IAC DISCUSSION FORUMS

Today I received the judge's comments for my film "Until You Smile". I must
admit that I was a bit impatient, Ned. Sorry for that. Now I know what the
judges thought about my film. AMPS is a very good festival just like the
Guernsey Festival, just like BIAFF and the Cotswolds Festival. The judges
wrote : "A visit with a musician, graphic artist, clown". I think that the
theme was a bit different : "Why did the musician, artist and clown Brian
Higbee leave London and the Garden of England and move to Devon ?"
The judges also wrote : "This is an enjoyable and very well made film but
it lacked the spark of passion that should come with a life of an artist
..." I partly agree with this. I'm grateful to one of the AMPS-judges who
has written this.

I visited Brian twice to make this film. The first time I asked a friend
to help me with recording the sound. He's a very good film maker and I admire
his skills. I'm always impressed when I see his films. But when we were
there he also started directing everything. I hadn't asked him to do this.
It was a very delicate moment. I think that he didn't realize that Brian
and I have been friends for almost 30 years. We laugh a lot. We tell jokes.
Brian is always very cheerful. Unfortunately when my Flemish friend and filmmaker
started shouting "One, two, three, ... Action !" in a very loud voice then
Brian was a bit paralysed. One moment I even thought that we were in a Nazi
camp. I took it easy. I was still very calm, but I was a bit disappointed
that Brian was not as spontanuous as usual. This was Brian not anymore. When
I was back in Belgium I called him. He admitted that he didn't feel at ease.
So I decided to go back to Devon the following year to take more shots. That
time I asked some members of my club to accompany me. One of them was young
Davy. Davy is a very good guitar player. When he was with Brian they started
playing music together. They enjoyed themselves very much. I saw the real
Brian again. He was cheerful, spontanuous. And he played with his dog as
usual. From time to time it was Brian himself who started directing. But
that was wonderful. For instance he said : "Look at Bilbo ( = his dog)".
It meant : "Please film him. He's so crazy !" I could take wonderful shots.
When editing the film I took shots taken during the two visits. After all,
AMPS-judges, I agree with you more or less. The film lacked some spark of
passion.

This year I filmed Brian again, but this time at a concert in a Kentish church.
He didn't see me when I was filming him from different angles. I called that
film "Just a Song at Twilight". Brian said : I'm happier with that film than
with the one that you made last year. Brian is always very honest and appreciate
that. Also because I learnt a lesson now. If you would like to make a film,
ask your friends to help you, but don't accept that other filmmakers start
directing your film in spite of their fantastic skills. Making "Until You
Smile" was a good experience.


Ned wrote in his letter that AMPS has a new president. Dave Watterson already
told us some time ago. I take the opportunity to thank Ned for everything.
Thanks to him I also know the American Motion Picture Society and its festival.

Willy Van der Linden raised the issue of how you work with another established
moviemaker. I seem to have come across more collaborations in recent years.
For this purpose I don't mean married couples like Ken and Carol Wilson,
Bernhard and Karin Hausberger, Ken and Jean McRonald and so on - though in
some cases both partners have made successful work on their own. I mean established
film makers who have had some success on their own and have now shared credit
with other successful film makers.

For instance:

Our own webmaster, Atta Chui, has a long history of making his own distinctive
poetic movies but has collaborated with Ashley Bond - himself part of a succesful
moviemaking group and now working in the industry.

Our technology webmaster, Alan Colegrave, makes superb award winning movies
on his own but has recently been working also with Mark Jackson a fellow
member of Harrow club and multi-award winner.

Probably the world's best amateur drama maker, Jan Baca from Catellonia,
worked with Austrian master-movienmaker Horst Hubauer on his most recent
work.

Pat Mahon and Bryan Saberton - two different spirits in Scottish film making
- have worked together.

Emmanuel Dubois maker of mountaineering based films has worked with Jean-Pierre
Hué the wildlife and ethnographic film maker on "For the Sheiks Spirits".

Ron Prosser and Len Skipper made "Going Loco" together.

How does it work? Do they suffer the sort of problems Willy mentioned (though
admittedly he was talking about someone asked to assist trying to take over,
where I am referring to people who plan to work together as equals.)

What problems arise? How do you resolve them?


Dave the curious

Thanks Willy for your posting. I am not going to discuss the specific comments
made about your film but rather generalise about documentaries in the light
of the very high standard we received this year. I can do this safely as
I will not be a judge next year. The best documentaries have a pont of view,
they are not even handed, they are also about people although superficially
they may seem to be about things. People are fascinating and more eccentric
or on the edge they are the more interesting. The best documentarians reveal
the person/people thay are filming, not easy and in my opinion works best
when the film makers disappears into the woodwork and the subject is no longer
aware of their presence.

