bradleyclarke94-blog - Tumblr blog

bradleyclarke94-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Student Number: 12005756

CDME4001

Bradley Clarke

Critical Evaluation

Reference List, Appendix, and Bibliography.

Reference List:

Dick, B. (2010) Anatomy of Film. Basingstoke: Palsgrave Macmillan.

Stam, R. (2000) Film Theory An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Watson, G. (2004) The Cinema of Mike Leigh. London: Wallflower Press.

Appendix:

Appendix A.

The ‘Theory of the Spectator’ is the idea that stems from “response theory (Stanley Fish, Norman Holland) or reception theory (associated especially with the Constance School of Reception Aesthetics).” - (Stam 2000: p.230). It allowed for the viewer, or audience member to be referred to as a spectator who was now “seen as more active and critical, not the passive object of “interpellation” but rather at once constituting and constituted by the text.” - (Stam 2000: p.230). It’s the start of an actively aware audience, who searched for, or wanted something intellectually deeper than what was on offer.

Stam, R. (2000) Film Theory An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Appendix B.

Pre Production Plan:

A SCRIPT (REHEARSED SECTION):

As of yet I’ve yet to really begin writing my script for “Ben and John aren’t Dead” which is a working title at the moment, my reasoning for not writing the script as of yet is due to the fact that there’s a need for the dialogue in the film to mostly be a direct response to the goings-on of the world, and I’m personally waiting as it’s gets ever closer to the upcoming General Election, as this will represent a core amount of the dialogue of this film.

A LIST OF BASIS IDEAS (IMPROVISED SECTION):

The ideas for the improvised section of this project will be devised by myself and my actors, however I will set the core sections of discussion to begin with, should my actors feel compelled to change the course of the conversation I would be fine with that as long as it remains engaging.

The core areas of discussion will remain in relevancy to the current goings on of the world, I want this project to be relevant, and to be able to voice an opinion of a period in time, not a collective opinion, just myself and my actors.

The improvised sections will all take place on the stage, the subjects at this moment will consist of;

British Politics, the lack of transparency, and the lack of trust that the public hold for the government.

The ongoing mess that is “Brexit”, and it’s damage to the people of this country, the difference of opinion that could be seen as racist, xenophobic, and cruel.

The possible colonisation of Mars in the next 10 years.

The proposed sugar tax ban, and subsequently Labour’s plan to ban adverts for junk food till after the watershed.

As you can tell, the conversation will be varied, and will remain so with constant updating to my proposed script. Evidently the script will be heavily influenced by the result of the upcoming general election.

A REHEARSAL PLAN (REHEARSED SECTION):

My initial plan for the rehearsals will be to split the 7-8 minutes of scripted dialogue into 3 or 4 rehearsals, wherein I will book out a room at the university and run through the sections of dialogue several times, not over and over again to the point where the dialogue sounds over-rehearsed.

Eventually I will move the rehearsals into the area we’ll be filming, and initially I will just walk through the scene, as to ensure my actors know exactly where they will have to be, this will be due to the fact that I will have to rehearse my movement for filming with the camera. We’ll be in cramped hallways, therefore we need to ensure everyone knows where they have to be.

In total I am aware there’s a worry that over-rehearsing could happen, and I’m determined to keep the performances fresh, and so that it doesn’t become an automated movement for my actors.

A REHEARSAL PLAN (IMPROVISED SECTION):

For my rehearsals for the improvisation sections, I intend to have around 3 or 4 rehearsals again, the first one will be mostly consistent of improvisation techniques to make my actors comfortable, we then will work a significant amount on character work. I need my actors to fully embrace, and understand the intricacies of their character, and this can only come from spending time to learn who their character is.

In terms of rehearsing the improvised section, this isn’t something I’ll do extensively, these rehearsals will not be preparing anything in particular to use in the film, these are a means to make my actors comfortable enough that they feel competent enough to perform via improvisation, this will come from using various exercises, and just running with scenes of improvisation, such as if I give them the impetus to have a conversation with, whatever comes out of that will be a result of their character work, and improvisational skill.

SET DESIGN AND IDEAS:

The set will be relatively minimalistic, this isn’t the full set of the play in the realm of the film, this is the rehearsal space, so elements of the full set will be there, this is partially so that budgetary requirements don’t ruin the ideas and basis of this film, it also gives the film more room should there be a reshoot in the future, or if it became a stage play entirely.

