Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Well I guess I am cautious of going outside the box, cause when I do, it hasn't turned out well. Even with that script, I want to do, people said it was unconventional and I should direct something more mainstream instead for my career, so I guess I feel pressured not to go outside the box therefore.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Either you believe in the script or you don't. Time needs to be spent writing it and rewriting it, you can easily spend a year doing this on a feature film, quite a few scripts take longer, some take years If you have a script editor/doctor any flaws can be worked out, but you do need to have the confidence to take on board what is being said and making it your own. You need to sense that the suggested change required may not directly what's they say, but some missing element is required as a set up. The good ones don't give direct suggestions, they ask questions.

I wouldn't confuse crossing the line or shaky crane shot, with thinking outside the box, that's not a mechanical thing.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Yeah that'st true. I've rewritten the script over the years, and kept applying changes and suggestions from people. But still people are not interested in doing it. I believe in the script, just got to persuade others to be in the rewrites.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Lack of interest in a script is more common than people wanting to get involved in a project. The person in charge of a big script development agency in the UK said that out of 200 well written, professional feature film scripts only one had what it takes to go all the way.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Yep that makes sense. I'll keep plugging away it.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Get a professional script reader's report, they;re basic, but not hugely expensive, just be aware that they can be brutal affairs. However, they can be better than what friends tell you. For example, Euroscript runs a barometer service http://www.euroscript.co.uk/feedback-services.html , but you can find others online.

Beware thar all reports are subjective (they can vary from reader to reader), but they are good indicators

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

My Director this week has taken numerous scenes and rewritten almost every line in some, because he couldn't make the written words work with real people - perhaps they worked with the writer's imagination of the casting, but with the real people it was like they were speaking French - just sounded wrong. It's made a huge improvement and as it's better, the writer is actually happy, when hardly any line is left untouched.

Just how it is. The Director just stepped up, and did it. No asking "is it possible" or "could we consider..." He just said this is wrong and sorted it. Wide shoulders. Cast and crew all thought the same - much better. Only a stupid production company would put it back!

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Okay thanks, I already did that by having other pro writers read it on sites. Opinions were very mixed. I can try this site too, after making some changes. Thanks! I think the biggest problem with the script, is that I find it difficult to create suspension of disbelief for readers, and need to work on that.

As for dialogue, I agree it's best to change the dialogue, once the actors are casted. I did that with some of my past projects, and the dialogue sounded better. One director I worked under, his scripts have very poetic dialogue, and the actors just can't recite it the way he wants in my opinion, but he still keeps the dialogue as is, and is not very open to changing it.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

All fiction films are about the suspension of disbelief. You usually need to add a bit more narrative detail to the sales script than you would in the shooting script, they are different animals. Opinions in script reports can vary.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Going back to this topic title, I had to smile a bit when yesterday I had a two camera crew in from the BBC here and their complaint was that they WANTED deep focus and couldn't get it, so I suspect maybe, just maybe, this quest for deep focus is only in a small subset of cinematographer and video people.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Funny because we’re always struggling to get shallow focus but getting deep focus has its own set of challenges.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Sure I can try adding more narrative details to suspend disbelief, if that would help. One thing is, some readers had trouble being able to tell what certain characters were thinking, since generally, you are only allowed to write what the viewer would see. But I can still write some thoughts.

As for shallow vs. deep depth of field, I could go for shallow if it's less challenging for a DP, as long as the audience doesn't mind rack focusing between multiple characters, in wide shots.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

You don't put character's thoughts in a film script, novels do that. You have to have subtext, character expressions and body language and your use of words to reveal what they're thinking. E.G. She throws him an angry look.

There are books, Linda Seger's "Making a good script great" might be worth reading for this.

Talk to your DP about shallow vs. deep depth of field.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay thanks. But even if you describe anger, or fear in looks, the reader still wonders some things about what is going on inside their heads still.

I will check out that book, thanks!

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

You can't show their thoughts in a film like you can in a novel, They're different mediums.

You have use the 93% that isn't the dialogue text and indicate that in your script, you can't see or hear on screen what's going on inside their heads unless you plan to use voice over. Sometimes you can indicate the subtext for the actor, but some actors don't like that.

You can put in things like "He stares out the stranger" or put "Angry" in the dialogue.

