Boston Open Screen

Kodak, the end of film, and the future

2012-01-19T07:13:00.000-08:00

So, as many of you have already heard, Kodak declared bankruptcy today. Even though I knew it was coming, I'm still filled with an overwhelming sadness about the whole situation. Kodak is still claiming that they will continue to operate, but I'm afraid that the writing is on the wall and Kodak will soon be out of business all together.

Fuji, I'm sure, will continue to make film for the time being, but we have seen a meteoric rise in digital projection in the last few years, meaning, if you are finishing and distributing digitally, there is little reason for most people to originate on film. And, even though there are still numerous and strong reasons to shoot on film, people seem to want to shoot on digital anyway, despite the myriad problems with the format. So, it may be premature, but I feel we should all take a moment and listen to the following...

Taps (part 1)

December and January Open Screen

2012-01-12T09:33:00.000-08:00

The last two months have been good to Open Screen. In December we had a full house which included the usual suspects; as well as, a large amount of University of Rhode Island students. In fact, our December winner was a URI student - so I have to give a hand to Keith Brown for continuing to mentor those URI cats and encouraging them to come show at Open Screen. It was also good to see some old friends that hadn't dropped in in a while and they happened to bring one of my favorites from the evening - "The Salesman". Meanwhile, Adam filled in for Jeff while he was off having a baby or something.

January was a little quieter, but the films were good and so was the vibe (albeit, a bit more "relaxed" than usual). We tried to screen some found VHS-C footage, but to no avail. It reminds that we still need to work out some of the kinks of our projection system as we still haven't found a rock solid way of tying into the current system or playing back file based films. DVD and Blu-ray, of course, are still working quite well.

For next month, Open Screen falls on Valentines day, so our theme is "Open Screen for the broken hearted". I'd still argue that Open Screen is the best place for a romantic interlude, but that's probably just me...

X-mas movies for people who hate X-mas

2011-12-18T07:59:00.001-08:00

So, yeah, I hate christmas. Deal with it. Why, you may ask? Well, for one, I worked retail on and off for a decade. So, I've seen the true face of christmas. Which, the above image captures pretty f%^&ing well I should say. I could go on, but instead I'll just skip to my list of christmas like films to help people get through the holidays:
1.) Gremlins - The film is pretty much a critique of conspicuous consumption; however, it's also a fun little film directed by master of mainstream subtle subversion, Joe Dante. The film also has a pretty awesome appearance by cult actor Dick Miller and, of course the best line about christmas ever (which is than further parodied in Gremlins 2) "On Christmas morning, when some people are opening their presents, other people are opening their wrists."
2.) Bad Santa - It's a bit of a guilty pleasure, if I'm being honest. Terry Zwigoff is an okay director, but the film is kind of a glorious mess. However, it's also fun as hell and has the last appearance by John Ritter. The film is also an unapologetic celebration of alcoholism and sleazy behavior.
3.) Rare Exports - Santa has huge horns and is slowly being defrosted by his minions. Think about it.

That's it for now, if I think of more I'll update the list... Oh, you can always watch "It's a Wonderful Life" and stop the movie after Jimmy Stewart kills himself. The movie is really dark that way.

A little reminder

2011-12-10T06:29:00.001-08:00

From the exceptional book "Art and Fear"

"A. Make friends with others who make art, and share your in-progress work with each other frequently
B. Learn to think of (A), rather than the Museum of Modern Art, as the destination of your work."

Yep.

Dear America

2011-11-24T07:36:00.001-08:00

Hey America,

Let's start building stuff here again. You heard me America. American's are good at building stuff. We've built a lot of pretty awesome stuff over the years - okay, some crappy stuff too, but that wasn't our fault. Our bosses made us build that crappy stuff and push come to shove we would way rather build good stuff.

We don't want to just sell crap to each other that was made somewhere else. We don't mind that other people are making stuff - everyone deserves a job and all that. It's just that we have unions here to protect us while we're building stuff. No, the unions aren't perfect, but it's better that they're here. Things were really tough before they were around.

A lof of people are out of work right now and there is all these factories just sitting there empty and rotting away. Let's build 'em back up, start our own companies and make shit we're proud of.

You with me America?

Negativity

2011-11-08T05:31:00.001-08:00

I've often been accused of being a bit of pessimist, however, like most pessimist, I typically refer to myself as a realist. The problem with the whole realist/pessimist dichotomy is that it is neither real nor useful.

A few years ago the show Radio Lab , explored deception. One of the fascinating conclusions was that people who tend to be highly self deceptive tend to be happier; whereas, people who see the world "as it is" tend to be depressive. Meaning, the world is actually terrible and those who see it as it is tend to be depressed about it. Of course, it's impossible to objectively judge oneself one way or the other. By which I mean, if I'm happy, should I seriously question myself? Or, if I'm sad, should I accept that as a natural by-product of living in our modern world? Both conclusions are pretty unsatisfying.

So what does any of this have to do with film? you might ask. Well, good question. For me, the issue is that while I love films, I always feel deep down, they could be better. I feel that we have moved so far away from seeing films as an art form, that most of us have forgotten what film is even capable of. We have come to accept film as being mere popcorn accompaniment - a way to pass a few hours without being challenged intellectually or having to question dominant ideology. And, of course, we all go in droves to the most creatively bankrupt films the world has ever produced.

People always ask me for film recommendations - yes, they really do. However, I never know where to even start because the cynic inside me feels that people will not like any thing I recommend to them because they have been so predisposed to understanding film in such an extraordinarily narrow context that the films that I enjoy would have no meaning for them (and vice-versa). However, the deeply positive part of me believes that people just need to be consistently exposed to challenging art works to expand their personal definitions of what is "good" and what is "bad".

The problem, of course, is that people will still drive past the local diner to eat at McDonalds. Even if it kills them.

Bellflower - Brattle Theatre

2011-10-24T19:50:00.001-07:00

This is just a quick reminder that "Bellflower" is playing at the Brattle Theatre Wednesday, October 26th. There's more info over at the Brattle site. Check it out while you can...

Holy F*%$

2011-10-21T20:29:00.000-07:00

I saw the motion picture "Drive". I liked it. You should see it to. However, that's not entirely what this post is about. What this post is about is the lawsuit against the film "Drive" by a Michigan woman who claims that the film a.) wasn't enough like "The Fast and the Furious" and b.) the film is anti-semetic. To both, I can only say one thing, what the f. I understand that we live in a highly litigious society and that because of that, sure, we're going to get some dumb lawsuits every now and again. The problem, for me, is that the basis of the whole lawsuit is that the film didn't measure up to expectations and that it was offensive. Sure, part of me laughs at this and says, "great - can I sue every film I thought sucked and/or offended me because of it's stupid plot, crappy dialogue and hackneyed execution?". They usually have an annual show every year that showcases these films, they call it "The Oscars".

However, the lawsuit also calls into question artistic intent and audience expectations. For me, part of the pleasure of cinema is that sometimes you're surprised by a film. Not always in a good way, but the risk vs reward is worth it. Plus, what is she expecting to get out of the lawsuit? A refund? Most theatre's will refund your ticket price if you think the movie really sucked (trust me, I used to work at one). The reason being, the theatre doesn't really get any money from the ticket sales anyway, so who cares. So the whole thing just reeks of some lame ass attempt at getting attention/fame.

Therefore, I am officially declaring my countersuit to the woman in Michigan for not having the taste or intelligence to not waste our time with her lawsuit. I am hoping to get at least $10 out of the thing so I can go watch a move somewhere.

Sanitize the Future

2011-10-03T13:36:00.000-07:00

Does Stephen Soderbergh actually care about anything? If he does, it's certainly not evident in Contagion . However, nobody really seems to care.

I don't mean that the characters in the film don't care, we don't really spend enough time with any one character to figure out what they think about anything, let alone, why we should care what they think. No, I mean that the audience for this kind of film doesn't really care if the dude driving the bus actually knows where he is going. From the reviews, and the box office, the only conclusion I can draw is that the abyss has simply become the background for story telling. The bus driver, in the aforementioned analogy is Stephen Soderbergh, who is not completely without ability as a director, but also doesn't actually seem to have anything to say either. What's frustrating about that in the context of a film like Contagion is that there is a very clear political angle to the film that is actually sort of commented on, but then the whole film just walks away from it and lets the bodies pile up. I think that like a mirror, the films success reveals a lot more about us than anything else.

