fonder heart

Well, it's late October now.

Teaching really does preclude editing for me -- especially because this is the first time I've ever had more than one "prep," which is to say I'm teaching both critical video production as well as public speaking. I'm finding it rather challenging. Ahem. Nothing left over in my brain (or life) for too much else and I'm worn out. Serious academics on tenure tracks do more than one prep - often 3 - all the time, I know, but notice how I supposedly *left* that career?? Hmmm...

Fingers crossed, it looks probably that I"ll get three sections of the same course next term, which will be much easier on my psyche and my time-wallet.

I write today, though, because I ran into someone yesterday (ouch) who mentioned that he'd seen the little video clip of Scene 6 (posted back in I think Feb), so this morning I went back and watched it, myself. Made me miss all the See & Be folk and the sense of progress on the movie and feel more optimistic about getting back to it. A little distance and it's not so bad. Have graded several student productions by now, too, which of course make ours look better.

Back to grading now!

Rachel

Next phase

Hi there,

Well, I'm back in town -- but my camera, alas, is not. I left it in Maine. Eek!

I have to start getting seriously down to business prepping my classes now anyway, so there wouldn't be much time for editing, but it is displeasurable not to have to occasional moment here and there to compare takes or down(up?)load, etc. Not to mention that I can't use the camera for anything else, either.

I have decided that I must duplicate all the tapes, regardless. So that will be my next task. It will take a while because it's near 29 hours of footage and I will not be able to do more than a few hours at a time, probably (have to borrow the equipment). But that's what I'll do -- I'll dupe it so that I can pass it along to someone else without giving up the originals. We really do want to see a finished piece!!

Do let me know you're out there!

Rachel

Six years and counting?

It's July, BTW. The dates I see on the "claqeta"/"clacker"/slate when I'm editing are all July. It's been six years -- SIX of them -- since we came together and were all so sweaty and determined. We've all done a lot in those years and we're all significantly older. We've worked and wanted; most of us (if not all?) have moved, many across the country, some across the ocean, some more than once. Relationships have started and/or ended. A few of us knew each other before the film and have stayed in touch as friends, some more and some less than others. Many of us knew each other only for a few weeks or even a few days during the shoot, making new friends and keeping in touch, or happy to work together and then move on. The majority of GW's presidency has transpired since most of us saw each other last.

I have to admit, I am considering passing the baton on this one. I watch this footage and it's hard to endure all the things I did then that I wouldn't do now. It's hard to look at this story through the lens of who I was in July 2002, because who I am in July of 2008 would do it so differently. I have doubled my knowledge of filmmaking, I think, since we first rolled on 'Seeing and Believing' (teaching others is the best way to deepen your own knowledge and I have taught four terms of video production since '04). Part of the increase in knowledge came from shooting S & B, itself, of course -- there's no substitute for doing a thing we know about, as we so often re-learn. I simply didn't know then what I know now -- there's no crime in that -- one should HOPE, in fact, that every six years of one's life, one will be able to say this: it's called growth. But even forgiving my pre-having-done-it-ignorance as necessary and natural, I can't help but get aggravated with and yell at my 2002-self from here when I watch her squander 2008-self's one opportunity to direct a feature-length narrative film. Watching the footage and trying to cut together shots I don't even like is taxing. I mean, I hate to say it, I really hate to say it -- believe me -- but some of this movie is just downright bad. Editing is not, shall we say, mostly pleasurable. Occasionally pleasurable, yes: some of it works, there are arresting little moments of truth here and there, some lovely shots, a few good scenes... but mostly? Mostly? No.

And DAMN!! for that.

Both RJ and Kevin have offered in the past to take on editing at least parts of the film and I have been reluctant for an assortment of practical reasons (duping 29 hours of footage, for one), but my main resistance has been a sense of ... oh, what would I call it? Duty, maybe. That is, it's partly emotional "ownership" since I wrote the script and lived and breathed those characters for so many years before July, 2002, but it has also been a sense of... responsibility. I'm the director and I feel responsible to you all who worked so hard for that time (though it may not show, since the thing is still Not Done) -- you deserve to have something to show for all you gave in time and energy and money! Can't let it go - can't let it go! My job!

But the relativity of six more years does start to make those six weeks look smaller. I would prefer to move my energy into a current project, I admit. I'd rather be writing.

Anyway -- I haven't given up on all of it yet, I do still want it to Be Finished. We all really do deserve to see an actual film, a whole narrative, after all we put into it. But this is what I'm thinking about as I'm heading off into the woods for a bit. Comments?

Peace out,
REA

Heading for Maine

Hello, Those Who Read Me,

I am leaving at 4:30 tomorrow morning for Maine (to visit my dad and step-mom -- where we shot some footage of Larry and Marissa's erstwhile tire swing) and I will be back (God willing and the creek don't rise) on the night of August 6th. It looks like I won't have time to upload any footage to take with me -- I daren't take the tapes -- so I won't be editing again until I get back.

Hope you're all enjoying life -- 'tis oh-so short!!

Love & fortitude,
Rachel

Survivor?

All right, I have to admit it - I have not been editing S & B the last week or so.

"Why not?" you ask, crushed.

Well, because I was too busy getting together my application to be on 'Survivor'!!!

"Freak!" you say -- and rightly so.

What am I thinking??? I'll be FORTY-ONE YEARS OLD in two weeks, I have never been athletic, and I really, really like my alone time. Hm.

But the application is in. Don't let any of my video students see the video I made - it's terrible! But hopefully it shows that I am not a total screen dud.

We'll see if I even get an interview. If September arrives and I haven't gotten a call, I'll know I didn't even make the first cut. If I do make the first cut, I'll have to go to Chicago for the first interview.

I'll let you know! No doubt.

Now - back to Scene 28 - where was I - oh yes - being annoyed that we crossed the 180-degree line when Marissa goes to the window...

Peace,
REA

Montagey bits

Hello again!

