I love panels and yet I hate having no quick questions that surface in that time window afterwards where you should walk up and ask insightful queries on film making, writing, editing and so on. I tend to get quiet and marinate on the nights events and key points made allowing my observations to evolve and well.. make sense (I do the same thing after seeing a film). Last week, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences held the event, “Turning the Page: Storytelling in the Digital Age” at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills, CA.

Panelists included:

• Writer Mark Boal (Academy Award nominee for “Zero Dark Thirty”)
• Editors Maryann Brandon and Mary Jo Markey (“Star Trek Into Darkness”)
• Editor William Goldenberg (Academy Award winner for “Argo,” nominee for “Zero Dark Thirty”)
• Writer Damon Lindelof (“Star Trek Into Darkness”)
• Editor Dylan Tichenor (Academy Award nominee for “Zero Dark Thirty”)

Stepping back and seeing the whole nights thematic tempo and major debate points made from the panelists, watching their exclusive clips; I like getting a gauge of forecasting that cultural effect towards what audiences want in a movie experience and the potential direction it goes from there.  If I went up to the panelists afterwards, I wouldn’t be able to do much in that 40 seconds past gushing about the films or television shows they worked on.

Film Director/Moderator, John August held the last question for each panelists, [With where we are now with storytelling in the digital age and propelling forward] “…what gets you excited or fearful about emerging technologies?”. Editors Maryann Brandon and Mary Jo Markey (“Star Trek Into Darkness”) both highlighted, among other panelists, about how they felt that there’s “too much detail, that films are meant to be a dream”; soft without such hard lines and realistic detail.

When Maryann said it should feel like a dream, I immediately pictured that technique from our golden era of film where extra special lighting and foggy lenses added to the camera would turn their female characters into glowing goddesses. It goes without writing, that’s prevalent today and you’d expect it stand the test of time since it pushes that romantic cinematic allure that we all have come to enjoy in film. “These actors won’t be able to work past 35!”, Markey adds.

Could her reaction be a result of more than just technology charging too far ahead for our own cultural evolution in the experience of movie theater entertainment? Do we feel like todays/tomorrows standards should be built upon biggest resolution, highest frame rate, in 3D – or do we really need them at all? A good story will always remain king, as technology will always continue to advance. That being said, has the years of advertising geared us into hastily re-inventing these tools that ‘innovate’ the film experience better each year, when all we’re doing is holding ourselves back from what good cinema really should be?

Surrounded in stimulus.

From the competition with epic home theaters, to torrent sites for ripped flicks, to the gross income standards for blockbuster films, there’s a lot of competition for movie theaters. Plus if you’re home, pants are optional. You can’t compete with that.. right? Well, then we get to the actual advertising. I know this won’t change as they do need to make that money back, but if it’s going to be a major blockbuster – and you know it’ll do well, please stop releasing 5 trailers and then 6 scenes after 4 featurettes. I understand you have to make sure your audience reach is strong for opening weekend, but there should be a parallel ad campaign that has catered footage shot specifically for commercial advertising. This lets you cut down on revealing too much of the excitement or plot points. Iron Man 3 did this quite well actually. There certainly was a bit of footage released that was spoilerific, but a lot of the attention has been directed to the Mandarin and I think that’s the sweetest deception that went on for the ad campaign.

If I buy a movie ticket online will your ad campaign stop playing at my location if I submitted my IP? That needs to happen. Aside from the money to be made and advertising that’s everywhere, I get the feeling that down the road (long or short), we’ll get to a point where there’s so much muscle and power to these technologies that we find ourselves being turned off or distracted by the detail, troubling our abilities to susprned our disbelief and enjoy the story. This may have been the issue with mixed reviews concerning the high frame rates (HFR) shot for Peter Jackson‘s The Hobbit.  