The set will be very minimalistic, it’s supposed to be a rehearsal space, therefore there wouldn’t be a huge set or backdrop in the background, there will be the basics of a rehearsal space.

Consisting of;

A single table. (Think the ones that are in every University room.)

Two chairs, or possibly bar stools, I want my actors to retain a good posture as to ensure they’re always completely visible in the shot, and the difference of levels will look nice, and interesting. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=university+of+worcester+chair&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_x53xg-rTAhWHK8AKHTZoC4QQ_AUIBygC&biw=1163&bih=1120#tbm=isch&q=wooden+bar+stool&imgrc=nQnTC8Q7-A1zNM:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=university+of+worcester+chair&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_x53xg-rTAhWHK8AKHTZoC4QQ_AUIBygC&biw=1163&bih=1120#tbm=isch&q=table+used+at+university+of+worcester&imgrc=_cD29p2QbYT6IM:

Or possibly I may use the white chairs from the University of Worcester canteen.

One chair/stool will be placed next to the table, the other will be on the other side of the stage.

The set will not be consistent of anything else major, however this is all subject to change. I will also be using the lighting rig in the Video Studio in the Digital Arts Centre, this will allow the scenes on the stage to go under significant colour changes, to represent mood or feeling of the scene.

COSTUME DESIGN AND IDEAS:

The costume that will be used will be relatively casual costume, due to the fact that this is supposed to be a rehearsal (in the film0. Therefore a decision will be made as to whether the actors choose to wear all black, as is sometimes customary within Drama, or they choose to wear whatever clothes they feel comfortable in. This will be a case of the actors telling me what they feel their character would wear.

A PROPOSED BUDGET:

The budget of this film has been set quite limited from the initiation of this project, I’m well aware of my lack of budget entirely and have made appropriate adjustments to ensure the professionalism of this project.

My lack of budget will be covered on my own end, this is a necessity realistically at the beginning stage of filmmaking. Not many early productions will be funded even slightly so this is just something that will be dealt with.

The costume will not be hugely expensive, as this film takes place in the rehearsal stage, therefore the actors would not be in full costume.

AN EQUIPTMENT LIST:

My list of equipment will be for the scripted section is;

A Canon C100,

32GB SD card,

NTG-2 Condenser Microphone,

20mm Lens,

C100 Battery,

0.5 XLR Male to Female connection lead.

For the improvised section it will be;

Three camera setup in the Video Studio,

Lighting rig.

PROPOSED LIST OF NECESSARY CREW MEMBERS:

As usual I intend to work with a small cast, (two actors in significant speaking roles, one who’s an extra/minor role), and usually I don’t have a crew, this is due to the nature of the films I make, and the style of filmmaking I use is very personal, and usually relies on one camera.

Therefore for the scripted section that takes place “backstage” I will be the sole crew member, as I don’t want the area to be crowded, it will be only myself, and my two actors.

However the improvised section, which will be taking place in the Video Studio in the Digital Arts Centre, for this section I will need possibly one or two external crew members. One crew member will man the lighting desk, should there need to be a colour change within the scene, the other crew member will help me run the three camera multiple-camera setup.

These crew member will probably have to be fellow students of mine, who would undergo whatever necessary training is needed to run the tech within this room.

The need for the external crew members is solely due to my own desire to make this film as professional as possible.

IDEAS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE FILM (FESTIVALS, ONLINE PLACEMENT):

As with all of my projects the goal is to enter them into film festivals, these are competitions wherein the best film of a category will sometimes receive an award, but all in all it’s a fantastic way to get your work out there and to have people of importance within the world of film to see your work.

Some of the festivals that I intend to enter will be;

Encounters Film Festival - 19th to 24th September 2017.

http://encounters-festival.org.uk/submit-your-film/

Norwich Film Festival - November 2017.

http://www.norwichfilmfestival.co.uk/

Bath Film Festival - 2nd to 12th November 2017.

https://www.bathfilmfestival.org.uk/

The film will be placed online, at YouTube, and possibly Vimeo, this is due to my want to have my work on as may different online destinations as possible.