I am back from camping -- no black flies to speak of anymore, but plenty of mosquitoes and certainly enough ticks to go around. Mm. But lovely! Fresh-water pelicans (so big!), falcons, eagles, dragonflies, leeches -- and a young buck pretty close up (so big!) for an extended time, as it didn't seem too threatened by me. It had cute fuzzy mini-antlers. I also saw some bear scat (so big!) but no bears. Just as well!

While I was up there, I took some video footage, just for personal "archives," and it occurred to me as I was shooting that I could still use some footage for the montage of Marissa's 'moment of being': a random collection (the more random the better) of people in everyday moments -- little snippets, not scenes. I could almost use still pictures, except I'd like the motion so I can overlap it in a cool way. I'm not at that point in the editing right now, but keep it mind, if you would. I'll put out a call when I'm ready. (some of you may remember that I actually put out a call several years ago, but we know how that went by now).

So -- today I will search all our stuff for ticks before bringing it into the house and then I will move on to more of Scene 28.

Guard against cynicism!!

Rachel

newsy news

Hi there -

Just letting you know I'm gone campin' this weekend. We leave in about an hour (at 4:30 a.m. -- I just got up at 3, fifteen minutes before Pete's son Jesse went to bed) and will be back on Sunday night. I truly hope we do not get attacked by a bear or other such large and feral animal. We'll be up in an area you can't drive to -- have to boat in (we'll be taking the catboat for it's last voyage as Pete will probably sell it as soon as we get back): Voyageurs National Park (http://www.nps.gov/voya/). That is, we drive five hours north to the park - it's much like Acadia - and then put the boat in to go the last few miles.

In other news:

I heard from Charlie Linshaw (played Eddie, mentioned previously)! Got in touch with him through IMDB. He has, since we saw him last, gotten his MFA at Columbia and is living in NYC ("in Hell's Kitchen now renamed Clinton :-)" as he says in his e-mail).

Also - back on May 29th (right before Pete fell off the roof), I got the following e-mail from Christine (now goign by "Vitta" after her grandmother):

"Hello Ladies & Gents!

"Production has just wrapped on "Passenger Side", a comedy feature in
which I have a supporting role. Check out the film's details:

www.imdb.com/title/tt1227170/

"Be sure to click through to my link as well. Search "Passenger Side" and
"Vitta Quinn" a billion, trillion times on IMDB.com so that our
StarMeter ratings skyrocket! :)

"In this film I portray Carla, a very, err, UNIQUE prostitute. That's all
I'm sayin', folks. My weird and wacky scene is with the two lead actors,
Adam Scott and Joel Bissonette.

"For all of you 1990's indie rock lovers (like myself!), Evan Dando (The
Lemonheads) and Greg Dulli (Afghan Wigs) have cameos in the film. I
believe the film's soundtrack is going to ROCK as much as the film
itself!"

I sat next to Evan Dando's dad at a Red Cross banquet once.

If you've got news of your own, please send it along!

Off to shower and head up into the black flies - I mean woods!!

Peace and courage,
Rachel

appreciation

Hello there,

I'm quite pleased with the way Scene 28 is shaping up. It's starting to cut together like a real conversation with a good pace.

We shot this scene (as I think I said?) from many angles. That is, we shot the first part of the scene (talk of specific relationships) from a few angles and then the second part of the scene (philosophical 'why attraction is healthy') from another set of angles. It really is a neat feeling to be able to put these takes together as if they were one flowing thing. The lines are, uhh, well, basically the same from take to take, but in one take, the lines are more on top of each other, and in another take, things take on a more carefree tone, etc. Cutting the different takes together lets an editor change the actors' rhythms, give them a switch in mood from one line to the next -- if it works/is believable.

It's a good reminder of how much power an editor has over the film as a whole. Javier Bardem (when he won one of those No Country for Old Men acting awards) thanked the editors for managing to piece together his best performance from all the different takes -- that's a kind of gracious we don't see too often.

My beloved John Sayles (writer/director) has said he always edits his own movies because to him it's like the final draft of the piece -- the script is the first draft, shooting is the revision, editing is the final draft. As a prose writer, he, this perspective makes a lot of sense and the more I edit (whenever I'm in an editing phase) the more I agree with him (I certainly experienced how shooting "revised" the script). To hire an outside editor is to grant someone a huge trust. Do they pick the take where the actor stutters a little and seems uncertain about what they're saying, or do they pick the take where the actor is brash, off the cuff. Such a difference in the way an audience will read the meaning of a moment. Not to mention where the close-ups come and where they decidedly do not: which moments are intimate ones.

It's hard to imagine discussion of "auteur theory" having any validity at all when a director's favorite editor or editing preferences are not discussed. Did Hitchcock often use the same editor? Ford? Scorcese? I seem to recall that Welles did -- though I might be thinking of the cinematographer... Tollefson? Something like that.

Anyway, I had some fun today. Yesterday was unfulfilling, but today was satisfying.

REA

Houston, we have a...

Okay, so I went to look up Tape 9 and what was on tape 9 at 46 min and 40 secs was not a CU of Bill, as it was so designated in my log notes. I fast-forwarded. 47:25? No. 49:08? No.

Uh-oh.

51?

Nyet.

So I went back to the PEDL copy that is sorted by tape rather than by scene to see if what I was seeing on the tape was in fact logged as Tape 9 at some point -- and yes, indeed: it says, "Tape 9, Scene 13, no take # [because we were practicing a zoom over and over without slating in between], 46:50 - M turns to cam already in CU."

Hmm.

This is the footage of Larry walking in on Marissa while she's dressing, and then Marissa walking in on Larry while he's washing his shirt in the sink. Pretty good stuff, actually! :)

But not Bill in the kitchen cursing about what a loser Marissa's ex is.

So I turned a couple pages and there at the end of Tape 9's log is another page -- the page I'd been looking at in the copy sorted by scene -- with Tape 9, 46:40 again!

???!!!

This is a problem.

Where the bigeezis are my close-ups of Bill??

I turned the page again and this Tape 9 notation continues -- The Bill CUs had stopped at 51:10 and this one picks up at 51:20, with "Rachel's bare feet walking on RR trax with dried leaves around" and th wild turkey we saw in street!!!!!!

I repeat for emphasis: !!!!!!

LAME!

