Compositions Of A Film

The basic need to represent a three dimensional reality on a two dimensional surface is certainly not new in the visual arts. What separates film from the other visual arts is that it is kinetic. The filmmaker is composing motion.

Composition of movement in time can be broken down into several dynamics. Movement of the camera is called intraframe movement. Screen sizes and angles of view can be manipulated in this way. Interframe movement is created by editing, cutting from one angle to another or from long shot to close up. The combination of camera movements and editing becomes a truly powerful system for manipulating the film reality. Whether static or moving, the frame represents spatial depth, or three dimensions, on a 2 dimensional screen.

 We’re told by those who have studied the psychology of perception that shadows are one of the clues by which the brain recognizes spatial depth. The fact that the projected image is always seen as a window into a 3 dimensional world is one reason for the filmmaker’s use of these dark and  light areas for ‘designing in depth.’

The figurative painters and engravers of graphic illustrations in the 19th century are worth study by filmmakers. Gustav Dore’s work is an example. He used a formula enormously effective in emphasizing design in depth. In the foreground a subject might be lit strongly, with an emphatic key light and strong modeling. But behind this would be figures more or less in silhouette, in shadow and 2 dimensional. These, in turn, would be outlined against a brighter area in middle distance, a part of light illuminating features of architecture or figures in an area of light. These were again silhouetted, light against dark, against a further background of shadow, gray but still dark. Each recessive plane contrasts with the one beyond it or in front.

The Spanish painter Francisco Goya wrote some 200 years ago. “I see (in nature) only forms that advance, forms that recede, masses in light and shadow.”

Composing in depth isn’t simply a matter of visual richness. It has value in the narrative of the action, the pacing of the scene. Within the same frame, the director can organize the action so that preparation for what will happen next is seen in the background of what is happening now. While our attention is concentrated on what we see nearest to us, we are simultaneously aware of secondary activities that lie beyond, and sometimes even of a third plane of distant activity the dramatic density of the scene is much greater.

Designing the blocking of the actors, the framing of the shot, with this sort of thing in mind and the cinematographer with a grain of sense will instantly realize your intention. He will use light to assist the eye path of the audience and to give dramatic depth to the scene. Composition, both in framing and lighting, directs the viewer’s eye to the appropriate part of the scene.

However,It is the unfortunate for a lot of filmmakers that they are not in charge when their work is being projected. A visit to a local theatre can at times be a heart breaking experience, let alone seeing one’s film on television.In spite of this uncertain future, the film crew puts all its talents and skills into producing a well-composed picture.

source : http://malaysianfilmmakers.blogspot.com/

With love and passion,

Amreish Siman

Review : Inception

Film : Inception (2010)

Director & Writer : Christopher Nolan

Producer : Emma Thomas,Christopher Nolan

Music : Hans Zimmer

Cast : Leonardo DiCaprio,Ken Watanabe,Joseph Gordon-Levitt,Ellen Page,Tom Hardy,Marion Cotillard,Cilian Murphy,Tom Berenger and Michael Caine

Language : English

Running time : 148 mins,PG-13

'Why did he make this film,people ?'...'Because we gotta watch it'...'He didn't waste the money,did he?'...'Because he's the director Hollywood deserves,the one it bloody needs right now!'...'So,we'll watch his films'..'because he can inspire us'..'because he's not a director'..'he's a master filmaker..a mindful craftsman...THE CREATIVE GENIUS...
 
Most filmakers make films,some directors make movies,but a creative genius will craft a masterpiece,this is one.Christopher Nolan who gave us the best comic-book inspired live action film ever made two years ago and extracted one of the finest performances from an actor who literally gave his life for the role returns with an original concept,an idea so intricately imagined and constructed,it requires maximum utilization of grey matter to just attempt comprehending the entire fiasco and if you thought that could've been said in a simpler,easily understandable way,then don't watch this film because this is not anywhere near Transformers,with explosive ka-boom metal mayhem with kindergarten screenplay,that's Michael Bay's territory,if you're still there,come out please.
 
