Mind of Migg

I wasn’t sure what to expect from Up in the Air.  On the one hand, there’s been lots of positive buzz about it, but I didn’t really know what it was about.  It turned out to be one of those films were most of the best lines are delivered in the trailer.  Yet, that didn’t take away from their resonance when delivered in scene or mean the rest of the film wasn’t any less poignant.

Up in the Air is about Ryan Bingham (George Clooney), a man who spends most of his time in the air and living out of hotels while traveling for his company.  His job is to fire the workers that companies are too ashamed or afraid to fire themselves.  It’s not an easy job or a thankful one, but he’s good at it and he loves his lifestyle.

Enter naïve Cornell grad Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick).  I’ve been a big fan of Anna Kendrick since first seeing her in “Rocket Science”.  She’s a fantastic actress with great presence.  Natalie has the brilliant idea of streamlining the company’s entire firing process online.  Instead of flying around the country, costing the company first-class tickets and fancy hotel room stays, they can sit Ryan in front of a computer and fire the employees from there.  Ryan disagrees that such a job can be so impersonal, but is ordered to take Natalie along with him to show her the ropes by their boss, Craig (a small role, but well delivered by Jason Bateman).

Natalie is a rookie traveler and Ryan does his best to show her how to be faster and more efficient.  Where Natalie really struggles though, is sitting across from people while telling them they no longer have a job.  She realizes the full weight of what they do and what a difference it makes doing it in person.

Overall, it’s a very lighthearted movie with some funny moments.  But there is something more just under the surface, revealing each character’s struggle with mortality along the way.  “What’s the point,” one man asks when getting cold feet before a wedding.  Ryan doesn’t have an answer.  Nobody does.  But everyone tries to find one and leave his mark, whether it’s through love, marriage, or collecting a record number of frequent flier miles.

The walls Ryan has spent years building up slowly get torn down by Natalie and by Alex (Vera Farmiga), a woman who lives the same type of lifestyle he does.  Does he completely change?  No.  But he shows a willingness to connect with people again, no matter how much it hurts.  Because we all need that human interaction, regardless of how difficult it is for us to control, or how painful it can be.  That’s how we leave our mark.

I’ve been immersing myself in India cinema for the last few months.  Before I go into a full analysis of what I’ve seen and what I think of it in later posts, I thought I’d first examine a comment about a Bollywood movie made by a friend of mine.  His comment was, “it was made for an Indian audience.” It wasn’t said as a complement, but more as an excuse.  It got me thinking.  Can we excuse a level of mediocrity or lower the bar of standards because of the type of audience a movie is geared towards?  And what does that say about our impression of an audience if we assume that low quality is all they can handle?

It would be easy to generalize the movies of any country that mass-produces films like India or the United States.  Do we shrug our shoulders and accept the mindless action and lack of story in Transformers 2 because it’s, “made for an American audience”?  I’m sure a lot of people do, but I don’t.  The thing is, just because a large number of people enjoy action movies, doesn’t mean we have to dumb down all action movies to satisfy the lowest common denominator.  Look at “Iron Man”.  That was a great movie, full of action and depth.

This brings me back to India and the chicken and the egg question.  Do we lay the blame on the audience, for not being open to films with greater depth and stronger filmmaking?  Or do we blame the filmmakers, raised on this low-level standard and willing to produce weaker films that please greater numbers?  If those of us ranking outside of India are rating all Indian films on an “Indian scale” rather than a “film scale” isn’t that a cause for concern?

The last point is the bigger problem.  I don’t think it’s a good thing for an entire set of films to be subject to a different standard.  It doesn’t allow room for improvement, and it creates a negative stigma about that set.  The blame falls on the shoulders of the audience for not demanding higher standards.  The people producing the films for profit are not going to go out of their way artistically if the people in the seats at the theater keep filling their pockets.  I think it’s a terrible thing, both for the art of the films and for the pleasure of the audience.

So I don’t think it’s fair to rate a movie as “okay because it was made for an Indian audience”.  Until those films start being held to a standard of film that is accepted by the rest of the world, they will never earn the respect they deserve.

An Education deals with an older man having a relationship with a 16 year old teen.  Yet, it’s not very dark and not creepy.  It’s handled in a way that doesn’t forgive it, but doesn’t draw direct attention to it either.  Instead, we are left to watch young Jenny (Carey Mulligan) learn for herself why a relationship such as the one she has with much older David (Peter Sarsgaard) never ends as romantically as one would hope.