Bibliography:

Fuller, G. (1998) Loach on Loach. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Raphael, A. (2008) Mike Leigh on Mike Leigh. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Rodley, C. (1997) Lynch on Lynch. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

0 notes

bradleyclarke94-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Student Number: 12005756

CDME4001

Bradley Clarke

Critical Evaluation:

Proposal:

“Ben and John aren’t Dead“ is a short film, which will range between 15 to 20 minutes, composed of two styles of filmmaking, my own developed style of free-flowing movement, and a multi-camera set-up. The film will be split in half, with the free-flowing movement sections being entirely scripted, and the multi-camera sections being entirely improvised, the pre-production plan for this project is provided in the Appendix, at Appendix B.

My aims are to investigate which technique the audience finds themselves more engaged, and invested in. I also intend to explore the use of camera movement, and how this can affect an audience’s investment into a film, and their engagement of a narrative.

I have a strong affinity towards the utilisation of improvisation within film, and as such I want to explore the use of it myself, this is due to the fact that half of the film will be entirely improvised, and not scripted in the slightest. Every project has allowed me to grow as a filmmaker, and this being my biggest project to date will ensure a wealth of experience and growth as a filmmaker.

My theoretical underpinning for this project will be the ideas of Brecht, the goals of Brechtian theatre more so than the techniques, I also will study the theory of Reflexivity, how it can relate to this project, and why I intend to explore the relationship between reflexivity and realism.

Critical Evaluation:

My initial idea was to write and direct a teleplay; I’ve found the concept to be interesting as to discover which of the two mediums, (being Television and Theatre) would be the more apparent and appear more prominent. Over the duration of the Master’s degree my interests have changed, and a more prominent interest was found within improvisation, more so the utilization of improvisation to create work, and the methods and techniques that a director can use to get the best out of an actor.

It’s within the idea of working within improvisation that I came to the full understanding of what I wanted this project to be. This project really came to fruition when my interest in the concept of the teleplay and the utilization of improvisation came together, which resulted in the idea of the split nature of this project.

This project will allow me to create what will be a valuable experiment for myself, working within two concepts but more importantly two varying styles and methods of directing performance. The contrasting styles will be that of a basic script, where every movement will be orchestrated and every line of dialogue wrote with no room for change, whereas the opposing style will be completely improvised, all dialogue and movement being given the freedom of improvisation to make it as free as possible, with rehearsals for improvisation in place for the actors to feel comfortable enough to experiment with their performances, and their dialogue.

I feel throughout the journey of this course I’ll slowly began developing improvisation into a style and technique which I intend to use throughout my career as a director, and this project is the culmination of a real utilisation of the technique, being that half of this project will be entirely unscripted and improvised, as appose to their being a few lines of improvisation, and minimal freedom given in my previous projects.

In relating this project to a theoretical value I’ve rediscovered the ideas and concepts established by the dramatist and practitioner Bertolt Brecht, whom I researched greatly on my undergraduate degree. As a practitioner his goals and aims are well documented, and they bare some resonance with the aims of this project.

Brecht felt that “the nurturing of the active spectator (as opposed to the dreamily passive “zombies” engendered by bourgeois theatre or the goose-step automatons generated by Nazi spectacle).” - (Stam 2000: p.146). Stam states of Brecht’s intention to treat the audience as “active”, relating to the Theory of the Spectator (see Appendix A), the Theory of the Spectator is at its simplest the belief that the audience should actively work alongside the narrative, it’s the treatment of the audience being intelligent enough to understand the complexities of a narrative without the need for spoon-feeding.

The nature of this project will be of a complex narrative, taking place between a conversation between two actors who are rehearsing for a performance of Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1966), it will include the complexities of a conversation which covers many issues, as does the original play, both current and previous issues that directly impact life and society, therefore the idea of treating the audience with respect enough to believe their capableness to conceive a narrative and understand the issues is prevalent to my practice and this project.

Whilst my project won’t take direct lines, or even the plot Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1966), it will take the running theme of uncertainty, uncertainty on one’s place in the world to be exact, which will correlate with the subject matter of my project being the disappointment of political representation, and discussion of where we’re supposed to find our place in the world.