This film falls under the category of mind**** genre,which means if you've been watching too much Stallone/Arnie/Van Damme/Vijaykanth films,you'll be sitting in the cinema with a Keanu Reeves expression,which is only one...DUH? This film runs along the theme of,most notably The Matrix Trilogy(1999,2003),2001: A Space Odyssey(1968),Minority Report(2001),Virtuosity(1995),The Machinist(2004),Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind(2004),Vanilla Sky(2001) and Shutter Island(2010,also the brilliant DiCaprio,click http://mindsparkenigma.blogspot.com/2010/04/review-shutter-island.html ).If you have watched these films,you'll understand why i believe Inception is a delicious potpourri of all these classics taken one notch higher with Nolan's genius insight.If you have missed some,i say go watch it because it will help fill in the blanks if u leave the theatre dazed and confused.
 
The film centres on the brilliantly inspired idea of 'extraction' of ideas from a person's mind via dreams and is depicted in an corporate espionage setting with a elite team(Joseph Gordon-Levitt,Ellen Page,Tom Hardy),each with a specific skillset,ala A-Team,Ocean's Eleven and films of that kind.The job of the dream team is literally hack into the target's dream and steal their thoughts,specifically highly valuable secrets deeply embedded in their sub-conscious minds to make a living.
Led by Dobb,played by DiCaprio,who like any other leader of smartass misfits in high-tech heist movies,is calling it quits and wants a normal life(did you noticed that almost all heist movies has this plot?,the i'll-do-it-one- last- time for my family/ex-boss loyalty/redemption stuff ),but hey,its Nolan's film,so cheesiness is out of the question !And for the one last mission,the boss,Saito(Ken Watanabe with a funny Jap accent) requires the team to do the opposite,which is to plant the idea/thought instead of extracting it,a process called inception,like planting a seed( pregnancy through in-vitro technique is where the word inception is used widely).The motive here is greed and monopoly,where high-profile corporate tycoon filthy play are abound.The idea is to plant an idea/thought in its rawest and infantile form so that it germinates and develops naturally as if it was an original motivation.The victim is the heir to a dying,super-wealthy tycoon,Bob Fischer(Cilian Murphy,with the same chilly look from Batman Begins) and the raw idea is one that will influence him to turn the tables on the wealth distribution of his father's assets so as to favor Saito to seize total monopoly of the world's energy business.What a plot,eh?
 
Now,this film could've easily been a straight metaphysical- heist film but what makes it stand tall is the complex psychological aspect of it.Leonardo DiCaprio,again,for the third consecutive time finds himself married with a woman with a fractured psyche,there was Revolutionary Road(2008),with a suicidal Kate Winslet(far cry from i jump,you jump melodrama from them in Titanic) and Shutter Island,with a alcoholic child-drowning Michelle Williams( ex-wife of the late Heath Ledger) and here its the beautiful Mal(Marion Cotillard from Public Enemies),a woman 'lost' in her own dream world,an Alice who went too deep into the rabbit-hole she's unable to distinguish illusion from reality,their relationship is portrayed in such a poignantly tragic manner it is heart-wrenching to watch.DiCaprio played his role to such perfection that he's now an expert in playing tragic-deep- loving- husband-of psychologically -troubled-on-screen-wives-with-a-hard-grasp-on-reality-as-a-result-of-intense-guilt-and-regret,nobody else can depict it better than a Scorpio man,and Leo is actually a Scorpio..hahaha..the guy is damn good and so is the rest of the cast actually,only downside is the under-utilization of the legendary Michael Caine,who is a staple face in Nolan's films(The Prestige,Batman films).
 
Technically,the film is a marvel.The cinematography is lush and awe-inducing and the visual-effects are grandiose,there's superb scene(spoiler alert!)where streets fold depicting the sheer creative power of the mind to imagine and manifest almost anything.There's even a revolutionary fight scene in zero-gravity which left me wondering how on Earth did Nolan filmed it !The powerful pulsating score by Hans Zimmer envelops each scene and elevates the impact and feel of the film perfectly,the score is uncharacteristically loud at times,which i notice is Nolan's trend(watch Insomnia,The Prestige,Batman films),his logic to up the volume in particular scenes is Hitchcock-inspired,even Shymalan does it.
 