Are these readers script readers or your friends?

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Some are friends, some are beta readers. A lot of it, is why did a character make this decision, instead of that decision... things like that. I think a lot of the decisions make sense, once certain surprises are revealed about the characters later, but the readers don't want to wait for surprises, and assume there are plot problems before waiting for the reveals, to be told why, or at least I think...

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

What they may saying is that your characters don't have a need, the thing that drives things along and the reason why they're doing things the way they do. This is more than they want to catch someone. In the story they may either fulfill this need or they won't.

It's Hannibal Lector in "Silence of the Lambs" fulfilling his need for a window with a view.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Ryan one good thing to do is pick a movie that you really liked and then read the novelisation. Most are done by pro authors. Then read a novel that had the movie made from it. Two that stuck in my head were the novelised blade runner which explained some things is not picked up on in the movie. Go the other was with 2001 a Space odyssey. So much in the book d SF unplugged and skimmed over in the movie for obvious reasons. If you analyse what came out you can see the directors reasoning. You realise some bits as irrelevant and which are essential and because they did a good job you don’t notice. Exactly the same with Harry Potter. However Clive cussler’s Sahara Git a ham fisted job that wrecked the movie. Apart from the very basic plot points, the movie was terrible. Plot, casting, even the feel were a very poor job. Worth doing this with movies vs books.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay, but I thought it wasn't a good idea to read books, if they have stuff in that the movie did not and just stick to the movies. I can try the Blade Runner one. I read the novelization of Mission: Impossible, the first movie, and it gave me a different perspective on some things. Makes me wonder if the writer changed some things around.

Well in my script I am told that the characters are not given enough motivation, but it's hard to give them more without the plot becoming ridiculous, so I have to figure out how to motivate my characters a lot, without the plot becoming over the top as a result.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

No that’s wrong. The script should provide foundation information for the audience. They can read clues, the semiotics, you don’t need to explain. If they have trouble at home, then a five second clip of them dissmissing the wife and slamming the phone down is all it needs. We know he’s troubled and that explains later behaviour. We don’t need the scene at home with the row. If a movie had a novel first it’s stupid not to read it, as I mentioned before. Jonathan frames deliberstrr et ly didn’t watch thunderbirds before he remade it and that was a mistake. Of course reading the book generates a perception but a good screenwriter diets this out. The director chooses to follow the screenplay totally or incorporates original novel background.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay, well here's one example from my script. I want a group of police officers to get together and form a lynch mob, after an officer is murdered and the suspects get away, cause there is no evidence, cause they got rid of the forensic evidence at the crime scene.

However, I was told that one dead officer is not enough to motivate cop friends of his to for a lynch mob. They need extra motivation. So I thought what the character another character, who wants to see the villains get killed also, cuts off the head of the dead cop, before the body is found by police, and then mails it into the police station with a note saying it's from the criminal organization, taking credit it for it to spite the police, thus making the police believe it was them, and getting them all angry and riled up that their friends head was delivered out of spite.

So I was told this would work a lot better to motivate the lynch mob. But, I don't think that the character who wants the villains killed, would think of cutting off the head of the dead cop, in such a quick amount of time, before the police arrive though.

Maybe he could, but seems unlikely he would think of doing that, that fast. But maybe? That's one example, of how motivating characters, can make the plot too complicated, or too over the top, if that makes sense?

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Look at LA Confidential for an example of such a scene. There really needs to be a corrupt culture in the police for things to go that far out of control.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

The scenario doesn’t make sense because police don’t form lynch mobs. They might cover for each other, be corrupt but they don’t carry out personal vendettas as a group. There is no good way to present scenarios that don’t make sense. Like I said before you aren’t writing from experience you’re making up things.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Well that's just it though. How do you push characters to become bloodthirsty? I suppose I could rewrite it so that the cops decide to find some sort of evidence, and arrest them the honest way, but it just doesn't seem near as dramatic or high stakes though, as being manipulated into a murderous revenge.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

The cops need to be in a world where the audience believe it's possible eg a concentration camp. If you're talking about the mounties, forget about it, come up with something else.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

I'm talking about an average police department, where I wanted some of them in the department, to become desperate and crooked by the criminal events, if possible.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

You're barking up the wrong tree, backhanders and general police corruption does occur, as does death by heavy handed restraint and shooting of innocent people out on patrol, but police lynch mobs are difficult to cover up in a modern western police station, they often have cameras all over the place, plus there's a police misconduct unit investigating deaths and the media all over it.