In Stam’s work he also notes that Brecht also believed in the idea of “Art as a call to praxis, whereby the spectator is led not to contemplate the world but to change it.” - (Stam 2000: p.146). This concept of ideas, potentially political views, being put into practice to create an instance of change resonated with me, the possibility of having a film that implored it’s audience to not only simply view the ideas of a film, but to actively be changed by it, allowed me to view the ideas of Bertolt Brecht with a sense of comparison to the potential ideas behind my own project. Allowing there to be a conjunction of the idealistic goals of Brecht’s practice, I found the ideas of a complexly intelligent and aware audience, being open to the prospect of change and the active of creating active change to be fascinating. Whilst the purpose of my project wouldn’t be to incite political, or cultural change, it would be affected by changes that have happened in reality, allowing myself, as a practitioner, to be directly affected by the events of the world, and to find myself not only contemplating the world, but also reacting to it, inciting my own personal form of change.

Another such theory that has resonated with the construction of this project is the Theory of Reflexivity, when relating to film “we generally use the term reflexivity, rather than intertextuality, but the idea is the same. The root meaning of reflect is “throw back”; the reflexive film “throws back” a reflection of itself - or of some text that inspired it, whether another film, a novel, or a play.” - (Dick 2010: p.166). The idea of reflexivity allows for, in the case of my project, a play such as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1966), to inspire the basis of a project. The idea of reflexivity allows for a theme or idea of the basis text to be the point of reference for points of conflict that will be interrogated, however in relation to my project I intend to be interrogating issues and challenges that we face in society, which will at its core be based on realism.

However it could be perceived that reflexivity and realism are not connected, and that there isn’t a point of comparison between the idea of utilizing the issue of a point of inspiration, and the issues of modern society, Robert Stam states that “It is a mistake, first of all, to regard reflexivity and realism as necessarily antithetical terms.” - (Stam 2000: p.152). Stam believes that these ideas aren’t as adversative as they would seem, he states that “Realism and reflexivity are not strictly opposed polarities but, rather, interpenetrating tendencies quite capable of coexisting within the same text. It it’s therefore more accurate to speak of a “coefficient” of reflexivity or realism, and to recognize that it is not a question of a fixed proportion.” - (Stam 2000: p.152).

It’s within this manner of thinking that I intend to utilize reflexivity and realism within my project, “Much has been made of what might be called the political valences of realism and reflexivity.” - (Stam 2000: p.151). I intend to enforce both reflexivity and realism to co-exist in order for me to address the issues that represent modern day society, such as the most recent fracture of opinion in Britain which resonated due to “Brexit”, and the upcoming General Election, whilst simultaneously addressing the issues that were paramount in the inspirational text I will be utilizing as the formation, and setting of the project.

It’s upon looking further into the ideas of Brechtian theory that one can find that “Brechtian theory showed the compatibility between reflexivity as an aesthetic strategy and realism as an aspiration. “ - (Stam 2000: p.153). I intend to explore what can be achieved from utilising both reflexivity and realism in one project, and to investigate how my project can embrace the theoretical ideas of each of these theories, whilst exploring the ideas of reflexivity being “an aesthetic strategy”, and realism being an “aspiration”.

In preparation to begin working on this project over the summer, I’ve created a comprehensive pre-production plan, see Appendix B, with the incentive of allowing myself to gain experience in preparing a project as professionally, and intricately as possible, in order to give myself the valid experience for what will hopefully be a career in filmmaking. My pre-production plan has allowed me to further look at the kinds of methods I should be using when beginning to getting my actor’s accustomed to improvisation.

Whilst I already had previous experience working within improvisation, to do it on such an intense level as I want to I realised I’d need a firm rehearsal plan in place, wherein I get my actors more comfortable with the ideas of improvisation, in order to maintain a friendly environment, wherein my actors should feel comfortable enough to go with any idea, should they wish to.

Due to the report of my interview with Gareth Edwards covering ideas and opinions regarding improvisation, I’ve been given a greater understanding of how to implement improvisation correctly, and to ensure the creative environment that’s needed when working with it.

