Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts

Friday, May 14, 2010

DNI goes Hollywood


Well, not really. But, I did help a couple friends with a short film project that was accepted to the Cannes Film Festival. Yeah, THAT Cannes. While it isn't as amazing as getting a judged feature in, it's still a crazy awesome opportunity, so here I am.

For those interested, the short is called Hushed and is a psychological thriller based around the idea of choice and free will. We used a religious theme, a group of folks going door-to-door witnessing for their unspecified religious sect, but isn't about, or pro, or con, religion. Since shorts are designed to either sell the story or the production group, there are a bunch of decisions you have to make regarding content. You want to show an understanding of the film making process, the business, and the showcase some creative talent. We really did do this in spades. The story is left open at the end, even though you generally have the illusion of thinking you know what it means. The main character remains a blank slate the whole way through, even though most people are sure they could describe him at the end (and these descriptions aren't consistent from person-to-person based on our polling, and people thought they were accurate in their descriptions). Basically, we played on biases heavily.

The religious theme was to create an immediate relationship between viewer and characters - it doesn't matter if you are a bible thumper or Richard Dawkins. You can root for them or against them. In a way, it is a perfect expose on innate bias. If you want to hate the characters and think they're screwed in the end, that's possible. If you love them, but think they got screwed and that the message is confrontational, you can think that. If you love them, and think they work it all out in the end, yup, there's that. The film is a product, and as a product, I think it rocked.

On the downside, we had nowhere near enough time or money to really do what we did. I mean, we did finish, but the timetable was so rushed that we couldn't do many takes of scenes. Shooting conditions, basically, left much to be desired, and a better schedule could have resulted in a better overall film. The result is some amateurish looking bits. But, we got through it. Also, while the actors and actresses did their best, the levels of experience varied greatly. That with the ramped up schedule means they are probably not portrayed as performing at the best of their ability. Awesome folks, though, and they stuck through the whole deal like champs. I know there are some scenes that could have been better, but there was just no time.

So, what did I do? Well, I was one of the 5 writers of the story and screenplay. I helped with a good deal of the technical aspects, was on set for every shoot (except one make up shoot), co-casted the talent, set photography, and basically odds and ends stuff. I was supposed to manage the post-production, but that fell suddenly and at the same time as major lab events began unfolding. Same goes for the website, which I started (the current one is the early alpha version, but unannounced deadlines and ramp up in lab work kept me from moving too far on that. So, I've been a busy beaver.

Check out the movie's site, if you're interested, and if you happen to be in Cannes, France or nearby and want to meet up for cafe', feel free to drop me a line.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Link Dump

So, I still got plenty of good stuff from 2007. Here are some tasty tidbits.

Media related items:
- Newsweek had an article on "Life 2.0" - the idea of creating new lifeforms based on our understanding of genetics.

- Book review of a novel on how people recover from brain damage.

- Yeh! New movie coming from DreamWorks dealing with government conspiracy and brain implants.

- Tooting our own horn, our lab was mentioned by CNet in a brief article titled "Pondering Our Cyborg Future."

Neuroinformatics
- Neural substrates of planning

- Modeling spontaneous activity (paper linked)

- Conceptual Metaphor Memory - VERY interesting look at a cognitive linguistics theory that metaphor-like associations are the primary means of experience building. Read this before going to bed.

- Neuroinformation theory video

Parkinson's

- Stem cell therapy shows promise

- How implants ease Parkinson's symptoms

- Two types of cells lost

Monday, February 18, 2008

HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray


Last post for today.

If you were waiting on buying a high def player, wait no more. HD-DVD is all but dead. Go ahead and get a Blu-Ray player. If HD-DVD wins at this point, I will buy every reader a flagship HD-DVD player. (Lost several major studios last month, recommended by Best Buy last month (read: uneducated masses will have to hunt for the HD-DVDs in the store while Blu-Ray on end caps and with demo stations), now no longer carried by Walmart, no longer carried by Netflix, and Toshiba now suspending the actual manufacturing of the discs.) BUT...