Nick Hornby wrote the script, based on memoirs of Lynn Barber.  Hornby is a great author who has had many of his novels adapted into movies already (High Fidelity, About A Boy, Fever Pitch).  The characters are real and there is a great touch of humor throughout an otherwise dramatic movie.  Alfred Molina, as always, is so brilliant in his role as Jenny’s father, Jack.  Jack drives his daughter relentlessly to go to Oxford, but is willing to let it all be for naught if she can find a wealthy husband.  He cares for her, and tries his best to show it in the only ways he knows how.  He doesn’t apologize for his chauvinistic behavior.

Jenny’s love interest David (Peter Sarsgaard) is just creepy enough that we are suspicious of him, but charming enough that we’re curious to see where it’s leading, as Jenny is, rather than wanting her to run straight to the police.  Jenny is often brighter than the adults letting everything play out and leaves them wondering who exactly the more mature one was.  Meanwhile, others like Jenny’s teacher Miss Stubbs (Olivia Williams) know that sometimes all you can do with teenagers is warn them as they make their mistakes, let them learn for themselves, and hope they come back to say, “you were right.”

An Education was so well done and was such an entertaining story.  It didn’t bang the audience over the head with a message, or try to take a moralistic stand.  Instead, it showed a lesson taught, a lesson learned, and everyone came out the better for it.

One final note – Carey Mulligan did an amazing job in this film and glancing through her current lineup of films this year (Public Enemies, An Education, Brothers) and her numerous films set to release next year, she has all the makings of the new “IT-girl” (no, not “I”, “T” – “it”). Based on her previous work, she absolutely deserves it. However, I will always remember her for the first role I saw her in – Sally Sparrow on one of the best Doctor Who episodes of all time, “Blink”. Sally Sparrow was the best.

Precious is an amazing movie.  It’s also a heavy movie, very heavy.  I was shaken even as I walked out of the theater to my car, and the movie lingered with me the rest of the night.  I love movies like that.

Precious (full name – Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire) is the story of 16-year-old Precious.  She’s pregnant, failing school, and all alone.  To say her mother abuses her would be an understatement.  Her mother hates her.  Precious escapes by imagining herself in fantasy situations, as a movie star, or a celebrity far away from the ghetto where she lives.  Precious gets an opportunity to change things when her current principal refers her to an alternative school.  She enrolls, and slowly starts to break out of her shell and realize there can be more to life.

If only it were that easy.  Precious already has a child and is pressured by her mom to help her stay on welfare.  That’s just the beginning of the uphill battle she faces.  I don’t want to give too many of the plot points away, but she endures a whole lot.  Fortunately, she has support from her new teacher, Ms. Rain, and her new classmates.

Gabby Sidibe does an amazing job in her first role.  At times, you forget you’re watching a movie, her character feels so real.  Your heart breaks for her over and over.  Mariah Carey was so convincing not dolled up in makeup that I didn’t even recognize her.  Mo’Nique blew me away.  I read in an interview with Lee Daniels that he told her she had to be a monster, but one that we felt sorry for her, and she was.  It was interesting, because I felt bad for her, but I felt no sympathy for her the way I did for Precious.

The entire movie builds for a final scene that is unforgettable.  The performances were so raw and so real and that is exactly why the movie stayed with me as I left the theater.  This movie will touch you.  It’ll leave you exhausted, but it will be worth it.

INK is a movie about forces of dark and light fighting for an 8-year-old girl.  The story moves between the real world and a metaphysical one as these forces battle unseen to us, but in ways that impact the real world.

I started following Double Edge Films on twitter a while back and followed bits and pieces of their journey over the last few months.  I saw a trailer of INK and was instantly intrigued.  When I heard about the fact that it had been illegally downloaded over 100,000 times in 48 hours, despite the fact that it had no distribution deal, I knew I had to see it.

I had moved it to the top of my Netflix queue when it was released, but since I didn’t return a movie on the day of its release, I was stuck with “very long wait” and a skip to the next movie in my queue.  Fortunately, it was also available in streaming form, so I watched it via my instant queue.