This project will allow me to continue on my path that began at the start of this Master’s degree, to allow me to discover my own artistic identity, this project will be the culmination of the beginnings of just that. The film will allow me to continue working on the style of filmmaking that I’ve established in my previous film; a consistently moving style of filmmaking, that focuses on intrusive shots that appear too close to the subject or the events being depicted on the screen. This is a style of filmmaking that I enjoy working in, as it bears resemblance to a sense of improvisation, due to the fact I’m moving around the scene with my actors, as appose to a static camera that captures the events from one posistion.

The contrasting nature of my project allows me to question how fresh and unplanned can improvisation truly be, it could be said that improvisation is as close to naturalism as you can possibly get, being that it’s an actor saying whatever comes from his, or her’s, internal thought process, it’s a true embodiment of the role. One such way to gain a true embodiment of the role would be to pair an actor with a non-actor, to experiment and investigate what results come from such a pairing, this is a current idea of mine, and not set in stone.

However filmmaker, and one of my inspirations, Mike Leigh once said “my point is that no work of art is truly naturalistic. Art is not real life, and has to be organised, designed and distilled because it’s dramatic. There is nothing accidental, it’s all contrivance. What is real is a very complicated, epistemological question.” - (Leigh, Watson 2004: p.27)

I have to disagree with Leigh’s statement that “there is nothing accidental”, I believe that great moments of drama, comedy and brilliance can come from something entirely accidental, all that is required is to take the acting away from it’s surroundings. If as a director I place the set, choose the costumes and give the actors their characters, whatever they produce is entirely fresh, and at it’s core, natural. Whilst the acting may not be accidental, due to skill involved in producing the performance, the circumstances of the performance are entirely out of my control. Whatever the results is, in it’s final culmination can be perceived as accidental, which is the great beauty of improvisation.

2,145 Words.

0 notes

bradleyclarke94-blog · 8 years ago

Text

I will now upload my Critical Evaluation including proposal, and the pre-production plan which will be in my Appendix.

0 notes

bradleyclarke94-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Student Number: 12005756

CDME4001

Bradley Clarke

Comparative Report of the Interview with Gareth Edwards

Reference List, and Appendix

Reference List:

Fuller, G. (1998) Loach on Loach. London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Appendix:

Interview with Gareth Edwards

1.) As someone who’s wrote and directed their own work, how do you approach the process of generating a good concept?

“Concepts are probably the hardest things to catch. They are like nervous animals in the wild who won’t come anywhere near you until you stop looking at them. They are very subconscious and you can’t really schedule them or sit down and just work on them like you can the actual treatment or screenplay.”

“I personally find the three things that tend to generate ideas in me the most are: travelling, music and imagery. I like to listen to music and look at images or travel and imagine that what I am seeing IS the film. Initially, it doesn’t make sense, but if you convince yourself it IS the movie, then you start to translate it into a moment from a film, or a shot or a scene or character. Like looking at an image in a magazine or online and imagine it is the poster to your movie.”

“Then you try and make sense of that in terms of a bigger story, much like you would if you had a dream and tried to analyse what it means to your psyche, this is like analysing these images about what they might mean to a story. Often it’s nonsense and doesn’t go anywhere. But if it’s slightly interesting, I try and store that idea and go onto to another moment or visual and try and make sense of that.”

“I try and do this throughout the day, wherever I can, like a sport or mental exercise. Eventually overtime some will really work and stick with you and get you excited. These might eventually merge with another one and make something even stronger, that’s usually when it becomes clear it could ‘be a film’… But there is no hard and fast approach to anything, this is just something I do I guess, but I know other much more talented writers than me that would never work this way. I’m very visually led, but reading books and watching films, having life experience are also good ways to generate concepts.”

2.) How did you discover improvisation to be important to your process of creating and directing?

“I started out having to work with ‘non-actors’ and ‘real people’ as I didn’t have the budgets to pay for A-list stars, and I found that you could actually get really strong performances from them as long as you didn’t tell them what to do. Everyone would win an Oscar for playing themselves, no-one can play you better than you.”

“So after making the mistake of trying to direct their actions and it looking bad, I started to just talk to them really loosely about what they are trying to do in the scene, and let them be free to approach it however it feels right to them, or however it just comes out. This led to some really good results I thought and so I kept that process going when I got to work on bigger films. It’s much harder to fully work that way on big movies, but we’d try and introduce it wherever, however we could.”

3.) Why do you feel improvisation to be of importance to your directing?

