Friday, January 16th
at 6:40pm
Sabi Pictures is pleased to announce the production of ten new films in Sweden, from director J. Erik Reese.
Sverige: a series of short films by Sabi Pictures
Ten Swedish Films by Sabi
Sabi Pictures is excited to announce the start on production of a new series overseas slated for completion in 2009. From the creative team that brought you Moments and Take 2 comes a series of films shot in Sweden that were highly influenced by Krzysztof Kieslowski’s The Decalogue.
The starring role is Mikael Ayele (This Can’t be Heaven, Elle’s Kite, Tired of Dancing by Myself).
Creative Producing is Daniel Carmody (Take 2, Moments),And creative team includes Joshua Nitschke (Take 2, Moments), Kevin K. Shah (White Knuckles) and Zak Forsman (Heart of Now).
“Sa - veh - ree - ya. Now try it over and over again… you’ll sound like a perfect Swede! Sverige simply means Sweden… These episodic series revolve around the character Jonas (Mikael Ayele). Inspired by Krzysztof Kieslowski’s The Decalogue.
Sverige embodies events that take place in one area. In Sverige, a young man arrives in a small town in Sweden where he resides. There he begins to find himself changing with life: pain & growth.
–J. Erik Reese
Monday, October 27th
at 8:55pm
Interdependent Cinema - An electronic Magazine / Blog / Print publication by Sabi
Today I had a terrific discussion with Sabi producer Daniel J. Carmody about the concept for a new Magazine/Blog for the modern indie filmmaker that understands/represents the true “interdependent” nature of collaboration on an ‘indepdendent’ film (and especially for those filmmakers that endeavor to create cinema art). Daniel sketched out the structure of the site, complete with case studies, how-to articles, improvisation articles, videos and filmmaker contributions (articles & behind the scenes on interdependent films).
He envisions an elegant and simple design for the site, with the information easily accessible for the first Phase. Subsequent phases will entail a place for audiences and filmmakers to interact in discussions about Interdependent filmmaking - and eventually lead to the debut of a film that subscribes to the ‘rules’ of this new realization of process on cinefist.com.
These rules, unlike those of the Dogme 95 movement, are entirely dependent upon each film itself (and thus, in flux) - but shares in its spirit an effort to depict a more organic and naturalistic style of filmmaking, a more true to life (realistic, honest) portrayal of the character’s journey. The rules include an emphasis on creative collaboration, transcendence, guided improvisation, set atmosphere, and several more elaborate details of making a successful ‘interdependent’ picture (most of which will be explored in our first Issue).
Interdependent Cinema magazine will work in close creative collaboration with Cinefist.com and we hope there will be some cross pollination of filmmakers from both growing communities, as well as a direct emphasis on emerging projects that share key qualities of the interdependent process. Daniel and my discussion about the Magazine - which will ultimately be a resource to up and coming interdependent filmmakers - got me very excited about the prospects and possibilities. And with a community goal of 1,000 completely new subscribers by 2009, Daniel has been put in charge of a very large and important undertaking.
As head editor & writer for the magazine, Carmody will be interviewing filmmakers about their creative collaborations with their crew and their cast, as well as regularly post articles from Zak Forsman, Erik Reese, Joshua Nitschke, Jamie Cobb, and dozens of other Sabi veterans that have taken part in the spirited process of ’interdependent cinema.’
I’m truly excited about announcing here today the debut of “Interdependent Cinema” magazine, which will be available soon FOR FREE at www.interdependentcinema.com and www.interdependentfilmmaking.com
Our head editor Daniel Carmody and I are looking forward to seeing you there in 2009 -
Kevin K. Shah
Friday, August 15th
at 2:29am
Understandably, many actors are simply uncomfortable with the idea of using your own words for the character, but what should be happening is that the director and the actor are together finding the character’s voice.
Martie Ashworth and Sue Gaetzman in White Knuckles
The Screenplay: Discarding the Words for Dramatic Improvisation in Interdependent Films.
Freeing oneself from the confines of the words on the page sometimes makes for a more authentic route for the actor that seeks to explore and refine his/her craft. Often actors feel this process is more artistic, more “experiential”, and ultimately, more fulfilling when executed well, with a director that nurtures the kind of atmosphere necessary for good dramatic improvisation to occur. What’s fascinating, is that often when it’s all said and done (and the film is put together) most of the beats and the words that were true in the original locked script, end up on screen anyway - but filtered through the heart and soul of the actor/artist. And most of the scenes that never rang completely true - now do. I wonder what it would be like to reverse-write White Knuckles or Heart of Now (which was a terrific script written by Zak Forsman all on it’s own) - just to see how the words have changed and/or stayed the same. I’ve never gotten around to doing something like this, but someday maybe a huge Sabi fan will transcribe our films. It would be interesting at the most - the final film is the ultimate tale: what happens on set, and what is carved in the edit - is the truest story.