The last decade in this country has been rife with political scandal, serious disease outbreaks, HMO's literally deciding who dies and who doesn't, rampant defunding of the bodies that are supposed to keep us safe (FDA, EPA etc), and large corporations doing untold damage to the majority of the country (both its peoples and its resources). However, Contagion merely sidesteps the whole issue, basically says the government is doing a fine job (the CDC specifically) and that we really shouldn't worry because if there is some unmitigated disaster, everything will be just fine. You know, like in New Orleans.

The problem, of course, is that we all know that this is nowhere near true. That's what is so terrifying, and yet, when the bodies really start piling up in Contagion, it's almost a relief. As if to say, f' -it, all those people were probably assholes anyway. Which again speaks to how little we seem to care about any of the characters, like those neighbors down the street that don't recycle properly, or are always making noise, would we really miss them if they were gone?

Maybe that's what the obsession with Zombie films is as well. We've entered a time that is so cynical, and we are all so disconnected from each other that our only recourse is to fantasize about blowing them all away and letting society crumble.
Or, maybe, we could just start talking to our neighbors instead.

Hurricane

2011-08-29T06:17:00.000-07:00

A wind from the south blew in, which is different than a wind from the east . However, any time mother nature decides to display her raw power, it serves to remind us that we have very little control over our actual lives. There are forces far greater than ourselves at work at any given moment. I don't mean this in a religious sense, as many might interpret, but in a secular "nature can deliver some pretty serious ass whooping and we are but mortal beings" sense. And, as artist, are we not trying to build in a little immortality for ourselves? If so, how do we create those works which will live beyond ourselves and serve to influence those will be here long after we are gone?

Maybe that's putting too much pressure on ourselves and instead we should work toward indulging our creative impulses. I've often said that only insane people make films because filmmaking is an act of insanity. It's too much work and risk with little chance of reward, yet it seems that more people than ever are making works of some sort. Maybe the culture has become so disposable that we have forgotten why we are making anything in the first place. So, for me, occasionally I need to think about things like hurricanes and question permanence and purpose. Disruptions are the fuel for many of my creative decisions, and even in destruction there can be rebirth.

How Many Dimensions are Enough?

2011-08-14T07:05:00.000-07:00

When first encountering "Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions" by Edwin A. Abbott as a child, it mostly went over my head. The premise, for those unfamiliar, is that the characters inhabit a two-dimensonal world. Eventually, the main character square, is brought into a three dimensional world and spends the rest of his time trying to explain it to everybody.

An astronomy professor once put it this way: "if a two dimensional being traveled in a straight line around a sphere, it would eventually end up where it started, but have no idea of how that happened. The same would be for us if we traveled in space for a very long time. We would end up where we started, but have no concept why - because we had just traveled 4th dimensionally."

However, "spacetime", where we combine space and time in a single continuum, can also be considered a dimension, so there's that as well. Then of course there is mathematical constructs of 5th dimensions as well. And there is always this

Anyway, pretty much since the beginning of film history, film has been two-dimensional. So, that's over 100 years of 2-D filmmaking. In reality, there were experiments with 3-D almost from the start. There was also the 3-D boom of the 50s/60s and the brief return in the 80s as well. So, 3-D has been hanging around for a long time as well. However, there are a lot of problems with 3-D, but studios keep going back to it because they think it will bring in more money - which it doesn't . Reality has never stopped anyone though, so we'll probably continue to see 3-D resurface every now and again. The question, though, is why?

The answer seems to have something to do with verisimilitude. Almost since the beginning of film, technicians have tried to make films seem more "real", even when the stories, characters and plots varied wildly between fantastical and realist. So, sound came in, then color and then better sound and then better color and then 3-D and then surround sound etc, etc. However, did any of that actually make the films any better?

The problem is that what people seem to respond to the most, is well told stories, not well manufactured technology. The technology has only allowed a greater gloss on the story and made special effects more "realistic". In some ways, the technology could be accused of making films worse - because it can place emphasis on spectacle over substance.

So, in conclusion, two dimensions is enough for me, thank you.

Super-8 Forever/ Jeff's Haiku's

2011-08-11T05:28:00.000-07:00

I recently presented at the UFVA conference about the modern uses of Super-8 film. I'll spare you all the details now, but there are some good references over here . My main point was that even though Super-8 was designed purely as a consumer format, it has long been used by indy and experimental filmmakers which is why it has survived to this day. I love when artist can repurpose something, and that repurposing changes its whole evolution (more or less). Anyway, if anyone ever had the urge to shoot Super-8, it's still very possible and I'd highly encourage it. There are so many resources now it's almost overwhelming!

Also, Jeff has been writing film review haiku's that have to be read. You can find them here .

Hope to see you all soon at the screen.

Open Screen - Gearing up for September

2011-08-09T09:06:00.000-07:00

Jeff and I are starting to plan out the next season of Open Screen. We should start again in September, but we're still trying to finalize the date with the Somerville Theatre (they couldn't do the second Tuesday, we're trying to find a good alternative). October through December, at least, we do have the second Tuesdays of the months all locked down.

Also, we're going to try to do some more outreach this year, anyone have any good ideas?

DIY

2011-07-27T05:10:00.000-07:00

As a kid I was attracted to punk rock for many reasons, but I don't think it was until I was in college that I realized how influential that early exposure had been. For example, it helped cement many of my anti-authoritatian ideals. However, I think the most important legacy for me has been the notion of DIY. DIY (as in Do It Yourself) certainly didn't start in punk rock music, and in reality most likely grew out of the pragmatic need to have things done that helped humankind stay on the planet as long as we have (take that sabertooth tigers!). In modern society, so much of our daily lives involve delegating even the most basic activities to others. What does this have to do with filmmaking? you may ask. Well, a lot, actually.

Independent film, like punk rock, survives because people take so much of it on themselves (and I have to give Ted Hope a lot of credit as he has been tirelessly promoting DIY for distribution and promotion here for some time). Of course, this has always been the mantra of Open Screen as well.

To put a point on it. Let's say you make a film, but you do not get into any festivals. That sucks. However, you have a few choices at this point. You can a.) give up, b.) put the thing on-line somewhere or c.) just show it yourself. In other words, you don't need to rely on the festivals to get your film screened, you can just screen it somewhere out of pocket. See, you did it yourself. Awesome. What usually gets in peoples way here is that they want (or need) the validation of the festival jurors or their peers in order to feel that they have made something worthwhile and, therefore, if they don't get into the festivals than their film is simply not worth it. The problem is that for a film to get into a festival it actually has to be good AND it has to have someone who will advocate for it (be that a promoter, or someone on the jury). Because, in this day and age, there is so much competition that just being "good" doesn't cut it anymore. So, many "good" films will never show. You dig? Therefore, you may need to DIY that bad boy. That's all I'm sayin'. The trick is trying to find who the film is for and brining it to them anyway you can. And, when in doubt, just ask yourself "what would Joey Ramone do".

Post 4th of July Thoughts on Film and Patriotism

2011-07-06T07:27:00.000-07:00

Anyone who has a had a conversation with me about film or read this blog (all three of them) knows that I have a preference for foreign films. The reasons for this are many and complicated. However, I can probably simplify it by saying a lot of it has to do with the funding and release strategies of films in the U.S. For example, U.S. films have seen an increase in gross ticket sales over the last decade. Of course, the majority of those ticket sales are generated by the big blockbuster films. In other words, the films with the largest investments are also the films with the largest revenues. Anyone who has taken Econ 101 will say, "hey, that makes sense". The problem is that nowhere does the word "art" come into this conversation. It's purely a capitalistic approach to filmmaking - we invest money in a product in order to get a return. The more money we have invested, the more of a return we need to see and the lower the risk on that investment, the better. Therefore, the vast majority of investment in cinema in this country follows that model - reduced risk of loss for investment. Now, from a capitalist standpoint, yes, that makes sense. The point of capitalism is not to lose money. The problem is that because this is the way that pretty much all films are financed, all films in this country must be seen in that light. Part of this has to do with some tax shelter loopholes that were closed by Reagan in the 80'sand the end of the vast majority of state or public funding of art. So, in this country we see two types of films: Big Budget Blockbusters or self financed indy films. Okay, yes, there is some room in the middle as well, but not as much as you'd think and not as much as there used to be.