“I think as a filmmaker, whether I realise it or not, I am constantly pulling from a subconscious visual vocabulary that I learned growing up watching films. If that’s all I ever did, the films can end up looking a little like all those movies you’ve seen before. I like to think film, or anything creative, is a like an organism, and it has DNA. If nothing ever mates with it, the organism stays the same and never improves. If you let other things come along and influence it, and shatter your preconceptions, like a location, an actor, the weather, the light. Then suddenly you are forced to include other DNA that is not yours, sometimes it leads to something worse, sometimes something better.”

“But if you always try and filter out the worse moments, then it should create something that merges with your original idea to make something even more unique. Whenever that happens, that always feels like the most exciting moments. Like you are treading new ground slightly.”

4.) How do you utilize improvisation in your directing process?

“When I work that way, we talk about the scene before hand, as much as the actors want to, and then try and creative a situation where we can film without stopping for 20 minutes or longer. Just like a documentary crew are following around these characters and it’s really happening. The problem here, is that there is the potential for a lot of rubbish.”

“But that’s okay, you know you are just looking for a few key moments and you will recognise them when you see them. I like to operate the camera in these situations, so you can try and find compositions that are still strong and feel like your film, even if the actors drastically move around. Again, this is a process that’s much harder to do on the bigger films because everything needs to be planned in advance more, or at least people feel that way about them.”

5.) How important do you feel the rehearsal process to be when working with improvisation?

“I try to ‘shoot the rehearsal’ I don’t like rehearsing for the first time and not capturing it. There will be something magical that could happen that will only happen the first time people experience a scene. The problem is, most actors want to block through the scene. So maybe we will walk through it and talk about rough positions without getting too detailed, and then just shoot it.”

“After the first take, when a lot of things go wrong, you regroup and iron out the things that didn’t work and try again. When a scene gets too well rehearsed and too rigid, then I ask to do it again, but completely different sometimes to keep it fresh and real. However, this is less of a problem if you are working with world class actors like on the big films.”

6.) What’s the best way you’ve found for your actors to be comfortable with improvisation?

“For them to trust that you aren’t going to sue anything that makes them look bad, and that the crew and everyone around them understand we are trying things and there’s a 70% chance they will fail, and that’s OK. If you don’t allow yourself to ever fail, then you can never do anything unique. Most actors are comfortable with this, some like to be very accurate and not change where they stand or how they behave, in those situations, the other actors use that to their advantage, they know what the other person will do and use them as an anchor to play around.”

“It’s like a dance, a double act, one actor might be solid and constantly very good, the other sometimes fail sometimes fantastic, and you make sure you just use the fantastic stuff, so both methods work.”

7.) How important do you feel improvisation is within film and theatre today?

“I can’t speak for theatre, but it’s very difficult to improvise a lot on a big film, and I think it shows in the results. The difference in style between Summer blockbusters and Indie Oscar movies is very obvious. But my secret hope is that with all the new digital technology allowing filmmaking to be more fluid and potentially cheaper (in the long run) that blockbusters and Indies can meet in the middle and blur the line.”

“Beautiful artistic films can be massive massive hits, and blockbusters can be subtle and artistic. For me, that is what was happening in the era that inspired me, the 70’s and 80’s… And I think we can get there again in a new way that the next generation can own.”

0 notes

bradleyclarke94-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Student Number: 12005756

CDME4001

Bradley Clarke

Comparative Report of the Interview with Gareth Edwards

I wanted to interview a prominent filmmaker, someone with multiple credits under their name, and most importantly a filmmaker with extensive work with utilising improvisation, a technique which I’ve found myself more and more interested throughout the duration of this Master’s degree.

I had the chance to interview Gareth Edwards, a prominent British filmmaker, for whom the relevancy of this interview couldn’t be more suited, due to the fact he directed a film called Monsters (2010), which is entirely improvised.

The entire 1,329 word interview is attached in my appendix.

How did you discover improvisation to be important to your process of creating and directing?

The main body of this interview was based around the concept and utilisation of improvisation, Edwards says that he “started out having to work with ‘non-actors and ‘real people’… I found that you could actually get really strong performances from them as long as you didn’t tell them what to do.” - (Edwards 2017). This bares significant relevance to my practice, and more so the potential usage of a ‘non-actor’ in my next project, I would find the result of the utilisation of an actor, and a non-actor to be incredibly fascinating.