I’m not sure if it was because of my current emotional state, or if it just caught me off guard, but I was really moved by this movie.  Like, holding back tears, letting out a deep breath and thinking about it the whole day type moved.  Part of it was the outstanding execution of the film and a great story.  But there I was, at ten in the morning, sitting on the couch getting choked up while leaning forward and rooting for the main characters in the final battle.  I had only intended to watch the first 30 minutes or so while I ate breakfast, and catch the rest in the evening when I was free, but work had to wait that morning.

The reason I loved this movie first and foremost was because it was a great story.  I’ve been to a couple different panels at AFM and LALIFF the last few weeks and in every forum with struggling, aspiring filmmakers, it always comes back to the same thing – have a compelling story and great script.  Add to that the execution of great actors and crew, a kick-ass trailer, a great marketing campaign, and an amazing soundtrack, and this film had all the recipes for success.  This isn’t a movie with a lot of potential that is forgiven because of its budget.  It’s one that succeeds despite its budget.

I use the word success relatively.  INK is a great movie and has a loyal following from the fans it has gathered at all of its screenings and now through Netflix, iTunes, and Blockbuster.  However, it deserves a larger audience.  It’s a shame that original, exciting movies have such an uphill battle to find a distributor.  At the same time, we’re seeing a changing market that allows filmmakers to control the fate of their films a little more.  I think it’s great what they’ve done as far as their release strategy and finding their audience.

The best way to learn more about the film and their journey is to read their blog.  They’ve done a great job of capturing their experience and been very open to sharing what they’ve learned along the way.  There’s also a great interview with them on Film Courage that’s very revealing.

And of course, the most important thing – see this movie!  Support it, show that everything doesn’t need to run through a Hollywood studio to be a success and find an audience.  Rent it.  Stream it.  Buy it.  Buy the soundtrack.  Buy a shirt.  Become a fan.  The only way original movies like this one can continue to thrive is with the support and voice of its fans.  Let others know about it.  But see it first.  You’ll know what I mean when you do.

Normally, I don’t write reviews for movies I watched on DVD.  For certain movies, I’ll make an exception – movies that blow me away because of their content and execution.  Movies like “Food, Inc.”

“Food, Inc.” is a documentary about the state of food consumption in the U.S.  It tracks the common foods many of us eat in the grocery store all the way to their source and pulls the curtain back on them.  It showed many of the problems with our current system and how misleading much of the food we eat is.  Not a lot of what I saw came as a surprise to me after reading “Fast Food Nation” and “In Defense of Food”.  Eric Schlosser and Michael Pollan play a primary role in this documentary, and for good reason.  They have done a great job in educating people about changing eating habits.

Seeing the things in “Food, Inc.” is a big difference from reading about them in a book.  It’s not only heartbreaking to see the environment that cows and chickens suffer through, it’s also disturbing to think that those sickly animals wind up on our dining room table.

“Food, Inc.” succeeds where “Capitalism” falls short because not only does it present a problem, it presents it from multiple points of view, with depth, AND offers solutions.  This isn’t a film that is politically polarizing.  Nobody will confuse Joel Salatin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Salatin of Polyface Farms http://www.polyfacefarms.com/ as being a bleeding heart liberal.  Gary Hirshberg didn’t please many of his hippy farmer friends when Stonyfield Farm began selling its organic yogurt at Wal-Mart.  There is an understandable call for some type of regulation to help prevent many of the problems with tainted food and abused workers.  However, there is also recognition that one of the most effective ways to fix these problems is to educate people and change what people demand.  It’s basically a plan to exploit the large companies by beating them out their own game.  Their bottom line is profit, so they don’t care if that profit comes from free range organic eggs, or chicken crammed into a dark space walking around in their own feces – whatever the consumer demands.  So why not change people’s perception and create a successful and profitable system in healthy eating?  I love that idea.

This movie is both disturbing and inspiring at the same time.  It’s a wake up call to think about what you eat and how you eat.  It’s a movie that can motivate you to adjust your long term eating habits.  It does enough to justify thinking twice before opting for the cheaper, processed food.  I’d rather eat smaller portions of real, whole food, than giant portions of the alternative.  I hope that others follow.