In other countries, there are more state funded films (meaning the people making the film are not beholden to investors and therefore are able to take more risks). Also, in many other countries, there is not the rampant anti-intelectualism that there is in this country. So, people actually make films that people who enjoy thinking about stuff might actually enjoy. I do think that in this county where we do see that is in the self-financed indy's, but they enjoy such a small part of the marketplace that most people will never know about them let alone have access to them.

In the end, I hope that more will embrace their local artists and support them in any way they can, otherwise we will end up with our chief cultural export being Adam Sandler comedies and Planet of the Apes remakes. Where's Orson Welles when we need him?

Things that Explode

2011-06-30T15:18:00.000-07:00

I have seen two films directed by Michael Bay: "The Rock" and "Armageddon". I thought both were terrible. However, other people found them worth watching as they both raked in a ton of money which, in the U.S. translates as "successful".

Like many who don't have an interest in big budget block busters, I have a hard time understanding why some people want to watch robots fight and see things explode. New York Times critic, A.O. Scott, wrote an amazing review of the latest iteration of exploding robot movies courtesy of Mr. Bay. The review doesn't say the film is amazing, but the review itself is so entertaining and cutting that I found it quite entertaining. Entertaining in a way that those who like robot explosion movies probably won't find as entertaining as I.

Again, the larger issue is that those who agree with me (both of them) feel that weird soulless pre-packaged explosion effect movies are so aggressively advertised that they become "events" and that people need to see them to remain culturally engaged. The argument continues that if people were bombarded with tie-ins and radio ads and toys and t-shirts for films like "Tree of Life" than films like "Tree of Life" would be super successful blockbusters too. Of course, that is a fallacy as teenage boys aren't going to go to films like "Tree of Life" in droves because there aren't any exploding robots (however, there are explosions and dinosaurs and it speaks to teenage boys about their experiences in a non-condesending way, but whatever).

When I was a teenage boy, I had the good fortune of discovering "Blue Velvet" which forever changed how I engaged in cinema. In fact, even before that I can remember watching "Raising Arizona" and realizing the film has symbolism in it (I was 12). I also have to give credit to "Harold and Maude" which I also discovered on late night television while in High School. So, I was always this way, more or less. As an adult I have continued to watch films and my taste have only become more rarified. However, this clearly isn't the case for many people. So, as any critic must face at some point, I have to face the fact that I don't watch films the way other people do, just as I don't read a legal contract like a contract attorney does.

So, there will always be a market for the exploding robot movies or the cops who like to shoot things movies or the criminals who like to shoot things and drive fast cars and cause explosions movies or the space explosions movies. And, the audience will, for now, continue to show up in droves to see if this explosion movie is like the other explosion movies they have seen in the past. hegemony is what it is.

In conclusion:

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

-Langston Hughes

Tree of Life

2011-06-22T06:52:00.000-07:00

Having finally had the chance to see "Tree of Life", I'm not sure how much I can add to the current debate. The New York Times has had a fascinating conversation about film art in general - largely prompted, it seems, by "Meek's Cutoff" and "Tree of Life". I won't enter into that debate because those who have read this blog before are probably well aware of which side of that debate I land on. The question for me with "Tree of Life" was twofold; does it live up to the current hype and does it achieve its apparent goal?
To the former, if you are already a fan of Terrance Malick's work, then yes, you probably will enjoy this film as well. It's clearly a masterwork and has all the hallmarks of any of Malick's films. And yes, the film is a very ambitious and grand experiment that largely does away with plot and instead centers on emotion, memory and the experience of time. To the later, does it achieve its own goals, is really a question of what those goals are. Many have compared the film to Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey"; however, I would argue that there are truly only superficial similarities between the two films. I do think that for many, 2001 is simply the only other film that they have as a reference point for "heady" films that have celestial and secular ambitions.

However, the reality is that "Tree of Life" has a far more direct referent in Godard's "Hail Mary" which shares the use of voice over, some elements of structure and the same repeated nature motif. Of course, Tarkovsky's "Mirror" is also heavily borrowed from as well.

In reality, though that doesn't really matter, what matters is the experience of watching "Tree of Life" is actually quite hard to describe. At times, I felt I was having a religious experience and at other times I was extremely aware of the intense beauty of the cinematography - which I do feel was what the film was trying to accomplish. It is an aesthetic experience. If one is to watch the film with the hope of pulling out a story in the traditional sense, they will be quite disappointed.
To put a point on it, an elderly gentleman a few rows ahead of me upon exiting the film stated "well, that was the worst thing I have ever seen" - to which, in my mind, I asked "what have you seen?". But that has been the debate since the beginning: what is a film supposed to be? If we think that a film is supposed to give us a clear story with clearly delineated characters and an ending that has been foreshadowed and orchestrated in a traditional way, then clearly this film isn't going to do anything for you. If you feel that film can do more than that, and you are willing to engage in an experience, than "Tree of Life" will deliver.

Chain

2011-06-15T06:09:00.000-07:00

I have long been an admirer of critic Jonathan Rosenbaum. Maybe he just speaks my language, but I have always found, even when I disagree with him, that his writing is clear, well thought out and quite profound. Ever since he left the Chicago Reader a few years ago, he has been maintaining a blog here . Recently he reposted an article he wrote about one of my favorite films of the last decade, Jem Cohens "Chain" which you can read here . The film is hard to get a hold of, but apparently you can rent it from Jem's site, the awesomely lo-fi wordpress site here .

I first became aware of Jem after watching the excellent Fugazi film, "Instrument" which is far more widely available than "Chain". I'm not sure how it would go over for those who aren't already into the band Fugazi, but it's at least a taste of Jem's filmmaking style.

Perspective

2011-06-13T05:44:00.000-07:00

For the last few days my mind has been reeling as I try to digest this . My own background is more from the cultural studies perspective , however, I have also always had a deep appreciation for scientific method. So, trying to wrap my head around cognitive science as it relates to screenplay format has been a fascinating experience. What amazes me is how reductive empirical evidence can be, but, when well done, also very hard to refute. As someone who has spent far too much time arguing from a purely theoretical position, looking at a graph that basically refutes and cements one idea over another is, well, absolutely fascinating.

What complicates the picture even more is that we are supposed to view sciences as politically neutral, which of course they are not. Cultural studies asks us to look at the reason and functioning of social mechanism, both of which are ignored by the linked scatter plot. Not that I want to formally enter into that argument here, so yes, the picture is far more complicated then I am laying out at the moment.

So, yeah, let's see where the "empirical neurocinematic agenda" takes us...

Chillin' in the Zeitgeist

2011-06-08T08:13:00.000-07:00

Well, it looks like "Tree of Life" has stirred up a hornets nest. For those who figured it out, my post "In Defense of Pure Cinema" was about the critical response, both positive and negative, to the film. Not surprisingly, the New York Times article I linked to a few days ago and now this piece in Slate all speak to the same thing and in far more articulate ways than my own.

I will only add this concluding statement for now (as I plan to see and review "Tree of Life" ASAP) - film should never be one thing or the other and they should never die from repetition and regurgitation. Film should always be looked at as a lively and dynamic artform that can both entertain and infuriate, often in equal measures.

A link, and beautifully good timing

2011-06-06T13:27:00.000-07:00

Sorry, I had to post this link . The similarity to my most recent post was too good to pass up - even the title!

In Defense of Pure Cinema

2011-06-03T08:39:00.001-07:00

Too many times I have shown someone a film and had them respond "I don't get it". My usual comeback is one borrowed from a good friend and exceptional poet Juliana Leslie which is "there is nothing to get".

