ISSUE NO. 2
The World Cinema Magazine | WPFF Edition
www.sinescreen.com
VICTORIA (COVER)
Out of Competition
Main Competition
Eurasian Cinescape
Cine Verde
Go Make Your Movie!
Sustainable Filmmaking
You’re Not Kubrick
Females in the Modern World
All About Drones
Adapting to the Smartphone Era
WORLD
PREMIERES
FILM FESTIVAL
ISSUE 2
CONTENTS
CINE VERDE (39)
“Fish” (Balik) Still
FEATURED FILMS:
WPF FESTIVAL:
Main Competition Selection (7)
Cine Verde (18)
Eurasian Cinescape (20)
SPOTLIGHT:
Remembering Guru Dutt (26)
On Richard Linklater (28)
You’re Not Kubrick (29)
End of Love, Li-Da Hsu (9)
The Territory, Alexandr Melnik (14)
OPINION:
Females in the Modern World (33)
War of the Sci-Fi Genre (32)
So Bad, They’re Good Films (30)
WORLD
PREMIERES
2 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
FILM FESTIVAL
TECHNOLOGY:
All About Drones (34)
The Death of Artistic Integrity (37)
The Smartphone Era (38)
FILMMAKING:
Sustainable Filmmaking (23)
Shooting Underwater (24)
Making Your First Movie (22)
WORLD
PREMIERES
FILM FESTIVAL
EDITOR
Melissa Legarda Alcantara
DESIGN & LAYOUT
Andrew S. Dalde
Kariza Grace Cruz
LEAD WRITERS
Melissa Legarda Alcantara
Bernadette Patino
Ana Karina Cosio
Sylvester Montances
CONTRIBUTORS
Claire Agbayani
Ronin Samarito
Justin Russ
Josh Harding
Solène Thériault
Pi Legarda
Himani Sood
SINESCREEN
The World Cinema Magazine
A MONKEYBOY PRODUCTION IN CO-PRODUCTION WITH DEUTSCHFILM RADICALMEDIA WDR ARTE
LAIA COSTA FREDERICK LAU FRANZ ROGOWSKI BURAK YIGIT MAX MAUFF ANDRÉ M. HENNICKE CASTING SUSE MARQUARDT SOUND MAGNUS PFLÜGER SET DESIGNER ULI FRIEDRICHS MUSIC NILS FRAHM DJ KOZE DEICHKIND SCRIPT CONSULTANT ANKE KRAUSE COMMISSIONING EDITOR BARBARA BUHL, WDR ANDREAS SCHREITMÜLLER, ARTE
PRODUCERS JAN DRESSLER SEBASTIAN SCHIPPER ANATOL NITSCHKE CATHERINE BAIKOUSIS DAVID KEITSCH STORY SEBASTIAN SCHIPPER OLIVIA NEEGAARD-HOLM EIKE FREDERIK SCHULZ CINEMATOGRAPHER STURLA BRANDTH GRØVLEN, DFF DIRECTOR SEBASTIAN SCHIPPER
SINESCREEN MAGAZINE
26th floor Export Bank Plaza
Chino Roces Ave., cor. Gil Puyat
Makati City, Manila, Philippines
WITH SPECIAL THANKS TO:
WORLD PREMIERES
FILM FESTIVAL PHILIPPINES
www.wpff.ph
FILM DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
OF THE PHILIPPINES
www.fdcp.ph
4 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
WPFF
WPFF
The Main Competition section showcases the
world premieres of noteworthy films that will
vie for prestigious awards to be given by an
international jury.
WORLD PREMIERES
FILM FESTIVAL PHILIPPINES
‘‘The major International Film
Festival on the Rise in Asia’’
Films in Cine Verde tackle environmental
films which awaken audience’s awareness
and inspire them to take action in taking
care of the environment and in turn our
communities.
A new section which features films from
contemporary Filipino filmmakers who are
looking to premiere their latest works before
an international audience in the Philippines.
MAIN COMPETITION
FILM SELECTION
Indonesia
FILOSOFI KOPI
by Angga Dwimas Sasongko
Netherlands
The WPFF celebrates the power and magic
of film by showcasing the works of critically
acclaimed, upcoming film directors from across
the globe. It is the magnificent evolution of the
world’s demographics and social trends, the
increasing number of viewers, and openness in
film appreciation has compelled the creation of
such an event here in the Philippines.
Our mission is to serve a growing number
of film narratives in search of new avenues of
exhibition, and to launch their international
premieres, particularly in Asia with its rapidly
growing film industry. At the same time, the
WPFF provides a unique opportunity for talented
filmmakers from all over the world to converge
and share their stories with a new audience.
The Philippines, one of the oldest film cultures
in Asia, is proud to host such a significant yearly
event. With the festival’s Main Competition
and Cine Verde sections, as well as the films
competing in the Parallel Sections and Filipino
New Cinema, the WPFF hopes to engage the
world by showcasing the best film narratives that
highlight diversity of cultures, current social
issues, and present visual discourses on climate
change.
The WPFF warmly invites all filmmakers,
cinema goers, film enthusiasts, and everybody
else to watch these great bodies of work by
distinguished international filmmakers to
celebrate and amplify the global human narrative
on screen.
This section showcases a diverse collection
of films hailing from all over the European
continent, allowing films and narratives from
Europe to forge deep connections with the
cultures of an international audience.
This section will show films from the Spanish
and Portuguese-speaking countries of Latin
America as well as that of Spain and Portugal
which have narratives that underlines
the historic ties between the countries of
Ibero-America in the festival’s international
atmosphere.
by Remy van Heugten
Russia
THE TERRITORY (ТЕРРИТОРИЯ)
by Alexandr Melnik
Spain
This new section focuses on the historic
crossroads and culture that is Eurasia and
looks to share stories from this vast and
diverse landscape which covers from the
northern waters of the Arctic, crossing
through Central Asia, and down to the
Arabian Sea.
This section features a collection of films
hailing from the member states of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations which
aims in promoting Southeast Asian cinema
and, in turn, creating a regional community
of active cultural exchange.
SONATA FOR CELLO
(SONATA PER A VIOLONCEL)
by Anna M. Bofarull
Spain
THREE LIES (TRES MENTIRAS)
by Ana Murugarren
Taiwan
This new section features timeless films
in restored glory as part of the World
Premieres Film Festival Philippines, providing
a wonderful look into cinema’s past.
Restorations done by The World Foundation/
World Cinema and the L’Immagine Ritrovata.
This section of the festival showcases an
exhibition of films which have garnered
critical acclaim at other international film
festivals.
6 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
SON OF MINE (GLUCKAUF)
END OF LOVE (愛情的盡頭)
by Li-Da (Eric) Hsu
Turkey
CRIMEAN (KIRIMLI)
by Burak Cem Arliel
WORLD
PREMIERES
FILM FESTIVAL PHILIPPINES 2015
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 7
www.filmaseantv.com
FEATURED
Of Lingering Loneliness: Li-Da “Eric” Hsu’s
THE END OF LOVE
by Melissa Legarda Alcantara
Written and directed by Taiwanese director Li-Da “Eric” Hsu, 愛情的盡頭 (The End
of Love) sensitively examines the human condition of loneliness. Set in Singapore, the
young Hsu’s film is a sequence of languid self-reflections, soft focus establishing shots,
and long takes of raw human expression.
W
ith fresh, inquisitive
eyes, Hsu portrays
in startling detail
the mundane issues
and interactions that
transpire in modern relationships. His
unobtrusive lens recomposes our present
day with such nostalgic familiarity
that seemingly jarring appearances of
technology such as an iPhone or Macbook
in no way hinder the film’s evocation
of a gritty, aesthetically rugged, Latin
American cinema-inspired narrative
that unravels with unhurried, unyielding
confidence.
Hsu imprints themes of love, birth, and
death upon our minds in lingering poetic
fragments: a student’s fingers brush
his teacher’s hand in compassionate
consolation; a young woman breathes
nervously beneath a body scanner before
confronting her potential infertility.
Hsu’s characters simmer inescapably
10 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
in a melting pot of human conflict and
emotion, meandering blindly through the
loitering bleakness in their lives with a
resignation that recalls T. S. Eliot’s poem,
“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”.
Eliot’s description of “restless nights
in one-night cheap hotels” suitably
resonates with the story of Chu Tzu (ChiaYen Ko), a pretty but unhappy young
woman making a living as a bar girl (and,
occasionally, escort). The smothering
sense of defeat in the poem’s final line,
“till human voices wake us, and we
drown,” solidifies the film’s despondent
final scene, wherein the depressed Li
Yi Lun (Lai Ya Yun) weeps in anguish as
she drives away from two irrevocably lost
loves; one physical, one metaphorical.
The cruel capacity of humans
to be hurt by their loved ones is
comprehensively displayed: an elderly
father struggles to connect with his
ever-distant daughter; an escort falls
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 11
INTERVIEW
INTERVIEW
WITH THE DIRECTOR
Li-Da “Eric” Hsu
(The End of Love)
When and why did you start writing and making film?
My parents are movie enthusiasts and we went
to the cinema almost every week as far as I can
remember in my childhood. The films were mostly
Hollywood movies. It didn’t occur to me that I’d
be making films one day when I grew up.