I have to be very self-disciplined with my schedule since I have nobody to answer to but myself.  It means outlining clear weekly goals and trying to stick to them as best as possible.  The toughest thing about this is that because I’m following so many different leads for work/pay/creative outlets that my weekly schedule is tossed out the window by Monday morning.

While I might plan on say, working at Borders Tuesday morning, and then working out of the home office on Wednesday, I might end up on an unplanned conference call that keeps me from leaving, or end up with a meeting on the other side of town that I hadn’t known would happen.  All very productive, but maddening when trying to have clear, set writing time – especially when you throw in late night dealings with India, since our night is their afternoon.  It means that many times, I go to bed hours later than planned and then don’t wake up for the early morning writing that I would love to do.  With my schedule out of wack, I obsessively try to track my timesheet and hit weekly goals, knowing full well that it’s just not going to happen.  There are too many unknowns from week to week to be able to balance the business side of film with writing, reading, and watching movies.  Something gives each week, but I still wear myself out trying to prevent that.

I’ve decided on a few new strategies going forward in order to give me some peace of mind.

Writing time is set in stone

This is non-negotiable now.  Too often my writing is what loses out to other things going on.  I am going to drag myself out of bed in the mornings, and stick to set writing hours in the morning.  The problem I have is that I usually chase whatever new issues arise as quickly as possible.  That means that if I sit down to start writing, but get an email of an issue that needs addressing, I’ll handle the email first.  Before I know it, a few hours of business work have replaced my writing time.  Not cool for the writing.  If I want to keep building momentum with all of my writing I have to always treat it as a priority.  I can always get to my emails later.

Schedule free time

I always forget to do this.  My mind is mush by the end of the day, but I’ll tell myself I can squeeze in some late night reading.  One, it’s not enjoyable to read as a task when I’m exhausted, and two, I don’t get as much out of it as I should.  It defeats the purpose of trying to do more reading if I’m always dozing while I do it.  Taking time outs, especially to break the day up between business and creative, makes a huge difference.  Knowing that I have some scheduled time to just relax goes a long way in being refreshed for work.

My work day should end.

This is another tough one.  I try to squeeze things in (unsuccessfully) from the time I wake up until the time I go to bed.  What ends up happening is that I slack off or get distracted in the middle of the day, feel guilty and work late, oversleep, repeat.  It’s a vicious cycle.  I think the combination of scheduled free time, and knowing that I have a stopping time will make the hours in between much more productive.

In all, I think these new strategies allow me to be more productive instead of constantly trying to stay “busy”.  Staying busy just wears me out without accomplishing as much.  Hopefully I can apply these ideas and they help make a difference.

The status quo.  It’s a tough thing to change.  It’s safe, it’s comfortable, and you know what you’re getting.  Even when I’m tempted to challenge the status quo, I always fall back on the familiar.  For example, I love Indian food.  At least, I love the Indian food I’ve tried.  Every time I sit down at an Indian restaurant, I tell myself I’m going to branch out and try a new menu item.  And every time my food arrives after ordering, it’s the same combination of chicken tikka masala, palak paner, and chana masala.  I can’t resist.

However there are situations much more serious than dinner that require a challenge to the way things are done.  In particular, I’ve seen this a lot when dealing with films – particularly regarding distribution and independent cinema.  Why does it reach a point of nearly being offensive to some people when change is proposed to them?  The prospect of change makes a lot of people defensive.

It’s interesting that those who would dare challenge the status quo are viewed as either “outside the box” thinkers, or outsiders to society.  One way or other, they’re different.  There was an experiment done recently and discussed at length in this (http://lateralaction.com/articles/computers-creativity/) article.  It talks about the ability of computers to think creatively.  Basically, they gave a formula to a computer and asked it to come up with an ad for four different products.  It also tasked a group of average people to do the same.  The robot’s ideas were voted by a panel to be more “creative” and frankly, they do sound a lot more interesting than the humans’ responses.  The most creative responses were a result of “thought templates” and formulas that took into account a lot of known factors.  That’s hardly “outsider” or “creative” thinking the way we know it.  It’s more like a logical progression that evaluates and critically applies existing methods in an efficient and effective way.

I tie these two aspects together – the status quo and creativity because of the perceived notion that challenging the norm or creating something different is “risky” or comes from a completely random place.  However, the robots weren’t more “creative” than the humans.  They just had a better thought process.  So if your idea has legs – if there is a clear process behind your new idea or process, you’re not a weirdo.  Quite the opposite actually.