In truth, however, I think the problem speaks to the way that so many of us are trained to deal with a text, which is, as a literary game that the author has encoded some type of secret message which is the audiences job to decode. Stuart Hall aside, I have always found this approach to belittle what cinema is actually capable of. For example, the problem with the literary approach to reading a film is that it assumes that a.) film can and should be read that way and that, b.) literary interpretation is more important than the cinematic mechanism - neither of which I believe to be true. The argument that follows the literary model is somewhere in the neighborhood of literature came first, then there was theatre, then there was film, therefore, film is an extension of both. However, that diminishes any unique autonomy that cinema has. For example, when watching experimental work, which has roots in neither literature nor theatre, but possibly painting or poetry, we cannot interpret the work in a purely literal way and therefore we may not "get it".

Again, that would mean that if we cannot "correctly" read the film, we have failed as an audience or the filmmaker failed as an artist to make the work readable. Either way, there is a missed connection or, to use another analogy, an incomplete circuit.

In reality, cinema as an art form pulls from many different disciplines and often simultaneously. Each shot, scene or segment can pull from a diverse range of influences and can be read, experienced or looked at in many different ways. Another element, I have yet to mention, is that the duration of time in cinema is fixed - which dramatically separates it from literature, but links it to most performative art such as live music, theatre and performance art. The crucial difference, of course, is that cinema cannot interact with the audience in the same way.

Therefore, we have to look to the psychological experience of watching a film to understand what cinema is truly capable of. So the question becomes, what experience do you have while watching a film? By which I mean, what do you feel "in the moment" of watching. Experiencing a film in this manner means that we are not actively interpreting nor are we analyzing after the fact, but instead we are within the films thrall as we are watching (and listening and following). Of course, there is a large potential danger here as we are giving ourselves over to the filmmaker for a moment to a few hours, but isn't that the unique pleasure of watching in the first place?

Tornadoes

2011-06-02T06:58:00.000-07:00

In the Wizard of Oz, after Dorothy lands her house atop a witch, she emerges from black and white into color. Back in 1939, that was some pretty hot stuff, but the bigger question it asked at the time was, which is real and which is "real". As an audience, we recognize that the black and white world of Kansas was real, in that, diegetically it represented the reality of the film, and, in Oz, the color is there to remind us that we are somewhere outside of the diegetic reality of Kansas.

Therefore, we need to accept that there are two realities, the black and white world and the color world. What's interesting here is that the color world actually approaches verisimilitude in a way that that the black and white world does not.

While revisiting Tarkovsky's "Solaris" recently, I noticed that there is a similar use of color and black and white, however, it seems almost arbitrary when we switch between the two - as was the case is Tarkovsky's "Stalker". I guess the joke was that Tarkovsky would switch to black and white whenever he ran out of money.

A good friend recently pointed out that in "Tron Legacy" a similar problem to the "Wizard of Oz" occurred. While the "real" world was in 2-D, the Tron world was in 3-D. Again, the statement seems to be that the non-reality is both more real and more interesting than the "real". I guess it shouldn't be a surprise that certain movies would try to posit fantasy as both more relevant and more heightened than reality, it's only that the vortex that creates seems to mirror our own displacement and separation from reality - as we move to the virtual away from the literal, are we not choosing to stay in Oz?

Cinema

2011-05-22T14:57:00.000-07:00

Today, here is where I am at. Cinema is light, convergence, a chemical reaction. Thoughts, blood, labor. A medium that takes three dimensions into two dimensions, but has the illusion of three. Time is more critical than framing or plot, for it is the fixed duration of a shot, sequence or film that adds up anything at all. When we are digital, we still begin as analog and alter our signal from wave to binary, but is the plasticity of our medium ultimately digital anyway?
Is a photon any less beautiful than the face it reflects off of? So much of our light has travelled so far, but do we appreciate the journey of those lonely particles as they travel from the sun and backlight our clouds? A great teacher once said, after watching a students film, "there was no film there".

Michael Snow, in his film "Wavelength", slowly dollies from side of a room to another. For me, it is one the greatest narrative films ever made. Which brings me to my point. Technology has made making a film easier and harder, but the technology has not made us better or worse filmmakers. In the end we have achieved a neutrality that may have began far away, but ultimately brought us to where we already were. Like those photons moving through space, not conscious of themselves, or their journey, so are we.

Best of Open Screen - Thank you

2011-05-20T06:40:00.000-07:00

Well, we've wrapped up another year of Open Screen and I just wanted to say a quick thank you to all of you who came out last night and to those who have continued to support us throughout the year.

Jeff and I are going to take the next three months to rest up and we'll resume Open Screen in September.

Best of Open Screen - confirmed line up

2011-05-16T05:37:00.000-07:00

A few more may be added as we track them down, however, here is the partial list...

Fine Without You by Alex Hagan
Madam Speaking - is this You? by Gina Basinsky
Winterthru by Ted Cormey
Wally the Waffle by John MacDonnell
Bullet With Butterfly Wings by Will Davis and Gabriel Munitz-Alession
One Day - Boston by Josh Rubino
Temporal Lapse by Zsuzs Szegedi
Bonfire Dance by Adam Van Voorhis
Vampire by Phil Healy
Papa's Nota by Mike Szegedi
Mud Liberator by John Hartman
Aunt by Keith Brown
A Letter of Apology by Nick Palm
Brain Dump by Ann and Tim Merry

Some Sunday Afternoon Thoughts About Michael Haneke

2011-04-23T07:46:00.000-07:00

Many years ago, on the strong endorsement from a good friend, I watched Michael Haneka's "Code Unknown". Like many at the time, I was absolutely floored by what I perceived as a singular intelligence and a sensitivity to the world as it actually is that is so rare in cinema. Some time later, I watched "Funny Games" (the original) which I found to be both useless and frustrating. Now, having seen "71 Fragments in a Chronology of Chance", "The Piano Teacher", "Cache" and "Time of the Wolf" over the last few years, I feel I better understand where Haneke is coming from.

I think it was while watching "Time of the Wolf", which is difficult at best, that my opinion began to change. The film illustrates such a bleak and dark portrait of humanity that the first time I watched the film I felt repulsed by it, but at the same time I could all too easily think of what happened in Haiti post earthquake. I had a similar response to "The Piano Teacher", the film was maddening at points, but at the same time one could see the chain of repression that led Isabelle Hupert's character to where she was. However, it was on a recent viewing of "Cache'" that something finally dawned on me: Haneke's films are not sadistic for sadisms sake, they are instead, deep meditations on our limits as a species. Happy Easter everyone.

"Super"

2011-04-11T14:51:00.001-07:00

I'm often accused of hating all films, so to begin this review, here are ten films, in no particular order, that I like:
Close-up Directed by Abbas Kiarostami
Le Samourai Directed by Jean-Pierre Melville
Pick Up on South Street directed by Sam Fuller
Raising Arizona by the Coens
Me and You and Everyone We Know by Miranda July
Beau Travail by Clair Denis
Dead Alive by Peter Jackson
Man With a Movie Camera by Dziga Vertov
The Passenger by Michelangelo Antonioni
Killer of Sheep by Charles Burnett

There, are you happy now?

I should mention here that I saw the film because Ted Hope, who I have nothing but the deepest admiration and respect for, produced it. So, despite what I write following this, the above still remains true. I will further mention that there are some serious spoilers in here, so don't read on if you don't want to know.

Anyway, so "Super" is a movie that is playing in movie type theaters currently. It's about a dude that decides to be a superhero. So, for movies about dweebs that decide to become Superheroes, I guess "Super" is better than "Kick-Ass" which is kind of like saying getting kicked the face is better than getting kicked in the teeth.

I could go on again about how much I hate rape as entertainment, and I guess that would apply here as well because there is certainly some of that in this movie. However, I think that may sell the film a little short because I do think it's trying to some interesting things, but it keeps bogging itself down and relying on B-movie tropes.