Regarding co-operative productions, I have worked with Alberto Kniepkamp
for 30 years on both professional and n-c productions. We each have quite
clearly different skills so do not get in each others way.

Ned C

Actually Ned, I was interested to note that Willy had received some judges
comments for his AMPS film. I have not done so but imagine they must have
liked my film since they gave it 'Best Documentary'! I feel compelled to
write on two points from this thread on the Forum. Firstly Willy, if you
are going to ask for assistance in the making of a film select your 'helper'
very carefully. If it is to be a joint production fair enough but if you
want someone to help with microphone placements and general physical assistance
do not get a film maker unless you can be very sure he is prepared to let
you get on with the job in your own way. I always try and work alone for
this reason. The collaborations mentioned by Dave are indeed laudible and
involve talented people working together but this is a rarity in my opinion.

Ned's comments on what makes a good documentary are succint. Thinking back,
I find that my most successful ones have involved a person, if not 'baring
their soul', then coming quite close to so doing. No matter how dramatic
the footage it is people's feelings and motives that really engage the viewer.
I find that a film maker has to watch and wait in order to get the essence
of his story. Never rush the subject and here Willy, you were put at a disadvantage
with your bossy and impatient 'helper'. One TV executive (of a major UK
channel) criticised my latest film as not being near enough "to the cutting
edge". This is a fair enough comment and Dave has often told me much the
same. However I prefer to 'observe' rather then 'comment', probably through
lack of courage (or ideas?).

Aren't we so lucky having the time and freedom to do as we like in film (video)
production?




"Ned C" <ned@ampvid.com> wrote:

Thanks Willy for your posting. I am not going to discuss the specific comments
made about your film but rather generalise about documentaries in the light
of the very high standard we received this year. I can do this safely as
I will not be a judge next year. The best documentaries have a pont of view,
they are not even handed, they are also about people although superficially
they may seem to be about things. People are fascinating and more eccentric
or on the edge they are the more interesting. The best documentarians reveal
the person/people thay are filming, not easy and in my opinion works best
when the film makers disappears into the woodwork and the subject is no
longer
aware of their presence.

"Michael Slowe" <michael.slowe@btinternet.com> wrote:

Firstly Willy, if you are going to ask for assistance in the making of a
film select your 'helper'
very carefully. If it is to be a joint production fair enough but if you
want someone to help with microphone placements and general physical assistance
do not get a film maker unless you can be very sure he is prepared to let
you get on with the job in your own way. I always try and work alone for
this reason. The collaborations mentioned by Dave are indeed laudible and
involve talented people working together but this is a rarity in my opinion.


Yes, you're right, Michael. Once I worked together with an established and

charismatic filmmaker. I will tell you about it later on.

Every individual has his own soul, his own feelings. He expresses his feelings
in a painting, in a film, in a poem ... He doesn't have to ask someone else
to work together with him to express his feelings, otherwise he is not happy
with the result for 100 percent. I can understand that two brothers (like
the Rouillard brothers for instance) work together, or Ken Wilson with his
wife. They know each other very well. They see each other from morning till
evening. But two other individuals ? I have my doubts. The result is always
a bit unnatural.

Vincent Van Gogh was Vincent Van Gogh. Gauguin was Gauguin. But can you imagine
that both painters made a painting together and signed it ? Imagine "Van
Gogh and Gauguin" ! They knew each other very well but they had different
characters. In my living-room hangs an etching made by the Kentish artist
Graham Clarke. I love it. I know that when he has made copies of his etchings
he asks one of his friends to colour them in. That's acceptable. Graham Clarke
is the creator. The other ones just help him, but not with the pure creative
work. Graham tells them what colours they must take.

Some time ago there was an international festival. Three filmmakers, who
had worked together on one film, won that festival. The most "celebrated",
the one who has most phlegm and flair entered that festival but his two mates
didn't know anything about it. They didn't even know that they had won awards,
money, etc... A few weeks before the ceremony they discovered everything.
It was not very pleasant for the organizers either. Collaborations may cause
problems.