“So after making the mistake of trying to direct their actions and it looking bad, I started to just talk to them really loosely about what they are trying to do in the scene, and let them be free to approach it however it feels right to them, or however it comes out.” - (Edwards 2017). Edwards goes on to describe the results of his backing off of over-directing his actors as good, seeing as much like everything else, Directing is something that requires practice, and experience in order for one to grow as a filmmaker.

Why do you feel improvisation to be of importance to your directing?

Seeing as how I’m integrating improvisation to be a key focal point of my next project, and also of my directorial identity, Edwards describes the freedom to direct, and improvise in his own filmmaking, as “pulling from a subconscious visual vocabulary” - (Edwards 2017). The idea that as creative we are constantly referring back to inspirations, whether it’s art, film, television or any other kind of inspiration is something I can relate to, as in my previous two short films there’s been a lot of references, or homages, back to the Western genre, it being a genre and style of filmmaking that I hold very dear to me.

How do you utilize improvisation in your directing process?

Edwards describes his techniques for working with improvisation as seemingly quite a safe, methodical method, ensuring the comfort of his actors and the presence on set of creative freedom, meaning that no idea is a bad idea. He describes filming for 20 minutes or longer, however sometimes “there is a potential for a lot of rubbish.” - /(Edwards 2017). Edwards describes the lack of warmth shown towards improvisation sometimes by some actors, mostly how some actor’s can be stuck in there ways and wanting to over-rehearse a scene.

How important do you feel the rehearsal process to be when working with improvisation?

“I try to ‘shoot the rehearsal’ I don’t like rehearsing for the first time and not capturing it.” - (Edwards 2017). This idea is something that has greatly influenced the way I intend to approach my own rehearsals for my next project, Edwards describes it as a means of ensuring that nothing “magical” will be missed. Once again Edwards describes the challenges that can approach with potential reluctancy from actors who sometimes don’t want to fully embrace the entire process of improvisation.

Edwards counteracts the idea of actors not wishing to over-rehearse or over-improvise by getting his actors to “walk through it and talk about rough positions without getting too detailed, and then just shoot it.” - (Edwards 2017).

What’s the best way you’ve found for your actors to be comfortable with improvisation?

“Most actors are comfortable with this, some like to be very accurate and not change where they stand or how they behave, in those situations, the other actors use that to their advantage, they know what the other person will do and use them as an anchor to play around.” - (Edwards 2017). The comfort of actors is not really something I’ve had to acclimatise myself with so far, I’ve always worked on small scale productions, wherein the actors were either accustomed to improvisation, or felt comfortable enough to work with it, yet the possibility that in the future there may be incidents wherein an actor is not comfortable is a worry of mine.

How important do you feel improvisation is within film and theatre today?

“I can’t speak for theatre, but it’s very difficult to improvise a lot on a big film, and I think it shows in the results. The difference in style between Summer blockbusters and Indie Oscar movies is very obvious.” - (Edwards 2017). Edwards describes the battle between Hollywood, and independent cinema, however I disagree that it’s hard to improvise a lot on a big film, a lot of very well-received and money-making comedy films have utilised improvisation a great deal, understandably it’s more difficult in say a Sci-Fi Action film, wherein there are a number of scriptwriters, and a number of re-writes.

In total, this interview has allowed me to have a greater insight into how improvisation can be utilised throughout the process of a film, it’s granted me new techniques that I myself intend to use in my own rehearsal process, such as the filming of the rehearsals.

However questions have been raised into the utilisation of improvisation when film breaches out of more smaller budget based films, and into the large budget money-makers, it implores me to further understand the marketability of improvisation, and whether it’s inclusion should be seen as vital or greatly important to the process of making a large budget film.

This interview has reaffirmed my own desire to work within improvisation, to create fresh and creatively inspired work, following in the footsteps of many of my own inspirations; Mike Leigh, Richard Linklater, and Ken Loach who said that, in regards to improvisation, “The actors, in particular, must be able to take any risk and they need the confidence of knowing they’re amongst friends.” – (Fuller 1998: p.114).

1,068 Words.

0 notes