Hm. When I logged originally, I did it from the SLP VHS tapes that the DP made as copies so I could play them on my TV (had no camera to play DV tapes at that time). Maybe one is mislabled?? Orrr....

Anyway, I checked Tape 19, just in case. I'll check 8 later - and 10? But I can't be looking through all 29 tapes (uhh... 28 tapes). What the hey?? Although maybe I'll have to...

There are a couple CUs of Bill on the end of Tape 3, but the ones I circled as good were on this mystery tape. Hmm.

Ridiculous.

REA

The art has its reasons...

First off --
Happy Birthday, Jenny!

Secondly --
I think I should start a running list for next time: What Not to Do!

I suppose it could have positive things on it as well -- surely I must be seeing more than what I did "wrong" as a director... right? Let me think... Is there anything I think I actually did right on this film? Hmmm...

In any case, What Not to Do Next Time #394:
Do not block a scene with two people working at the same counter or stove without the ability to shoot from the other side of the counter or stove! I mean, unless there is some artful reason to use their backs.

In S & B, I did not have an artful reason to use their BACKS, for heaven's sake. I mean, I had would-be artful reasons for doing a lot of things that others will think were accidental, I suspect, but having BACKS TO CAMERA was not one of them.

Also -- #4,632 -- Do not shoot actors in profile without having them "cheat" towards the camera a little.

I guess I could phrase that one in a positive way: when shooting in profile, have the actors cheat toward camera a little (unless an artful reason to do otherwise).

This reminds me of that Pascal phrase I love so much: "The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing." In this case, though, it's art, not heart, of which reason knows nothing. Ha ha?

ahem.

Anyway -- I have been better about editing than about blogging, but it's also true that I'm finding it harder to stay out of my new garden than I expected (pictures on my Facebook page). AND I've developed that Minnesota/Northern Territories disorder, PWSD (Post-Winter Stress Disorder), which manifests itself with the primary symptom of the occasional plaintive, desperate cry in a doorway, vis., "Please don't make me go inside!!" I'm terrified that I'll wake up tomorrow and it will be cold and dark again, that June will turn not into July but into November. I must be outside - I must be where I can see the "leafing greenly" (paraphrase of e.e. cummings) and feel the warm air caressing my sunscreened skin! I wish I could edit on the deck, OMG do I, but the laptop screen gets to washed out.

So, here I am in my study. At least it's overcast today.

I have managed to upload the Gay Comedian stuff from Tape 22 after all (though I have great concern about future tapes having similar degradations), and have cut Scene 27. I'm now about a quarter of the way done with the Attraction/Evolution scene (28). We shot this scene using the ends of four different tapes, which is a little inconvenient.

What Not to Do #4: Do not divide one of the longer scenes over several tapes when you have SEVEN set-ups to cover the way the actors move around the room throughout the scene.

For example, I'm only a little ways into the scene, but I need Bill's close-up now, which we shot in the middle of the footage on the day's third tape (Tape 9). I have already uploaded some footage from Tapes 2 & 3, have not yet looked at Tape 17, where most of the dramatic stuff is.

I suppose an editing teacher would tell me I should look through all of Scene 28's footage, all four tapes, all the way through, before uploading anything. Hmm. It has been a couple years since I did such a thing (when I logged the footage originally). ...see what coverage I really got, not rely on my "ridiculous ice cream" notes.

Oh, all right!

So that's what I'll do now -- watch the rest of Tapes 9 & 17.

See you later!
Rachel

All Rightee Then...

Hi, every(any)one!

Clearly -- as any of my students already had figured out, I suspect -- my ability to judge how long it takes me to do things is substantially limited. I thought things were going quickly with the unpacking, but then reality set in... and then literally as I was setting up my editing station, my partner Pete fell off the roof! Aack!! It was A) scary (I found him lying on the ground, moaning, basically unable to move), B) not even half as bad as it could have been (only one night in the hospital and no neck or back injuries), and C) time- & energy-consuming to do everything around the house that he was unable to do for a while. He's hobbling around with a Frankenstein boot now, back to work and off the Vicadin; seems as normal as he ever did...

And then, this past weekend, I did set all aside, editing included, in order to participate in the 48-Hour Film Project. Woo-hoo!

90 groups participated in Minneapolis this year -- reps gather on Friday evening and receive their genre, line of dialogue, prop and one character. Then we have 48 hours to write, produce and edit a short film (4-7 minutes) including all these elements. It's stressful and fun! I directed this year, which added to the stress, for sure, but it definitely worked out. We had a great group of people! The poor writers stayed up until 3 am working on the script Friday night, then Sat'y morning we secured some locations (really lucked out, there), and I made the shot-list (!!!), and then we shot 'til 8pm. Sunday we edited, turning in our finished product to the judges 15 minutes before the deadline! There will be a screening of a dozen or so of the films (including ours) at the Riverview Theater in South Minneapolis on Tuesday.

Ours is called "Finishing Touch" and you can view it on the editor's website, here: web.mac.com/paulyfunk (he lists our assigned genre as "Comedy" but it was actually "Sci-Fi" -- blame that on the lack of sleep!). On this same website, if you're interested, you'll see another video called "Return of the Century," which is the one I Assist. Directed last year -- that one was harder to edit and really should have been a full 12 minutes or so in order to make complete sense -- but, hey, you can see me in it as a guest at the party! :)

It was interesting this year to direct a script I didn't write most of -- always a good experience. No film written and shot and edited all in TWO DAYS can be perfect, and of course there are some flaws with 'Finishing Touch,' but overall we're quite proud of all we managed to pull together and it's got me all revved up to get back in to See & Be!!

"Attraction = Moths to a Flame" scene, here I come!

Love and Peas,
REA

unpacking

Hi - Just thought I'd let y'all know two things:

1) I'm on schedule to start editing & blogging this weekend, and

2) I accidentally signed into my old blog (http://peculiarpix.blogspot.com) when trying to get on here and, reading it over, I think I will probably start writing on there again, too. Maybe I'll combine them, but I'm not sure yet (I'll take votes if anyone cares). The other one's purpose was more philosophical, more about the writing and thinking, less about updates and the progress of the film. It wasn't Seeing and Believing specific, but was about my journey (if you'll allow) as a Quaker director/writer.