The film is ostensibly about a delusional short order cook who, after his recovering drug addict wife leaves him and relapses (and then, as with any movie about drug addiction, she becomes an unwilling prostitute because that's what we're supposed to believe happens to all drug addicts), decides to "save" her. So, yes, there are some echos of John Ford's "The Searchers" via Scorsese's "Taxi Driver". Anyway, so here is where things get derailed. While the film, and Rainn Wilson are actually able to give the character some genuine pathos and empathy (really), we're asked at the same time to laugh at people getting bashed in the face with a pipe wrench. It seems that writer/director James Gunn doesn't trust the film, the characters or the audience enough to not delve back into his Troma roots when things get too "serious". What ends up happening is that the film has some wonderfully and deliberately awkward moments, and has moments that are genuinely and absurdly funny, but at the same time B-horror body issues keep creeping back in and spoiling the effect. It's almost as if the parasitic slugs from "Night of the Creeps" are able to burrow into the films brain and zombify it (and yes, I know that James Gunn directed a film that sounds exactly like the above plot description called "Slither" 20 years later and I also know that he wrote the screenplay to the "Dawn of the Dead" remake - you know the movie that was not quite as good as the movie it was based on?) To make matters worse, despite some inspired casting (Kevin Bacon in, I'm not kidding here, his best role) and some very solid ideas, the film just sputters along from one gag to the next, until Rainn Wilson's Frank, finally just grabs a gun and blows a bunch of people away (this is immediately after he is raped by Ellen Page, by the way). So, in the end the film becomes like the sarcastic iteration of its title:
"Hey Sylvia, the dog just peed on the rug again"
"Super"

a little late SXSW recap

2011-04-11T14:42:00.000-07:00

I wrote the following as part of what may or may not become a larger piece for a different blog. However, I thought I would at least print this bit here for those who may be interested

SXSW 2011

Even if the world wasn’t literally on fire, I am not sure if I could have possibly found an adequate context for SXSW 2011. The problem is that we have been in midst of revolutions, real, spiritual and technological for so long, that by the time the inevitable release of the iPad2 completely usurped any thrust the film component of the festival had, many were wondering what the hell had happened.

The question for me as I consumed breakfast tacos and Shinerbocks in near equal proportion for the past few days, was how does film fit into the world we now inhabit? The Middle East is in the midst of such important and conflict rich change and the multiple and catastrophic disasters of Japan hung in the air over any and all we did. During and between screenings, panels and parties, our fellow humans were being mowed down in Lybia while the threat of meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant increased daily. Meanwhile, the buzz at SXSW was almost completely around the interactive area, which again brings me back to the original question: what the hell happened?

To be sure, the world will always be in conflict by our own hand or by natures will. Additionally, many of us will find a way to rationalize our daily lives and activities despite overwhelming evidence that our ideas are incongruent with reality, however, we continue to put one foot in front of the other. Maybe, in the end, that’s all there is. Maybe next year the world will be calmer and the buzz that surrounded the release of an object, largely manufactured in China with precious and rare metals mined from around the world with little to no regard for those who literally put their lives as risk to manufacture it, will be about a film that dares ask us who we really are.

SXSW slowly decompressing

2011-03-18T07:49:00.000-07:00

Jeff and Zak had the great pleasure of hanging out in Austin TX with most of the original Open Screen crew this week. We are both sleep deprived and probably still processing the compete and total awesomeness of the last few days.
The short films this year were on the whole absolutely incredible. It's always amazing to see how much one can play with form and content in such a contained space. It makes me wonder why so many films are so terrible and why short film culture in this country is so anemic.
Anybody who has any interest in film who has not gone to South By are doing themselves a great disservice. Even if you hate film, you should at least go for the breakfast tacos.

God Save the Queen

2011-02-28T06:02:00.000-08:00

Full disclosure: I hate the Oscars. Why? Well, I have always felt that any celebration that is simply a celebration of the self that is than positioned as being more than that is a bit obnoxious. By way of proof, if the Oscars actually cared about cinema, in the global sense, than there wouldn't be a best foreign film category, all films would compete equally for best picture regardless of the country they were produced in. Furthermore, independent films would also compete head on with the big budget studio films, however, neither is the case as the Oscars has always been about celebrating Hollywood and Hollywood filmmaking. I could also mention, of course, that almost all Oscar nominated films are "safe" - - in that they infrequently actually challenge the audience, society, or any preconceived notions of what a film should be. Where is Stan Brakhage's Oscar? Or, Todd Haynes' for that matter or Hal Hartley's or Jim Jarmusch's or Chantal Akerman's or Andrei Tarkovsky's or Olivier Assayas' or Abbas Kiarostami's or Wong Kar-Wei's or Lynne Ramsay's or John Cassavete's (okay, yes his wife very deservedly won one for one of his films, but that's not quite the same thing, but yes, they do get it right every now and again)? So, the point is, the only films that ever win the Oscars are big budget "films of quality" in the most narrow and myopic sense.
So, what the hell happened last night? Inception, directed by Brit Christopher Nolan, 127 Hours directed by Brit Danny Boyle, and the King's Speech directed by Brit Tom Hooper all receive various nominations and then King's Speech wins best picture? Best supporting actor goes to Brit Christian Bale? Brit Banksy gets a nomination (but sadly, doesn't win) for best documentary? Has Hollywood finally realized that they are no longer making anything worthwhile and, therefore, turned to England to fill in the void? Is this the beginning of a British Invasion? If so, I hope the door that now seems open to at least British talent has been opened for more challenging films, as well, in the future.

The Strange Pleasures of The Social Network

2011-02-17T06:18:00.000-08:00

As is the case in many current releases, the extra-textual information can be as important, if not more important than the film itself. One recent example is Slumdog Millionaire, where the fact that the slums were real slums, not some artificial slums was heavily reported and purported to give the film some relevance and verisimilitude that, presumably, would not have existed otherwise. In a different vein, Cloverfield went as far as building a vast viral campaign that not only promoted the film, but also explained elements of the plot that are not revealed in the film itself (I'm referring here to the multiple fake websites that were built that explained offshore drilling accidents, unexplained phenomenon etc.). In the case of The Social Network, we of course had the direct referent, that many of us use Facebook, and that Mark Zuckerberg is a real person that really developed Facebook, but also that we knew that Harvard does not allow companies to film on campus and, therefore, all the shots on campus were shot guerilla, as was the the case in Slumdog.

The question than is, are we capable of viewing a film like The Social Network as a complete whole, or are we to view the film and the extra-textual elements as the whole of our entertainment. Furthermore, if we are in fact supposed to view the advertising, interviews, our own knowledge of Facebook and the film as a whole, what does that say about the current state of filmmaking?

Of course, advertising and star culture have long played a role in our enjoyment or interest in films; however, it appears with films such as The Social Network, that it is being taken to a different level. Because, if the filmmakers had any real interest in the real Mark Zuckerberg, or the development of Facebook, they could have simply made a non-fiction film. Instead, they chose to make a fictionalized account of something that we are familiar with that could then become part of our experience of the actual thing while incorporating the actual thing into our interest in the film. It is this seemingly infinite meta-ization loop of entertainment that, for me, speaks volumes about where filmmaking is going - especially given the success of The Social Network. If we can no longer separate the individual text (the film) from its surrounding maelstrom, how far are we from no longer needing the text itself?

Black Swan

2011-02-13T15:20:00.000-08:00

Is Black Swan the worst movie ever made? I'm not sure I could go that far, but it is bad. The problem with the word bad is that it can be read, at worst, as dismissive, and at best, as reductive. The further problem is that the word bad does not even begin to explain in how many ways Black Swan truly fails.

From the outset I felt, as I often do while watching modern American films, that the director has a true and profound hatred of women. I was hoping that the feeling would subside, but unfortunately in this case, the film went on to torture, humiliate and ultimately (spoiler) kill its protagonist. I guess that could be forgiven if the woman was given even a remote amount of agency or if there was some point to it. However, the reason the protagonist has to endure her trials is because, of course, she is trying desperately to impress a man who wants her to embody both the madonna and the whore. The protagonists ensuing psychotic break is a result from her moving from her virginal self (again, a male idealized version of such) to her id, which isn't even really her id, but the projection of the id she thinks the man wants. Of course the fact that on top of all of it the dude is a complete douche is hardly even touched upon. Complicated? Hardly.

