Jump to content

I want to work with....


Recommended Posts

CLINT EASTWOOD

 

clint.png

 

 

I usually don't get star struck. I don't know, I guess I never really did. However, there are a few exceptions to that. One of them being Clint Eastwood. I'm not saying I'd go nuts and make a fool of myself around him. I just think being lucky enough to work with him would definitely be something I would reminisce to just before I say "piece out" to this world. My father and I would watch his movies together so I guess he has a bit more significance to me now that my Pops is gone. 

 

So, if anyone is ever able to help me out and let me be on set even as a coffee runner I would FOREVER be indebted to you. Just thought I'd post this cause you never know. 

 

Thanks,

 

Michael

 

 

In fact, why not post who you're top person to work with is. After all, we may be able to help each other out "so long as we can agree to be professional" when that time comes. I most definitely would return the favor if I could. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to work with some of you guys (and gals)!  It's so funny in this town (LA) in that so many people ask me if I know such and such because he's a sound mixer, but in reality, we're one of the few departments that really besides a boom op and maybe utility, we really all don't get to work with one another.  I have friends that are mixers but it's a rare occasion that we all get to work with one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to work with people that understand the business of gathering images and audio ....  this seems to be lacking these days. We are often told what to do by persons with little idea how to do them... 

  If I had a penny for every time I was told to Wire 10 people when the shot dictated a boom for 2 speaking on screen talent... or to bring 40 Comteks when 5 people wear them...   Surprise... there's playback... here's the thumb drive...  

This gets old after a while...  It is always refreshing when you actually work for people who have their S^%$ together...

They are who I want to work with... People in the know..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFMY: I couldn't have said it better myself. These are the people I want to work with and there are very, very few of them still alive and working. I loved working with people that I could learn something from. I would not have the career and reputation that I have, nor would I have been able to make really good sound, were it not for the directors, editors,  transportation captains, prop masters and actors that have taught me so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people get it, but not too much any more.. here's what I mean..

 

 

  You know if you think about it... It really is not that difficult...  For us gathering sound, we used to be able to record really nice stuff. But then the need to multi camera everything caused HUGE compromises in sound, image quality, lighting, makeup hair and on and on...

 

  I am not saying don't multi camera, but if you must, do it wisely...

 

 When this two and three camera stuff goes down, shoot a wide to get us in, then use your cameras to shoot a true medium and a close...but don't shoot the wide as part of this cluster F$%#...  Why directors don't understand this I will never know... Everything becomes a compromise... How much time is really saved at the expense of getting mics in, lighting for close ups and mediums, having the Makeup just right and the lighting done to maximize a beautiful look..

 

 I despise the shift to these rushed, 20 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag methods... It tells me two things, 1 they are trying to do too much in too little time and 2 they REALLY don't care about trying to do the very best in terms of quality..  I do understand budget, but, if done properly, the correct way will produce much better results 20 ways, and not take much more time at all... 

 

 

  Actors must despise it as well..  Sometimes the wide first gives them a bit of time to perfect their delivery, timing and performance... Then when they do move in they are both warmed up and better prepared for the scene at hand... their lighting and makeup and hair can be perfected to look the best..  Women especially want all this to be just right.. To do this right off the bat, wide tight and medium, they go in cold... and they know their performance has not been given the best effort from the production..

 

And...for us, we can get nice mics in where they belong... for the shots that do matter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree with AFMY here. Multicamera shoots (even "single camera" shoots are almost always 2 cameras) have changed everything. There was so much benefit from the enforced necessity of shooting only one camera in the old days. I've been doing this long enough to remember that a second camera was only used for special scenes, for things that only happen once like blowing up a car or a stunt. For scripted narrative, almost never. In the old days, the cost of film, the camera rental, the cost of the additional camera crew, all these things were factors that made almost every shoot a true single camera shoot. When multicamera stuff started to come in, I used to point out the fundamental filmmaking problem it introduced. There are so many more reasons to cover a scene properly and in the traditional way: shoot a master where everyone can get a sense of the scene, then move in for coverage. If you try and do your master (all inclusive shot) at the same time you are doing your coverage, the things that are wrong in the master may well be wrong in the coverage. This is not specifically a sound issue but affects all departments AND the actors (as AFMY has stated). The reason for moving in to a tighter less all inclusive shot with only one camera is to strip away those elements that the wide shot necessitated, thereby being able to concentrate and refine the closer shot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only worked with one director who got multi cam and did it right. 2 wides, then 2 mediums, and then 2 close ups. We boomed 98% of the shots in the film and it was 95% our sound in the final film.

These days it seems to be about quantity not quality. Other than setting the tableau, or pull up to a scene, a wide shot has little value to anyone. The actors could be monkeys smoking a cigar as far a performance goes. Yet we find ourselves framed out of the closer shot that will play in the scene with the lesser quality sound of lavs.  Crazy way to do it.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am finding it impossible to get good sound on the movie I'm on. Director "hates ADR" but has little training in filmmaking. His DP has nearly no experience in narrative work, and any time I try to get help, he refers me to the director who doesn't know what I'm talking about. The DP is also operating 'A' camera. Our 'B' operator is very experienced, but is trying to get good shots, and not in communication with 'A', and isn't really helping. Never common head room and always contradictory angles in semi-cross coverage, so headroom again is compromised. Lavs not working well (actors, costumes, action, etc.)

So in other words, I'd love to work with some true filmmakers who understand that telling the story matters over "cool" shots that won't cut together.

Sorry to rant in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...