Hmmm...

Rachel

Merry Month of May

Hi there -

It's been crunch time around these parts -- end of term grading and packing up the old apt while trying to clean/repair the new house to get it ready -- little time for walking the dog, let alone editing.

But here's how the next few weeks look:

-- We MOVE on Sunday the 11th (in honor of mothers everywhere)

-- I get students' final papers on the 13th and will spend the next few days grading those, having to submit final course grades by the 16th.

-- I will likely spend a week unpacking and setting up my new garden (she grinned)

-- Then, starting around the 23rd of May (you know, give or take a day or two), I will set up my summer editing station and get back on it!

-- I will spend the summer editing!

Right now it's unclear how much temping/money-work I"ll have to do over the summer -- possibly none!! -- so I might be editing Full-Time (when not sailing or gardening) which would kick butt!! It's also unclear whether or not I"ll be coming east this August. We'll see.

So -- back to grading now, but that's how things look from here!

Love and courage,
REA

possibly...

... I think I might have fixed my camera today... even Tape 22...

...thinking seriously about getting a playback deck now...

REA

camera issues & local film

Okay, so... I tried to use the camera for taping some of my students as they gave their Informative Speeches (I teach Public Speaking), and it was having the same problems as with Tape 22 -- a kind of digital flipping & skipping on playback of the tape I was testing to see if it was the right tape to use. This means I really do have to bring the camera somewhere to get it looked at -- sh@*!! :(

Saw my brother in an independent film here recently -- 'Further North.' Lee's in it, along with small parts for Laura (his wife) and Calvin (one of their sons), and a bunch of local actors I know, including Pete. Took them two years to film it over three seasons! They used high-end professional equipment -- the director has access through his job, I understand. Producer was boom operator, that sort of thing -- I'm not sure how much money they had. A lot of it was shot outside in the snow when it was like 5 degrees! In fact, Pete was supposed to get shot and the bloody back of his head was going to go flying off, but the blood contraption kept freezing, so they couldn't use it.

As truly "indie" films go (friends working together, no one getting paid), I don't think it was any better than See & Believe could/will be. There were things about it that showed more feature experience, and that camera really did take beautiful pictures, but the characters were pretty cliché, for the most part, and the story was skeletal -- some intriguing shapes, but basically pretty shallow. It was an hour and a half of people shooting people, thinking about shooting people, and trying not to get shot. I respect its labor and effort and, if I do say so myself, my brother's performance, but I'd much rather work my ass off on a film that was at least trying - even unsuccessfully - to be worth the ones and zeros it's printed with: to make an audience think about something. Or else to laugh and feel good. 'Further North' just made one feel ill, and not for any philosophical purpose.

Those are the movies I like: movies that make you think, and movies that make you laugh and feel good. These seem like worthwhile endeavors. ...although-- there are movies that are trying to make audiences laugh that I do NOT like, but I think this is probably because these movies are at someone's expense; they're not respectful of humanity and its intricacies.

Layers, dude: I like me some layers.

I like that in music too.

Okay, well. There it is. I'm going to look into buying a playback deck and fixing my poor camera. Maybe tape 22 will play in a real deck.

On a personal note, we haven't been able to move into the house yet -- still too much work to be done -- but the water is now on, the new door is in and we're getting impatient, so it will probably be only a few more weeks (five more weeks of teaching - hmmm...).

Hope you're all well. Let me know you're there!

Rachel

drat

Well, the new Sony head cleaning device did not work. At least, for now, this means, I abandon the "gay comedian" scene. As I said, this is an okay scene to lose, for the most part.

The one problem I dread is that it's contiguous with the moths/evolution/attraction scene in the kitchen. That is, in "plot time," these two set-ups (kitchen and living room) are really the same "scene" -- From the kitchen, Bill says to Marissa, who is in the living room, something to the effect of "How garlicky do you feel? Kissing anyone later?" and she answers from the living room. We're not going to be able to intercut these, I think. It's only a small part of the scene, but I really liked having them call out to each other while each alone on screen.

Not to mention, it's cool to intercut things that were shot in two different places on two different days as if they were at the same time in the same place.

The close-up shots in 'sex, lies & videotape' of Andie MacDowell smashing the earring that she finds with the vacuum cleaner (proof of husband's affair) was apparently shot during post-production, long after initial shooting. They're in an entirely different room than where the scene "really" took place, and MacDowell is visibly pregnant, really, though manages to hide this fact because - coincidentally - the character was wearing a large men's oxford shirt in that scene. They had to match the carpet color and everything. Very impressive.

That movie is just generally impressive as a filmmaking endeavor. The only thing that really doesn't work is the last scene, and I know some other people who really disagree with me, who really like it, so heck...

Anyway, I've got to shoot around the gay comedian. No gay comedians for us.

Personal News!!

I bought a house! Pete and I did, together. Me! Us!

I have never owned a house before. In fact... have I ever lived in a non-rented house? Oh, Bird Street (where we shot the suicide scenes) - my mom's house - I lived there for a couple years. But my life has been pretty mobile. When, at the closing, they asked me to write down all my addresses from the last ten years, I choked. Pete put down his two little addresses, and then I had to confess I didn't think I could remember them all. It took me several minutes, with everyone else in the room watching me and coaching me, basically, just to make stuff up, so we could get on with it (!!). As it was, I think I ended up putting 242 1st Ave, Tucson, when actually it was 242 E 5th St, Tucson, and 737 1st Ave. Or 1st Street? East? And I was so unnerved, I couldn't remember the name of the street in Davis Square where I lived for a couple years and where Louise lived for innumerable years (Elm).

This was quite a rigmarole -- we almost didn't get it because our financing fell apart after they accepted out offer. We didn't know if we'd get new financing until two days before the closing, and didn't know if the seller would accept our new financing until 16 and a half hours before the closing! And all that was after losing two other houses we'd wanted (one of which might still have trumped this one -- but only in some ways, not in all ways), and seeing more than 20 others that were not for us (our low price range made many of the houses we looked at basically uninhabitable - "investment opportunities," as they say). In the end, though, good luck triumphed!