Here is where the film so clearly shows its limitations. Had I never seen a film before, or if the film were directed by a 16 year old, I guess I could at least give the film the caveat "yes the film was bad, but it was directed by a 16 year old who had literally never seen a film before". Of course, however, that is not the case. So, all the posturing and pretension that the audience has to suffer through is all the more frustrating. Even if I hadn't seen Michael Haneke's far superior "The Piano Teacher" that treads the same ground, but at least respects the audience enough to give us some deeper insight into the protagonists psychic state (it helps that Isabelle Huppert can actually act quite well; whereas, Natalie Portman's "acting" seems to be relegated to having a blank stare and her mouth half open for the entire film), I still would have found the general lack of respect for the audience frustrating. The dialog is almost always a reiteration of exactly what is happening on screen. And, Aronofksy's execution is so self congratulatory and self indulgent that by the time the requisite lesbian scene comes on you can imagine Beavis standing next to him in the edit suite, as they both laugh and say "huh huh, this rules". Which brings me back to the point I'm trying to make. At every turn in the film, I feel as though Aronofsky is saying "look how cool and edgy I am" , just as a young child is so impressed with their finger painting when they have no idea there was ever a Van Gogh or a Vermeer.

In the end, that's all there is: trite, amateurish ideas poorly executed by someone who thinks he is smarter than you, when in fact he is five to seven steps behind you. I hope some day that Aronofsky will see another film and realize how lame, recycled and behind he truly is.

Why Open Screen?

2011-02-10T07:04:00.001-08:00

Film School, 2000. A bunch of troublemakers end up at the same place at the same time. We feed off each other, we push each other, we fight with everyone and have a pretty good time. At some point, after traveling halfway across the country to shoot films in Kansas, Georgia and West Virginia, someone says out loud what the rest of us had been thinking; what if we just kept doing this?

The tour had been exhilarating. There were streetfights, epic basketball tournaments, amazing food, haunted houses, waterski accidents, chicken throwing, pizza ovens bigger than my apartment, weird and wonderful West Virginia news stories about us and in the end, some pretty damn good films.

Coming home and settling into "normal" life was a drag. It was good to be home, but at the same time the road beckoned. Her siren song called to all of us. However, there were bills to pay, girlfriends, boyfriends, wives and one domestic house cat that needed attention. So, we started trying to keep the momentum going. The discussions were long and epic. We all had our own idea of what could be, what should be and what we ultimately wanted. The one thing folks agreed on was, film festivals were a crap shoot.

Why work that hard only to have to spend all that money to get rejected, we asked? We liked the festivals, don't get us wrong, but we wanted to make something different. So, someone said, why don't we just do it ourselves? Why don't we create an environment where anything goes and you can just bring your film and show it to an audience? . So, that's what the original crew did. We made the thing and people had a place where they could just bring their films and show them and it was a third of the price of entering a festival that you may never even play at. So, that is why Open Screen. I wouldn't trade it for the world.

Trailer for my film..

2011-01-31T08:55:00.001-08:00

Ant Bike Mike Makes an Ant Bike - - Trailer from zak lee on Vimeo.

Kodachrome: 1935-2010

2010-12-30T06:11:00.000-08:00

Today is the last day that Kodachrome will be processed anywhere. You've seen Kodachrome, you just may not be aware of it. However, every memory you have of your grandparents standing on a beach, or on vacation is because of Kodachrome. Your very understanding of every moment before this one was shot, processed and printed on Kodachrome. You are Kodachrome as I am Kodachrome. So, now that it is gone, so is a part of you and I.
To commemorate this great passing, yesterday i shot my last roll and duly sent it off to Dwayne's Photo is Parsons, Kansas. Hopefully, expedited shipping will get the roll there before their noon deadline today.
Kodachrome is gone, long live Kodachrome.

Bullet with Butterfly Wings

2010-12-24T12:23:00.000-08:00

I can remember the first time I listened to Melancholy and the Infinite Sadness upon its release in 1995. Bill Clinton was still in his first term in office, and we were a long five years away from the Y2K meltdown that changed the very fabric of our reality. As I ate a veggie burrito and watched cars roll down El Camino Real, I remember thinking; this isn't as good as Gish or Siamese Dream, oh well. And with that, I went back to trying to figure out what the point of the internet was and why so many people listened to Phish. I never have been able to answer either of those questions, however, now, a mere fifteen years later, I can at least watch Gabe Munitz-Alessio's "Bullet with Butterfly Wings" on the Open Screen website. That's right, I found the disc, worked my encoding magic (well, actually Compressor's magic, but it was at least a custom setting) and now it's on the Video page of our site. Check it out.

Updates / Delays /Open Screen!

2010-12-13T07:43:00.000-08:00

Well,

As you all know Jeff and Zak are big time superstars so, every now and again, their superstar schedules keep them busy. With all the people to be seen with and limousine rides and chi chi restaurants to be seen at, sometimes things fall by the wayside. Quite often, even a simple blog update can be interrupted by screaming fans and paparazzi. So what did you miss? Well, October Open Screen Audience Choice winner "Bullet with Butterfly Wings' has yet to grace our website do to some serious media mismanagement on the part of the Open Screen archivist (which in reality is a paper bag in Zak's closet). Also, November's winner, "Ethan Rising" is also yet to grace our digital domain. Now that the slow winter months are upon us, Zak and Jeff will have more time to sit inside, away from the throngs of middle aged men who throw their underwear at us for some reason (seriously, please stop) and hunker down for some serious Open Screenin'. Everything should be together soon enough - sorry for the delay. Also, Open Screen is tomorrow and our theme is "The Winter of our Discontent". It's highbrow and literary so put on your beret's, brew up some chamomile tea and get to filmmaking. Hopefully we'll see your masterworks tomorrow at the Screen...

December Theme

2010-11-18T08:22:00.000-08:00

Our theme for December is, "The Winter of our Discontent".

Enjoy...

The Future is Now!

2010-11-09T08:34:00.001-08:00

Mr T. Party. Party Mr. T.

There is still time. Make a movie already.

November Open Screen

2010-11-01T06:41:00.001-07:00

You have nearly a week to make something. Do it.

Open Screen Tomorrow

2010-10-11T11:24:00.001-07:00

Tomorrow night is the next Open Screen of whatever season we're in right now. Make a movie and come show it. It's just that easy.

September Audience Choice

2010-10-11T11:17:00.000-07:00

The September Audience Choice film, "Flashmobbed" is finally up on our video page? Why did it take so long, you may ask. Well, we're humanish. And as human like being sometimes we are just plain lazy. So, during my exploration of the Crystal Caves, I finally was able to do a mobile upload after I figured out how to boost my iPhone signal using a paper clip and a wad of chewing tobacco. I should mention that while I was fixing my phone signal, I also helped a mother give birth and saved an orphan from a well. To be honest, it wouldn't have been a big deal, but first I had to single handedly take down a Mexican drug cartel and cure a rare form of cancer. So, sorry, I didn't get the video up sooner. Next time I'll let the orphan figure out their own damn way out of the well.

Rocktober

2010-09-19T19:16:00.000-07:00

Our theme for October is: Roctober!: Make a Film Inspired by your Favorite Song Without Actually Using that Song. Complex? Maybe. Awesome? Definitely.
Also, we had a few announcements at the last Open Screen, one was for a web series, one was for Super-8 Extreme, the other was for the Bicycle Film Festival - Boston . If you have links for the web series or Super-8 Extreme, please send them to us. We blame the dog for losing them.

September Theme has Arrived

2010-08-30T12:01:00.000-07:00

Our theme for September is....

"Back to School"

Yep, took us the whole summer to think that one up.

Six Filmmakers in Search of a Theme

2010-08-25T09:14:00.001-07:00

What's the theme for September you may ask? Well, we don't know yet. So there. We should probably figure that out soon. Okay, you're right, we'll get right on that. Jeff is brewing up some of his patented triple octane coffee right now. Zak is rolling up his sleeves and has a look of sheer determination on his face. Stay tuned...