There are several Blu-Ray 'profiles' - 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0. Current players are only in the v1 realm, and the only firmware upgradeable player is the Playstation 3. What does this mean? Profile 2 basically just adds the ability to access online content. If you can do without that, you can get another player. The profiles refer to added features, and if you get a "profile 2.0" disc, but only have a profile 1.1 player, you can still play the disc, just not access the 2.0 specific content.

That being said, the PS3 is not an ideal Blu-Ray player for two main reasons.

1) The remote is RF only (actually Bluetooth), which means that if you have an all-in-one remote, like the Logitech Harmony line that I LOVE, it is useless for controlling the PS3. There is a 'work around' to get IR support that involves getting an old PS2 IR remote and a USB to PS2 controller adapter, which might be worth looking into if you plan on making the jump.

2) It is loud. Not jet engine in the living room or XBox 360 loud, but more noticeable than a standard player (it starts off near silent, but around mid-way through the movie the fans kick in). Nice comparison (don't trust the YouTube videos).

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly Review


Turns out that the artsy little Cable Car Cafe was showing The Diving Bell and the Butterfly all this time (they don't show up on the major movie theater sites). Saw it last night, and here are some general thoughts.

First of all, everyone in this field should both read the book and see this movie. The book is a more somber, introspective experience, forcing you to take some real time to consider the situation of the author (locked-in due to brainstem stroke, communicating with a single eye blink). The movie makes a bigger deal of the author's relationships with women (his children's mother, his lover, the speech therapist, anything with mammary glands), but it somehow brought it all together. I guess watching two hours of deadpan, introspective dialog just doesn't make for enjoyable viewing.

The majority of the movie is shown from the perspective of the patient (Jean-Dominique Bauby, former editor of Elle Magazine), and was truly a remarkable experience. Later, the camera does leave his body to focus on him, but the way the director goes about it is extremely artistic and at the same time respectful. Rather than hit you with the image of Mr. Bauby in his immobilized and distorted state, he makes you relate to his condition without considering the visible impact - the distorted lips, the bloodshot eye, the trach tube, etc.

I don't want to give away too much, or describe it in too much detail because some of the stark transitions and imagery is meant to be experienced as part of the progression of the film, but it was remarkable on every level. Artistically, it felt like every shot was intentional, telling its own story. The actors and actresses were just amazing. The pace was good, and the organization well thought out. I simply could not have been happier.

On the 'mechanical' side, it looked to me like everything was well represented as far as the medical issues (though I assume they removed much of the lung suctioning because it can be a little disconcerting to people not used to it).

Mathieu Amalric does an incredible job of depicting a locked-in patient. There is one emotional scene that really hit me hard. If you saw it you probably know which one it was, but Bauby's emotional response to a situation, only being able to move that one eye, was downright haunting. I've seen that look of helplessness and panic, and it brought up memories I try not to think about. Amalric's portrayal is spot-on exactly accurate, perfect, wow, can't even say how surprised I was.

Thankfully, the movie is not all about helplessness. It is in some ways uplifting, with some great scenes to match, and part documentary. You'll leave the theater quietly thinking about the whole experience, but not in the "that was so sad, I don't want to speak" sort of way. You can't help but reflect on each scene and each transition. Each moment is its own story or point to meditate on. While I wouldn't say the movie is uplifting, it wasn't depressing either, which I think was the director's attempt to catch the spirit of the book. It has been almost 10 years since I read it (now I plan on rereading it), but I remember a similar feeling. It's the Existential feeling of - this is what it is to be human, the good and the bad. One doesn't exist without the other, and you can't choose to ignore or dwell on just one aspect of your humanity forever.

People say that it isn't what you say that makes a person, it's what you do. But, then what if you can say or do nothing? That is what this movie is about.

IMdB link
Official Site
Amazon book link
Netflix queue link
Fandango theater search (be sure to check your local artsy locations, too. This is a 'foreign flick', so expect it in smaller venues.)