In my high school years I first encountered
Truffaut’s The Four Hundred Blows; it was indeed
a “blow” to me. Something lit up inside. But when
I finally made up my mind to make film, it was
after a very long time.
in unrequited love with her
unattainable client; a married couple
grow increasingly resentful towards
one another over their reproductive
inability. When the latter couple
exchange bitter blame about
who is responsible for her lack of
pregnancy, it is the husband, Cheng
Hsu (Chun-Hao Tuan) who hammers
the final cutting nail into the coffin:
“I impregnated someone before,”
he reveals coldly, staring straight
into his wife’s eyes. “So it’s not my
problem.”
Themes of love lost continue.
When nurses wheel a covered
12 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
corpse out of a room in a senior
citizen’s home, a happy elderly
couple is suddenly confronted by
their inevitable mortality. In one
last bid to regain happiness and
love, the elderly man proposes to
his Alzheimer’s-afflicted sweetheart:
“Marry me before you forget me,” he
begs, gripping her hands with tender,
foreboding urgency. Their short-lived
elation is inexorably pricked by fate’s
bitter needle; his love stares blankly
into his face on their wedding day.
Hsu’s slowly, intricately brewed
web of relationship troubles and life
inevitabilities eventually culminate
in a chillingly depressive state
of isolation. The ‘everyman’ (and
‘everywoman’) characters paint
universal relationship issues with
such biting realism that it becomes
impossible not to recognize versions
of these truths in our own lives.
The lack of intimacy internalized
by each character soon swells into
a stifling loneliness that permeates
the entire film; ultimately serving to
reinforce Hsu’s fitting title, as well
as the gravely ephemeral nature of
love.
What inspired you to write The End of Love?
The End of Love originally was a short film. The
script was merely three pages, with six characters.
I kept feeling a little unsatisfied, that there was
room for further development. I completed the
long version of the script in 2014 and received
funding from the Public Television Service (PTS)
in Taiwan.
The young socialist and the bar-girl are selfprojections plus the story of a friend’s; the man
and his wife craving for pregnancy, a cast from
the news; the boy and the teacher is totally my
own projection; the only story without my selfprojection was the elderly couple, inspired by
news of high suicide rates in elderly homes.
How did you know when the script was ready to shoot?
I think there is never a day for a script to be
‘READY’. It is always changing, from the very first
draft, to the day before shooting kicks off. And the
so-called finalized ‘ending’ may change versions
up to 7 or 8 times.
Technically speaking, I say there is no such thing
as “the script is ready to shoot the film”, it’s only
in your heart there is a voice telling you “I want
to make the film now, so let’s do it.” Most often
you’ll know when the producer is screaming in
your ear: “Shoot your film quickly or else we’ll go
over budget!”
The End of Love has many striking visuals in its coloring
and composition. Any particular influences?
What really influenced my choices and preferences
in film aesthetics are from Central and South
America (i.e. Mexican) and Brazilian films and
directors. For example, works by Mexican director
Alfonso Cuarón or works by director Alejandro
González Iñárritu.
I find that these movies of Central and South
America carry strong realistic style: they are vivid,
wild, and do not pursue the beauty of formality.
The themes show brutal, naked, realistic forms
of living, reflecting social, cultural and human
nature.
It differs from the style of the Taiwanese films
that I grew up with. The aesthetics that the latter
pursue are clean-cut, nice, conventially beautiful,
and formal. Not my cup of tea. I prefer wear and
tear, dirt and sweat, wild, un-tamed, disordered
elements.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 13
FEATURED
Delve into
THE TERRITORY
by Bernadette Patino
In the biting cold of the Arctic, on the northeastern-most edge of the earth—that is, in the
Territory— the search for gold puts to the test the best geologist-engineers of the Soviet Union.
Alexandr Melnik’s film The Territory, an adaptation Oleg Kuvayev’s famous Soviet novel of
the same title, brings to cinematic life the author’s romantika severa (romance of the north) set
in Chukotka province, USSR.
A
lexander Melnik’s
film adaptation
of Oleg Kuvayev’s
classic Soviet novel
The Territory frames
its story in history
outside History, or a history on the
periphery of History. The film is set
in 1960, a time between epochs,
that is, a time well after the end
of World War II on the one hand,
and on the other, a time at the
cusp of the Cold War’s arms and
space race apogee. It was a time
of change within the USSR. With
de-Stalinization spreading across
14 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
the Soviet republics, USSR was
transforming and was in search of
an altered collective narrative, as
tensions outside the USSR with
former allies—namely, the United
States—added further political
pressure.
The Territory takes a step
away from the drama of global
developments, and instead delves
into what is happening in the oftoverlooked (that is, by the Westerner)
history of what took place away from
the USSR’s metropolitan centers.
The Territory’s geologist-engineers
searching for gold are caught in
the USSR’s moment of transition,
retreating into themselves as they
search for gold in the remote Arctic
province of Chukotka.
The geologists are led by Ilya
Chinkov, the chief engineer of
the Geological Department, who
insists to mine gold despite the
administration’s rebukes that
scientific fact renders it impossible
for gold to be present in Chukotka.
Chinkov, also known as “Buddha,”
leads his brigade using his moral
strength and sound belief that gold
can be found. His position to unite
the men around a single cause is
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 15
INTERVIEW
INTERVIEW WITH THE DIRECTOR
Alexandr Melnik
( T h e Te r r i t o r y )
a difficult one, as his men come
from all sectors of life, each with
different motivations for coming to
Chukotka. He navigates their diverse
personalities to bring out in them the
belief he has in himself, standing as
their moral pillar.
But blind belief is not enough;
the men of Chinkov’s brigade—some
of the lower-classes, some of the
metropolitan intelligentsia, some
young and in search of adventure
and love, some looking to redeem
their government careers, some
still coping with painful losses from
the past war—all must navigate a
multitude of conflicting personal,
political, and moral forces as they
commit to the search for gold.
The film paints a subtle but also
rich psychological portrait of the
geologists, illustrated more by quiet
gestures rather than dialogue. As
the director puts it, “Real feelings
and real tests are needed. Real men
16 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
are needed. In these places, it’s
impossible to cheat another person
or deceive oneself. Everything is
real there… In this world, one may
be oneself, real, natural, correct to
oneself, to one’s friends and to one’s
circumstances.”
The gorgeous backdrop of the
Chukotka tundra seems to follow
the unfolding of events. Opening
with summertime on the tundra, The
Territory begins with the surprisingly
lush greenery of the Arctic. But
the green forestry slowly progresses
to icy tundra as summer gives way
to autumn, autumn to late winter,
and finally, the onset of spring.
More is at stake, and doubt infects
the group. On the icy tundra, the
question the men face becomes:
What shall be my next step? Each
man’s decision making has a ripple
effect throughout the group. Some
continue; some fall. Individual
survival and collective triumph do
not always converge.
“All this occurred in another
century, on another earth,”
says Sergushova, the journalist
from Leningrad who acts as the
knowledgeable narrator, in the
film’s final scene. Her words
seem to throw the story back into
the formless abyss of history.
But the phrase has an opposite
effect, instead coaxing the viewer
reexamine and reflect on the story’s
historical context. Melnik invites a
conversation about the past.
Being situated in the future, we
think we know History’s winners and
losers. Rather than asking viewers
to assign who was on the “right” or
“wrong” side of History, Melnik’s
masterpiece instead illustrates the
historical agency of a group of men
on the periphery, fleshing out the
complexities of their decisions and
their lives as if it all occurred in this
century, on this earth.
Alexandr Melnik graduated from the Odessa
Hydrometeorological Institute in 1980. He
worked as a journalist at Vecherni Kishinyov,
and wrote plays and stories (Crazy Mirror)
until 1992, when he created Andreyevski flag
Publishers, and the Foundation of St. Andrew
the First-Called. In 2003, Melnik established
the Andreyevski flag film company and made
his debut film as a director.
AS A FORMER GEOLOGIST YOURSELF, WHO DO YOU IDENTIFY
WITH MOST AMONG THE CHARACTERS?
TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE
TERRITORY.
HOW DID YOU DECIDE TO BECOME A FILM DIRECTOR
CONSIDERING YOU HAD A VERY DIFFERENT PROFESSION
BEFORE?
The Territory narrates the events of 1950-1960s (usually
referred to as “The Thaw”) in the north-eastern part of
Russia. At the time it was still USSR. World War II has
just ended, the Stalin’s rule was over and the country
was recovering after the war. It was also the time when
we sent the first man to space. Sciences were developing
rapidly. Literature, poetry, music, cinema – everything
was full of enormous positivity.
My son Anton was a producer for Sergei Bodrov’s Sr. film
Mongol. Mongol, by the way, was nominated for Oscar
as the best foreign film (2007, Kazakhstan). When
they were filming it in China, I went there as well. The
filming process captivated me, and it turned out that I
had a lot of ideas of my own and so I decided to bring
them to life.
WHAT WAS YOUR INSPIRATION FOR THIS FILM?
I fell in love with Oleg Kuvaev’s novel “The Territory”
when I first read it in 1978, and have loved it since.
This novel was extremely popular in the USSR. When I
was given the chance to work with this material, I agreed
immediately. I borrowed from Kuvaev’s unfinished texts,
from his letters and notebooks. When we were filming in
Taymyr and Chukotka, the nature itself was the greatest
source of inspiration. If you mean cinema – then I really
love David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia (1962), Kevin
Costner’s Dances with Wolves (1990), Akira Kurosawa’s
Dersu Uzala (1975)...
Perhaps I have something in common with Chinkov, the
main character, as I got older. All the characters, not
just Chinkov, search for life’s meanings, love, friendship,
integrity, wisdom. But I think that I am more like
Baklakov – a lot of enthusiasm, at times running ahead
of reason.