Totally Non-Film Related Post

2010-08-10T11:28:00.000-07:00

I don't know if anyone else is following the Jet Blue flight attendant story, but man is it funny. Having worked ten years in retail, I can sympathize with the dude and I love that one of the details that all the press keep repeating is that he grabbed a beer on the way out of the plane. I mean, how many of you have wanted to do something like that? I know that my co-workers and I used to discuss elaborate revenge fantasies and or how I'm going to quit this crap job fantasies for hours. So this guy totally did it. Awesome. I think anyone who has ever worked retail and or in the service industry should send a dollar to his defense fund. It may be silly, but somehow I think it's a victory for human dignity which so often gets defeated in our culture. Maybe someone can make a movie about that.

Open Screen Dates for Fall

2010-08-05T14:09:00.000-07:00

So for all of you who have been waiting desperately for the new Open Screen dates, well, your long wait is over:
September 14
October 12
November 9

That's all you get for now. Start making your movies/films/cinema experiences now...

Screenings-a-rama

2010-06-14T14:28:00.000-07:00

So, just in case the summertime blues (Blue Cheer version, of course - look it up if you don't know what I'm talking about) has gotten to you, well, we at Open Screen have just the cure. There are two screenings you can attend: tonite, a "Keep the Balance Right" plays at the Kendall as part of "The Best of the 48 film festival" (Jeff, Zak and a group of Open Screeners worked on it). I'm sure there will be some other good films as well. Or, if you get bored you can try to sneak into other films at the Kendall instead, which, as an ex-Landmark Theatre employee, I can't really endorse. If you happen to be in NYC on Sunday, Zak's film is playing at Anthology as part of the Bicycle Film Festival.Of course, regardless you should support your local movie theatre and partake of the air-conditioning and pop-corn. While I'm at it, there is some cool stuff at the Brattle (grindhouse), and at the Harvard Film Archive (70's sci-fi) and at the Somerville Theatre (classics of rock-n-roll cinema). So, stop wasting your time on the internet and go watch some movies!

Longwalls at Precinct

2010-06-03T08:24:00.001-07:00

Yes, there is no Open Screen in June, however, you can check out the B-Movie inspired music of locals the Longwalls at Precinct in Union Square on June 12th. You can read more here

Summer Update

2010-06-01T06:14:00.001-07:00

So, we are taking the summer off and will be returning in September. The winner of the audience award for last time was "Wally the Waffle". We should be uploading the video soon. Stay tuned for "important' updates during the summer.

Wind Through Trees

2010-05-07T06:10:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, was quite windy. The wind would make it's way through the leaves and branches of the many trees in my neighborhood. The wind also blew the lids off my trash cans and stirred the trash on the streets and sidewalks. So, if one were to look up, they would see mighty branches swaying in the wind and smell the scents of spring. If one were to look down, they would see trash can lids and garbage moving sickly down the sidewalk. Maybe there is a lesson there somewhere.

Fire.

2010-04-18T11:39:00.001-07:00

Yesterday I spent the afternoon helping a friend build a fire. We were mainly clearing old brush and other yard waste, but there were some thick tree branches and some old wood beams as well. While watching the fire I noticed two things:
1.) Fire will devour as much oxygen and fuel as you feed it. Fire is insatiable.
2.) Fire is pretty.
What does this have to do with anything you might ask? Well, the theme for next months Open Screen is "Things That Have Been on My Mind". According to official Open Screen rules that can be something either on your mind or on my mine. So, yesterday at least, fire was on my mind.

Does Tomorrow Exist?

2010-04-12T15:10:00.000-07:00

Yesterday existed, of course, but only if you consider time capable of existing. Yesterday is really more a concept than an actual place. I can, for instance, visit the Parthenon tomorrow, or today. However, I can't visit "tomorrow". I can think about doing something tomorrow or I can conceptualize tomorrow, but I can never be in tomorrow any more than i can visit "yesterday" which I can, however, revisit. Time exists in that it can be measured. My body will age and then decay until it ceases to exist. "Tomorrow" will be one day closer to that end - the thing that doesn't exist, can't exist, will still bring me one day closer to my eventual and unavoidable death - when tomorrow becomes today which will be yesterday. And on that note, if you're not doing anything tomorrow or "tomorrow", well you might as well come to Open Screen. We can celebrate being one day closer to death by watching some movies about cheese or something. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Are DSLR's the future of an already bygone era?

2010-04-05T14:28:00.000-07:00

For those of you that don't know what a DSLR is, well, it's a camera. A digital single lens reflex to be exact. Basically, it's just a digital still camera. The thing is that the new generation of these cameras shoot video. Like, really, really good video. The image sensor is as big as a 35mm negative, so you know, the resolution pretty much kills it. They're also dirt cheap compared to video cameras with the same size sensors. The thing is that you, of course, have to make a lot of compromises because it's not built to be a video camera - so there aren't any real sound inputs and there is some pretty serious image stability problems (on those camera with CMOS sensors - please don't ask), not to mention the thing is small as hell so you don't have the heft of a decent camera built to actually shoot movies with. On the flip side, because they're small, you can just carry this little thing around with you and when the moment strikes, you can shoot a super high rez movie and move on. In other words, they scare the hell out of me because it's just way too easy. I also may think I want one. In the end though, it feels like a transition technology and I've already been hearing the titers on the corners of the internet about wanting the thing to "feel" like a "real camera" and behave like a "real camera" etc. So, by the time this blog entry comes out, the world will already have moved on and all those who pray at the alter of the new and shiny will be saving up for the next big thing which will be a Swiss Army knife that shoots 3D in native 4k while cooking dinner and solving advanced calculus equations.

March Audience Award Winner Up

2010-03-22T20:12:00.000-07:00

Keith Brown's "I Want to Put Candy in His Mouth" is up on our video page - you can check it here . Also, our patented theme for March is "Things That are Better with Cheese", in other words, everything. Enjoy...

February Audience Award Winner is Up!

2010-03-07T08:02:00.000-08:00

Congratulations to Mick Cusimano who took the audience choice award for February with Surreal Cafe - you can check it out here.

SXSW and Open Screen

2010-03-04T06:21:00.000-08:00

Just wanted to give a little congrats to Chris Maggio and John Wilson for getting their film "Have You Seen My Hair?" into SXSW. Of course, not that we're counting, but that's the third film we've beat South by to. The other two being James Dingle's "Pilgrims Progress" and Peggy Nelson's "Filmstrip". Come on South by, you really got to step your game up if you ever want to make it as a festival.

Man with a Movie Camera+Alloy Orchestra

2010-02-27T11:56:00.000-08:00

For those of you who are uninitiated in both the works of pioneering Soviet filmmaker Dziga Vertov, and local legends , The Alloy Orchestra, tonite may be for you. The Alloy will be playing a live accompaniment to the heavily (and deservedly) canonized "Man with a Movie Camera" - a film that lies at the intersection of Soviet avant experimenting and straight up propaganda (and, of course, well before Socialist Realism!). Okay, a little too textbook. Basically, the movie rocks, the Alloy rocks, put 'em together and you get twice the rock which somehow breaks into this equation: R, where R stands for rockness, x 4 or Rx4. That's rock times four. Trust me, it makes sense according to this drunk MIT professor I ran into. At least he said he was an MIT professor. He also asked me for spare change and attempted to tell me his life story, but you know how those MIT folk are...
Anyway, the whole thing goes down at the Somerville Theatre tonite, Saturday, February 27th 2010. It'll totally be better than like four "tweets" and a facebook update, which is what you'll probably be doing instead, and, if you don't mind me saying, that's a pretty big waste of a Saturday night for a handsome man/beautiful woman, such as yourself.

Open Screen tomorrow

2010-02-15T06:04:00.000-08:00

It's the first Open Screen of 2010 - tomorrow February 16th. The Somerville Theatre is primed and ready. The correct air to fuel mixture has been achieved. The pop-corn has been specially imported from a top secret farm on the central coast of California where the night mist can creep off the Pacific and lightly touch the growing and impressionable kernels. The beer has been brewed with a blend of hops and spices that can only be found on a remote Himalayan mountain top. The seats have been adjusted to maximize blood flow to your brain so that when the right audio-visual stimulus is absorbed by your cerebral cortex you will find yourself lost in a psychic state somewhere between terror and euphoria. All that's missing is you and your films...

