Screened the Karim documentary yesterday at the local film school.
First public screening for me. In India, for an audience of young students that prefers Hindi as their medium of instruction. And have no clue on Kenya or cricket or the Indians in Kenya (OK, now they've seen MUIGWITHANIA, so they know a bit about Indians in Kenya).
Screening off a laptop with poor sound and uneven video projection.
I was pretty convinced it wouldn't be appreciated at all.
Luckily, the documentary holds itself pretty well. Despite the obvious lack of visuals.
So a big relief to have the screening go off well. A question and answer session followed, I commented and told stories, much more than the questions that were asked.
I don't know about others, but these first screenings are big events to a filmmaker like me- where the work cuts across culture and information zones a lot. Having screened my work in Kenya and India a bit now, the cultural differences in audience reactions are quite a bit.
Having said that, the underlying humanity of the characters and events always comes across quite strongly.
Which is a relief, that's what we hope and live for as filmmakers.
Tuesday, 25 June 2013
Saturday, 22 June 2013
Writing is re-writing
Its an old saying: all writing is rewriting. But you never learn it until you actually experience its magic.
Sending a proposal, looking at the story synopsis I was submitting, I was feeling that this was not it- this was not my story. So I began to tinker around and rewrite what I thought was my story.
Almost magically, the story transformed, it became what I was always trying to write. At the end of it I was left wondering if it was really me that had done the writing.
And of course accepting the old truth: all writing is rewriting.
Somehow, rewriting is like plumbing deeper into yourself, to find the 'real' story. Which of course will be further transformed by your collaborators- financiers and actors and cameramen and editors and sound-men. You will and stay on top of the situation, its your job as writer- director, but somehow by then the story has its own life. As has each project.
But still, a pleasure to find a story and then an old saying.
Sending a proposal, looking at the story synopsis I was submitting, I was feeling that this was not it- this was not my story. So I began to tinker around and rewrite what I thought was my story.
Almost magically, the story transformed, it became what I was always trying to write. At the end of it I was left wondering if it was really me that had done the writing.
And of course accepting the old truth: all writing is rewriting.
Somehow, rewriting is like plumbing deeper into yourself, to find the 'real' story. Which of course will be further transformed by your collaborators- financiers and actors and cameramen and editors and sound-men. You will and stay on top of the situation, its your job as writer- director, but somehow by then the story has its own life. As has each project.
But still, a pleasure to find a story and then an old saying.
Monday, 17 June 2013
Writing about your own work
One of the most difficult things to do (for me) is to write/talk about my own work.
Doing mainly commissioned work, its not an issue that comes up very often. But now, as I'm trying to move towards doing my own kind of work, the matter comes up every now and then.
A simple thing like writing out a page full of 'Artistic Intent' for an application for funds becomes a mountain to climb. Is it one's orientation in an old world where you only created and others wrote about your work, or something else? I honestly do not have any answers.
What happens is that I feel my story is a story, almost self explanatory, complete in itself, the 'audience' or reader is supposed to 'get it'/ understand it. I think there lies the problem- the vanity of a creator assuming that his work is perfect and he has an ideal audience that appreciates every nuance of its meaning. Yes, I'm exhibiting all the symptoms of a creator's vanity.
The reality of audiences or readers (as the case may be) is very different- where you see a story of a grand conflict of the races, the reader/ audience sees a one night thriller. You do a story of conflict between classes and the audience sees it as a light comedy. The audience/reader sort of bring their own experience of life and movies and that influences their decisions on your work, as much as your intentions as a 'creator'.
I guess what has to alter is one's notion of an audience, and it has to be said that one can't get everything right about what an audience really 'sees' in a story or a movie.When you're writing/ creating a movie, you try and guess the audience's reaction at each stage, but it actually remains a mystery until the work meets the audience.
And then something magical happens- people laugh, get tense, get excited, exhibit emotions that you only imagined. And in a way the work gets complete with an audience.
I guess this is the problem I have, I need to learn to describe my work simply and clearly to readers, just like the eventual work communicates to an audience. No real answers as to how to do it, but at least I've managed to describe my problem.
Doing mainly commissioned work, its not an issue that comes up very often. But now, as I'm trying to move towards doing my own kind of work, the matter comes up every now and then.
A simple thing like writing out a page full of 'Artistic Intent' for an application for funds becomes a mountain to climb. Is it one's orientation in an old world where you only created and others wrote about your work, or something else? I honestly do not have any answers.
What happens is that I feel my story is a story, almost self explanatory, complete in itself, the 'audience' or reader is supposed to 'get it'/ understand it. I think there lies the problem- the vanity of a creator assuming that his work is perfect and he has an ideal audience that appreciates every nuance of its meaning. Yes, I'm exhibiting all the symptoms of a creator's vanity.