WHAT DO YOU HOPE THAT THE TERRITORY WILL BRING TO OR
MEAN FOR WORLDWIDE AUDIENCES?
I really want the audience to see the beauty of Russia
and to fall in love with it. Fall in love with this country of
amazing, honest, kind, selfless and beautiful people.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 17
WPFF
WORLD P R E M I E R E S
FILM FESTIVAL PHILIPPINES 2015
CINE VERDE FILM SELECTION
Austria/Spain: SINCE THE WORLD WAS WORLD
by Günter Schwaiger
Estonia: THE GULL THEOREM
by Joosep Matjus
CINE VERDE
The Cine Verde section showcases contemporary films that tackle environmental themes
such as climate change, depletion of natural resources, and other related phenomena.
Greece: EMERY TALES
by Susanne Bausinger and Stelios Efstathopoulos
This year’s selection of films delve into the following themes: co-existence with nature;
social explorations of native tribes; natural resources and sustainability; organic human and
animal connections to the environment; moving away from the urban and the technological;
and the implications of human actions on nature.
With ever pressing global concerns regarding the environment of our world, the films in
this Cine Verde section hope to bring awareness to a mass audience and inspire them to
take action in protecting the environment and preserving our communities.
Peru/ Spain: NOPOKI “I COME”
by Inmaculada Hoces
18 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
Turkey: FISH
by Derviş Zaim
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 19
WPFF
WORLD P R E M I E R E S
FILM FESTIVAL PHILIPPINES 2015
EURASIAN CINESCAPE FILM SELECTION
EURASIAN
CINESCAPE
Georgia: BRIDES
by Tinatin Kajrishvili
Georgia: THE VILLAGE
by Levan Tutberidze
India: VEES MAHNJE VEES
by Uday Bhandarkar
Iran: AZAR, SHAHDOKHT, PARVIZ & OTHERS
by Behrouz Afkhami
Israel: ALL THAT REMAINS
by Kineret Hay-Gillor
Russia: GOOD BYE, MOM
by Svetlana Proskurina
Russia: NAME ME
by Nigina Sayfullaeva
Turkey: MRS. NERGIS
by Görkem Şarkan
Turkey: SIVAS
by Kaan Müjdeci
The Eurasian Cinescape section focuses on the historical and cultural crossroads of the
vast landscape we call Eurasia, which stretches more than a fifth of the globe, from the
northern waters of the Arctic, crossing through Central Asia, down to the Arabian Sea.
Eurasian Cinescape is part of the Parallel Sections, which features films taken from
specific regions, particularly South East Asia, Europe, and the Latin American states.
20 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 21
FILMMAKING
FILMMAKING
Sustainable Filmmaking:
Going Green On and Off Set
GO MAKE YOUR MOVIE!
by James Thomas
Filmmaker James Thomas (Two Guys and a Film Productions) shares advice for first-time directors.
M
aking your first
film can seem
like a daunting
and sometimes
impossible task. In fact, I’m often
asked, “How did you do it?” The
truth is simple: Hard work. My
business partner, Canyon Prince
(the other half of my production
company, Two Guys and a Film), and
I spent the better part of three and a
half years writing, shooting, editing
and releasing “Hard Sun” and “Run
Like Hell”. Each phase was just as
difficult and took just as much effort
as the previous one. No matter what,
you’ve got to put in the time and be
willing to out-work and out-last the
other guy.
LEAVE FEAR AT THE DOOR
This is harder than it seems, but
in filmmaking, there’s no room for
fear. You can’t be afraid to fail, be
afraid it won’t work, or be afraid that
someone will say “no.” It’s very easy
to get overwhelmed when you are
planning out your first film. You’ll
be thinking, “We don’t have enough
money,” “every location is turning
us down,” “we have no crew,” “the
actors we want said they won’t do
it for the amount of money we can
offer” – the list is endless.
My advice? Develop tunnel vision.
When overwhelmed, write down the
next five things you need in order for
the film to move forward. Strategize
what tasks you can do, and which
ones require help from others.
Develop a plan and start attacking.
If you need someone’s help, reach
by Susan Claire Agbayani
Still from “Hard Sun”
out; don’t say “no” for them. Leave
fear at the door, and keep yourself
focused on the end product.
STAY POSITIVE (AND SURROUND YOURSELF
WITH SUPPORTIVE PEOPLE).
When Canyon and I were gearing
up to shoot the two films, we pitched
the idea to everyone we knew. We
protected ourselves from anyone
who was negative. We knew that
to accomplish the difficult task of
completing two feature films, we
needed to surround ourselves with
positive people. More importantly,
we knew that we had to stay positive
ourselves. When filming, your mood
affects your crew! It all boils down
to protecting your set. Stay positive,
and make sure you have the support
you need. You’ll thank yourself later.
BE FLEXIBLE
On “Run Like Hell” we shot for
twenty-three days (including reshoots and pickups) for free. Not one
of those days did we pay a locations
fee, even though we were at the
main location for fifteen days. FREE!
So, how did we achieve this?
When we went location scouting, we
found people with unique locations
that were excited about our film
production. We went back and fit the
script around those locations.
On any film, but especially your
first film, you have to be open to
shifting locations in the script to
take advantage of what’s available to
you. “Run Like Hell” originally took
place in a small town, but when we
22 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
found the ranch in Palmdale, I knew
we needed to use it. That resulted in
roughly 45% of the film’s locations
being changed. Had we not been
flexible, we would be still waiting to
shoot.
KEEP MOVING
Building momentum can be one
of the hardest challenges, but it’s
important to keep going forward.
Financing can be a major struggle in
independent filmmaking, and often
stops filmmakers from finishing their
movies. When we started shooting,
the films were only 70% financed,
but that didn’t stop us. Regardless
of being fully financed or not, we
were going to keep moving forward.
You can spend forever waiting for
things to align or you can go out and
make it happen.
NEVER QUIT
In those moments when
everything in you wants to quit,
you must push through anyway.
That is success. There will be many
moments during your first film that
will make you doubt that you have
what it takes. You might be thinking,
“It’s too big of a task. It’s too hard.”
Just remember, never quit. Say it to
yourself. Tell it to others. Live by it.
Keep pushing through, step by step,
and before you know it, you’ll be
saying, “That’s a wrap!”
HERE’S A LITTLE SECRET – YOU CAN DO IT
AND YOU DO HAVE WHAT IT TAKES. YOU JUST
HAVE TO BELIEVE IT.
Image from feelgrafix.com
A
ccording to the
Changemakers.com
website, the entertainment
industry “produces thousands
of movies per year through an
inherently wasteful process.
Set construction creates tons of
landfilled materials while set lighting
and trucking burn through fossil
fuels and natural resources.”
The site goes on to state that
unfortunately, once production is
over, producers want to get rid of the
waste as fast as possible “without
consideration for the environment.”
This means that the environmental
footprint of a film set “can be felt
long after the cameras stop rolling.”
Filmmakers have played crucial
roles in raising awareness and
encouraging discussion about critical
issues in society – for example,
as stated on the Center for Media
and Social Impact (CMSI) site,
“environmental threats from climate
change and over-exploitation of
resources.”
Most of those involved in the
other aspects of filmmaking, though
– such as producers, distributors and
broadcasters – “do not acknowledge
(the) true costs of the impact on
the environment” and climate
arising from the production and
distribution of films. There’s also a
distinctive lack of any “independent
certification process or board for
(this) profession as there are for
other industries and professions.”
Filmmakers have thus, as of
late, “adopted pro-environmental
practices in their own production;
with codes providing them tools to
measure” the sustainability of their
practices throughout the production
process.
The organization Creative
Migration (www.creativemigration.
org), have provided a breakdown of
ways to ensure your filmmaking stays
“green”:
•
•
•
PRE- AND POST-PRODUCTION
• Hold meetings locally, in venues
that are accessible via all modes
of transport
• Communicate with one another
online or via telephones
• Do accounting and admin
paperwork online
• Turn off equipment when not in
use; power down monitors when
computers need to run overnight
• Have recycling bins and reusable
containers
PRODUCTION
• Shoot in accessible locations
• Mind the impact of the
production on the environment;
avoid damage on surroundings
• Remove all equipment and
production remnants
• Use electric or hybrid vehicles;
no SUVs or diesel trucks
• Minimize number of planes for
transport; minimize car trips to
stations
• Recycle scrap paper
EQUIPMENT
• Use memory cards vs. tapes
• Capture footage nightly
• Use natural light and/or solar- or
battery-powered lighting devices
• Turn off all equipment not in use
MEALS
• Tap local suppliers, restaurants
or vendors
• Dispense drinks through large
containers
Bring own coffee mugs, water
bottles, reusable plates and
utensils, and cloth napkins
Donate uneaten food to local
shelter
Compost food waste
TRAVEL ACCOMMODATIONS
• Camp or stay with friends
• Stay at artist communities with
sustainable practices
The organization Tree Hugger
stated that for one particular
film, “as part of a pilot project
lead by Earthmark/Green Media
Solutions, the production team …
increased implementation of better
sustainability in four areas: energy,
transportation, construction and set
materials, and waste.”
The production team used biodesel
fuels for all location vehicles and
generators; replaced gas-powered
vehicles with hybrids; distributed
reusable aluminum water bottles to
cast and crew; tapped local caterers
for food; used low-energy washers
and driers for wardrobe needs; used
eco-friendly cleaning products; and
finally, shot the production using
three-perf film, which ensured 25%
less film and chemicals were used to
shoot and process.
