mentor, Laurie Collyer (Sherrybaby), Laurie has really emphasized using improvisation as a lead-in to scripted scenes in order to get a more natural performance from child actors. Tze also advised that I give my young actors a set of actions to execute whenever possible, rather than a single action, in order to keep them from over-emphasizing each one. I’ll definitely be employing these tactics.

The Reach Film Fellowship (RFF) is an intensive six-month programme in which four film-makers work with individual mentors, a team of advisors, and Cinereach staff to take their short fiction and non-fiction films from concept to completion.

RFF fellows each receive a $5,000 grant and production resources. At the conclusion of the fellowship cycle, an additional $5,000 award will be presented to one of the four Fellows for the completion and distribution of his or her RFF film.

The 2010 Reach Film Fellows, mentors and films are: Nadia Hallgren (mentored by Annie Sundberg) for Love Lockdown; Courtney Hope (mentored by Jeremy Kipp Walker) for Wild Birds; Gabriel Long (mentored by Laurie Collyer) for Brothers; and Anthony Morrison (mentored by Marilyn Agrelo) for Our Principal Intent.

..

http://www.screendaily.com/news/production/cinereach-names-2010-reach-film-fellows/5006226.article

Cinereach has announced the names of the 2010 Reach Film Fellows and their mentors, launching the third year of a program that “nurtures socially conscious filmmakers at early stages in their careers.” The Reach Film Fellowship (RFF) is a six-month program in which four filmmakers work with individual mentors, a team of advisors, and Cinereach staff to take their short fiction and nonfiction films from concept to completion. RFF fellows each receive a $5,000 grant and production resources. At the conclusion of the fellowship cycle, an additional $5,000 award will be presented to one of the four Fellows for the completion and distribution of his or her film. Mentors this year include: Marilyn Agrelo (“Mad Hot Ballroom”), Laurie Collyer (“Sherrybaby”), Annie Sundberg (“The Devil Came on Horseback”) and Jeremy Kipp Walker (“Cold Souls”). Fellows are: Nadia Hallgren (“Love Lockdown”), Courtney Hope (“Wild Birds”), Gabriel Long (“Brothers”) and Anthony Morrison (“Our Principal Intent”).

“We’ve seen how access to mentorship and advising from successful independent filmmakers really makes the difference for those just starting out,” said Cinereach founder and executive director Philipp Engelhorn in a statement. “It’s critical to encourage young filmmakers who are inclined towards making films of social relevance, and to help them do that effectively through cinematic storytelling.”

..

http://www.indiewire.com/article/quickshots_polanski_precious_cinereach_

fellows_thessaloniki_news/