The best thing about this film is not the above mentioned achievements,the real success here is Nolan's triumphant attempt to creatively depict how the subconscious mind works and the sheer power of thought.The way emotionally-entangled memories embeds itself so deep in our sub-conscious minds that its almost impossible to eradicate is shown brilliantly in scenes where Mal and the kids appear abruptly at the most unexpected circumstances much to the shock and disbelief of Dobb.The sub-conscious mind is a free entity,it cannot be controlled,once an idea/thought/memory is implanted...ahem..sorry...INCEPTED into the sub-conscious,it will germinate and evolve on its own depending on how much power do you feed it,meaning how attached or how deeply you feel or felt about the thought in the first place,if it was an idea or memory which deeply moved,affected or was experienced by you,chances are the frequency of the idea/thought popping out to the conscious mind is very high,just like Dobb.So,be very careful of what you think because you are what you think,you become what you think,such is the power of thoughts.If you thoughts are predominantly negative,then be prepared to face the consequences and expect screw-ups upon screw-ups because you simply asked for it !So,might as well we flood our minds with positive,uplifting and beautiful thoughts because its free !You don't have pay to think,do you?So,think....think big..just like Christopher Nolan did....Inception was his idea...it was a 12 year-old idea,he first presented the story to Warner Bros after he did Memento,originally scripted for a much smaller scale film like his 'Insomnia',but the stupendous success of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight opened gates for him to blow-up the scale to a US$160 million film,allowing him to create this masterpiece the way it deserves to be made.

 

What is the moral of the story here?Christopher Nolan incepted the idea of 'Inception' in his own sub-conscious mind and waited patiently for 12 years until he proved his box-office mettle and for technology to advance and then delivered his baby,a handsome,pricelessly beautiful baby for the world to adore,appreciate and love.Its safe to say he has firmly cemented his place as one of the finest filmakers in the world today,filling in the space left by well...my grandfather,the late Stanley Kubrick :)

Go get enlightened if you haven't !!

 

Rating : A
 
Reviewed by
Amreish Siman

The Relationship Between Director & Director Of Photography

Ideally the cinematographer’s relationship with the director is a symbiotic one. The cinematographer embraces the director’s vision and uses his visual talent and technical knowledge to capture the director’s inner thoughts and put them on the screen. Needless to say, the process of choosing a cinematographer is of no small importance to the director.

It is my impression that most of the cameramen have developed a highly personal style. They have an individual character that becomes their stock in trade.

Often a director will screen several films shot by a prospective cinematographer.

In effect, I believe you have to trust the taste and temperament of the cameraman as you see it in his previous work. Obviously, you should take care to see a number of his films to see how he handles different genres; to see what range he has.

BLACK-AND-WHITE AND COLOR

A cinematographer cannot separate the problem of light from the problem of color. Through the film stock he is using, through the filters on lights and lenses, and through the printing in the lab, he cooperates with the art director in the orchestration of colors or in the modulation of the gray scale in the black-and-white films.

I’ve always felt that melodrama and satire have characteristics in common. Ideally, I would prefer to shoot both of these genres in black and white. Distributors nowadays declare that black-and-white movies are unsalable. A compromise may be the kind of cinematography where there is a very emphatic range of tonal values, black to white, at the expense of hue values; strong directional lighting of chiaroscuro, which underlines the architectural structures at the expense of the local colors of the surface.

There are personal idiosyncrasies when it comes to particular colors, for both aesthetic and practical reasons.

With love and passion, Amreish Siman

 

Source : http://malaysianfilmmakers.blogspot.com/

The Creative Intuition

Some individuals seem to have an intuitive sense, as they begin their creative work, about what their final product will be like. Indeed, evidence from several sources confirms the role of intuition in the creative processes of artists and scientists; among these sources are autobiographical testimonies, analyses of historical evidence, psychometric assessments, and experimental studies

In combination, this evidence supports the notion that early intuitions may guide decision making in the process of attaining creative results. But at least three issues remain. First, there may be various forms of intuition.

                                                                             
Second, there may also be various forms of  creativity. Third, it 

might well be the case that only certain forms of intuition are related to certain forms of creativity. It is important to develop a clear conceptual framework for distinguishing various forms of intuition as well as for explaining whether and to what extent they interact with one another and with various forms of creativity.