For more tips, information, and
advice on sustainable filmmaking,
check out the following websites:
www.cmsimpact.org
www.greenfilmmaking.com
www.creativemigration.org
www.treehugger.com
www.filmmakersforconservation.org
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 23
Image from eyefish.tv
FILMMAKING
FESTIVAL AWARDS
FILMING IN A SUBMERGED WORLD
by Sylvester Montances
F
ilm allows us to experience
different worlds which we
might otherwise never see.
Enter: the underwater world.
Filming underwater entails the
usual trickiness of filming with an
added element: water. Everywhere.
There are additional considerations
and notable risks (lack of oxygen
being first and foremost).
At base level, the camera
operator must be a certified SCUBA
diver. Knowing the very basics of
SCUBA diving is essential. This
both minimizes the risks of being
underwater for a time and benefits
the filming process.
Enormous water tanks are usually
utilized, especially in filming
underwater scenes that require
controlled environments. Water
conditions are rigidly controlled
– temperature and chlorine levels
especially – to allow longer shooting
periods. It’s less dangerous for the
cast and the crew. Numerous films
including Jaws, Titanic, Free Willy,
and Harry Potter used water tanks in
the filming process.
When filming is done beneath
actual bodies of water, such as
for underwater documentaries,
everyone involved must know the
specific underwater environment.
It’s imperative not only to keep focus
on the filming, but also to remain
24 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
wary of sinking, floating, colliding
with corals or dangerous rocks, or
of course, any fish swimming by.
Camera operators must remain
calm, moving slowly underwater and
comfortably underwater. Assisted
lighting makes things clearer, which
is essential when deep underwater.
Colors change when underwater in
the sense that water absorbs color at
different rates, based on depth and
water type (tropical, temperate, and
so on). Such color issues underwater
can be compensated for easily, either
by using a color filter for the camera,
usually red; or by using underwater
lights. Lights aren’t necessary for
shallow or clear tropical waters,
whereas filters are used on a case to
case basis.
More underwater videographers are
using HID (High-intensity Discharge)
lights with greater effect compared
to conventional halogen lights. For
energy-efficiency, LEDs are popular
due to their battery life and their
color effects. At depth, most divers
use small halogen lights. These are
however unsuitable for video work as
halogens produce concentrated and
focused beams.
Similar to taking videos above
surface, different conditions affect
the colors that can be captured,
more so underwater. White balance is
very important for adjusting to depth
change. For sharper images, manual
focus is best. Other elements floating
in front of the lens like silt, dust or
other aquatic life may drift by and get
sensed by auto focus functions, and
thereby ruin the shot.
There are hundreds, thousands
of cameras on the market, yet only
a relative few underwater housings
exist. Generally, there are camera
housings which are mechanical or
digital, and there are housings which
combine both.
Mechanical housings have physical
buttons that physically pentrate the
hard casing to operate the camera.
Digital housings tap into the camera’s
digital port and operate the camera
functions from a digital controller on
the casing.
Knowing the pros and cons of
each camera setup is crucial. Some
features for consideration include:
access to controls, depth rating,
Support for fiber optic connection,
housing materials, size, underwater
buoyancy, type of port mounting,
and leak alarms. But in the long run,
no matter the brands or equipment
used in filming underwater, the final
output is always what matters.
This depends on the creativity
and intuition of the one holding
the camera, submerged in a world
which remains vast, beautiful, and
enormously unexplored.
Sundance
Winners
2015
T
he renowned Sundance
Film Festival kicked off
this year in Park City,
Utah on January 22nd and ran
through until February 1st, 2015.
Jurors for the various sections
were prolific and varied, including:
Eugene Hernandez, co-publisher
of Film Comment magazine;
cinematographer-director Kirsten
Johnson (Fahrenheit 9/11);
cinematographer Lance Accord
(Being John Malkovich); editor
Sarah Flack (Lost in Translation);
director-writer-cinematographer
Cary Joji Fukunaga (True
Detective); actress Winona Ryder
(Girl, Interrupted); actress Brit
Marling (The East); and writer
Jonathan Nolan (The Dark Knight).
U.S. Grand Jury Prize: Dramatic
Me and Earl and the Dying Girl
Directing Award: U.S. Dramatic
Robert Eggers, The Witch
Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award: U.S.
Dramatic
Tim Talbott, The Stanford Prison
Experiment
U.S. Documentary Special Jury Award for
Vérité Filmmaking
Bill Ross, Turner Ross, Western
U.S. Documentary Special Jury Award for
Social Impact
Marc Silver, 3½ MINUTES
Alfred P. Sloan Feature Film Prize
The Stanford Prison Experiment
U.S. Dramatic Special Jury Award for
Collaborative Vision
Advantageous
`ld Cinema Grand Jury Prize:
Documentary
The Russian Woodpecker
U.S. Dramatic Special Jury Award for
Excellence in Editing
Lee Haugen,Dope
World Cinema Grand Jury Prize:
Dramatic
Slow West
U.S. Dramatic Special Jury Award for
Excellence in Cinematography
Brandon Trost,
The Diary of a Teenage Girl
Directing Award: World Cinema
Dramatic
Alanté Kavaïté, The Summer of
Sangaile
U.S. Grand Jury Prize: Documentary
The Wolfpack
World Cinema Dramatic Special Jury Award
for Acting
Regina Casé and Camila Márdila,
The Second Mother
Directing Award: U.S. Documentary
Matthew Heineman, Cartel Land
U.S. Documentary Special Jury Award for
Cinematography
Matthew Heineman and Matt
Porwoll, Cartel Land
U.S. Documentary Special Jury Award for
Break Out First Feature
Lyric R. Cabral, David Felix Sutcliffe,
(T)ERROR
World Cinema Dramatic Special Jury Award
for Acting
Jack Reynor, Glassland
World Cinema Dramatic Special Jury Award
for Cinematography
Germain McMicking, Partisan
Short Film Grand Jury Prize
World of Tomorrow
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 25
TRIBUTE
Remembering
Guru Dutt
by Himani Sood
Contributor Himani Sood delves into
the life and films of Guru Dutt, the
Indian director, producer, and actor,
who was one of Indian commercial
cinema’s greatest icons. His films are
hailed as some of the best creations of
Bollywood’s Golden Age, both for their
artistic and lyrical content and for
their exquisite human universality.
26 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
K
aagaz ke Phool (‘Paper
Flowers,’ 1959), the last
film Guru Dutt directed
in his short career
before his untimely death in 1964,
was the first Guru Dutt film I had
ever watched. Exposing the world
of filmmaking à la Billy Wilder’s
Sunset Boulevard (1950), Kaagaz ke
Phool is a deeply melancholic movie
that follows the life and demise of
celebrated movie director Suresh
Sinha, played by Guru Dutt himself,
who feels uninspired by the tinsellined glitz of studio-era Bollywood.
The very title of the film, ‘Paper
Flowers,’ suggests the deceptive
and make-believe nature of fame.
A reviewer in Filmindia (November,
1959) savagely wrote, ‘Kaagaz ke
Phool is an utterly undistinguished
picture except that it is made in
Cinemascope. It is a depressing,
incoherent tale boringly told.’
In Dutt’s words, “the baffling
unpredictability that gives edge to
the thrill of moviemaking” was lost
on the mass audience of the time.
Today the film, along with Dutt’s
other films, is heralded as a classic
in the history of Indian cinema,
and Dutt himself is mourned as a
great populist progressive filmmaker
for his ability to adhere to certain
formulaic conventions, whilst at the
same time veering dramatically away
from expectations and norms.
While Dutt’s earlier films Aar
Paar (‘This or That,’ 1954), Mr.
and Mrs. 55 (1955), and C.I.D
(1956) were commercial successes,
his later films are now known as
“The Tragic Trilogy” comprising of
Pyaasa (‘The Thirsty One,’ 1957),
Kaagaz ke Phool, and Sahib, Bibi,
aur Ghulam (‘The Master, the Wife,
and the Slave,’ 1962). These he
only shadow directed, but are oft
cited as his most personal works; a
rigorous articulation of himself — as
a man and as an artist — against
the increasingly commercialized and
corrupted backdrop of 1950s India.
“Yeh daulat ke bhooke riwaajon
ki duniya, Yeh duniya agar mil bhi
jaaye to kya hai?” / “This world of
those hungry for wealth, What is this
world, even if I get it?”
This song is from the film Pyaasa
(‘The Thirsty One,’ 1957) in which
Dutt plays poverty-stricken poet,
Vijay. Despite harbouring a deep
commitment towards his art, Vijay
is condemned by his brothers for
evading family responsibility. Both
Pyaasa and Kaagaz ke Phool deal
with the same theme: the exposition
of evils inherent within the current
societal structures.
Like Vijay, Suresh displays
a deep passion for filmmaking.
Both characters do not view their
choice of career as simply a means
to bread and butter, rather their
entire self-worth and the process of
identity negotiation is articulated
through the catharsis involved in
the production of art. Although both
films address the same themes of a
degenerate society devoid of human
values, Pyaasa was a hit and Kaagaz
ke Phool a flop. With the passage
of death and time, however, the
frighteningly thin line between the
mental states of Dutt’s characters
and himself has been made known
and spread through biographies,
articles, gossip, and the internet.