When making a film I always think of a story that I would like to tell. I
do some research. I write the scenario. I sometimes ask some friends what
they think about it. I write the script and I make a shot-list. Then the
moment has come to ask friends if they are willing to help with lighting,
sound, etc... Of course I can do them a service in return. Last Friday two
friends showed their rough film. They asked me to come to their house for
the "finishing touch". Sometimes a few shots are useless. Then I ask them
if it's not better to delete these shots in order to make the film a bit
stronger... But I always tell them that I am not "The Holy Spirit". I know
very well that it's not good to be bossy. In the future I always try to do
my work alone, just like Michael, and I also try to form a team of good friends
to help me with lighting, sound, etc...

First, all the AMPS comments/awards have now been mailed so everyone should
receive theirs within the next week or so, Sorry for the delay but the Las
Vegas Convention took up a lot of organisation time.

The great thing about n-c film making is that it can be a lone or a group
activity but the "authorship" of a film may be a subject of debate. Here
is a true story, a person who had never made a film had an idea for a film,
contacted the local camcorder club and with the help of skilled cameraman
and editor, both spent hours working on the project, much more time than
the originator. The result was a remarkable film, the originator entered
it into contests and won awards, all in his name. The cameraman and editor
received no more recognition than having their names in the credits. They
were not happy. How should this be handled? Very creative people are sometimes
neither nice nor generous.

Ned C

"Ned C" <ned@ampvid.com> wrote:

The great thing about n-c film making is that it can be a lone or a group
activity but the "authorship" of a film may be a subject of debate. Here
is a true story, a person who had never made a film had an idea for a film,
contacted the local camcorder club and with the help of skilled cameraman
and editor, both spent hours working on the project, much more time than
the originator. The result was a remarkable film, the originator entered
it into contests and won awards, all in his name. The cameraman and editor
received no more recognition than having their names in the credits. They
were not happy. How should this be handled? Very creative people are sometimes
neither nice nor generous.

Ned C

How should this be handled ? I must admit it's difficult to answer that question,
Ned. But I'm sure that all our friends on this forum also do the editing
work and/or camerawork. Filmmaking is a hobby. We do not only write scripts
or make shot-lists. I can't feel a filmmaker without working with a camera
or an editing machine. This is my personal feeling. I cannot imagine that
I have a good idea and that I ask members of a filmclub to do all the other
things (camerawork, editing, ...), that I pretend that I'm the filmmaker
and that I receive the awards for it. I would feel embarrassed. Also editing
is a creative part of filmmaking and I always enjoy working on my machines.
When I worked together with the "established" filmmaker he edited the film.
The reason ? He has a sophisticated machine that costs 6 or 7 times more
than my casablanca. I still worked with the very first version the casablanca.
Mine had only two audio tracks. But every week I went to his house to
watch the part that he had already done and we changed things. The cooperation
was perfect, but I must say ... I didn't enjoy it for 100 percent. On the
other hand I can accept that my colleague is the director. We made that agreement.
It must be very difficult for the actors to listen to two or three directors.
That would be ridiculous. In your true story the originator was not nice
and generous. It's also a matter of making an agreement before starting
making the film and also standing by the agreement.
Willy

Whilst documentaries, travel and nature films may be made single handed I
don't think this can be done with narrative films. For exemple, it is almost
impossible to both direct and photograph a film (I have tried and it doesn't
work). The sound has to be managed separetely for the best results, requiring
at least one person on boom and monitoring sound. The cameraman really needs
an assistan to set lights and move things around. So, for a narrative film
the minimum crew is a director, cameraman and assistant and sound person.
One of the advantages of club membership must surely be the availibility
of people to crew the productions.

Ned C

How should this be handled ? I must admit it's difficult to answer that
question,
Ned. But I'm sure that all our friends on this forum also do the editing
work and/or camerawork. Filmmaking is a hobby. We do not only write scripts
or make shot-lists. I can't feel a filmmaker without working with a camera
or an editing machine. This is my personal feeling. I cannot imagine that
I have a good idea and that I ask members of a filmclub to do all the other
things (camerawork, editing, ...), that I pretend that I'm the filmmaker
and that I receive the awards for it. I would feel embarrassed. Also editing
is a creative part of filmmaking and I always enjoy working on my machines.
When I worked together with the "established" filmmaker he edited the film.
The reason ? He has a sophisticated machine that costs 6 or 7 times more
than my casablanca. I still worked with the very first version the casablanca.
Mine had only two audio tracks. But every week I went to his house to
watch the part that he had already done and we changed things. The cooperation
was perfect, but I must say ... I didn't enjoy it for 100 percent. On the
other hand I can accept that my colleague is the director. We made that
agreement.
It must be very difficult for the actors to listen to two or three directors.
That would be ridiculous. In your true story the originator was not nice
and generous. It's also a matter of making an agreement before starting
making the film and also standing by the agreement.
Willy

"Ned C" <ned@ampvid.com> wrote:

One of the advantages of club membership must surely be the availibility
of people to crew the productions.