Best of Open Screen = Huge Success!

2010-01-23T17:36:00.001-08:00

Thanks to everyone who made it out on Thursday. The vibes were as good as the films - by which I mean the vibes and the films were good. Congrats to Adam Van Voorhis - long time Open Screen regular who won the highly coveted Brian Higgins Award for making the most films on theme during the 2009 season. Also, we realized that we never published the films or the directors. So, thanks to a comment on the blog, here is, a little late, the films and directors:
"Have You Seen my Hair?" by John Wilson
"Ochitecture?" by Patrick Johnson
"Zombies in Circles" by Alex Hagen
"Blood Condiment" by Gabriel Munitz-Alessio
"Geico's Revenge" by James Day
"What's Your Favorite Food?' by Chris Maggio and John Wilson
"The Lovelife of Cromwell Rogers" by S.C. Smith
"Italy from the Outside" by Jesse Kreitzer
"A Remote Tale" by Kathy Castro
"Bus Nut" by Nick Palm
"Mixed Signals" by Mike Szegedi
"Untitled" by Ana Mallozzi
"I Want Your Vote" by Dave Newland
"Jerk-Off Car" by Adam Van Voorhis
"No Day, No Night" by Dave B.

Best of Open Screen

2010-01-04T06:17:00.000-08:00

The New Year is here and Open Screen is moving bravely into the future. First up, the Best of Open Screen, our annual programmed show with works pulled from the 2009 season of Open Screen, is just weeks away. We have a solid line-up of the weird, the wonderful and everything in between. So, come check it out, Thursday, January 21st at the the Brattle Theatre. We have also scheduled our dates for the next few months with the Somerville Theatre. The next regular Open Screen is February 16th.

Open Screen tomorrow and attack of the Blog

2009-12-07T12:57:00.000-08:00

Next Open Screen is tomorrow, unless you are reading this tomorrow and then it will be today and by Wednesday it will be yesterday. Confused? Don't be that's just how time works. Although, time is both relative and a construct. So, if you are traveling at light speed while reading this blog, then the next Open Screen may have already happened. It gets more complicated if we take quantum mechanics into account, which I typically don't, but I guess I really should more often. So, if Open Screen has already happened, but has yet to be observed, then maybe it won't actually exist until you can see it, which you'll get a chance to if you come to the Somerville Theatre, Tuesday December 8, 2009 around 7ish. Also, we seem to be lighting up the blogosphere like a fricken Christmas tree this month. That's right, we have been mentioned in TWO blogs in the last two weeks! Incredible, I know, I fell right out of my pants and dropped my drink in my hair when I heard the news. You can check out our friend Peggy's blog entry here . I should mention that Peggy made a film on theme for Open Screen that ended up in South by Southwest. The other previously mentioned blog is here

Next Open Screen and Best of Open Screen

2009-12-03T20:27:00.001-08:00

The next Open Screen is just around the corner - December 8th. Well, that may not be a literal corner, unless time has bends and intersections. Which I suppose it very well could depending on where and when you happen to be standing. Anyway, the theme for December, in celebration of the very near end of the aughts, is- You Aught to be in Pictures. Get it. Also, it looks like we will be having our Best Of Open Screen event at the Brattle late next month. Jeff and Zak (me) should be finalizing our decision for what we will include very soon - stay tuned for updates. Also, we got a little mention in another blog here

Next Open Screen November 10th

2009-10-24T12:39:00.001-07:00

That's right, the next Open Screen is on the horizon. Can you see it? Just to the left of that ship... yeah, the schooner. I know it seems far away, but that's just an optical illusion. It's close, so very very close. Breath deep, can you smell it? The faint sent of popcorn in the air. Its siren sent drifting into your nasal cavities, drifting past your frontal and sphenoid sinus where it finally mingles with your olfactory bulb. I know, my friend, a beer would wash that down oh so well. It's only a little longer. You can make it. I know you can. I've been watching and your only growing stronger and more resilient with each passing day. But I don't have a movie you say, well, there is still time, however fleeting. But really, I don't have any ideas for a movie you plead, eyes wet. It's okay, here take this tissue. Dry your eyes. Have a seat. I've been wanting to tell you this for a long time. We have a theme. That's right, you don't need an idea. We have one for you already. We knew this day would come. You see? We've been waiting for you to come to us. We've been patient - how could we not be? The theme you ask? Of course, please relax. There's no need to have that gun pointed at me. We're friends here and this hostility is out of place. The theme for November is The next red hot trend in cinema. The rest, is up to you...
You see, that wasn't so bad. Yes, of course I forgive you.

Videos are Finally Up!

2009-10-03T08:12:00.000-07:00

Figured out the old ftp problem (solution: yahoo=jerks). So enjoy our September winners - Nick Palm with "I.F.D'.s" and Myles David Jewell with "Pursuit of Self".

Internet Problems

2009-09-17T19:40:00.000-07:00

Ever have one of those days? You know the days when you're just trying to get the job done and then, next thing you know, total catastrophe. I'm talking total, systemic, failure. Well, that's what's been happening to my ftp server today. There is a new video. I can't upload it though. Hopefully tomorrow. In the mean time, try to imagine "Invisible Flying Dragons" in all it's technicolor glory.

First Somerville Open Screen=Awesome

2009-09-15T17:26:00.000-07:00

Thanks to everyone who made it out the the Somerville Theatre last Tuesday. Out theme for October (in honor of Jeff's, new addition to his family - Leo Coolidge Stern), is Astrology. Yes there was some Open Screen logic to get there. Also, it looks like we might have a tie for the audience award...

Stay tuned.

First Somerville Open Screen is around the corner!

2009-08-29T11:11:00.000-07:00

September 8th is approaching fast. Remember the theme for our new launch is "The Dawning of a New Era". You can also make films about previous eras, epochs or millennia. However awesomeness may be bestowed upon you if you do make a film on theme, or not. And remember... beer!

Husbands on DVD!

2009-08-18T08:46:00.000-07:00

For all you Cassavetes fans....

check it

Film Reviews

2009-08-17T11:00:00.000-07:00

So, I've been toying with the idea of writing film reviews here. I'm not sure if anyone is interested in what I think about current (or past for that matter) films - so, if anyone is interested in some reviews here, let me know. I may also try and find some other voices to add to the mix.

Official Open Screen Date and Time!

2009-08-09T06:35:00.000-07:00

Okay, it's official. The first Open Screen of the 2009/2010 season will be September 8th. Sign-ups 7:00pm - show starts at 7:30pm. Oh yeah, it's at the Somerville Theatre in Davis Square. That's right, you can now drink beer at Open Screen and take the redline home. Enjoy...

Almost Official

2009-08-01T12:20:00.000-07:00

The big news might be official very soon..

Also, it looks like the first Open Screen of the season will be September 8th, but that's not official yet either. So, start your filmmaking engines!

Rejected Open Screen Themes

2009-06-15T12:23:00.000-07:00

Throughout the year, Jeff and Zak come up with themes to help inspire people to make films. However, some of these themes never see the light of day, as they are rejected for various reasons. Now that summer is in full swing, Jeff and Zak have decided to share some of these rejected themes in order to keep the creative juices flowing. So, without further ado, here is a little summer motivation:

"The History of Catastrophic Trampoline Accidents"

"Things to do With Flannel"

"Giant Creatures of the Sea, and Their Favorite Television Programs"

"Math!"

"U.S Presidents from John Tyler through Benjamin Harrison"

We'll publish more as we "remember" them.

Hey! Where's the video of this months winner?

2009-06-10T11:45:00.000-07:00

We do have a winner, we just need to get ourselves out of vacation mode and get it together. The new video will be uploaded soon. If you haven't seen "Zombies in Circles" yet, well go check that out on our video page.

Open Screen Summer 2009

2009-06-01T12:11:00.000-07:00

Jeff and Zak have taken the summer off. There is some potential big news in the future, so stay tuned.