The house is a converted storefront -- years ago it was a candy store, we're told. Neat! I'm going to have to look it up, see if I can find any references to it when it was a store. It's right across from a high school, so there must be thousands of grown-up kids that remember buying candy there. Maybe there's a memoir online or something.

Whenever we see a news report about the horrible economy and housing market, Pete and I recall that line of Jimmy Stewart's in 'It's a Wonderful Life' -- During the panic, when Bailey's trying to get people in the 'building and loan' to calm down, he says, "Look - Potter's not selling - Potter's buying!" [...wait, though - is that backwards?...] Well, that's us!! You can't say we're not doing our best to boost the nation's economic confidence.

Anyway, there it is. We still are in our apartment and will move little by little for a while.

And I'm going to have a garden to plant! Hooray!!!!!

script, lessons & videotape

Well, I have checked four stores, purchased one head-cleaner that my camera won't accept, and now finally have ordered what I hope is the right one online. Alas, it may take a week to get here.

It's possible that it's tape 22 that's the main problem, somehow, and not the playhead. I tried tape 23 in there and it seemed to be fine. I'm reluctant to try more tapes out in case there is something wrong with the camera -- don't want to damage the tapes, somehow. The fact that it might be the tape and not the playhead is a little scary -- it's my only copy of the tape. Makes me realize why duping is so important. Cleaning the playhead will be a good thing, regardless.

Fortunately, as tapes go, #22 would be one whose loss would probably not stop the film from being completed. It is mostly that first day of shooting the "frazzled" scene, which we ended up reshooting with different blocking and lighting the next day. The rest of it is the "gay comedian" scene (which is what I was going to edit next), but I have come to dislike this scene, anyway, because it's sort of simple-minded and perhaps cliche -- a display of Bill's "gay-dar." If I can, I might cut it from the film, anyway -- even though I really do like the aesthetic of it: Bill on a couch facing the camera/a TV, replaced by Marissa in the same spot when he leaves, both munching Chinese crackers from a little bowl. It's a cute little moment - except for the writing.

I find that I cringe at a lot of the writing nowadays. I feel that my final script did not do justice to the years of development I did for each character and the issues, prior. I ended up with an over-simplified and heavily expository version because I was so determined to ACT-- by which I do not mean "be an actor," but to move from INaction and wishing and whining to DOING. I was hellbent on Getting it Done because I felt that I had been idle too long, let it go too long in the stewpot -- needed to get it all out on the plate!! What is it all for, after all, if it stays inside you (or your computer)?

In the Gnostic gospel of Thomas, Jesus says: "If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you." Wise, wise words that have intrigued, shamed, inspired and comforted me for 25 years.

The frame of mind I was in at that time in 2002 was sort of bifurcated; it was one part "to do is to grow" and one part "get me into ANYthing that's not grad school!!" The former is not my typical state of mind, really; it's very "J" (for you Myers-Briggs fans), whereas I am usually exceedingly "P." But I was so sick of my own P-ness (as it were, ha ha). Sick of pondering.

I wonder what others of you thought of the script at the time or talked about when I wasn't around. I'd be very interested to hear your impressions.

I remember that one of the things that enabled me to get the words on the page was that I thought that we'd be able to do a more "improv" style, that I would encourage the actors to improve the lines & scenes (one of the best scenes in 'sex, lies & videotape' was developed by the actors in a rehearsal improv, according to Soderbergh's memoir, I knew). As I wrote a clunky line, I'd tell myself not to take too much time to make it perfect, because I was working on a deadline and we'd be able to fix it during production - I'd leave it to the actors, for their individual shaping.

I know that in our first rehearsals I said that I wanted to do this, but then I recall shutting actors down a couple times early in shooting because - coincidentally - the couple lines that they first chose to improv on were actually very specifically crafted. D'oh! After that, I tried several times to get actors to branch out and be looser, but all resisted me because I'd lost (or never earned) their trust, I think. Did I say, D'oh! Only about ... oh, 15%? of the lines were word-specific. Less, maybe (without the script in front of me, it's hard to recall -- probably it was scene by scene, actually, not line by line). But how could they/you know?

I seem to recall with Kevin (?) that he wanted to say something other than "lime rickees," but "Rickee," of course, is the name of the main character in my other screenplay, so I wanted to leave it in. How would he know that?

It was a directing lesson. I'm not sure I learned more than "I don't know how to do that" (direct through improv), but that, in itself, is a valuable piece of knowledge.

So. Any thoughts or memories about the script?

'Til next time,
Rachel

News

Oh - and by the way - Christine got married! The "swell lad" (as she called him) is named David Joy. What a nice name! They got married in Connecticut but live in L.A. nowadays.

You can take a look at Christine's actorly websites:

www.vittaquinn.com
or
www.imdb.com/name/nm2183298/

Kevin has an IMDB site, too, though no photo (unhappy face) (that is, not that your photo should be of you with an unhappy face, but that I'm making an unhappy face because it would be neat if you had some pix up there - does it cost money?). Say, did you meet Parker Posey?? (happy face)

R.J. also has an IMDB site, photoless.

Anyone else?

Ooo - Charlie Linshaw. Charlie has no idea there's a blog, though. Right Charlie? Most people didn't meet him - he played "Eddie," half of the couple whom Marissa "overhears" arguing while walking through Back Bay.

Alas, I have not the clout to get Seeing and Believing up on IMDB until it screens somewhere or until one of us becomes famous enough that anything having touched us is considered as having "general interest" (or some such phrase).

Rachel (other one), I noticed a while back that you hadn't updated your Movie Star site in quite some time.

Anyone else got a website? Jack-the-Mac-Man? Greg? Henh? Anyone? Any news people want to share?

Jenny & Mark, whose house we used for Bill's dining room and Amy's bedroom, had a baby last year. :)

Oh, and I think I just bought a house. Although not all the t's are dotted, etc., so keep all your fingers crossed yet. It used to be a candy store!

Rachel

stupid (play)head !