Modern Canada is the wrong place for this type of lynch mob, you need a dystopian society.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh yeah, I meant they would have to cover it up. The way I had it written was that they try to make it look like the villains were killed, cause they tried to shoot back.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Sorry, I don't believe this incident in your modern story set in Canada. I accept a similar thing in LA Confidential because all types of police corruption happened then and the cover up culture was extremely strong. The modern mounties don't seem to have that type of reputation, so you'd be struggling to get traction with the audience, regarding a police lynch mob.

There are dark acts in sectors that should be whiter than white, hidden by institutional cover ups.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

That's true I suppose it's more of a western ending, but is there anyway to have such an ending and make it believable in modern times?

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

You have to locate your story in a place where that type of stuff happens.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Well for budget sake I can still have it be in a modern North American city. I can just have it so that the villains arrest them then, if that's better. I just thought it wouldn't be as unique then. What about a movie like The Fugitive, where something similar happened?

In that movie, the police think that the main character killed a cop, and then the Tommy Lee Jones character makes remarks about how the police will shoot him on site now. If this is fake, and the police would not do anything like this to someone for killing a cop, then why did they write it that way?

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

"The Fugitive" isn't set in a police station..

Police do lots of things they shouldn't and films have things aren't the same as in real life and US culture has s dead or alive element to it, Lots of American movies have cops shooting down crowded streets after escaping cars without, seemingly, any collateral damage.

As I mentioned look at "LA Confidential", you need to set up a city with corrupt officials and corrupt cops.

You should do more research on your subject to find a place that has a reputation, here's starting points.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...and_Maher_Arar

You need to set up a world where bad things happen, the US has more of a reputation for these kinds of events, so if you're set in Canada you'll need to spend more time on setting this up.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

If I remember, The Fugitive takes us on a long, long chase where Jones' character undergoes a gradual evolution born of days/weeks/months of frustration while cut off from his usual supports. And, anything can and does happen in the wild places - we know this, it's a trope we've seen before, that when people are off the leash in the wilderness some life and death stuff is much more immediate. And, after all, they never do kill the doctor. I may be misremembering this.

But, the point is, characters should, no, they must be seen as taking credible actions. For example, in your arc the cops can never credibly form a lynch mob, but, the cop we know as a hothead, who's been drinking, who's wife/girlfriend left him, who's broken up over the death of his kids... could go way too far in dealing with a suspect who dies. Cops who sympathize with him might cover it up - hey, we all know John is a good guy and the suspect was a sleazeball, right?

Otherwise, if you must maintain the setting in a north american city, you'd need to develop a different culture that occupies it, that is, you'd need to create a credible dystopia, which is much much harder.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay, but as far as character development goes in The Fugitive, when Gerard comments about how the Chicago PD will shoot him on site, now that they think he's a cop killer, the Chicago PD were not even main characters, that were not developed very much though.

So how do you write it like that, where you want to push supporting characters over the edge like that, without having to develop them much? As for the The Fugitive not being set in a police station, what's a police station have to do with it? The cops would still have to leave the station to go kill the suspects, just like in The Fugitive, so that doesn't make much of a difference, does it, since in my story, the cops leave the station to go get the suspects as well?

As for the Canadian setting, I could set it in a U.S. setting, if that's better then?

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

As a neutral observer it sounds like a terrible B movie thriller. It’s fine if you’re doing it as a fun project with your buddies. But I wouldn’t have any aspirations this will lead to anything career wise.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay, what about it sounds like a terrible B movie? Perhaps I can work on that, or keep that in mind.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Unfortunately, probably everything...the rape gang, the revenge, the cop thing, etc.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

Oh okay. Well I didn't think it was a B movie in it's tone, since B movies have a certain tone to them, that I didn't think my script was going for.

Re: Why do a lot of filmmakers seem to hate deep focus cinematography?
 

I suspect by B movie they dont mean the definition youre thinking of, but more one of those dime a dozen direct-to-streaming crime thrillers.