However it’s not to say this is a bad format to work in, as it’s proven to be a very legitimate form of high quality frame rate for digital film capture – the real question is, what types of movies would HFR be more fitting towards? The Hobbit pushes fantasy. Although it’s bringing you into this created world, in real-time and live-action, it’s pushing fantasy very heavily. I thoroughly enjoyed it yet I didn’t manage to watch it in 48fps. Many though did, and it was enough to stir a debate.

To Maryann Brandon‘s point of ‘being in a dream’, this very well could have been that one deciding shift in the rails towards different HFR approaches. Applying this lifelike frame rate to movies that push hyper real, like Zero Dark thirty – real intense cinematography that feels visceral and ‘in the moment’ might work as a better module for HFR. As opposed to more whimsical tales of colorful worlds that cultivate more pure imagination and wonder, might want to just keep the limits at 3D and call it a day. I remember going to see ‘Superman Returns’ in IMAX 3D. The parts that had choc-full of activity and dynamic action were the parts I had trouble keeping up with. Even though the technology was present and able to run those kind of numbers for a 3D experience at IMAX, my eyes couldn’t keep up with the frame rate of that 3D transfer from screen to my eyeballs, resulting in a real-time ‘dropped-frame’ delivery. For me, that was a case where the technology held the experience back.

Whether people aren’t 100% sold on HFR, Peter Jackson had some balls to take it on and break into new territory with film technology. He helped innovate and push the envelope, which will lead as a stepping stone towards another breakthrough in the future to come by utilizing that technology.

When advancing into new technological horizons, is there really anything that would hold us back anyway from achieving that 5-star night at the ol’ cineplex? Are these discrepancies about high frame rate a matter of balancing the goals of immersing ourself without revealing our own presence as a part of the experience? This may sound odd because I feel the lines between the two are so fine but we want to be a part of that movie and yet never want to recognize fact that I’m in a theater until the lights come up. The theater is a place where only consciousness exists. When those lights go down, we’re cloaked in the safety of darkness, left with only yourself and the screen. There are no rows of chairs or people anymore. No flashy clothing or even flesh on your bones. It’s just your open mind and heart that is present now, ready to be emotionally engaged.

This is how movies work with the audience since day one. No news in that. The supposed ‘problem’ presented here is that people are having difficulty with it as that seam for hyper-real becomes clear and thus pulls that luster away, making the audience find it harder to ‘let go’ and get swept away into the world that this story is taken place in. 

For the beginning of Argo, when Iranian citizens break through the gates at the US Embassy, the 8mm crowd shots that were recreated using extras turned out to be so realistic that they ended up being used more than the actual footage they had available from the 1979 event. By using the appropriate tools, you’ll convey your story more accurately without having to depend on the latest high-definition cameras. It fit the material, and therefore surpassed expectations and succeeding. 

These are merely observations of mine and are open for discussion. Do you think HFR usage should be based on whether or not the plot/experience calls for it, or should be applied to any film, regardless of genre or story, but to ultimately ‘push’ the movie experience?? 

I just recently went to School Night at Bardot nightclub in Hollywood, CA for birthday drinks with some friends and came across GOLDROOM. From the start it had me and every other character in there hooked. Holding such a steady confident beat that challenges anyone not to move their body to the rhythm, GOLDROOM is exactly the kind of music I look for as it pairs with anything; working, cooking, hosting friends or just relaxing. Drummer, piano/guitar player, female singer – they all did a great job performing. That might have been why I was sold so quickly. Transitions were well done, moments where it peaks but doesn’t lose momentum. Just a constant evolution of a fresh attitude. I dig. I haven’t visited Bardot with proper justice yet either so it was a stellar way to get introduced to new music that I’m late to the party on. The open-curtained ceiling lets the heat out and the Capital Records building peak in. Take a listen…

Enter 2004. The Savannah Film Fest in downtown Savannah, Georgia on the 1st of November. Twelve-thirty in the dry afternoon at the Trustees Theatre, I was lucky enough to attend Citizen Kane, A Shot in Time - Hosted by Roger Ebert. Naturally a sold out venue, Roger invites all to take a journey literally alongside with him in a shot by shot, frame by frame analysis of Citizen Kane. As Roger regards it as a film that keeps revealing itself to the audience, as he has claimed, ”Every great film should seem new every time you see it.” With that, he turns his podium into a chair and gives the audience the spotlight. In this case, it’s the cloak of darkness that permits any anonymous outburst to point out the seams of the film. Its characters, the editing, set production, symbolism and cinematography details aren’t safe if they aren’t hidden, as all two hours of the film are analyzed and dissected like a med school open forum.