I’ve seen recent examples of people determined to stick to tried and true methods in their industry that no longer work.  They refuse to admit defeat; instead plowing blindly ahead determined that eventually it would work again.  They scoff at the proposal of new methods and hesitate to try a new approach.  They might listen to some new ideas, but like me at the Indian restaurant, they’ll fall back on what they know.

I went to a handful of panels during the Los Angeles Latino International Film Festival a few weeks ago.  There was clear frustration from both the audience and the panelists about the state of Indie cinema.  The problem I saw was that every approach they suggested, everything they based their statements off of was from the premise of old methods.

Indie cinema is in a serious state of transition.  For those speakers from the studios, there was this idea that certain things were set in stone.  Because those things were struggling, the entire process would struggle.  There wasn’t even a consideration to not use certain methods.  They wouldn’t even think about alternatives that were radically different.  The changes some filmmakers now talk about – collaborative filmmaking, self-distribution, cheaper marketing approaches, don’t even fit into the equation for some people.  Instead they’ll become defensive, and more determined to beat a dead horse.  How does this make sense?  It’s one thing to hesitate when what you know is still great, but what if it isn’t anymore?

Let’s say you have a faucet that’s not working right because the pipe is broken.  Let’s say it’s impossible to fix this pipe – it’s too old.  Why wouldn’t you build a new pipe?  And while you’re at it, why wouldn’t you build a new pipe that’s more effective than the old one?  If it’s time for a change, make it a valuable change.  Those groundbreaking new approaches filmmakers are coming up with are no different than the computers creative ads built from a template.

The ideas required to successfully challenge the status quo come from a place of logic and application of experience.  Creative ideas, such as the ones now shaping the possibilities for independent films are not “outside the box” or fringe thoughts.  They are serious, effective alternatives to the broken pipes of Hollywood.  It is a challenge to move outside our comfort zone.  However, it’s necessary in order to grow.  Sometimes that same meal starts to get a little stale.  Be brave.  Try a new meal.

What is science fiction?  How would you define it and categorize it?  There are so many types; it’s hard to lock down one clear definition.  I’m taking a Sci-Fi writing class through the UCLA Extension Program this semester and the instructor asked for our own definition.  I had never thought about this and it’s tougher than I thought.

To make our jobs easier, he first gave us his interpretation of science fiction.

“Any story that relies on science for its narrative advancement.”

This helps cover the variety of different sci-fi genres, but I don’t think I like it.  I believe what makes sci-fi so compelling (at least to us sci-fi nerds) is that it holds a mirror up to society better than any contemporary story could.  The science is a way of telling the story in a unique way.  However, the science can be stripped away from many of examples of science fiction and still leave the main story.  When the USS Enterprise visits a warring planet and tries to make peace, it’s a diplomatic story.  No warp drive is necessary to tell that tale.  District 9 deals with apartheid, it just uses aliens to effectively get its point across.  Doctor Who is sci-fi at its finest, but some of the best episodes require the Doctor to make do without technology – his TARDIS can’t be reached in “The Satan Pit”; he is a human in “Human Nature”.

I don’t believe a story has to rely on science in order to be classified as sci-fi.  A time travel story requires the technology to time travel, true, but it’s what happens in the past or future and the characters’ interactions that make up the majority of the story.  The narrative is driven by their actions and attitudes while in a strange new world.  It becomes a reflection of our own thoughts and ideals in our time and how they differ either in hindsight or in potential.  I think in nearly every case of sci-fi, you can tell the same story in a different way without the science.  It just wouldn’t be as interesting.

So how would I define science fiction?  That’s a good question.  I’m sure anything I put forth would be full of more holes than my instructor’s attempt.  The problem is, there’s so many types – military, time travel, distopia/utopia, steampunk, hard, soft.  The great thing about science fiction though, is that it always stirs debate.  Debates about the realism of technology in the story, debates about the moralistic views of the characters, debates about how the characters are reflections of modern day – even when going for pure entertainment, there is something special about the multiple layers of any science fiction story.

I would say any story that invokes science as a story element in a speculative or fictional manner can be defined as science fiction.  That’s to say that, this fictional science is used in order to create the world of the story.  It’s a structure, but it’s only one pillar of the whole.  It creates a world, but it doesn’t necessarily drive the narrative.  That is left to the characters.