It is also relevant to distinguish intuition from insight, although the 2 phenomena sometimes overlap. Intuition entails vague and tacit knowledge, whereas insight involves sudden, and usually clear, awareness. In the context of creativity, intuition may precede insight. (See INSIGHT)
Earlier intuition was defined as a tacit form of knowledge that orients decision-making in a promising direction. In the context of innovation, a promising direction is one that leads to potentially creative outcomes. For example, Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, and medicine refer to their own scientific intuition as “a metaphorical seeing of the phenomenon searched for, an anticipatory perception of its shape or its gross structure.”

In time line between an early intuition and its final articulation might very from a brief period to many years, depending on various factors, such as the nature of the problem or the subject’s knowledge base. Jean Piaget, for instance, commenting on the creative process of Charles Darwin, said that he found two results most interesting: the time that Darwin needed to become aware of ideas already implicit in his thought, and the passage from the implicit to the explicit in the creation of new ideas.In fact, Darwin seems to have implicitly prefigured some of his most relevant ideas in his early writings. Highly creative individuals in other domains, such as Pablo Picasso (visual arts),Sigmund Freud (psycho-analysis), Albert Einstein ( modern science),and Stanley Kubrick ( filmaking) appear to have moved along their own creative processes in a similar sequences – starting off with generative  intuitions and ending up with more explicitly articulated products after long periods of persistent work (See FREUD, SIGMUND,KUBRICK,EINSTEIN )

                                                                                                                       

This leads us to a further question. If some individuals have an early intuitive sense about their final product will be like, why does it take them any longer to reach the ultimate goal? In other words, how can we explain a creative process in which the beginning is in a way also the end, given that we have a tacit estimate of the end state right from the start?
Perhaps the creative process unfolds as a developmental sequence of representational changes, from vague, syncretic, and implicit forms of knowledge into more differentiated, integrated, and explicit ones. In more technical terms, it is conceivable, at least, that the creative process might operate as a developmental translation – from an implicit code of associative strengths among neural units into an explicit code of symbolic rules. In this cognitive system, implicit neural networks might precede and
constrain the generation of symbolic rules.
         



INTUITION AS CONSTRAINT

A number of scholars hold that divergent thinking (multidirectional and open ended) is the essential feature of the creative process. But, we may wonder, what prevents divergent thinking from becoming mere rambling as the person considers an infinite sequence of potential alternatives? (See DIVERGENT THINKING)
As we all know, any creative process involves a long series of choices: each decision one makes will affect future options, and one’s alternatives at any given will depend on previous decisions. If individuals had to consider each option that arises in any creative search, the growth of alternatives would become astronomical. In other words, the sequence would lead to what cognitive scientists call a “combinatorial explosion,” and it is very unlikely that the creative process would get to the desired result in any reasonable amount of time.
Creative intuitions may fulfill an important cognitive function: By setting the preliminary boundaries for promising exploration, these initial intuitions may keep the creator’s divergent thinking from generating a combinatorial explosion. That is why creative intuition may be technically defined as a tacit form of knowledge that broadly constrains the creative search by setting its preliminary scope.
Although cognitive scientists have widely acknowledged the need to check a combinatorial explosion in a problem space, they have not considered intuition as a potential constraint for the creative search. Instead, they have focused on heuristics.
Creative intuition may fulfill a similar role to that of heuristics by making the search for possible solutions more selective and efficient. Heuristics, however, are explicit rules of thumb, or particular strategies that, for example, deliberately move away from an old path and look for conflicts and resolve them. Conversely, creative intuitions appear to be implicit rough estimates of the final solution or goal, and advances in this problem space might be measured in terms of how close the subject is to achieving a clear symbolic representation. (See HEURISTICS)

Creative intuition has always been difficult to define, explain, and measure. Conceptualizing it in terms of search in a problem space may be a valid and operational alternative for investigating this phenomenon. But it still leaves many questions unanswered.

With love and passion,

Amreish Siman

 

Source : Encyclopedia of Creativity, Volume 2 By Mark A. Runco, Steven R. Pritzker

Publisher: Academic Press (9 Aug 1999) &
http://malaysianfilmmakers.blogspot.com/