The whole experience gave an excited unity to the theatre, learning and participating as a group while having some laughs along the way. Having Roger admit his own realizations about the film made my experience (as well as everyone else’s) that much richer and I honestly felt the same as I would at a thrilling concert – that joyful feeling of, ‘This won’t happen anywhere else and there’s no other place I’d rather be.’

“Every great film should seem new every time you see it.”

 I think the same goes for Roger and his dedication towards reviewing films. He has led a life witnessing so many stories, so many character identities and their flaws, comedic story arcs and dramatic conclusions, that the wonder never dies. For a man who may not have traveled the world in all its exotic locations, he’s been immersed within all types of cinematic storytelling and journeys, good or bad, carrying a good sense of humor along the way. To be the only film critic to get a Pulitzer Prize, he continued to the very end, reviewing 285 films a year despite his physical condition. If you love what you do, you don’t work a day in your life.

His name now stands as a true testament towards the appreciation for film as well as a reminder that we should not only enjoy but share the wonder and escape of going to the movies. Rest in Peace Roger.

Now in true fashion of being in a critics seat, I have to show you a clip which (I guess) would be part of Siskel and Ebert’s ‘greatest hits’ compilation. Click on the photo above where you see them defend ‘Star Wars’ from film critic John Simon, who pretty much looks like a ship captain from the Republic side. It’s a fun little throwback debate however my focus is between the 3:00-5:00 minute marks that I think you’ll find wild to hear.

One last thing I have to share. While coming out of one of the SCAD Film Fest after-after-parties, walking down a now quiet and dimly lit Broughton Street, my friends and I encounter Roger Ebert and Jason Patric carrying a very joyful, very wasted Peter O’Toole to the next party. How this came to be was God’s doing.. and probably what Peter mentioned as a “piss-load of brandy.” The result was as hilarious and awesome as you’d expect it to be.

Don’t let friends drive dead drunk.

As another season of The Walking Dead closes, we can’t help but feel a bit helpless about what gruesome misfortunes await for our favorite characters, both good and evil. We can at least have a good laugh to wrap another crazy season up with this clip below from a recent taping of Conan in Atlanta. Drink it up internet zombies. Comedic interruptions like this always go down smooth…

Excited to return to set, Christian Bale has expressed his positive approval for the reshoots, “To step back into that role for such a short portion of the film really doesn’t help the character of Superman to stand on his own. It’s as if he needs help in this one, so, as long as I’m getting paid, I’m more than happy to help.” More details revealed by Bale include “people jumping to conclusions” and “believing anything they’ll read online” because of how the internet and social media works today. Foooled Youuuu. Man of Steel is slated to come out June 14, 2013.

Thrones!!!! #gameofthrones #hbo #dontcallitacomeback #got vine.co/v/bIivtvz7iqK

— Nick Sears (@SearsNick) April 1, 2013

Check out this great featurette for the set they created for the new Oblivion movie. The practical effects of projected imagery on a panoramic wall allowed for spectacularly natural lighting which gave that authentic feel, for not only the viewers but the actors as well. The execution on this is so convincing, the Sky Tower itself becomes it’s own character in the story in a way… reflecting the sterilized, utopian yet superior employers which Tom Cruise’s character works for. Haven’t seen it yet but that’s my first thought. It kind of makes me to want to see this film a bit more. How about you? Excited for this to come out?