Before establishing his own
studio, Dutt’s films upheld the
requirement of moral legitimacy that
most commercial Indian films had
formularized, where the idea of evil
triumphed by forces of goodness is
central to melodramas. His earlier
films — albeit more light-hearted
— are responses to evolving social,
cultural, and political forces against
the background of an emerging
nation. The melodramatic form is
more than just an aesthetic practice:
it is a way of viewing the world.
The audience participates in
Dutt’s vision by confronting a broad
set of relevant themes — desire,
fears, values, and identities — that
lie under the skin of society. Guru
Dutt put forth this ideological
struggle and search for morality
through the struggles of characters
played by himself: the poet Vijay in
Pyaasa and the filmmaker Suresh
Sinha in Kaagaz ke Phool.
“Raj, it’s a stillborn child,”
whispered Guru Dutt to his friend
director Raj Khosla, just before the
interval of Kaagaz ke Phool. Being
further misunderstood by society,
Guru Dutt withdrew from filmmaking
and embarked upon a demise that
was eerily foreshadowed in the film.
In his personal life, Dutt was
lonely after having been separated
from his wife and children, and
estranged from actress Waheeda
Rehman, who ironically plays his
lover in Pyaasa and ‘the other
woman’ even in Kaagaz ke Phool.
I’m not one to indulge in what we
in India like to call “filmi gossip”,
but it’s through Dutt’s personal
battles that we are able to better
understand his own thoughts, his
worldview.
Like many other filmmakers, Guru
Dutt did not write about his films,
but what we have in Pyaasa and
Kaagaz ke Phool is a truthful and
honest account of his aspirations,
beliefs, and troubles, delivered to us
through the lead characters played
by himself.
Trapped in a world of pretense,
Guru Dutt illustrates the kind of
yearning that softly and slowly
erodes the soul — a desperate hunt
for human connection.
Hari’s Treasure is a collection of products which support a wellbeing experience through authentic blends. With formulas that are
carefully chosen by the Hari’s Treasure master blenders, we combine
specific ancient yogic wisdom with rare herbs and spices, into
unique, delicious blends that produce specific wellbeing effects.
Hari's Treasure is a collection of
products which support a well-being
experience through authentic blends.
With formulas that are carefully
chosen by the Hari's Treasure master
blenders, we combine specific
ancient yogic wisdom with rare herbs
and spices, into unique, delicious
blends that produce specific wellbeing effects.
Enjoy the benefits of artisanal yogic
recipes and bring the temple home.
Enjoy the benefits of artisanal yogic recipes and bring the temple
home.
Contact us:
0905 514 2433
hariteaph@gmail.com
www.haritea.com
www.haritea.com
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 27
OPINION
On Richard Linklater
by EJ Dimaano
“Dude, I service society by rocking, okay? I’m out there on the front lines, liberating people with my music!”
— Dewey Finn, a.k.a. Mr. Schneebly (Jack Black in School of Rock, 2003)
R
ichard Linklater has
created films of such
varied range that it’s
close to impossible to
just hazard a guess at which ones
were his, or to predict his next
contribution to the industry.
A search on the web for
the name “Richard” yields
a dozen other names in the
dropdown – a Hollywood actor, a
painter-photographer, a famous
entrepreneur; “Linklater” doesn’t
come up until after you type it in
full.
The unfortunate truth is, Linklater
himself isn’t as popular as his
movies. In his own words, “I do find
myself at the moment, due to the
success of School of Rock, to be on
people’s radar a little.”Instead of
an enraged “But why?!” – although
it was in my own biased head –I
stepped back and analyzed his body
of work with fresh eyes.
In 1991, Richard Linklater
introduced himself to us in the
opening scene of Slacker – an
audacious presentation of the
generation set in his hometown,
Austin. I say ‘audacious’ because it
28 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
was a bold calling out of the “lazy”
self-indulgent subculture of the time,
but one done with such apparent,
non-judgmental understanding that
it was exceptionally well-received.
What Slacker, his first ever
feature, ultimately revealed is
Linklater’s genius for dialogue. Who
didn’t listen and nod as the talkative
cab passenger who “should’ve stayed
at the bus station” rambled on? In
his later works, like Before Sunrise
and School of Rock, who didn’t hang
on to Jesse’s every word as he and
Celine made their way through the
streets of two continents in eighteen
years, or listen with a rebellious
heart as Dewey Finn passionately
espoused rock music to a class of
12-year-olds?
Linklater’s films are occasionally
meandering, often quite funny – but
most importantly, always, always
real. This is the reason for the
reception of his irreverence as fresh,
rather than disturbing.
Slacker stirred the industry upon
release. The film had no real plot
to speak of, but held solid, welldeveloped, believable characters
that stole the audience’s hearts
– a strength of Linklater’s that is
consistently exhibited throughout his
career.
The brilliance in Linklater’s
storytelling firmly attaches itself to
the fact that the man knows exactly
how to cast the right actors. Either
that, or he simply knows how to
create characters and stories that
dedicated, seasoned actors gravitate
to. Matthew McConaughey and
Jack Black, Uma Thurman and
Patricia Arquette, and of course,
Ethan Hawke. Ethan, Ethan, Ethan.
These actors all appear repeatedly
in Linklater’s movies, bringing the
characters to life, and help make his
films what they are –memorable and
impactful.
Linklater may be low-key, but his
movies certainly aren’t. He’s not Mr.
Hollywood by any means, but one
would only have to watch or read
his interviews to believe that he
sincerely wants to keep it that way.
For him, it’s about the movies
and the art, and absolutely not the
celebrity – which, in this time of
fame-starved B-listers, is incredibly
admirable, and to that I say:
“Alright, alright, alright.”
You’re Not Kubrick (And That’s O.K.)
by Ronin Samarito
N
o one is Kubrick, so
forget about it. You
won’t ever have his
eye. That’s his eye.
You won’t ever have
his mind. That’s
his, too.
Don’t care for Kubrick? Doesn’t
matter who you aspire to—they’ll
never be you. And that’s something
to be proud of.
No one else sees your children like
you do. Feels the same way about
the love of your life. Remembers the
weight of your father’s hand. These
are the things only you know. These
are your stories.
Now, I’m not about to tell you to
be original. I know what people say.
I’ve heard the rumors. This is, after
all, cinema. They say that originality
is dead. You’ve probably heard this,
too. It’s a small world—we may know
the same people.
Well, you know what? Good god
damned riddance.
Originality is a trap.It is vanity.
The restless path of originality
leads to the desire to be different
to be different. To impress just to
impress. If all you’re trying to do in
this craft is astonish people with
your brilliance (if I may borrow from
Messrs. Parker and Stone), you’re
gonna have a bad time.
Fortunately, there is a bulletproof
way to get out of the trap of
originality: don’t give a shit.
Kubrick did what he did his way.
P.T. Anderson has his way. The
Dardenne Brothers have theirs.
Don’tgive a shit. You aren’t them.
That doesn’t mean you can’t be
among them. That just means you
won’t get there the same way.If you
do get there (and I sincerely hope
that you do),you will have made your
own way.
Don’t give a shit about originality.
Far too much is at stake. You can’t
afford to waste a single shit. The fate
of cinema rests on you giving every
shit you can about authenticity.
Forget about Kubrick. What about
you?
What does your eye see?If it’s
something only you can view, then
it’s something only you have seen.
Where does your mind lead? If it’s
somewhere only you can go, then it’s
a place only you have been.
If you want to do something no
one’s ever done before, do something
only you can do.
You are never going to be the next
big anything. Instead, be authentic—
there’s a good chance you could
be the first something. What that
something is exactly – masterful or
mediocre, insipid or indestructible –
is the decision of exactly one person
on Earth.
You’re not Kubrick, and that’s
O.K. Kubrick could never be you.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 29
Still from “Death Proof”
from cinemeccanica.files.wordpress.com
OPINION
The Rise of Intentional
“So Bad, They’re Good” Movies
by Justin Russ
B
ad movies have been
around almost as long
as there have been
movies. The 40s and
50s gave rise to second rate, quickly
and poorly made science fiction,
horror, western, and films noir which
wricharere played before the main
showing. Dubbed as B-pictures,
they were considered as cheap
shlock. They lacked any major stars
and received considerably less
funding and time from studios.
They had to be made as quickly
and inexpensively as possible. The
results were narratively absurd,
poorly acted, poorly designed junk
that audiences generally didn’t care
about.
In 1959, the low-grade B-Picture
known as Plan 9 From Outer Space
was created by Edward D. Wood,
Jr. Wood couldn’t have known the
legacy he left behind, posthumously
spawning what’s known as “so bad,
it’s good” cinema – in other words,
a film that’s so horrendously acted
and so roughly assembled that it
transcends pure “badness” and
evolves into something entirely new;
a laughably awful picture to be
screened at midnight in theaters all
across the country.
Since then, there has been a
growing popularity for “so bad,
they’re good” movies. The Room,
Troll 2, Reefer Madness, Manos: the
Hands of Fate, and Killer Klowns
from Outer Space are just a few
titles that have achieved cult status
for being comically bad. Each
features a ludicrous story with stiff
acting and shoddy camera work. No
30 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
doubt these films would have been
all but forgotten if it weren’t for
late night screenings for cinematic
misfits to revel in.
The rise in popularity has led to
a new type of “so bad, it’s good”
movie – the intentional “so bad, it’s
good” movie.
What a strange world we now live
in, when a filmmaker sets out with
the intention of making something
terrible!