Hello again,

Apparently I am an idiot! ...grrrr... Okay, not about everything. But the stupid part of my stupid brain was clearly - and stupidly - in control when I got this DV camera and paid $100 for the 4-year warranty But Then Didn't Send In the Warranty Activation Card.

Aaaaaaarrrghh!!!!

It is a particularly gnawing error because it cost me $100!!

Now my camera, which I use to upload all my clips, needs service, she said menacingly, squinting. It would have been FREE (for that $100)!

WE are NOT amused.

It could very well be that the problem could be fixed by a head cleaner. I have tried cleaning the head manually with a swab, but it didn't help, so I dunno. I guess I'll buy a head cleaner this week. Much less satisfying than having it professionally cleaned.

This has put a stop to Scene 27, 28 and any other editing.

I am so annoyed!! How can they take your money and then not provide the service?? Grrrr...

I can still progress with trying to figure out what Final Cut "data files" are and getting Scene 6 off to Kevin (who called last night on his way to - did he say, "baseball practice"? In early March? Indoor baseball, Kevin, or have you left NY?)

sigh.

REA

ow

Well, I've been sick the last couple days, so no editing, and then this afternoon I got a migraine aura, which sent me to bed full of dread. Haven't ever quite got the full headache, though, which is great. Still, it means I can't be staring at the computer for long or those cute little vision-blocking crystaline shapes start forming again. They look like little swatches of Picasso paintings, all lit up.

Migraine auras, anyone?

Did find out that I can't use the DVD recorder as I had hoped, BUT that I might have a way to copy tape-to-tape on campus.

I think what I'll do is send Kevin his raw footage, including all 300 hours of Scene 6 (I exaggerate) (a little), and then also send him the Final Cut data files for the Scene 6 that I put together, myself. Truly, now having cut Scenes 3-5, I know just how bad the sound in Scene 6 is -- it's bad. So maybe, Kevin, you know someone who can deal with it?

Must close my eyes again now.

How 'bout that Diablo Cody? Huh?

REA

check and check (and Brando)

Hello again,

I have finished Scenes 3 and 4 - so check those off!! They were both pretty short -- Scene 3, in fact, was only one shot, so that wasn't exactly "editing" except insofar as it was choosing the best take and that sort of thing. In Scene 3, Marissa enters Bill's apt with her bag and plops down on the couch to wait for him. Scene 4 is him coming in ("Heyyyy!") and showing her that he brought her some raspberries, and she thanks him for letting her stay there. Then they move into the kitchen, where he fixes her a snack that I wish someone would fix for me sometime --

--yes, as with calling the conservative, "freaky," I get to serve my characters raspberries and lime rickees and make reference to Joni Mitchell, Skip Gates and Marian Wright Edelmann (sp?). This is definitely not _Grey's Anatomy_. Not to mention, I can have a Quaker meeting without quaintness. It's no accident that the character I'm currently writing has a pet iguana, either.

Of course, when I say "currently writing" I really mean "currently holding off on because I have far too much other stuff going on."

I have not fully appreciated that "create your own world" aspect of writing in a long time, but it really is aces. I remember once reading a murder mystery in which the main character was a transplant to a small New England town from Greenwich Village, NYC, and what's more, she was married to a liberal Protestant minister. There were all these little references and in-jokes about the differences between NE and NY and about being on the admin side of a church community that I especially relished and had never found in any other book. It drove home the point for me that readers respond most powerfully to characters who are actually like the people they really know - an argument for making sure little kids "of color" have books that aren't all about white people, among other things. I had a similar experience with the characters in _The Bean Trees_ and in the comic strip _Dykes to Watch Out For_. So rarely have I encountered characters with life experiences or priorities or interests like mine that - even though I'm supposedly educated and sophisticated in my understanding of literacy and related things - I think that subconsciously I _still_ have a resistance to believing that such characters are "legitimate." I struggle with that issue, anyway: "Ohh, I can't write about _that_!!"

But I do believe that it's through the specific that we reach the universal. The more clear and truthful you can be about your personal, genuine experience, the more likely you are to be genuinely recognizable to others.

Without wanting to go too far afield -- that's why Marlon Brando is such a f%#!ing brilliant performer/actor: because all the moments of all his characters are just so beautifully damn SPECIFIC. There's no "anger" or "pleasure" or "wonder" in Brando, there is only THAT MOMENT FOR THAT CHARACTER. He is never *outside* his characters.

Was never, I mean. Alas. Time. Have I mentioned lately that we're all Five Years Older than we were when we shot this movie?

Scenes 27 ("gay comedian") and 28 ("moths") are next. I'll try to upload them tomorrow.

Anybody know the answer to that DVD question?

Peace and fortitude,
Rachel

Final Cut from DVD?

Oh - and also --

Does anyone know...?

My department has acquired a new machine that will allow me to copy my mini-DV tape content onto DVDs (in real time, alas). As I recall, there's no real degrading of quality with copying digital stuff, because it's just copying all the ones and zeros, unlike with the magnetic tapes. Can anyone confirm or deny that this would be true, going from tape to DVD? Would it depend on the type of DVD?

I'm wondering if I should back all my tapes up on DVD, for one thing. Also, this would allow me to mail the footage to someone who might want to do some of the editing (Kevin and RJ?). If I copy all the footage onto DVDs, would editing software simply be able to utilize that footage like it would any raw "clip"?

Anyone, anyone?

posting video?

Rachel/Amy asked about whether or not I was ever going to get any of the stuff I edit online. Well, truthfully, I can't be spending an hour on uploading every 15-second clip these days. Does anyone know a better way? There must be a way to put videos online nowadays. I might have something through the university, but if you have any suggestions, please pass them on, I'd be happy to share --

-- though you must all to please remember that these are "rough cuts," i.e., the sound isn't fixed, there are a couple places I've decided to leave a little less than smooth because I think a more experienced editor would be able to do better with that particular problem, etc. I mean, Scene 5 is _much_ better than 6 because there were fewer things to deal with, but you should just (to please) remember it's all going to be somewhat "rough" until I get someone else to smooth it out -- especially the sound, which makes a big difference for the viewer, if only subconsciously.