However, back to writing a screenplay to discard it: in discussing problems that might happen during Directing Improvisation by asking your actors to discard their words, there are instances in directing improvisation in interdependent films where an honest performance is given and the emotions and words shared are true — but the beat is not honest for the character at that particular point in the story.
EARLY EMOTION
With improvisation, actors tend to courageously dive into the conflict head on - floodgates tend to open early on for an actor once they get the hang of it (and a lot comes out in particular scenes at the top of the production schedule where critical emotions that are to be explored later are felt “too early”). That is ok. Everything is useful. Chemistry that will be explored later is sometimes put down here as a ground-work, or a foundation. And I believe this happens generally, if the scenes’ intentions & objectives are not structured properly. Again, that is ok. Every production is rusty at the start, particularly on feature films heavy with dramatic improvisation. There are ways to prepare for this. Rehearsals, meetings, and call back-auditions are a way to kick start everything (if each are done as if we were shooting the scene).
With White Knuckles we had a full rehearsal with the actors doing character exercises - and it happened a) on set, b) in the scene, c) with lights, d) with camera and sound — i.e. full on. And still we called it a rehearsal (though we were prepared to use it somewhere if it was needed - it wasn’t). The idea was to get moving, slowly - pushing the train the first few inches…
With Heart of Now, we got things rolling with what we called “Pre-Shoots” - 5 days of shooting with a bare-bones crew - which I think helped us ease into production (Note: there was also a million other things the core team - Jamie, Zak, Kester & Sam did to help the actors transition into this feature that would last 30 amazing and memorable days of everyone’s life - like White Knuckles).
HONEST BUT NOT TRUE OVERALL
But when discarding the words (which takes some time at the start) there are times — fascinating moments where the actors have a legitimate feeling about something and go with it - but it is incongruent to the journey of the character in a way that would alter the story to its detriment. I.e. change the direction of the story too far in an unrecoverable direction. Sometimes it’s compelling, real, honest, and exciting - but just not right for the overall arc of the story (which the director and producer and editor carries). Sometimes it is right, even though it was totally unplanned - and we must adjust the story around the moment accordingly. But again - if it is not honest for the overall journey of the story - or if the new material doesn’t excite and challenge the director to explore a new direction with everyone & the entire production schedule - then it must be lost immediately. Cut, clear our minds, re-set, move on.*
WHEN TO CUT, KEEP ROLLING
*It is important for the director here to be as quick and decisive as possible about where to stop an actor during improv, i.e. when to re-set rather than give a note and keep rolling, trying something different. On one hand all the previous takes are explorations of the take/moments that will be used (and should be allowed to play out) - on the other hand, a director doesn’t want to exhaust an actor (and acting for dramatic improvisation for all actors involved is physically exhausting). Also, too many different options without clear direction leads to confusion (for the actor on set, and the editor in the bay).
Of course, this happens (exhaustion, confusion) - and there is no way of avoiding it. 8-10 hour days max for the actors I believe is a great help to heavily improvised shooting - to stave off the exhaustion factor. But I say this to say, it’s important for a director to be fully aware of what will and will not be used in the final edit - on set - as best as possible. And rather than cutting these moments off too soon - in directing improvisation, it helps to let them play out, let the emotions rise and fall again naturally. Especially when discarding the words of the screenplay. There are awkward silences in these moments that are real and could otherwise never have been staged. There are glances of a deeper understand, and the struggling to find the right words. All of this is real. And conversely, there are often beats that happen just after an intense improvisation scene where the actor may say the perfect line — out of real exhaustion — long after a conventional filmmaker would call ‘cut’. A glance often says everything without all the words before it, and to help ensure we get these kinds of looks when directing improv - we often do what we call a “silent take” after all the other takes are completed. We did this quite a bit with White Knuckles and it helped us tremendously in the edit (though it’s not necessary if you’re actors don’t rush through improv - as in comedic improv).
Often, that little tiny silent beat where the camera kept rolling might end up being the only part used in the final edit, if that is what is honest in that moment - and right for the overall story.