A few recent films gained a cult
following not too long ago during
this craze. They feature some of
the worst CGI ever put on screen,
and even worse writing, directing,
and acting. The films were called
Sharknado and its sequel, Sharknado
2: The Second One. These Twister/
Jaws mash-ups (or rip-offs) aired
on the SyFy channel in 2013 and
2014, and for whatever reason, a
third one (Sharknado 3: Oh Hell No!)
is set for release this year.
Fortunately (or unfortunately) the
trend of intentionally bad movies
didn’t start with the Sharknado
trilogy. It was in 2006 that Snakes
on a Plane had its monkey-lovin’
debut causing audiences to flock
to the theater to witness what they
believed would be the next “so bad,
it’s good” midnight masterpiece.
Take it for what it is, Snakes on
a Plane had exactly that, but
most critics didn’t find it all that
endearing. Then, in 2007 Quentin
Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez
released the Grindhouse double
feature of Planet Terror and Death
Proof. These two homages to the
exploitation cinema of the 70s
received a fair amount of critical
and box office success. Both films
feature the trademarks of their
respective directors, beautiful
kick-ass women, tons of gore,
intentionally added “missing reels”,
and grainy, jumpy film stock to add
to the overall aesthetic of the late
night 70s drive-in movie. For better
or worse, they are decent films and
together they make good companion
pieces, even if Death Proof is
arguably Tarantino’s weakest effort.
Other films that fall into this
category: Iron Sky, Piranha 3D and
the even worse Piranha 3DD, Hobo
with a Shotgun, The Expendables,
Casa de mi Padre, and Machete and
Machete Kills. There are some that
are better than others, but sadly
most of them will probably not be
remembered 10 or 15 years from
now. Or at least not in the way that
The Room or House is remembered.
The question is then raised: can a
good intentional “so bad, it’s good”
movie exist? Can that type of film
be replicated? After seeing most
of these films, the answer might
regrettably be “no.”
All of the films that are generally
regarded as good “so bad, it’s
good” movies all have one thing in
common; they were made by either
delusional, misguided directors or
young filmmakers who were in over
their heads. In the cases of Tarantino
and Rodriguez, it was out of genuine
love for that style of film.
Ultimately, “so bad, it’s
good” cannot be replicated or
manufactured. It must grow
organically.
CGI (AND MY MARRIAGE)
Film enthusiast Pi Legarda shares her particularly modern brand of relationship troubles
M
y husband and I have
been married now for
24 years. Both sides
will tell you that it’s
been no picnic in the park on a
lovely summer’s day. Even so, we
put up with each other and our love
continues to last “because of” and
“in spite of”. (Those of you with
long term partners will understand.)
We share a common love of good
books and great films. So confident
was I in our mutual love of the latter
(Casablanca, Cinema Paradiso,
Trainspotters, to name a few) that
I was dreadfully unprepared for my
husband’s infidelity.
(Ok, infidelity isn’t the right
word. But who doesn’t like a bit of
drama?)
It shatters me that, in recent
years, rather than sharing my horror
at yet another flamboyantly CGIheavy disaster movie being released
onto the big screen, my husband is
first in line to buy tickets.
Don’t get me wrong – there’s a
place for flamboyantly excessive
use of exaggerated cinematography.
But how many more times do we
have to be subjected to: skyscrapers
blasting into smithereens; huge
walls of sea pounding down upon
a helpless coastal populace; or the
poor old White House imploding
into a raging fireball?
I’m surprised the White House is
still standing.
With sadness I realize that
nowadays my husband couldn’t be
persuaded into a vintage screening
of Casablanca – but he’d happily
book tickets in advance for a new
The Avengers release.
As I write this, Old Faithful and
I are finding it difficult to agree
on what film to watch. We tried
watching the films we liked on our
own, but discussing them together
afterwards is only recounting, not
exchanging viewpoints.
I accept my daughter stating
that even “really old films” (in
other worlds, the films of my youth)
such as Disney’s Snow White
used CGI, as did Burt Lancaster
in his Moses when parting the
red sea. Nonetheless, I maintain
that judicious CGI makes a film
special, as opposed to the countless
forgettable blockbusters which
incessantly abuse the technology.
The use of CGI in James Bond
films is not superfluous to the
audience’s visual needs, nor is its
judicious use in Star Wars, Avatar,
or Tomorrowland, a film that hubby
and I did actually watch together.
But I still lament the fact that
once my husband sees a trailer for
the next CGI-ridden disaster movie –
with yet another spaceship crashing
spectacularly onto a historical
monument (insert imploding White
House here) – I just know he’s
already mentally buying the ticket.
Consider Inception, Apollo 13,
or The Dark Knight. All these
spectacle-heavy films prove that
contemporary dramatic, sci-fi, and
action screenplays can be filmed
without the necessity of extravagant
CGI.
Old-fashioned as I am, I get the
mass appeal of the larger-thanlife scenarios. We’re able to bring
impossible, improbable scenes to
life, and we’ll continue to do so
through the use of CGI (sometimes
regardless of a decent plot).
I fully acknowledge the sheer
awesomeness of spectacles that
befall us. The primary aspects of
cinema are entertainment and
escapism, right?
But I worry that we’re being
dumbed down as a mass audience.
At present, it’s a legitimate worry
that millions of dollars are used
to broadcast movies about hostile
aliens sending video games to earth
to destroy mankind (cough, Pixels).
Returning to my marriage, Hubby
and I have settled on taking it in
turns to watch his choice of film
(action), and my choice of film
(decidedly less action). And for the
record, just because there are no
explosions or deaths in the films I
want to watch, that doesn’t make
them ‘chick flicks’.
But that’s another topic for
debate.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 31
Image from hdwallpapers.in
Image from blastr.com
OPINION
OPINION
SCI-FI WARS:
Females in the
Modern World
Intellect versus the Popcorn Flick
by Solène Thériault
by Josh Harding
S
uperhero movies seem to
be here to stay.
With billions and billions
of dollars going to the
studio chests, who can blame them?
Popular science-fiction movies
find all audiences, so financing is
never really a problem. However,
recently, shrinking audiences and US
domestic box-office numbers have
been making studio heads nervous.
Hollywood’s answer was, and is,
“Let’s make more blockbusters”.
God save sci-fi.
The first attempt at science fiction
was A Trip to the Moon, in 1902 by
George Méliès. Two decades later,
Metropolis became the first feature
length science fiction film. From the
1930s to most of the 1960s, sci-fi
was mainly low budget b-movies.
In 1968, after a certain movie with
a problematic artificial intelligence
named Hal came to theaters, the
genre was taken more seriously.
Finally 1977, the public met the
Skywalker family.
The era of blockbusters begins.
This science fiction genre
manipulates speculative sciencebased fictional phenomena. In other
words: anything that discusses
scientific possibilities in a far (or
near) future. More often than not,
sci-fi has political, philosophical,
ethical or social undertones. We are
made to scrutinise humanity in a
micro way or a macro way.
Films that touch upon these ideas
are what we could call intellectual
or progressive sci-fi films. They ask
difficult, morally tangled questions.
Examples of this subcategory
include Ex Machina, Her, Blade
32 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
Runner, Interstellar, Under the Skin
and Gravity, to name a few. The
first of this kind would be Kubrick’s
2001: A Space Odyssey.
The other category involves, along
with being ignored during award
seasons, a very epic sci-fi plot with
a wild sense of adventure. They are
to be referred to popcorn flicks, or
mainstream if you will. They are
bigger than life, unapologetically
fun, and need an all-American hero
to save the day. This is Marvel’s
happy place. Same goes for DC,
Jurassic Park, Terminator, X-Men,
and so on. The first born of these
extravaganzas? Star Wars.
Of course there’s always a
balance between mainstream movies
and intellectual ones, whatever the
genre, thanks to various seasons.
Blockbuster season means big
commercials and the biggest names
in Hollywood on a media tour. The
awards season is for film festivals,
soirées, selling your movie for
distribution or having your stars and
big players campaign for the coming
award ceremonies. Everyone’s goal
is to find the audience for their film,
whatever it is.
What’s interesting about the
sci-fi dichotomy is that both
subcategories have the same obvious
references. Visually speaking, they
are allowed the same tools (CGI,
green screen) and even look similar
at times. Science fiction is rarely
stand-alone, often tinted with other
genres (horror, adventure, thriller,
etc.). At its core though, it remains
faithful to the genre. Visually, the
genre is mostly dark, with very little
nature and with exciting brand
new technologies. Costumes are
important, giving a sense of time
period. An unstable genius is also
always a nice touch.
Where the two categories differ
is mostly in the experience itself of
viewing them. Star Wars was
ground breaking for one main thing
when it came out: it was fun. The
special effects were great, but
at a time where big movies were
pessimistic (albeit successful, with
dramas such as Chinatown, The
Godfather, etc.), George Lucas gave
his audience a fun, good versus evil
epic
adventure. Star Wars rejected the
ideas of the film snobs and chose
pleasure over depth. Since then,
science fiction falls into “serious” or
“popcorn” categories.
1982 was the year of E.T. and
Blade Runner; 1983 brought
Cronenberg’s Videodrome and The
Dead Zone as well as Superman
III and Return of the Jedi. And it
goes on until 2015, the year of Alex
Garland’s excellent Ex Machina and
Avengers: Age of Ultron.
The best part about science
fiction is that each accomplishment,
whatever the subcategory,
carries the genre further and further.
The big and explosive flicks make
special effects and stunts more
exciting, and the scripts get more
original and daring for the serious
ones.
