Fuel In The Tank

The general wisdom is: watch as many movies as you can in as many genres as you can. I understand that and agree with it in principle, although it has never worked for me.

I mostly focus on what I love. On what makes my soul stir. If I die tomorrow I don't want to have wasted my time watching Japanese films I don't understand, or Hollywood films that I've figured out after nine minutes.

I chase greatness. I wanna find the artists. I crave that feeling I got when I first saw "Adventureland" or "Once" or "The West Wing". Those of you who are regulars here will know what I mean. Because my blogging isn't diverse, I cover the same ground often. I go after the things I love, the things that speak to me. I'm not here to review every new release. I watch them, but mostly have nothing to say about them.

The films I love have a big impact on me. After watching Woody Allen films I feel monumentally inspired. I can't wait to sit down with my laptop and storm through some dialogue.

When I watch Cameron Crowe movies I feel so alert to the little intricacies of life. The shared moments. It opens up a part of me, a part that loves to meet people on the road, that likes to stand up for an ideal in a crowded office, or likes to sing along to Elton John. It opens it all up.

It's fuel.

I've been re-watching 'Ally McBeal' and 'One Foot In The Grave'. Those shows reignite something inside of me, because they're who I am.

I'm not the guy they hire to write the new comic book movie, nor can I write the film where Leo dives through alternate realities and shoots the bad guy and takes down the FBI. Someone else focused on that as a kid and they fill the tank up on something different.

I'm optimised for the narrow field I'm most interested in.

All my life; through fascination, awe, and careful study, I've seen these traits in all my heroes. They zone in on what they're passionate about, what fuels their art.

It's all too easy to marginalize and oppress the very things that, in all actuality, are at the core of your creativity. The things that influence us the most we often tuck into a corner and assume we've outgrown or already stripped for parts.

But everyone has to refuel. Top yourself up on what you love, because that stuff is a drug that will have you leaping into the skies as an artist.

Care to share?

Tweet

Studios V Independents

Fans of the indies often see the studio flicks as dumb. Fans of studio pictures see the indies as snorefests.

Both perspectives miss the point.

You get great movies in both systems. It's just the odds are different.

Woody Allen is an independent. His films are mostly (but not always) funded outside of Hollywood. His content is very independent, he has full control and doesn't ask for opinions from the investors or producers.

The good: Sometimes he makes 'Annie Hall' and 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona'.

The bad: Sometimes he makes 'Scoop'.

And 'Scoop' was atrocious.

Here's the thing -- nobody can sustain genius every time. If you have a true artist on your hands, they'll push the boundaries of a) what's expected and, b) what they're capable of.

Which means they'll sometimes fail, no matter how good they are.

The studios are scared of failure. Especially as they like to spend money. Imagine if Woody Allen directed 'Friends With Benefits' and had final cut privilege. What would happen?  Maybe it'd be awful because he doesn't know the lifestyles of the characters, and because he'd rework the script to make the ending less predictable... by doing that he'd alienate all the viewers who just want to see Kunis and Timberlake flirt and kiss.

Or maybe he'd create a masterpiece because he's one of the all time great writer/director's of the New York rom-com. With the studio cash, schedule, and talent; he could achieve great things.

But the risk is too big. (And Woody is a bad example, because he wouldn't ever take that job)

So instead we get a studio made flick which is filtered through producers and studio heads and focus groups.

And sure, the film is likable and many people will like it. It does its job and makes money.

People might enjoy 'Friends With Benefits' but underneath the sweet dialogue and quirky characters is standard formula. The film doesn't transcend. It doesn't change your life. And it never will, because of how it's made.

When you make 'Annie Hall' it might end up being 'Manhattan' or it might end up being 'Scoop'. You just don't know. But when you make 'Friends With Benefits' you make 'Friends With Benefits'. The potential for greatness is blocked, impossible.

The exceptions: Spielberg, Abrams, Eastwood, Tarantino.

These guys rose to the top by being blessed with a touch of genius. Hard work, too, but mostly genius.

They may do work within the studios but they have the attitude of an independent, and the power. Spielberg is like an excited Kid, Eastwood has exquisite instincts, and Tarantino is an obsessive maniac.

They stand out as unique and independent spirits.

That's what you need. If you make independently funded films based on things you're passionate about, the door is open for greatness. But it's also open for disaster.