For fiction films you always need a film crew. Yes, of course I agree with

that, Ned.

Now an other true story. Perhaps you know the life of Toulouse Lautrec, the
famous French impressionist. He was a real womanizer. You can also see it
in his paintings. One of my friends, called Gerrit, wanted to make a dramatized
documentary about him. As he is more specialized in making documentaries
he asked the "established" filmmaker Huub, who had an excellent reputation
as fiction filmmaker, to help him. They made agreements. Gerrit would write
the scenario, the script and make a shot list. He would also do the camerawork,
write the commentary in Dutch and French and do the subtitles for festivals
abroad. Huub would be the director and he would edit the film. Both would
come together from time to time in order to check the edited parts of the
film and to change things if necessary. So they did. Gerrit also travelled
to France to film locations. These locations could be used in "blue key"
sequences. He didn't want Huub to share these expenses because he loves France
and he often makes trips to various parts in "La Douce France". He would
take the shots while travelling around. On the other hand Huuub found the
most fantastic locations in Belgium. Both asked other friends to play a role
in the film. They agreed to share all expenses. Of course they didn't make
a written contract. They are amateur filmmakers and friends.

They agreed about the scenario, the script and shotlist and they started
making the film. It lasted for more than two years to finish that dramatized
documentary. Both enjoyed making it very much. The expenses were very limited,
but from time to time they had to hire a costume. Gerrit and Huub went to
a shop for it. The hirer out of costumes asked if they had a VAT number.
Gerrit said no, but he was very surprised when Huub said yes. Huub had his
own firm "Video Productions H.B" and Gerrit didn't know that. It appeared
that Huub made films for companies. After some time it also appeared that
he had an enormous project for a firm. He started giving priority to that
commercial film. He asked Gerrit to cross out a scene in the scenario in
which Toulouse Lautrec is trying to tempt a lady. It would take too much
time to prepare that scene. Gerrit was disappointed because that scene was
very essential to illustrate the life of the impressionist painter. At last
he could persuade Huub to film that scene. Each time when both filmmakers
were at the location it appeared that Huub had lost his shotlist and he also
preferred to improvize. On the other hand Gerrit gave his main actors a
bottle of whisky or a box of Belgian chocolates this to thank them. Some
actors had to make long trips by car to get to the locations. Filming the
acting scenes also took some of their precious time. All together about 5
or 6 bottles were bought and 2 boxes of chocolates. Huub, however, didn't
want to share these costs. Apparently his wife was against it. He also said
that it was against his principles. The actors had to be willing to do it
without receiving a present. He was against gestures of thanks.

The two filmmakers Gerrit and Huub were very happy when the film was finished.
At the end Huub asked Gerrit to commercialize that film. It would be a good
film for schools, he said. But Gerrit was against it. They both appreciated
each other's skills and talents, but now they have decided not to work together
anymore. The film was not successful, neither in Belgium, nor abroad. Luckily
they didn't blow up bridges. Anyway, I think that Michael is right when he
says that you must be careful when looking for friends to help you with your
project. if you would like to work together with someone then you must make
arrangements first and afterwards you must stand by the agreements. Don't
you think so ? Sorry for that long story, but I thought it was better to
tell you every detail.

Wow - the Lautrec film story is a cautionary tale for all of us - the more
so because everyone was acting in good faith and still there was a major
misunderstanding which with less sensible film makers could easily have become
a major feud.

Any thoughts related to this issue for my friend Oskar Siebert? Some of you
will know he has been making films for many years. In the last year or so
"Mutter" has been round the festivals - the story of a fusspot mother whose
daughter collapses at her own wedding and needs a heart transplant. The daughter
is preganant and though the baby is safely delivered there is still no new
heart. Then the new granny gets an idea ...

Oskar had a series of shoulder operations and complications set in. He cannot
now hold a camera for any length of time. He believes his film making days
are over and that "Mutter" will be his last work. I suspect that another
component to his decision is that his daughter, Daniela, with whom he has
made most of his films is now at university and will, presumably, be leaving
the nest.

I've been trying to persuade him to continue making films as a director with
someone else handling camera. Am I being foolish?