Avengers did not offer responses
to Ex Machina’s questions on
gender, ethics and existentialism.
Then again, neither did Ex Machina.
And that’s the real beauty of science
fiction.
E
x Machina is up there
with the very best
cinematic science
fiction. This category
excludes sci-fi films
that are more fantastical in nature,
such as Star Wars or Avatar. Think
more of films like 2001: A Space
Odyssey and Blade Runner, where
aesthetic and semiotics boggle the
mind and keep audiences watching
long after the first viewing. It pleases
me beyond belief that Ex Machina
seems the first serious sci-fi film
to tackle issues of gender. What is
initially a (very strong) movie about
the possibilities, both beneficial and
problematic, of creating artificial
intelligence beautifully transitions
into a symbolic treatise on the role of
the female in the modern world.
The movie really only has three
central characters, and, with a few
exceptions, is set in one distinct
location: the underground homecum-research facility of a scientific
genius named Nathan, played
by Oscar Isaac in one of his best
performances yet. Nathan lives in
isolated seclusion in his scenic
mountain retreat, whiling away
his days with the singular focus of
creating something never been seen
before: an artificially intelligent
being indistinguishable from any
other human.
Caleb, tasked with testing the
AI being, is introduced as the
audience’s surrogate, and he is
played by the ever-talented Domhnall
Gleeson. Gleeson’s performance
shows a shy yet bold everyman
whose curiosity always gets the
better of him. We are meant to latch
on to his character from the outset of
the film, but Garland is idea-driven
enough that he more than turns this
trope on its head by the film’s end.
This tested individual comprised
of wires and gel is her own unique
person, and the true lead of the
film. Her name is Ava, and the
performance that Swedish actress
Alicia Vikander gives is excellent.
While seemingly robotic in her
movements, she ultimately shows
more humanity and personable
pathos than even the real humans
in this film do. Ava is a living,
breathing creation, ironic as that
statement may be.Garland, as usual,
writes an excellent script, filled
with great dialogue and character
moments. He writes a perfectly
paced and structured story that
isn’t epic or grand in its physical
ambitions (and it absolutely doesn’t
need to be) but is certainly so in its
philosophical and moral quandaries.
Symbolically, the whole concept
and character of Ava is a discussion
and analysis of the role of women in
the modern world. It is that simple,
but no less fascinating. While
Garland’s script contains many wellwritten and insightful discussions
between Nathan and Caleb about
pretty much everything that you are
thinking or asking yourself while
watching the movie, whether it be
sexuality, morality, ethics, art, and
individuality, we become increasingly
aware that there is not a single,
identifiable woman in the film.
Why then does a man choose to
make his creation a female gender
in appearance and characteristics?
While it is never outright answered
in the conversations within the film,
the character of Ava stands as a
highly functioning symbol by which
all of these questions can be asked
and discussed long after the film has
ended.
The fact that Garland was able to
create an independent, scaled-back,
and contained film that functions
as a thematically alive character
drama is truly a tremendous
accomplishment. We need more
science fiction films that are this
bold, driven, and smart.
As it stands, Ex Machina is
possibly the best film I’ve seen so
far this year, and one of the best
science fiction films released this
decade. It certainly satisfied my
longings for a singularly intelligent
work of sci-fi at the movie theater.
The three superb performances at its
center, coupled with the immaculate
cinematography, set design, score,
and densely packed script, all
coalesce into a wonderfully fresh
and bold work of art. It is a tightly
structured and well-researched
movie that grapples with the current
(and future) issues surrounding the
creation of artificial intelligence
head on.
I greatly anticipate whatever
filmmaker Alex Garland has up his
sleeve as well, as he has now proven
that he is just as talented a director
as he is a writer, and has firmly
found the place where he belongs:
making distinct, high-minded films
that audiences certainly will not
forget for quite some time.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 33
Drone aerial: Boats on Taal Lake in Tagaytay, Philippines
Drone aerial: Sunset in Coron, Palawan, Philippines
Image courtesy of R.S.V.P. Studios
TECHNOLOGY
Image courtesy of R.S.V.P. Studios
DRONES 101
THE LOWDOWN ON AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
WHAT ARE DRONES?
Drones are unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAV). They’re relatively
small aircrafts that are
autonomously piloted or controlled
by computers. They make aerial
photography a breeze.
available drones are ready to fly
out of the box, like Trick Drones,
while others require more at-home
engineering, such as Prosumers
and Heavy Payload Drones. Trick
Drones and Prosumer Drones are
for enthusiasts situated between
consumer to professional levels.
Prices are generally affordable.
Also known as multirotors,
quadcopters, or octocopters
(depending on the number of
propellers it has), drones are
available along a wide spectrum of
types, from those used for amateur
hobby to professional Hollywood
film crews. Either way, they are
able to create images and videos of
places that were once impossible
for humans to see from--from the
site of an Icelandic volcano eruption
to hundreds of meters above your
backyard family reunion.
Heavy Payload Drones can carry
payloads from cakes or pizzas to
heavy cameras for shooting cinema
quality videos. They’re pretty pricey.
Most airborne multi-rotors “know”
their location by communicating
with six or more GPS satellites. They
have propellers and motors which
produce minimal vibration for steady
video capture. Other drone types are
operated by sophisticated radiocontrol (RC) consoles that control
altitude, direction, and speed.
WHAT KINDS OF DRONES EXIST?
WHAT CAN DRONES DO?
Some drones can carry compact
cameras to high-end DSLRs, and are
usually rechargeable with built-in
batteries which provide various flight
times per charge, depending on the
model and payload. Commercially
Beginners and hobbyists usually
use their drones for various types
of aerial exhibitions or performing
maneuvering tricks. High-end drones
are now being used in a number of
professional sectors. Real estate
34 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
companies use drones for aerial
photos of properties. Police, military,
and border control agencies use
drones as tools for law enforcement
to improve situational awareness
and public safety. Some businesses
utilize drones to deliver orders to
their clients, a major convenience for
owners and clients. Both can monitor
items in transit.
Sports photography has taken
advantage of the perspective
drones can provide. In live sports
broadcasting, a drone can send
previously impossible dynamic views
to the stadium JumboTron and the
TV audience around the world.
Capturing images previously
unattainable, or attainable only by
spending thousands of dollars as
well as high safety risk, is just the
start of what drones can do for the
film industry. A number of films,
including Skyfall, The Wolf of Wall
Street, and Harry Potter and the
Chamber of Secrets took advantage
of drones’ capabilities to shoot
aerial and action scenes that would
have been previously impossible or
extremely expensive to achieve.
Drone aerial: Slum houses from above, Philippines
Image courtesy of R.S.V.P. Studios
WHAT ARE SOME TIPS ON USING
DRONES RESPONSIBLY?
Make sure you know the laws of
your country’s national aviation
authority (NAA) before you start
using your drone. Drones are a
classed as a type of aircraft, not a
toy. Drones weighing less than 20kg
have few restrictions, but flying
for commercial use requires the
permission of the NAA.
For the most part, anyone filming
with a drone has restrictions on the
distance it can fly within congested
areas; people, vessels, vehicles,
or structures not controlled by the
pilot; and the drones must typically
be flown within sight of the pilot.
Restrictions vary from country to
country.
Just remember to be considerate
to others when filming in public.
Maintain distance as to keep
people’s privacy. If using your drone
in a crowded area, let people know
before recording. Keep yourself
and your drone in view so that
others know that you are the person
controlling the machine.
KNOW YOUR DRONE
Be sure that you know your drone
thoroughly before you start flying!
Understand its capabilities, quality
of images, and controls. This keeps
both you and the drone from trouble.
Be aware of its battery life and plan
out your flight before flying.
Always consider who will be viewing
your images, and be careful if
posting to social media.
Avoid sharing images that could
potentially have unfair or harmful
consequences. Just use common
sense! Use the same tact when you
are uploading to the internet images
or video recorded from your digital
camera or smartphone.
HAPPY FLYING!
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 35
TECHNOLOGY
TECHNOLOGY
HDTV and the Death
of Artistic Integrity
With great technology comes great responsibility.
Stripping away the cinematographic integrity
and original artistic intention of filmmakers
is the default “Smooth Motion” setting on new
High-Definition television (HDTV) sets.
An ongoing Change.org petition established by
cinematographer and director Reed Morano
(Frozen River, Kill Your Darlings, The
Skeleton Twins) urges television manufacturers
to disable the default motion interpolation setting
on new televisions.
I N D E F I A N C E O F G R AV I T Y:
DRONES AND THEIR IMMENSE POTENTIAL
SineScreen speaks to Oli Laperal Jr., the Managing Director of R. S. V. P. Film Studios
Philippines and one of the country’s most experienced Drone Cinematographers.
D
rone footage opens up
infinite possibilities for
seeing the world above
ground, rather than
on it. It’s a revelation
much like underwater filming: a
whole new world.
After having been accidentally
introduced to the film industry when
working as a runner in Francis Ford
Coppola’s Apocalypse Now, Laperal
established R. S. V. P. Film Studios
in the late 1980s. Starting as a
modest company, R. S. V. P. now
stands as one of Asia’s most prolific
service providers. His passion for
drone photography is closely tied to
a desire to see put the Philippines
on the tourism map.
Using drones to film aerials
provides a much cheaper
alternative to its more expensive,
riskier counterpart: filming from
a helicopter. At present, however,
drone laws are an extremely
unchartered territory worldwide.
