Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale (Post 1954539)

If something unexpected happens that the audience don't see, they'll just assume that the normal physical world exists and the people in the reaction shot are reacting to that world. If what you're doing differs from that the audience will be confused. You can't copy and paste from other films, you're telling your story and the audience can't tell what's happening unless you've already set it up by them seeing it and establishing the rules of your world earlier in the film

Usually you don't pitch with the script, you have it for the next stage when the funders have seen the pitch documents with a very short synopsis and heard your pitch, then they'll read the script if they're interested (in some cases the final decision maker may have never read the script) In this case. Gareth Edwards knew the production company and improvising with non actors on location was part of the proposal that he pitched to them, so, in this case, the treatment makes sense. The company knew what he could do from his TV work.

Yet another method: https://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/m...leigh-way.html

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder (Post 1954563)

Yeah I guess I am just afraid I will get carried away with my own confidence and make a movie people don't want to see, if I decide what is right, and everyone else is wrong, if that makes sense.

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder (Post 1954563)

Yeah I guess I am just afraid I will get carried away with my own confidence and make a movie people don't want to see, if I decide what is right, and everyone else is wrong, if that makes sense.

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder (Post 1954563)

Yeah I guess I am just afraid I will get carried away with my own confidence and make a movie people don't want to see, if I decide what is right, and everyone else is wrong, if that makes sense.

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder (Post 1954580)

Oh okay. Well I could make all the decisions myself, and decide on what the rules are, it's just without relying so much on advice from experienced people who have been at it a lot longer, I am afraid that I will do it wrong and fail.

However, all you experienced people had to be beginners sometime, and still make your first feature sometime?

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson (Post 1954589)

In theatre, Directors can come from so many origins that second guessing them is often impossible - one said to me "well - what else is there that you don't know?" when I didn't turn up at a meeting I'd not been asked to and used as the excuse "I didn't know you called a meeting".


I find the most interesting times are when the Director is from an acting background, has no clue how easy or simple technical things are and say things like "At this point there's a big explosion, the wonderful sound designer will make everyone jump off their seats, the lighting will sort of go 'wow' and everyone gets blinded, and the music hits a huge crescendo while tons of glitter descends from the ceiling while the cottage collapses. The Heads of Lighting, Sound, Stage and the MD all look at each other - all having read the same script and seemingly all missed this very critical element. None want to be the one to break the news that this is going to be somewhat tricky - and then they all turn to me with an expectant look of 'you tell him'. The best solution is when the Director is also an executive producer with a large bag of gold. Seeing grown adults realising that this is the cue to realise the Directors vision, amazing things happen.

Worst is when the Director is an arse, who has no real power, certainly no money, and all these people simply say NO!

I've just seen the completed project I was involved with at one of the big UK movie studios. My entire scene, that I worked so hard on, that took me two days work - has been cut. Who knows if it was time, the edit decisions, or importance to the completed thing? I don't even get told. I got paid. That's probably all that really matters. I have no compelling need to see things to their conclusion. That need kind of left me. I was working on one when the Director got a recall to the states. There had been bad weather and shooting was cancelled. He was working on a new production when they recalled him, with a first class air ticket and he went, because the recall clause was in the contract that earned him mega bucks. The project he abandonned paid less, so he got on a plane. Needless to say, he won't get any more Directing roles from this production company - but again, it's a job and you do what you have to do. Ryan's need to make movies is a 'passion' not a job. Maybe that's what we can't quite fathom out what he's up to?

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale (Post 1954588)

When directing a commercial feature film for the first time, you will have an experienced crew with you; this will be insisted upon by the funders. Usually, the first timers will have had more experience in either theatre or the film or TV industry than you currently have, they may have worked as either a director or head of department. They usually have an editor, someone who has a separate set of eyes, who can "rescue" the film, regardless of how crazy the director is.

The problem seems to be that you seem to be unsure of the basic mechanics and are obsessing on them.
Perhaps you should be more obsessed by the story, the characters and their world, these usually provide all the answers as to where you place the camera etc, not copying other films.

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson (Post 1954593)

I suspect Ryan, that understanding this (or not) could be one of the reasons you have trouble with people? The look I described was understood by every single person there - who were all thinking exactly the same thing. I'm not sure I can explain this one if you don't get it?