AND, I'd be happy to put some of it up if I knew how. I'll spend some time looking into that this weekend, but if anyone has any suggestions, they're more than welcome.

I've also dug out my notes on grants and will spend some time on that again soon.

It's 6 below zero here!!!! Aaaaaghhhhh!

Love and light,
Rachel

Progress!

I have finished Scene 5 - huzzah! It was an entirely different set of issues from Scene 6 and much easier. Plus, I got to watch Christine say the same lines over and over (opposite Kevin again), instead of myself -- which is much preferable.

Why is it that so many of us hate to watch ourselves on tape/film, I wonder. Why do we really _hate_ it so? I mean, I know that what I truly hate is my own bad acting on display - I cringe when see myself so vulnerable to ridicule and inviting of criticism; but so many people don't want to be taped AT ALL, even when they're just sitting there being themselves, that it must be something _human_.

I have never been one of those people who staunchly refuses to have her picture taken even on special occasions; I admit such people Baffle me and I sometimes find such refusals selfish and often downright rude. That is, there are certainly times when I protest, become annoyed or duck away, and we all have a right to those days - but in general, if someone wants your picture, they probably know you and like you, know what you really look like, and just want to be reminded of your existence from time to time by a visual representation of you - that's nice, isn't it? When I meet up with those people who WILL NOT be taped or photographed, I always feel like saying, "Do you think that I _can't see_ you right now? I SEE you - right there in front of me - You Are Visible. It's not an existential x-ray machine, for crying out loud. Do you think that I _can't tell_ if a photograph is a good likeness of you or not? Is it that you're actually a vampire? Being photographed doesn't actually remove or add anything from or to you, it doesn't _make_ you any different than you are pre-photograph..."

But what is the feeling that people have? It might be the sense that one is giving up control of one's Self, one's self-determination -- as if a photo/tape were like a clone: this "version" of you then circulates in ways you can have no consciousness of -- that would be hard on any insecure heart: "What if someone thinks that's how I Am??"

You can't defend "yourself" -- it sets "you" up as present in places and times when other people might tear you down (or up) and you cannot react or fight back, cannot use your intuition to assess their intentions, cannot distract them or change the subject. That must be the human/animal thing - fear of not being able to protect yourself. One's ability to be self-aware & aware of one's surroundings and to defend oneself is instinctively guarded, I guess. Right? Although if it were really deep-seated, the people who don't want their photographs taken wouldn't drink alcohol, either - alcohol certainly makes people less self-aware and less aware of surroundings -- though you're not _aware_ that you're losing awareness, whereas with the photos, you do maintain a certain cognizance of how unaware "you" will be in that photo. The irony, of course, is that a photo _isn't_ you, whereas the intoxicated body _is_. The photo's lack of ability to read an environment doesn't actually endanger _you_, while the drinking effect might very well.

Why am I suddenly writing about drinking?

Hmmmm...

What a strange entry. I'll leave it intact, though - I mean, what the hell?

SCENE 5 is DONE.

I think I will do Scene 4 now -- the one where Bill comes in and says "Heyyyy!" to a sleeping Marissa. It is already neat to see how 5 & 6 actually fit together, I like the idea of tagging 4 on there, too. Scenes 7-13 involve the first dinner gathering -- including Marissa walking in on a shirtless Larry by accident. Scene 14 is the actual dinner, at the table -- the one where it was 100 degrees - remember? I don't think I'll do those next; I think I'll move from 4 to 28 -- the scene in which Christine gets the joy of saying, "Hold that thought, Habermas" and Kevin gets to explain the Law of Moths & Lemmings: attraction kills! (pffft!)

I think I'd better go eat something.

Peace out,
Rachel

freaky roommate, take 1

Hi!

It's been three weeks, I know -- teaching set in.

But today I have been at it -- Scene 5, in which Marissa wears a yellow shirt and stands next to yellow flowers. What did I want yellow to mean, again? Her repression? I think it was her repression. Does that sound right, Christine?

In any case, she plays with the Wolfman -- not a euphemism but an action figure -- and Bill refers to Amy as the "freaky roommate." I like being the writer because I get to refer to conservative conformists as freaky. That's the good life. Though you wouldn't know it from looking at me.

Editing straight dialogue between two people in a quiet kitchen, and NOT contending with bus farts, traffic growls and beeping crosswalk signs, is much, Much preferable, I do declare. I think this scene is going to be - gasp - good!

More tomorrow,
Rachel

Clip by Clip

Okay, I have now uploaded all the clips from Scene 5 that I think I'll draw from. Five different angles, ELEVEN takes of the master shot -- what the hell was my problem?? I'm sorry, actors.

This is the scene in the Jenkins kitchen when Marissa tells a worried Bill that she's "ready" (to be out of the hospital) and Bill describes to her Sarah's "freaky roommate" with the really cool boyfriend. Kevin is prepping some fresh raspberries -- mmmmmmm... makes me miss summertime!

This is also when Rachel (me) takes the Jenkins' Wolfman action figure and marches it across the screen going "Grrr. Arrrgh." a la Joss Whedon at the end of 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer.'

There are some touching moments here. Thanks, guys!

video P.S.

Okay, now that I've posted the video (two tries - took me an hour - just for 15 seconds! We may be approaching the technology age, but we're not there yet), I can offer a little warning about it -- two things:

1) I think it plays too fast here. I mean, I think it's sped up as posted on the blog -- it's not *quite* this fast & obviously jumpy in Final Cut or Quicktime, I don't think. Does it seem too fast? Plus, 2), I finally figured out how to export the videos to Quicktime while preserving the 16x9 aspect ratio, but it was lost in posting here - too bad!

I hope those two things don't make it impossible to judge. But comment anyway!

Video!

Hey there -

Thanks to Rachel O and Kevin for the surveillance notifications! :)

I'm here to try to post some video - 15 seconds from Scene 6 (Davis Sq). This is the opening, with the WS that is "backwards" as compared to all the MS & CU of the scene. I really want to use some kind of establishing shot, so - despite Pete (m' manfriend')'s comment on a previous version that I look (in the shot) like I'm doing a pirhouette (sp?) - I've tried to cut from the WS to a MS on the turn I make as I sit down - you know, like audience turning with me, sort of thing...