There are no globally implemented
guidelines.
Laperal’s approach to drone use is
36 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
pragmatic, and he firmly advises that
“common sense” is “all you need to
fly responsibly.” He further mentions
that newer drone models with builtin Global Positioning Systems (GPS)
bring added elements of safety
for drone users, making them less
prone to breakage or accidents if the
signal between the drone and the
controller is interrupted.“GPS drones
have ‘Return to Home’ features, so
if a signal is broken by something
like a police radio, the drone will
automatically fly safely back to its
point of origin.”
Laperal’s drone pragmatism goes
so far as to track weather patterns
in advance. “I’m very careful about
filming. If it’s too windy outside or
starting to rain, I won’t film. There
have been instances where I’ve
turned up to set and then told the
director we can’t do the aerials that
day.”His rule of“common sense” has
so far apparently been working, as
R. S. V. P. have yet to lose or break a
drone or camera during filming.
Returning to the concept of
tourism and new perspectives,
Laperal and his fellow directors view
drones as an indispensable tool for
showing the world the natural beauty
of the Philippines. As such, they
do usually film the aerials free of
charge. “We give the shots away in
the interest of actively promoting the
country as a tourist destination.”
Laperal’s latest project has been
shooting aerials for the International
Rice Research Institute (IRRI), a
global sustainability and research
organization ‘dedicated to reducing
poverty and hunger through rice
science.’ Their headquarters is based
in Los Baños, Philippines, a province
just outside of Manila.
Laperal shot a number of aerials
of the rice fields for their upcoming
videos, and his passion for the new
perspective on the world that drones
can offer us is evident: “We humans
are born with this cursed called
gravity and stuck on the ground.
But drones can take new disciplines
to new heights. We can reward
audiences with new angles that
they’ve never seen before.”
Still from “Frozen River”
S
o, what exactly is “smooth
motion”? Also known as
motion interpolation or motioncompensated frame interpolation
(MCFI), smooth motion is a form of
video processing that was initially
created to reduce motion blur. A now
default feature on the majority of
120Hz+ televisions, the technology
inserts ‘fake’ frames between
original frames which interpolate the
movement of the picture, making
the footage far more fluid. Sony calls
their interpolation technology Motion
Flow, for LG it is TruMotion, and
Samsung, Auto Motion Plus.
Although many television
watchers value the increased
fluidity and definition of the
footage on their screen, the smooth
motion setting poses a number of
technical and ethical problems.
Firstly, the interpolated frames may
contain distortions because they
were computer-generated and not
captured by a camera. Secondly,
and most importantly, smooth
motion destroys the intention of the
filmmakers vision and obliterates
the ‘film’ aesthetic, making footage
look real to the point of artificiality
– an occurrence which people have
deemed the ‘Soap Opera Effect’.
Smooth motion is a very
serious problem to filmmakers,
whose integral artistic visions and
intentions are obliterated by the
setting. Morano’s petition explains
the downsides of smooth motion
from a cinematographic perspective:
“A very unfortunate side effect of
using this function is that it takes
something shot at 24fps (frames per
second) or shot on film and makes
it look like it was shot on video at
60i. In short, it takes the cinematic
look out of any image and makes it
look like soap opera shot on a cheap
video camera. It is unbelievable that
this is a default setting on all HDTVs
because essentially what it is doing,
is taking the artistic intention away
from filmmakers.”
“It actually is a great way to watch
sports,” the petition adds, “[But] if
you care about the artistic integrity
of the visuals that you watch and
appreciate cinematography and
a cinematic experience, then you
should sign this petition.”
The petition finally reminds
the reader that films watched on
television should provide a viewing
experience as rich and beautiful as
in movie theaters themselves: “As
a consumer, you should know that
this function is ruining the theatrical
experience that you are supposedly
paying for when you purchase these
expensive HDTVs.”
In a guest editorial for Filmmaker
magazine, Morano elaborates on her
issues with ‘smooth motion’, both as
a cinematographer-director and as
a viewer. “If you took a photocopy
of a painting and hung it up in a
museum, trying to pass it off as a
real painting, it would look cheap
and lack texture.” She further recalls
her “shock” when watching her film,
Frozen River, on an HDTV television:
“It was so disheartening to see that
cinematic look I had put everything
into completely eradicated – all my
work ruined by the default setting of
a television manufacturer… It’s not
fair to the artist or viewer.”
This is serious stuff. Next time
you watch a film on an HDTV,
remember to turn off smooth motion
as a tribute to the director’s artistic
intention, and to avoid the dreaded
soap opera effect. For now, the
debate on whether technological
advancements help or hinder art
rages on.
// M. L. A.
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 37
Image from endthelie.com
TECHNOLOGY
The Changing Face of
Photography in 2015
FOUR CINEMATOGRAPHERS
to Follow on
Smart phones may be taking over the realm of casual pointand-shoot photography, but that doesn’t mean the end of digital
cameras. Far from it. The smart phone hegemony pushes
manufacturers to transcend the conventions of digital cameras.
S
mart phones today pack a
punch. That is, a punch
which caused the steep
decline of 35 million
cameras sold in 2009 to
the predicted figure of a dismal
7 million to be sold by the end of
2015 in the United States alone,
according to the International Data
Corporation. Numbers in Japan
aren’t looking great either: in DSLR
sales, the peak of 120 million
units sold in 2010 dwindled to
the projected number of just 30
million this year, as per the Camera
and Imaging Products Association.
These numbers show that smart
phones have claimed their spot
in point-and-shoot photography
(snapshot compacts seem to have
disappeared at recent trade shows),
but are also impacting the rest of the
industry.
The ‘best smart camera phone’
today, the Samsung Galaxy S6, has
a 16-megapixel rear camera with
optical image stabilization, beating
the iPhone 6 in terms of megapixel
count (8-MP) and performance
in low lighting. The Samsung
Galaxy also shoots at an incredible
2160px, or 4K UHD, quality video—
something you can’t get in too
many DSLRs. With all that packed
into your smart phone, casual
photographers are quite satisfied
with one gadget—understandably so!
It’s interesting to see how
manufacturers are responding
to these changes. On one hand,
high-end compacts and mirrorless
cameras are getting equipped with
better sensors and technology that
smart phones can’t offer (more
on that later). But another trend
is picking up, with manufacturers
catering to smart phone
photographers, making wireless
cameras and mounts for phones to
have more of a camera-like feel and
higher image quality.
Sony’s QX line was the first with
its strap-on “lens camera,” like the
QX30 with its 20.4-MP and 30x
optical zoom and adapters, and the
QX1, featuring a 20.1-MP APS-C
sensor and BIONZ X processor—
basically giving your smart phone
the machinery of their A5000
mirrorless camera. The downsides:
slow performance and a drain on
your wallet. Instead of these fancy
accessories, if purchased in entirety,
you might as well have bought an
actual high-end compact.
As technology advances, mounts
and adapters for the smart phone
may pick up. At this year’s CP+,
Olympus unveiled its take on the
trend with the Olympus Air, a 16-MP
MFT sensor and mount that attaches
with various lenses. Alongside the
Air, Olympus released an Olympus
PEN-esque camera shell, a sleek
clear plastic holding where you
can insert your phone and the Air
mounts. It has an optical viewfinder
and rig that triggers the shutter on
the lens mount, taking the term
“camera phone” to the next level.
The 2015 CP+ also revealed
various fit-in-your-palm compacts
with advanced sensors, seemingly
designed to produce selfies
in high-res glory. Panasonic
presented its Lumix GF7, a compact
interchangeable lens camera at a
meager 64.6x33.3x106.5mm. It
houses a 16-MP sensor and has
a flippable selfie-friendly LCD
monitor, secondary left-hand shutter
button, and a hands-free mode that
shoots when the subject waves.
Marketed as the “Next Level of
Selfie Expression,” the Lumix GF7 is
certainly trying to entice the smartphone-wielding Instagram-addicted
crowd.
The Fujifilm X-A2 is also a
compact mirrorless with a175degree flip LCD screen that can
face forward for selfie-ease. When
flipped, the face and eye detection
is automatically activated. X-A2’s
edge over the GF7 may be its
compatibility with the brand’s great
selection of glass.
With these developments in the
era of the smart phone, camera
manufacturers are putting their
fingers to the wind to figure out what
trend will pick up more—accessories
for smart phones; selfie-inclined
compacts; or, what the winds seem
to indicate, the rise of the high-end
mirrorless camera.
Stepping away from the casual
photography front, the challenges
that mirrorless cameras pose to the
long-time dominance of DSLRs in
the pro domain will be discussed in
the next installment. Stay tuned!
INSTAGRAM
Matthew Libatique
(‘Requiem for a Dream’)
@libatique
Requiem for a Dream, Black Swan, Noah, Iron Man, Everything Is
Illuminated, Gothika, Cowboys and Aliens, Phonebooth
Rachel Morrison
@rmorrison
Fruitvale Station, Cake, What Happened, Miss Simone?,
Dope, The Harvest, Any Day Now
Benoit Delhomme
@benoitdelhomme
The Theory of Everything, A Most Wanted Man, The Scent of Green
Papaya, Breaking and Entering, The Boy in Striped Pyjamas
Wally Pfister
@wpfister
Memento, Laurel Canyon, The Prestige, Inception and The Dark
Knight Rises, Money Ball, The Prestige
// B.P.
38 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE
SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE | 39
40 | SINE SCREEN - THE WORLD CINEMA MAGAZINE