A phaser is no different than a gun in the sense that it’s used to achieve the same end.  But how cool is it to see a laser instead of a bullet?  And how cool is science fiction that writers can imagine all kinds of impossibilities that may someday come to pass?  As technology continues to advance at breakneck speeds, the range of sci-fi storytelling continues to grow. The problem with trying to define science fiction is that it knows no bounds.  It speaks to us in many ways, through many forms.  That is the beauty of it.

All I wanted was a mentor.  Someone from inside the industry, someone already established, who would put up with me.  There’s nothing better than a person more experienced than you are letting you hang around and ask questions.  I thought I finally had one.  I found someone who was instrumental in improving my script.  I think working with him helped my writing tremendously.

So imagine my excitement when he talked about wanting to work as a Producer on the script that he had helped with.  I thought I was set.  I knew it was still a long, uphill battle, but I had someone on my team who had been through it before and instantly added credibility to my cause.  He talked about the importance of collaboration and why he wanted to work with me.

“When you make a movie, you spend a long time with that group of people.  There are a lot of bad people in this town, but I want to work with good people.  If I’m going to spend my time working with someone, I’d rather surround myself with the good people.” he said.

He cared about the attitudes of those around him as well as their quality of work.  I really appreciated that.

The lesson here is, when push comes to shove, good people end up in the same place as nice guys – left alone.  In a business proposition, someone who says he wants to work with “good people” usually only does so at his own convenience.  And why not?  It makes sense.  I should’ve known better.  It is, after all, a business.  But what do you do when a mentor disappears for months?  When e-mails go unanswered and you discover by chance that he’s moved on to produce another project, suddenly realizing that it was silence with a middle finger you were getting? It sucks.

There are lessons to be learned from an experience like this.  Here’s what I’ve taken away:

1. I stated it above, but it bears repeating – when it comes to business, being a good person, and wanting to work with other good people can only get you so far.  If it would be tough for a family member or childhood best friend to go above and beyond for you, don’t expect a person you don’t know very well to come through just because you’ve started establishing a working relationship.  That’s not to say you have to be a jerk, but don’t be too naïve or optimistic about things.
2. Keep your eye on the ball.  I knew I wanted to make this outside the system – DIY style.  I knew we were developing a good plan to get the film funding and start growing a community around it.  I put it all on hold when this person showed interest.  Granted, I told him what I wanted to do, but then I listened to his more traditional approach, and I’m not sure if my desire to make it happen without a studio’s help turned him off to the project.  It’s a scary prospect to do things differently when you’re used to a certain system.  I shouldn’t have dropped what I was doing at the first hint of help from the inside.
3. Be aggressive.  Honestly, I was a little intimidated.  I deferred to his opinion and that of an actress he introduced me to that was also interested.  In hindsight, I had only worked on the script with him.  He had no idea of the amount of work I had put into the development of the film itself.  I think making that clear in the beginning may have helped the business part of the relationship.  Instead, I brought it up later, after they had already started cementing their, “when this is our project…” mentality.  I know that was partly my fault.  I let him rip me and build his own design without letting on right away that I had a clear vision for the project.  To say I had one later only looked defensive.

It hurts from a business side.  Having a Creative Producer with a track record definitely helps.  However, I can find another one of those.  What really stings is the lack of returned calls or e-mails from someone I thought was a mentor.  What stings more is that the last communication was about him being away for a while due to an illness.  Most subsequent replies were to make sure he was in good health, but apparently those didn’t even warrant a response.

What have I learned the most?  Rejection is going to be personal as well as professional along this path.  It’s going to be often and going to sting a whole lot each time.  I’d better be ready for it in the future.  I’ve also learned to not be so trusting, no matter how genuine the other person seems.  But has it made me jaded?  Nope, not one bit.  I’ll always wear my heart on my sleeve, and I’ll always want to collaborate with good, passionate people.  And in the future, when I’m a whole lot more experienced and there’s an aspiring filmmaker talking to me (if I’m so lucky), I will at least give him the courtesy of a response.  It’s the least a person could do.

Sometimes, you have to wash your hands of a bad experience before you can move forward.  So, hands washed, I say, “Enough.”  Back to work.