How Far We've Come

Tomorrow is the last day of the month before the movie is due to Sundance, the first of the fests I'm submitting to.

That means I have roughly three weeks to get it as good as I can.

The good news is, the current cut is pretty solid. I'll do some more fine-tuning for sure, but I've cut 20 minutes out already and I don't see myself going much further than that. I've solved just about all the problems I needed to with editing.

The big things on the to-do list:
FX Shots - Some inserts of the ship igniting, sparks, etc. Imaginary shots of the ship taking off and crash landing on the moon. These will all be done practically with models. Should be fun. Master of construction/pyrotechnics will be assisting.

Sound - This is a multi-parter. I've got to go through and finish a full run of audio clean-up, then based on what needs it, get ADR from Kemer and Cyndee. I did it already with Steven and could go ahead and do it with everyone, but I don't actually know 100% what I need and don't yet. I'm just ballparking it. I've also got to record/mix foley for the whole movie. This should take a couple days of solid work. I've got to work with Ben to lock in the music and work on a final mix of everything together.

Credits/Titles - This seems easy enough, except I really want to go all out with it. Especially the end credits. I'm also considering doing these practically. Actually drawing out all the names or something, I haven't really figured out the specifics. And honestly this isn't crucial for the screener that's due at the end of the month.But being that this is the first title/credit sequence I've really done since both schooling/working in design, I feel like it's a great opportunity to do something ambitious.

Color Correcting - This is both big and small. On one hand we shot everything really well. For the most part the image I shot is what I wanted, but there are a handful of places that need real "correction," everything else will just be matching shots for consistency sake, and making sure everything feels right. I'm of the school that digital color correction is way abused/overused these days. For something that didn't used to be such a big part of the production process, it's really become overblown, and largely results in people ruining footage and making cheap choices and marketing choices in the use of color. This is an era of everyone having the tools to change their footage and people are doing it in order to give this impression of professionalism. But real professionalism is knowing what you want in advance and shooting it on set.

This leads me onto a tangent: Imperfection. (and before I get into it, that is pretty much all that's left to do in three weeks)

Increasingly, I believe that imperfection is what makes good art good. It's largely a side effect of risk-taking which often goes hand-in-hand with innovation which is often what defines defining works of art.

When you're doing something for the first time, you're never going to get it perfect. But you're going to get something unique. I think that uniqueness stems directly from that imperfection. Because if you believe practice makes perfect, then it also stands to reason that perfection is stale. You can do something enough times that you get it perfect, but I think the first time you do something is probably a lot more human and interesting than when you do it after doing it a bunch of times. The attempt at perfection is ultimately more compelling than perfection itself. Although you could argue that perfection doesn't actually exist and everything is an attempt.

But my point is, that I think it's the artist (in this case filmmakers) that aren't afraid to make a mess of things that make the most interesting things. You can see it in concrete examples like Apocalypse Now, Star Wars, Edward Scissorhands, Reservoir Dogs, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. These are all imperfect films. But they're charmingly imperfect. It's what makes them. I would argue that most directors' early works are their most interesting. It's what defines them and inspires people to support them. Heck, the Criterion Collection has basically made a business out of rereleasing early works.

This isn't to say that director's can't continue to make good films after they've made a name for themselves. I think in some cases they lose a passion that drives their early work because there's a desperation about it. Good directors continue to innovate though. And continue to take risks. Christopher Nolan is a solid example of this. Or Danny Boyle. Each of his films is something entirely different from the last. Tim Burton would be an example of someone who has stopped innovating and just keeps repeating...now without the low-budget charm of his initial innovation.

Wes Anderson, probably my favorite director, is seen by a lot of people as someone who keeps repeating himself. Then again he just made a stop motion kids movie, so I don't think anybody really saw that coming. I may be biased because I'm a sucker for his material, but I'm also most fond of largest critical failure, The Life Aquatic. It's a movie that you can see uncertainty and imperfection in, but that's part of why I think I'm drawn to it. It's kind of a failed attempt (though I use that term lightly as it's my all-time favorite movie), but in falls in line with the themes of the movie. That's why Apocalypse Now works so well. It's as fucked up as the situations and characters within it.

All of this is just to say, I think the idea of having perfect picture or color correction or sound is an overrated side effect of the digital age. The Beatles are probably the greatest band ever, and their music was all recorded mono. Most people today would insist on a stereo mix, but is that really so crucial to quality music? I think you can't be afraid of those things. If I was I don't think I could have made this movie. I'm okay without a Skywalker Sound audio mix. I don't think it's what makes or breaks this film. In fact, I don't think most people will notice.

Now the real kicker, is I'm a huge blu-ray fanatic. I love collecting HD restorations of old films. Who knows where that comes from......well, one could argue that it's knowing you're seeing something as pristine as it'll ever be (or need to be) and it's still not perfect. The blu-ray of Wizard of Oz doesn't hold a match to Avatar, but that doesn't really change the fact that Avatar is a very bad movie.