Anyway - I'm hoping some one will tell me how it looks -- how bad is the jump from one direction to the other? From Kevin CU to the WS? Is it usable or not? Other comments?



Lemme know what you think.

Scene 6 was hard. I'm moving on to Scene 5 now.

REA

Further motivation

Well, I started teaching yesterday (for the new term, that is). It's the first time I'll have three "sections" - i.e., they're all 'Intro to Public Speaking,' but different times. Is 27 times 3 really 81? I've been saying I'll have "75" students -- 81 seems like more than six more than 75. I think it's psychologically more like twelve more. :)

Anyway, in my third section, one of the students asked me to say a little about myself, and whaddaya think came out of my mouth? From Boston, blah blah blah, have a dog and a cat, etc., etc., and I'm slowly editing a movie I shot "a few years ago." They wanted to know what the movie was about, I said something vague, a couple people looked interested and then it was time to go. But now I have yet one more group of conscience police on my tail.

That's 50% what this blog is for, you know -- to keep me on th ball. I haven't had time to work on the editing for the last two weeks or so, but I WILL get back to it -- I'm going to try to edit every Friday and Saturday. It would definitely help my motivation to know that someone was looking in on this blog from time to time. If you actually read this, just post a 'hi' comment, so I know you're keeping an eye on me. If you would. Maybe I should tell my class they'll get extra credit points if they post on my blog...

In any case, I'll keep at it as best I can!

It's been below zero here for two weeks now -- I'm COLD!

All the very best to youse and yourn,
Rachel

People News

Hi - so - Greg Dancer is moving to Copenhagen!

Copenhagen is cool. That's where the "Dogme 95" group is. They are a group of filmmakers who wrote a manifesto (in 1995, as you might guess) about how movies should be made -- cheaply, for the most part, for both values-related and artistic reasons. Very interesting. They made 'Dogville' (with Nicole Kidman) which I loved. I thought the lack of walls in the set was fascinating and very effective. The story takes place in a small American town, but the set is all just one large warehouse, with "chalk" marking where the "houses" start and stop -- among other things. It's a gloomy, disturbing film, a la the short story "The Lottery." If you're interested in independent film, I highly recommend it.

So, Greg, are you going to go find Lars? Tell him I said 'hey.'

I have other interesting news about other people, but not the express permission to share it. Anytime you want to let me know that I can share, please do.

And thanks for posting a comment, Jack!

Rachel

SCENE 6 is "in the C"

All right, for better or worse, I have put one scene together! Yayyy! Woo hooo!!

*big sigh of relief*

One down, sixty-five-ish to go. I say "ish" because of things like the absence of a Scene 11 and the fact that we re-numbered some scenes in accordance with how we shot them, etc.

I tried to export the beginning in order to post it here and get some feedback, but I can't figure out how to get it to export in 16x9. I'd swear I was doing what I'm supposed to be doing -- except for the lack of result. I'll keepbnm [cat walking on my kekloyboardgh - go away, Max] keep trying.

I finally saw 'Rosemary's Baby' a few days ago. [spoiler alert] That really is a remarkable movie for 1965--definitely not directed by an American (Did she just say something about her period without it being a punchline?!) Just so artfully shot--although I could have done without the superimposition of the devil's face near the end, that was overkill and a little silly.

I'm sure our film won't have any overkill. Ahem.

You know what our film does have a lot of? Food.

But I'm not going to tackle one of the dinner scenes just now (I actually did do a version of the "Life has directions" dinner scene between Larry and Marissa a year or two ago - I wonder if it will hold up). I'm thinking of doing the scene when Bill comes home from work to find Marissa newly arrived. I think of it as the "Heyyyyyy" scene because Kevin had to come in the door and say "Heyyyyyy" so many times. Scene 4 maybe it is? Hmmm. I haven't seen the footage for this scene in a couple years - should be interesting!

I'm hungry.

Rachel
oh - P.S. - This is Max. He helps me sometimes.

I Miss My Moviola

...although I actually liked the Steenbeck better. The old by-hand film-editing machines. Screw this computer editing!! *can't *touch *it -- *all *illusory... Aarrghhh!

Of course, I'm sure that people who actually know what all those commands mean have an easier time of it. But I, for example, seem to have de-activated the auto-link function, somehow. That is, when I put a clip in the timeline, it's not automatically locked to its sound. Driving me crazy! And even when I get a little check mark next to the word "Link" in the pull-down menu, it's not!

I miss the actual cutting and splicing - hanging clips up on the bin pins, wheeling the bins around... oh well. This was certainly cheaper.

Thanks for reading, Other Rachel's BF!!

Good night,
REA

Oh, and BTW

Some of you gave me some interesting details about your lives that I'd be happy to relate here, but I don't want to "talk out of school" -- let me know if I can share your life updates!

Gang's All Here!

Hello again!

It's true - I've been gone for a week. How could I deny it?

In the meantime, I've heard back from Rachel (the other one), Kevin, Christine (who may or may not actually go by "Christine" anymore...), Cynthia (Conti), Greg and Sarah. Hooray! Also another friend who likes her privacy but who helped us out quietly, back in the day, with some _money_, which was mighty nice of her, and although she hasn't confirmed my mention of the blog, Louise might check in here from time to time too (she made us some very yummy food when we were working in the Jenkins' kitchen, and she and her Michael & Duncan were Quaker extras at the meeting house). Soon I'll send out a wider net. Feel free to spread the love and chaos, yourselves (IF you're actually even reading this, which, I know, you might not be. La la la...)

I didn't finish Scene 6 as I said I would -- I ended up refining the timing of the dialogue instead. So TODAY, by gum, here goes.

Also - a little later today, after I've got some cutting done, I think I'll post some more pictures -- and see what the deal is with posting video. There seems to be a little filmstrip icon, but I'm dubious.

And if you do read this - let me know you're out there! I must admit, I feel a little silly writing into the ether sometimes. :)

Peace out,
Rachel