The reality of audiences or readers (as the case may be) is very different- where you see a story of a grand conflict of the races, the reader/ audience sees a one night thriller. You do a story of conflict between classes and the audience sees it as a light comedy. The audience/reader sort of bring their own experience of life and movies and that influences their decisions on your work, as much as your intentions as a 'creator'.
I guess what has to alter is one's notion of an audience, and it has to be said that one can't get everything right about what an audience really 'sees' in a story or a movie.When you're writing/ creating a movie, you try and guess the audience's reaction at each stage, but it actually remains a mystery until the work meets the audience.
And then something magical happens- people laugh, get tense, get excited, exhibit emotions that you only imagined. And in a way the work gets complete with an audience.
I guess this is the problem I have, I need to learn to describe my work simply and clearly to readers, just like the eventual work communicates to an audience. No real answers as to how to do it, but at least I've managed to describe my problem.
Wednesday, 12 June 2013
A local TV Channel
Went to meet a local TV Channel, out here in North India, in my hometown to which I've relocated.
Never seen the channel before so when I saw it for the first time, it was in the office of the channel's owners. As I'd gone to the TV Channel looking for work, this was obviously not the place or the time to open the mouth.
But I suppose one can jot down a few thoughts in a blog, and hope they don't sound terribly offensive!
Basically, nothing wrong with the content, I don't think I'm the right person to comment on that anyway but the technical and aesthetic 'finish' of the work was amazing- almost all the camera angles appeared wrong, the framing brought out people's bad sides. The lighting was completely 'flat'- not bring out any quality of the content of an image.
But then I came home and the people here were watching a 'national' TV Channel, one of the biggest in fact. And guess what, the technical qualities were barely ten per cent better. Yes, the national channel was shot on HD, probably HDCAM, while the local one stuck to DV for shooting and MP4 for output, so there was visible visual difference. But not a difference you'd pay millions for.
What's happenning seems to be a crisis of 'exposure', the people running the big TV Shows or channels seem to have no idea of how to create a better, world class show. Maybe from a lack of watching and analysing enough movies or TV Shows. So their TV Shows remain at a slightly 'lower' level of finish.
Then when the smaller channels, who've grown up watching the national ones, create their own stuff, it suffers from a similar lack of quality in its 'finish'.
There's nothing that can't really be sorted out, giving a much better finish at almost the same costs.
But is the talent capable of this 'sorting out' still available in the small towns or has it all gone to the bigget cities and bigger channels? I don't really know, am going to discover in the days to come.
Never seen the channel before so when I saw it for the first time, it was in the office of the channel's owners. As I'd gone to the TV Channel looking for work, this was obviously not the place or the time to open the mouth.
But I suppose one can jot down a few thoughts in a blog, and hope they don't sound terribly offensive!
Basically, nothing wrong with the content, I don't think I'm the right person to comment on that anyway but the technical and aesthetic 'finish' of the work was amazing- almost all the camera angles appeared wrong, the framing brought out people's bad sides. The lighting was completely 'flat'- not bring out any quality of the content of an image.
But then I came home and the people here were watching a 'national' TV Channel, one of the biggest in fact. And guess what, the technical qualities were barely ten per cent better. Yes, the national channel was shot on HD, probably HDCAM, while the local one stuck to DV for shooting and MP4 for output, so there was visible visual difference. But not a difference you'd pay millions for.
What's happenning seems to be a crisis of 'exposure', the people running the big TV Shows or channels seem to have no idea of how to create a better, world class show. Maybe from a lack of watching and analysing enough movies or TV Shows. So their TV Shows remain at a slightly 'lower' level of finish.
Then when the smaller channels, who've grown up watching the national ones, create their own stuff, it suffers from a similar lack of quality in its 'finish'.
There's nothing that can't really be sorted out, giving a much better finish at almost the same costs.
But is the talent capable of this 'sorting out' still available in the small towns or has it all gone to the bigget cities and bigger channels? I don't really know, am going to discover in the days to come.
Friday, 7 June 2013
Never stop learning!
Went to get DVD copies made of my movie, thought it'd be one of those DVD duplicator in a few minutes kind of thing. Surprisingly difficult to find one of those duplicators, finally cyber cafe and one by one duplication.
Then, seeing the DVD had more information than the standard 4.7 GB (the movie plus making-of-the movie), the duplicating person asked me to wait. Got another bunch of DVDs, hey these seemed to do 5.3 GB of info. Never heard of them before. Or maybe working in Kenya blunts your technical edge, you kind of follow the routines there.
Anyway, learnt a lesson.
Then, seeing the DVD had more information than the standard 4.7 GB (the movie plus making-of-the movie), the duplicating person asked me to wait. Got another bunch of DVDs, hey these seemed to do 5.3 GB of info. Never heard of them before. Or maybe working in Kenya blunts your technical edge, you kind of follow the routines there.