Dave

No arguement with that Ned, but my point was that one person has to have
the 'dream', the feeling for the mood of the piece and the final say in any
discussions. That is not to deny that suggestions and improvements often
arise from others involved in the project but there has to be an 'author'
as the French would say.



"Ned C" <ned@ampvid.com> wrote:

Whilst documentaries, travel and nature films may be made single handed
I
don't think this can be done with narrative films. For exemple, it is almost
impossible to both direct and photograph a film (I have tried and it doesn't
work). The sound has to be managed separetely for the best results, requiring
at least one person on boom and monitoring sound. The cameraman really needs
an assistan to set lights and move things around. So, for a narrative film
the minimum crew is a director, cameraman and assistant and sound person.
One of the advantages of club membership must surely be the availibility
of people to crew the productions.

"Dave Watterson" <david.filmsocs@virgin.net> wrote:

Am I being foolish?

I don't think you are foolish, Dave. It sounds strange to write this. Isn't
it better to write :
"You have not been foolish" ? Or "I don't think you are being foolish" ?
English is difficult from time to time.

I have not met Oskar Siebert ever before, but I see his name in results of
international festivals very often. Today I have received "Movie Makers",
the magazine of the AMPS. Oskar won a "Certificate for Honorable Mention".
So I'm sure that he is an excellent filmaker who has always worked with his
camera and who has been creative with his editing machines. He's not like
the creator who contacted the local filmclub in order to make a film for
him. His shoulder problems must give him a feeling a frustration. Someone
else handling the camera is not a problem. It's not the most creative part
of filmmaking... and as Oskar is still the director ...

I'm making a film about the First World War now. I am one of the actors myself
in the introduction and at the end of the film, though I am a bad actor and
I have asked Gerrit to be the director for the acting scenes. He's very
good at it. In the film you will see me visiting the grave of my greatuncle
Frans Van der Linden somewhere in Flanders Fields. My father was called Frans
after him and Frans is my own second name. Of course I had to ask a friend
to do the camerawork for that scene.

I think that Michael has written it in the right way (see his last message).
So, please, Dave, it's good that you try to persuade Oskart to continue making
films as a director with someone else handling the camera.

Yesterday I met Douglas Boswell in my second club. He told our friends how
to work in the best way. He works for Belgian television now. He showed
two films "Mijn Eerste Sjeekspier" and "Romance", but he also showed his
two "Making Off"-films. It was very interesting. He didn't do the camera
work himself for "Mijn eeerste Sjeekspier" and "Romance", but he gave his
"camera lady" instructions all the time in a very friendly way. The story
was his idea. He asked someone else to write the script, but he changed things
very often and he said : "I'm the boss" (also in a friendly way) and "I want
to have a reflection of my own feelings in that film for 100 percent." In
fact we should try to show his two "Making Off"-films in England as well.
If I have more time then I can translate his "Making Off" films and ask poor
Dave Watterson again to correct the subtitles. Dave, if you would like to
see the Dutch-spoken version already, then I can ask Douglas to send me a
copy. His first "Making Off"-film was made in the filmschool and it was on
TV three years ago.

By the way, I told Douglas that I intend to make a film about Guernsey. He
said : "Oh, Afifa ... and Guernsey !. I enjoyed my trip to that island very
very much !" Three or four years ago Douglas - who's "already" 30 years
"old" now - won the top award in Guernsey. He asked me to give his love to
Afifa and to all the other friends in Guernsey.

Perhaps the comparison is a bit exaggerated. I know, but I would like to
give it. Marc Herremans is a famous triatlon athlete in Belgium. He was third
in the "Iron Man" on Hawaii about 5 years ago. Triatlon means swimming, cycling
and running. On the island of Lanzarote he fell and broke his neck about
three years ago. He got paralysed. Now he can only move the upper part of
his body. But Marc is extremely courageous and he enjoys triatlon immensely.
He still participates in triatlon competitions, but now in a wheelchair
! Some weeks ago he won the "Iron Man" for handicapped athletes. If you love
filmmaking, if you have done it all your life , then it is normal that you
ask other friends to help you when you are handicapped and it does not mean
that you are less good than before.

I believe that Oskar Siebert should carry on and I hope that his group, VideoAktiv
continue to make the ambitious films they have in the past. I saw in "Mutter"
he shared the cinematography credit so they must have someone who can do
the camerawork and Oskar can Produce/Direct or whatever that does not put
any strain on his shoulder. Most of us started with a camera in our hands
so letting go is difficult. I don't know if Oskar reads these comments but
if he does my request is "keep making the films Oskar!"

Ned C