Working in the studio system safeguards against disaster as best as it can. But you only get to make art if you rise to the top by being marked with creative genius and an ability to pull in giant audiences.

Care to share?

Tweet

Writing Comedy - A Few Starter Tips

Let's focus on a scene where a woman and man are sitting on a sofa talking. How can we make it funny?

1. The sofa is about to collapse.

2. The woman needs to pee.

3. The man suddenly goes blind.

4. They both go blind at the same time.

5. There's a dead body under the sofa. It's also blind.

6. The man has a fear of sitting.

7. The woman has a fear of men who have a fear of sitting.

8. The man has a fear of sitting and the woman, who's sitting down, has a fear of standing up. The dead body has a fear of neither but refuses to move.

9. The sofa has a fear of people sitting on it.

10. The sofa belongs to the man, who's OCD about stains. The woman is eating a curry. With her hands.

Comedy is everywhere. The ideas above; maybe you found five of them funny, maybe only one or even none. There's no harm in exploring scenerios. That took me fifty seconds to do.

Chaplin used to get on set and just start playing around with props to see what was funny. That's most of what comedy is.

Care to share?

Tweet

BOB LEFSETZ on being an ARTIST

When Bob Lefsetz' muse in turned on, there's nobody better than him. A few days back he wrote a post called 'Artists'. Here are some key points.

"As a result of crass commercialism, primarily MTV and now the Silicon Valley rush to riches, our vision of art has been skewed. Money comes first. It’s readily available to he who succeeds, and there are short cuts to ubiquity. But most people employing these short cuts are not art."

"So there are two camps.

One camp is peopled by aggressive individuals who want in. This is the reality television crowd. How can I make myself into a character, push ahead of so many others and get screen time? Remember the art kids in high school? They never grubbed for grades, they never fought to get ahead, they questioned this herd mentality/behavior, they hung back."

"So we have a world where the aggressive, normal people and the desperate poor will do anything to make it, get plastic surgery, change their soul and their sound to fit the desires of the man, of the system.

Ain’t that what "American Idol", "The Voice" and "X Factor" are? Do it my way, I’m an expert. The judge/advisor is no different from the principal, and if you think the art kids listened to the principal, you were home-schooled and have no clue."

"But don’t confuse commercialism with artistry. Most people are just passing through. Their stardom is brief, they’re puppets whose strings are pulled. When their moment is through, they get desultory day jobs or go back to college and move up the corporate ladder. An artist can’t do this. He can go to college to prepare himself to be an artist, but not a doctor, lawyer or manager. And he continues to create irrelevant of success, it’s in him."

"With the crumbling of old institutions, the time of the artist has returned. With less money in music, only the artists persevere, because they’re not in it for the money. There’s a reason why Joni Mitchell is an icon and Vanilla Ice is a joke."

Make sure you read the whole thing here.

Care to share?

Tweet

Starbucks Profundity

I'm sitting in a Starbucks just across the road from Tottenham Court Road station, and was just hit by this pang of missing New York. This Starbucks reminds me so much of the one in Manhattan, somewhere between 66 St and Columbus Circle. There are probably twenty Starbucks between those seven streets, yet somehow I'm longing for a particular one.

The cynical thing is to say that all Starbucks are the same and whether you're in London, New York or Japan, Starbucks is Starbucks.

But the way it feels right at this moment is that I could be in New York. The feelings I'm feeling, that longing and comfort and excitement in my mind, it feels like New York, not London.

It seems accidental, and outside of my control. Sometimes I can be so stuck in one place, one idea, one feeling. But sometimes I'm able to be somewhere else in my mind completely.

Right now it's in Starbucks with Bry, somewhere just North of 59th St. He's as good as here. I'm as good as there. The mind is amazing like that, how we can be transported across borders and time. So much of creativity is getting out of your current condition and finding another feeling, another insight, another reality. If only it was as easy as it feels right now.

I've had this all my life. Little pieces of poignancy, where I'm picked up from nowhere and carted off into another world. The lady with the laptop who just looked at me thinks I'm sitting in front of her when really I'm a thousand miles away. I want to step out of the door and take a walk in Central Park. Maybe I will. Whether it's for real or in my imagination, what's the difference?

Care to share?

Tweet