Anyway, learnt a lesson.
Wednesday, 5 June 2013
Screening MUIGWITHANIA in Meerut
The much awaited screening came about on a hot afternoon, driving there the AC didn't seem to have any impact!
The screening venue turned out to be a classroom with an improvised projector running off a laptop. Except that the laptop didn't play DVDs! So the kids transferred the DVD's contents onto a pen drive and then ran it. I thought the screening venue was a disaster for a film school. The audio, running off the laptop was a near complete disaster.
Luckily, or maybe its just a sign of changing India, the classroom was air-conditioned- with not one but two units.
The screening was all right, got stuck a couple of times, but overall pretty acceptable.
Then came the Q&A session, OK a bit of comedy with the direction teacher feeling insecure and running up to speak before me, after making a nuisance of himself earlier!
The questions were perceptive, technical ones as well as aesthetic ones. The history ignorance part was pretty much to be expected.
But overall it became clear to me why this movie's having a hard time- it falls between two areas: its an African film but simultaneously an Indian one and it seems clear that its better to be one or the other. Or else both disown you and you sort of get into a no-man's land- remaining lost and ignored despite the qualities of the story and the overall narrative.
So we have to go with one culture, one set of ideas as the core, not two.
Of course that has to wait until the next movie!
The screening venue turned out to be a classroom with an improvised projector running off a laptop. Except that the laptop didn't play DVDs! So the kids transferred the DVD's contents onto a pen drive and then ran it. I thought the screening venue was a disaster for a film school. The audio, running off the laptop was a near complete disaster.
Luckily, or maybe its just a sign of changing India, the classroom was air-conditioned- with not one but two units.
The screening was all right, got stuck a couple of times, but overall pretty acceptable.
Then came the Q&A session, OK a bit of comedy with the direction teacher feeling insecure and running up to speak before me, after making a nuisance of himself earlier!
The questions were perceptive, technical ones as well as aesthetic ones. The history ignorance part was pretty much to be expected.
But overall it became clear to me why this movie's having a hard time- it falls between two areas: its an African film but simultaneously an Indian one and it seems clear that its better to be one or the other. Or else both disown you and you sort of get into a no-man's land- remaining lost and ignored despite the qualities of the story and the overall narrative.
So we have to go with one culture, one set of ideas as the core, not two.
Of course that has to wait until the next movie!
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
Long time on the road to MUIGWITHANIA
I suppose somewhere I must have known that MUIGWITHANIA (a Gikuyu word from the Kikuyu people of Kenya, variously translated as 'reconciliation' or bringing two opposing points of view together), my first feature 'film' was always going to be a difficult project to 'sell' or 'market'.
You have to be realistic: its a story about an Asian shopkeeper caught in the midst of the Mau Mau freedom struggle in Kenya. It was marketed purely to the Asian market in Kenya by my producers-the market they knew. But that ended up hurting its prospects and the movie never really got its due (at least according to me).
The Indian markets were never explored by my producer, so that's a new territory.
The Western markets were interested, but the overall inferior quality of the movie's 'finish' let it down. For Western markets, the technical finish is a 'must'. Add to that the subject- no 'great white man come to rescue the natives' narrative!
All that was then.
Now, suddenly, on Madaraka Day (June 1st), Kenyan TV Station NTV showed the movie across Kenya, reaching far more people than it had ever done.
And today, I embark on the Indian leg of the journey- with a screening in Meerut at the Indian Institute of Film and Television. So sudden excitement.
Long tail or just a movie that refused to die?
A movie with a universal story, a multi-cultural narrative deserved more and now it seems to be slowly coming along. Google for MUIGWITHANIA the movie, see the results for yourself.
You have to be realistic: its a story about an Asian shopkeeper caught in the midst of the Mau Mau freedom struggle in Kenya. It was marketed purely to the Asian market in Kenya by my producers-the market they knew. But that ended up hurting its prospects and the movie never really got its due (at least according to me).
The Indian markets were never explored by my producer, so that's a new territory.
The Western markets were interested, but the overall inferior quality of the movie's 'finish' let it down. For Western markets, the technical finish is a 'must'. Add to that the subject- no 'great white man come to rescue the natives' narrative!
All that was then.
Now, suddenly, on Madaraka Day (June 1st), Kenyan TV Station NTV showed the movie across Kenya, reaching far more people than it had ever done.
And today, I embark on the Indian leg of the journey- with a screening in Meerut at the Indian Institute of Film and Television. So sudden excitement.
Long tail or just a movie that refused to die?
A movie with a universal story, a multi-cultural narrative deserved more and now it seems to be slowly coming along. Google for MUIGWITHANIA the movie, see the results for yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)