All entries for Saturday 19 February 2005

February 19, 2005

Medea #2 – Conceptualising Again

So JR Enterprises moves production to Warwick for something serious. A collaborative effort with "the film group", Owen, Sophie, Ricardo, Sarah and Rhyyyysss.

After feeling slightly pressurised by the term "Rothelite's Film" the above team set out to create the greatest piece of silent film since 2001: A Space Odyssey.

We considered the original idea of the film and blew it wide open. It was much easier to discuss ideas in a smaller group than it was in the first session after the loss of the conch, ideas were said that sparked other ideas and by the end we all felt very excited, after two hours of conversation we came up with some nice ideas:-

– Someone is sat in a room doing something like smoking looking depressed and possibly drunk with a dark or sleazy or dirt or sad feel (don't know yet). They could do other things aswell which would compliment the words of the speaker in front on the screen (on stage). The film would end with the killing of the children.
– Hard to explain… Gender issues rose in the opening discussion which led us to this: (Beep beep) The actor (male or female) switches all the time, whats the point? It challenges the audiences perspective of gender in certain situations, for example seeing a man depressed or a woman depressed, and later and more importantly either of them killing kids. It's not gonna switch between the same two people, its about six guys and dolls, this is to depersonify the character and narrow it down to gender (hopefully). The switches would be done in different ways, for example. Woman fully in shot goes to stub out her fag in an ashtray, close up of her hand, stubs it out. Cut to original full shot only its a guy in exactly the same position sutbbing out the same fag. AND when killing the kids, show just the killers head and shoulders and have them lit only with passing headlights from a window outside, each time different headlights pass the person has changed and is doing the same thing. It's a cheap trick but it should be good.
– The live performance is to be more stylised, if the film is realistic then the performance could be more physical, could involve line swapping, could be anything because we really don't know yet.
– My (beep beep) slight plagurism of the sound of trains screeching by and getting louder and louder to show inner turmoil!
– Fast, really fast cuts between different actions, like in Requiem For A Dream when they do it with different drug related actions and TV watching related action.
– "Laughter with knives". A seperate TV screen showing the murder, with headphones attached, the headphones are playing "Wouldn't it be nice" by The Beach Boys, listening to it now it seems to be it about a relationship and how there are hopes for it going on and greater things happening. I think that's irony but I'm never sure.

We need to consider the style of the film, be it film noir or abstract or whatever, I'm not gonna pretend I know all the styles but I have an idea in my head of how its gonna look and we need to share our thoughts on style because thats the starting point.

It seems that with the focus established as perception and opposition, we are able to conceive ideas that are more cogent and possible, with consideration of their place in the wider context of the piece. The piece as a whole is a doosy. Are the different things going on independently without regard for eachother or do they trigger eachother and time somehow? I dont think they do but it seems unclear in the group, its the uneasy reference to "Rothelite's Film" as though it will be something that everyone looks to at once when really its just a supporting element of the live performance, and its not just made by the Rothelite. There is a big issue with sound, how much sound can each thing make? if any? I figured if each is quiet enough it can be heard if you are in range but one element won't have overriding loud sound, like the film. And live performance doesn't have to be theatrically loud and booming, it almost felt like this thought hadn't occured to anyone. It's good to talk, it'll feel more personal, intimate and will draw in the viewer for a more "interactive" experience, that's what theatre is right? What?

February 2005

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Jan |  Today  | Mar
   1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Search this blog



Most recent comments

  • can you do one of those for gays? please. i would but it would be theft of a brilliant idea and layo… by on this entry
  • It's because I've added entries for things that I forgot had happened. So I have to repost everythin… by The Rothelite on this entry
  • Dude this is the third time this has appeared 'new'! hey, it makes all our comments disappear which … by on this entry
  • Besides I'm buying it off you aren't I?? by on this entry
  • a cake? no need to get so tetchy Roth by on this entry

Blog archive

Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder