There have been enough Star Wars films to say what the constants need to be for a good film. The writing of Lawrance Kasdan. Music of John Williams' and subtle camera work. 

With that said, get the jump coordinates from the navi computer and punch it.

My first knee jerk was 10 seconds into the film and no I'm not joking.

The choice not to open with a crawl is a bold one. I understand that these are to be stand alone movies. It makes sense but it's jarring considering we are used to the rhythm of a Star Wars film. Then not to even show the Star Wars logo or that beautiful Rogue One a Star Wars story logo that we've been treated to on the trailers. It's just this horrible hand drawn thing that made me question of the theatre hand accidentally been sent a rough print. This is one of the most petit gripes I've indulged but it just didn't work. Even Star Wars Rebels has the logo.

After a start like hitting a brick wall at light speed, we're in. 

Stars.

Planet.

Title card. Wait - WTF???

Really? I need a title for Yavin 4? You could argue that new audience members might not know the planets, but you'd be wrong. You could argue that these films are to introduce a new audience to the Star Wars universe and they are, but that is not the reason. Every film of the Star Wars saga has aimed to introduce new people to it. The Force Awakens was to introduce new people to the saga. Did it need title cards? No.

We have never known the planets. It's part of the drama. Where are we now? You'll find out later in the dialogue. It also helps create the feeling of a vast, foreign galaxy. 9 year olds didn't need title cards for the planets in 1977 and I see now evidence that 9 year olds have gotten progressively stupider since then. Right out of the gate this smacks of a studio that lost its nerve without JJ Abrams at the helm and a studio that doesn't actually understand Star Wars. 

The dialogue is utter pants which is born from character that don't have any decent drives or conflicts. Characters voice their inner most thoughts which sucks all the drama out of every scene. This is dialogue reminiscent of the prequel trilogy. Which leads to some good actors doing the best they can with what they have. Show me don't tell me. This is a drama adage as old as time.

This is the biggest bugbear for me and I can't believe no one else has noticed. Technology is one of the things that separates Star Wars from Star Trek.  Both take place in technologically advanced universes. Star Trek is our future and Star Wars takes place in the past. Technology is featured constantly in Star Wars but rarely mentioned. Star Trek is all about the technology. How it works, why it works and how they can adapt a bit of technology to help the crew out of whatever fix they maybe in. Rogue One had a lot of technical jargon that distracted me and didn't feel like a Star Wars film. In the first few scenes Storm Troopers ask to see some "Scat Docs" where as in 1977 on Tatooine they simply asked to see Luke's identification. It's a tiny thing. But it shows a gross miss understanding of the Star Wars universe. Put simply in Star Wars R2 D2 just works. In Star Trek we would know exactly how he works.

The score was a huge misstep. By the end of Rogue One you realise that we're are pressing up against the beginning of A New Hope. Ie if the film had gone on a few seconds longer we would have seen Vader give chase to Leia's Blockade Runner. With that in mind there is no excuse to not using the classic themes. Only moments before, Vader stands lightsaber in hand having just cut down a corridor full of rebels. An awesome scene I might add. He stands looking out at the vanishing Blockade Runner. The first few notes of the Imperial March begin and then the last note is different. That is something that can be said of the entire film. Every time it starts to get a little bit like Star Wars, something happens that pulls you out of the experience and the overall feeling is one of frustration. 

While we're on the subject of Vader. This is something that is nearly perfect. Even details like going back to the original helmet mould give Vader a feeling of familiarity that was absent in the prequels. The voice has lost the clean processed edge of Episode 3 and gone back to the more dirty, bassey incarnation of Empire and Return of The Jedi. He looks like Vader, sounds like Vader and is scary once again! Some people have balked at the pun he used but personally that didn't annoy me.

Why in Jabba's slug balls does the Vader scene take place on Mustfar (the only planet without a title card).

In early concept art for ANH Vader had a home planet made of laver with a castle on it. It never made the final film because even Gorge Lucas realised this was a monumentally shit idea. Vader's home looks like his closest neighbour is Lord Salron. 

Just move Vader's scene into the Death Star. It would have had context then. You can see from the trailers that Krennic and Vader did have scenes on the Death Star in the original cut. More of these scenes would have required less of CGI Tarkin.

Vader and Krennic argue aboard the Death Star in an original cut. 

CGI Tarkin - everyone in the industry is patting themselves on the back over bringing Peter Cushing back to life. It's giving me feelings of the Emperors New Clothes. If we tell everyone it's great then people will start believing it. There is no doubt, that without 3D body scans, recreating Tarkin from studying old film and photos is a massive technical achievement! But as good as it - is it's still terrible. The blinking of the eyes, the mouth moving, the teeth. All serve to create feel slightly off kilter and pull me out the scene. Tarkin is introduced with his face reflected in a window. It was amazing, subtle, and the nature of the reflection made up for the glaring imperfections that would be apparent later.

Doesn't he look great?

You could have made the main conflict been between Krennic and Vader about the nature of power. It's clear from the trailer that before the reshoots that they did have scenes together on the Death Star. Finally, Krennic could have been summoned to Tarkin's office. Tarkin tells him that he is taking command. We basically have the same scene that we had in the film but loose the audience of Imperial Officers. Tarkin remains gazing out the window. He's so powerful and confident he doesn't need to look at Krennic. We get a great scene and Tarkin never looks wank. Ultimately we aren't taken out of the scene.

Reusing the fighter pilots from ANH. This bit scares me. Reusing fighter pilots makes total sense. They haven't been killed yet (in the time line). There is every chance they would have been at the battle of Scariff. It's a move I probably would have made as a director. In reality they just feel like cameos and cameos suck. They're a wink to the audience that usually pull you right out of the experience. "Red 5, Red 5" is heard over the comms channel. Isn't that Luke's call sign? But Luke hasn't joined the rebellion yet. Oh I see there was another XWing pilot with the same call sign who died before the battle of Yavin, isn't that clever? No it's boring. It reeks of terrible sequel writing.  At time of writing Screen Rant posted, 15 Cameos you missed in Rogue One. Nah. I didn't miss them. Each was a reminder that I was watching a film based on another, better film. This was for fans, apparently. Why not just concentrate on making your own "stand alone movie" actually stand alone. I'm a fan. That's what I wanted.

Look everyone, it's R2 and Threepo - APPLAUSE! They practically wave at the audience in a momentary scene so jarring it's like trying to floss your anus with barbed wire. I would certainly consider myself amongst the die hard Star Wars fans. That bit wasn't for me. I LOVE R2 and Threepo. Threepo, claims he's not very good at telling stories yet is telling us one of the greatest stories ever told. He's always scared of the situation and on another level the story they're in the process of telling. R2 being brash, always wants to continue with the tale by going forward in the adventure. I happily could have watched this whole film and not missed the droids. They weren't necessary. It wasn't their story. 

I don't like Jyn. It's not Felicity Jones' fault. She did the best she could with what she had. The only chance we have to connect with her is seeing her mother die in front of her and her father be taken away by Director Krennic. The mother's death is utterly inconsequential. It's never mentioned again. 

It's like Martha Wayne. Bruce only ever mourns his parents together or his father. Never gives a toss about his mother.

So that just leaves Jyn's Dad being taken away. Parent/child relationships is Disney's staple diet. My heart strings are about to be ripped out of my chest right? We're supposed to care because it's her Dad. But we never seen what that means. Just one scene with her Dad teaching her how to fix something in the home. Or him teaching her about the world. Maybe we see she has a mechanical aptitude, like her father. Wouldn't that come in handy? Especially if she's going to become a resistance fighter. Give us something special in their relationship that is lost. 

This really is prequel level writing reminiscent of Anakin and Padme. We're supposed to care because we're told they can't be together. Do we care? No, because there is NOTHING in their relationship that makes us want them to be together. This same lack of writing affects Jyn's relationship with Saw Gerrera too. Jyn becomes one of his resistance fighters for a while before he abandons her - we never see this - we are told. If we had seen Saw training a young Jyn. Building on the knowledge her father gave her. Seeing Saw become trusted by her, a surrogate father. Jyn's love for him growing and then him ultimately betraying her. We would have been hurt. We would have understood her reservations when the Rebel Alliance asks for her help to meet him. We should have been with her, wanting her not to go back to this man who can't be trusted.

Consequentially Jyn and Saw's meeting means NOTHING.

I've got no reason to be with the main character and it would have been so easy to fix.

Donny Yen's portrayal  of a blind monk is amusing. Is he force sensitive or just a nutter butter? 

His death is ultimately meaningless too. FILM CRITIC HULK suggested his death would have real weight if - Chirrut Imwe (Yen) walks into the war zone speaking his mantra. Gets shot. While on his knees he reaches out desperately towards the switch...reaching -- SUDDENLY the switch flicks down. Imwe knows the force has answered him and dies knowing his faith hasn't been blind. Wouldn't that have been an amazing moment?? I would have screamed!

This film thinks it has balls because it kills off all the characters, but if you don’t care about them the deaths are meaningless. People often mistake the deaths in Game of Thrones as a reason why its good. That's it at face value but not the whole reason. It's good because they take the time to get you emotionally invested in all the characters then you feel for them. You are worried for them all the time. If they didn't feel there was enough time to do this they could have simply given everyone a specific task on the beach. Then at least when they died it would have affected the plot. I felt nothing for any character except K-2SO.

K-2SO a reprogrammed imperial droid, violent and dry witted. At times a little too much, but he is a stark contrast to the likes of beloved Threepeo and R2. When the first of many laser bolts rip through his chassis I felt myself think oh Christ. He was one of the few characters their was a reason to like. It was superficial, but I felt something.

Star Wars is famous for intercutting several stories in the final act. Return Of The Jedi cut between Han and Leia on Endor, Luke and Vader on the Death Star, and Lando in Space.

The space battle is visually what we have come to expect from Star Wars. Except one thing. There isn't a single person in the space battle that we care about. We aren't with the Rebels because they're Rebels - It's not enough. 

Ben Daniels (Law & Order UK) is one of the finest actors in this film. Criminally underused. They could have made him more prominent... actually scratch that. Make Bodie (the defector) a fighter pilot instead of a freighter pilot. He could still have been on the defence force assigned to Galen Erso's outpost. Put him in the final battle in space. Lets see Bodhi being brave and heroic before sacrificing himself for the greater good.

I find it hard to believe that so many people at Disney made these mistakes. Somewhere on a hard disk Garath Edwards original cut exists.

Death Star plans cleanly made it out of the installation in the original cut

I would pay pure money to see it. I’d wager it was a better film. Supposedly the film was too dark. Firstly, I'll bet it wasn't. Secondly, I would have excepted a consistent tone over the mess of this one. The tone of this film should have been Empire Strikes Back. The strongest Star Wars film. Instead it's all over the place. People are saying it doesn't work because it's a war film. THEY'RE ALL WAR FILMS... wait wasn't this supposed to be a heist movie? Oceans 11 in space? The Dirty Dozen in space? A misfit band of Rebels and thieves coming together to steal plans to the Empire's most feared weapon. I would have paid cash money to have seen that film. 

On the web there are some strange Rogue One apologists. 

"This is just a filler movie" - Fuck you, entertain me!

"They don't want to be too good or it will distract from the main trilogy" - Fuck you, entertain me!

"They're finding their feet" - Fuck you, entertain me!

This is a film for the fans - I'm a massive fan. Fuck you entertain me!

"The acting doesn't have to be good it's Star Wars  - you have $200,000,000 at your disposal, hire someone better to fucking entertain me!

People rightly accuse The Force Awakens of being A New Hope all over again. Those people are correct and there is zero denying it. That was the film that had to play it safe. That was the film that had to remind us that Star Wars could be good again. Despite its glaring comparisons it was charming and entertaining. 

I won't be watching the Han Solo spin off. Coz frankly if they don't care enough, why should I?

Confessions of an Editor

I want to thank director Neil Oseman for inspiring this post. Neil recently wrote a blog discussing our work editing his short Amelia's Letter. I’m immensely proud of our work on the film. You can read his post here. 

It left me thinking about film editing as whole. I joke to my friends that when you boil it down, film editing is just gluing pictures together. What is it about this act which has caused me, a relatively extravert outdoors type person, to spend their entire adult life in doors staring at a computer?

What is it that has kept me fascinated? I’ve missed parties, nights out, conversations, been late for stuff. All because I wanted to make one last tweak. Or to get a scene just right. Perfect even. I’m not a competitive person by nature. But this is the thing I want to be the best at. Something subjective where there can never be a ‘best’ and where, if you’ve done a good job, your work should be invisible. 

I’ve always wanted to make films. Getting hold of a video camera back in the 90’s was easy. Editing - that was hard. You had to record all the sequences of your film in the order you wanted to see them in. If you messed up a take you had to rewind the tape to the exact spot you started the take and record it again. 

There was an alternative. You could get two video recorders. One to play and one to record. This way you could film multiple takes. Choose the one you wanted and record that onto a fresh tape. The timing had to be exact. If you made a mistake you would record over the end of the previous clip. Then you would have to start all over again. 

Now this is where it got geeky.  If you had a computer you could bypass the sound of the camcorder and record sounds from the computer to your film. I had a few disastrous instances early on which my friends still find hilarious to this day. This is where it gets complicated. If you had a friend who was a DJ you could use their mixer to get extra sound channels recorded to your film. This means that you could combine music, sound effects together with your film's original sound. It all had to recoded live. In time with what was happening on screen. If you made a mistake - back to the beginning. 

When I start thinking about all this I wonder if I should have spent more time kissing girls on the mouth. 

If you’d seen my room in the 90’s it was always a mess. On days when I was trying to do this it must have looked like a mad professors lab. Equipment stacked all over the pace. Wires and cables everywhere. 

Seems a bit much doesn’t it? The more conversations I have with editors the more I realise I wasn’t alone.  Everyone had their crazy method of creating their film. 

Then it all changed. One day when I was in 6th Form. A friend of mine came home from college with a piece of software. Adobe Premiere 5. Digital editing software.

It. Was. Magic.

You could take clips and place them in any order. If you made a mistake you could just undo. This felt like filmmaking. If I was’t hooked before - I was now.   

At the time I didn’t realise what was happening in the wider industry. The change that the digital software represented. I was unwittingly part of a new breed of editor. One that would never touch a piece of film, never smell developing fluid, never use a grease pencil. A generation for whom the phrase “left on the cutting room floor,” would only be a metaphor. 

The editors of old worked standing up. Cutting was both a physical and tactile experience. Something you did with your hands. You picked up the film. Found the In Point. Marked it with a grease pencil. Cut it with scissors. Discarded offcuts and adjoined the pieces together with sticky tape.

Not all filmmakers have embraced the change to digital. Spielberg reportedly brought up all the remaining Moviolas editing machines in Hollywood. So he would have spares for the rest of his career.  

This new digital software, referred to as NLE (Non Linear Editing) was conceived from a project helmed by George Lucas. Lucas, himself an editor, felt that computers could be used to organise clips and make the process of editing easier. His company developed the Edit Droid in 1983. A computerised bay that took up an entire room. It was the beginning. Paving the way for all the software to come.  

  

I’m pleased I missed the physical side of editing. I’m terrible with my hands. If editing had been more akin to crafting something with your hands I would have been useless. 

So what is it that keeps me nailed to my computer?

Editing is about context. Its about the image, the image that preceded it and the image that follows it. Its about problem solving, meditation, repetition, focus, play, curiosity, and experimentation. What happens if I put this bit here? How does the meaning of this line change if we see them say it. How will it change if we watch a character react while the same line is said? There is no right or wrong. There is only 'this way' or 'that way.’ Or even more exciting - how can I use this clip in a way it was never intended? Films are littered with creative edit decisions like this. The triumphant Tusken Raider in A New Hope thrusting his Gaffi Stick into the air is a very cheeky piece of editing. The actor originally only raised the stick above his head once. The editor took the footage and rocked it back and fourth to create the illusion that the celebration had gone on much longer. At the end of Serenity Joss Whedon felt he needed to see all the soldiers at the end of the film put their weapons down (something that was never shot). When Joss shouted 'cut' luckily the cameras were still rolling. The actors naturally lowered their weapons. The editor was able to use that portion of the recording in the actual film. 

Its impossible to argue which is the most important element of filmmaking. Ultimately it is a collaborative art. It has been said a film is written 3 times. Once on the page, again during filming and finally in the editing room. 

I never enjoyed directing. A long laborious process. Often I would shoot for the edit. Getting lots of coverage. Offering little direction. Just getting plenty of variation ready for the edit. That is where I would make the film. I’m pleased to say I don’t feel that way any more. I love directing and being on set. It's one my favourite places in the world.

I still get the most pleasure from editing footage I have directed. That will never change. Its why, when pressed, I will always describe myself as an Editor/Director and not the other way round.      

Tarantino and the Death of Cinema

Recently at Cannes 2014 Tarantino made a speech about the death of cinema as he knew it. Our current generation deemed “hopeless” due to our obsession with digital film. He went on to comment that digital projection in cinemas was just television in public. “As far as I am concerned digital projection is the death of cinema.” He continued; “I’m hopeful that we’re going through a woozy, romantic period with the ease of digital, and I’m hoping that while this generation is completely hopeless, the next generation will come out and demand the real thing.”

He did concede that digital equipment is making it easier for young tenacious filmmakers to get their movies made. But questioned why established filmmakers would even bother with digital.

It isn't surprising Tarantino feels this way. It echoes the thoughts of filmmakers like Spielberg and Cinematographers like Wally Pfister.

There is a lot of inherent craft lost by not using film. From a Cinematographers point of view - the greats had to know and understand everything. For example how the colour temperature of the lights would react with a particular film stock. What it would look like without being able to see the results.

Most people don’t know that on a film camera there is no way to see the film being exposed as it is shot. The Director's monitor is only a video feed that is recorded in a separate part of the camera. This is what is used for the Director to see what is happening live and to see playback of a shot. The film itself doesn’t leave the camera until the reel ends. Lets compound the difficulty further. The Camera Operator often does not focus the camera themselves. Cameras are too big. How does the Focus Puller see when a shot is in focus? They don’t. Its done with measuring tapes and experience. No one on set knows weather a shot was in focus until the dailies are screened the next day.

It all sounds crazy doesn't it? This is how films have been shot for close to 100 years.

Digital is different. Results are instant. The monitors are a direct representation of what is happening through the lens. Focus Pullers can have their own mini monitor. There are video villages with all departments seeing exactly what is happening on screen as it is captured.


I would agree; the craft of this classic kind of filmmaking will be lost in time. I’m not sure this is what Tarantino is referring to though. I think he’s talking about aesthetic. This agreement has been going on since digital started to encrouch onto film's turf. This is a different form of the argument. One I have never heard before.

To call digital projection in cinemas "extended television" makes no logical sense to me.

I was lucky enough this week to see Pulp Fiction as part of its 20th anniversary. Not on the beach at Cannes but at my local Cine World. The screen was packed with people. The atmosphere was electric and the film, like a fine wine had only got better with age. People laughed, winced and screamed at this masterpiece of cinema… but not because it was on film. At no point was that a consideration. When it won at Cannes in 1994 everything Pulp Fiction was competing against was shot on film. It didn’t standout because it was a 35mm print. It stood out because it was brilliant. Brilliant dialogue, editing and acting. None of this was enhanced by being shot on film.

Tarantino’s rationale raises a question. All the TV shows that were shot on film - were they in fact cinema? It makes no sense. Are Directors like David Fincher not making cinema because they shoot on RED? Is Roger Deakins no longer an artist because he favours the Arri Alexa?

Tarantino has fascinating insights into cinema but that one left me a little confused.

Now I was going to the cinema to watch Days Of Future Past, but apparently all I was going to do was watch an extended tv show in somebody's living room, but pay for the privilege.  

Six Degrees of Simply Syndicated

Out of the blue this morning I received an invitation to be a guest on Star Base 66. Utterly delighted!
SB66 joined Simply Syndicated right about the time I was getting ready to leave. These two facts are unrelated.

It got me thinking about the old days when the Simply Syndicated Network launched.

2005 feels like a lifetime ago. We were fresh out of university. Richard Smith had been pushing us for ages to do something. Anything. We just weren't sure what to do. Then Rich told us about this new thing that had begun happening with iPods. Now we're talking about a time so early in podcasting that they weren't even listed on iTunes. Apple hadn't caught wind of how their tech was being used. You had to use obscure RSS readers to pick up shows. They all had an underground pirate radio feeling to them.

What kind of show could we do?  Movies. Obviously. But we couldn't afford to go to the cinema each week. That was for people with disposable income and lives. Neither of us had two goats to rub together. So it would have to be a movie retrospective. Films that you knew you should watch but hadn't ever gotten round to. It needs a name. Movies You Should See? offered up Mr Dawson. Craig cemented the silence that followed with a pluck of his guitar string. Thus began MYSS. We began  recording 1 show a week. But who was listening right? It wasn't long before Apple cottoned on to what was happening and introduced a podcasting section to iTunes. We started getting data. Download data. Every week we would check to see if our numbers had gone up. When it got to 499 listeners I was screaming at the number to click over. Climbing the charts on Podcast Alley started to become a regular part of our week. Then when Allison Downing  joined the crew things really took off. For the next 4-5 years we recorded an episode a week of MYSS.

It became an excuse to get together and talk about film. To argue and dissect. Rich became funny. (not quite sure when that happened). I started wearing a t-shirt that had something Rich had said on it.....and other people brought it!?!

9 years later Simply Syndicated boasts its own area in the iTune Featured Providers section. Where  it sits amongst such high ranking company as ESPN, Sky, NASA and BBC. Podcasts from the deepest pits of Genre to the heights of it's Do Ask Do Tell podcast. 1000's of hours of audio, created just for the pure pleasure of it. Shows have had favourable reviews from the likes of Radio Times and The Guardian. Thats enough chest beating. The network now serves as a launch platform for promising new podcasts that might otherwise launch into obscurity.

I stepped away Simply Syndicated in 2009 to concentrate more on making films than talking about them. I've never forgotten the network. Which brings me to the point of this ramble. It wasn't until the invitation from Rick Wihtgar Tetrault this morning that I realised how much Simply Syndicated is still responsible for what I do.

I met my story mentor Adrian Reynolds on the Event Horizon episode of MYSS. "What do you do?" he enquired. "I make films," I replied. "What do you do?" I asked. "I write films" he answered. Little did I know Adrian was the script editor on a film training scheme I was already involved in.

When I look at White Lily, my latest short film, it amazes me how many elements can be traced back to the Simply Syndicated network.

CartBozMan a former Simply Syndicated listener, who started hosting his own shows, hooked me up with Pablo Hoyos - a concept artist at Rocksteady who designed the comet hunter in my film, who linked me with Bob Molesworth who offered original artwork for our KickStarter campaign. Boz is very quickly establishing a solid reputation on the independent film scene as a trusted Gaffer. Onset I think his name was being called more often than mine was!

Nick Long of Turtle Canyon Media, based at Pine Wood, offered their post production services.

The delightful Lori Bauerlein supported me by throwing her hard earned $$s my way.

One morning I was serving people in KRCS my local Apple store when a customer asked me "excuse me but are you on Movies You Should See?" It was an odd moment to say the least. That was a chap called Ashley Carter, a journalist for the Left Lion. He writes excellent film reviews for the publication. We have now become friends and are about to collaborate on our first film together.

Rich flashed the Bat Signal and had me on a few shows to plug the project....

...and of course it was a project written by Adrian Reynolds, who I'd met on Simply Syndicated all those years ago.

White Lily wouldn't have been possible without the support of Simply Syndicated. I'm truly grateful you haven't forgotten me, because I haven't forgotten you.

Movies You Should See crew recording the Lost In Translation episode (2006)

Tristan Ofield & Adrian Reynolds on the set of White Lily (2014) 

Camera crew prepare for the first of many takes

Camera Assistant Oliver Walker and 3rd Assistant Director CartBozman

set up the Sony F35 

Actress Siddhii Lagrutta & Tristan Ofield chat between setups

Actor David McCaffery. Shot lit by NFTS Cinematographer Alistair Little

 Actress Siddhii Lagrutta lit by NFTS Cinematographer Alistair Little

The Crew of White Lily

Left to right Sarah Kelly, Tristan Ofield, Siddhii Lagrutta, Sophia Ramcharan, Heather Jordan, 

Fiona Allardyce, Ahmed Tarek, Adrian Reynolds, Oli Robinson, Ellie Wake, David McCaffrey,

Arti Sharma, Donna Bowyer, Max Crow, Josh Knott-Fayle, Ashley Carter, CartBozMan, Oliver Walker, Alistair Little. 

Photograph by Mike Saunders  

Say What?

For the past several years of reading about directors and actors, whenever they've said something that ticked me I've written it down. Quite unintentionally I've ended up with a bit of a collection that I thought I might share.

Have a limited amount of money but limitless ambition - Danny Boyle

Meeting everyone else's expectations is really just meeting your own - Joss Whedon

Know the script so well you can work of instinct - Anthony Hopkins 

A character comes to a choice where things either get better or they get worse - A. Reynolds

Film making is the art of withholding information - Per Holmes

The power of mystery- the power of what might be - JJ Abrams 

Clarity & Geography - what's going on in the scene? where am I in the movie? - Tom Cruise

Story telling is joke telling - Andrew Stanton

"The cat sat on the mat" is not a story. "The cat sat on sat on the other cat's mat" is

- John le Carrie

As long as it is working, don't cut - Michael Kahn

Whatever character you're playing they are always doing something. They're not just talking. Alive and experience - Tom Hardy

What's the best thing a Producer can do? Fuck off mainly - Ewan McGregor

Always risk, go out onto the edge of the limb of the tree, go out even further till you fall 

- Laurence Olivier 

What happened between the characters birth and page one of the script - Viggo Mortrnsen

All you have to do is ask yourself what frightens you and you'll know what frightens me 

-  John Carpenter 

"Yes and" is the respond to all improvs - Mike Myers 

Work through that 97% of murky abysmal mediocrity to get that 3% which everyone will remember you for - unknown 

8 rewrites - well worth it - Ricky Gervais 

Breaking TV

As the final episodes of, arguably one of the greatest tv series of all time, comes to a close. I found myself wondering how the series managed to be so consistently smart, well written, and challenging at every step. Its been a total joy to be engrossed in a series that I've not been able to predict at any point and has beaten me at every turn. Not knowing who Vince Gilligan was I decided to look on IMDB. Mr. Gilligan's philosophy seems to be similar in nature to that of Aaron Sorkin. Basically you don't need to dumb a show down to get good ratings. You need to make the show better. My research didn't go any further than Vince Gilligan's bio where I came across the following quote.    

"I guess I learned and am in the process of learning that less is more and oftentimes it's a benefit when you don't throw the kitchen sink at it... Especially that you don't make any of your plotting decisions out of fear or desperation. That is an important lesson for anyone to learn, to keep to the story and the characters simple rather than letting it all get away from you in an effort to please what is perceived to be an increasingly attention-deprived audience. The show's either gonna work for you or not. The odds tell you it won't. Most shows don't work. And when they do work, it's kind of like winning the lottery. With Breaking Bad I feel like I pulled the lever at the slot machine, and it came up cherries. If it was something I did, I don't know if I could repeat it. Having said that, in hindsight, my good fortune was that I didn't have the opportunity to go with my first instincts and throw the kitchen sink plot-wise into our first season. If I'd done that, I would have painted myself into some seriously unpleasant plot corners. My general philosophy now more than ever is to give the audience the least possible, which sounds like a weird philosophy, but you want to parcel things out as slowly you can. Of course what that means is, you want to parcel things out as slowly as you can while keeping things gripping and interesting. I don't necessarily believe the conventional wisdom that the audience is more restless than ever and always needs more stimulation. People still like storytelling that can slow down enough to explore characters and examine them closely. I think there's still room for that. Hopefully, that never gets lost completely."

                                                                                                                            Vince Gilligan

It also brings to mind a quote slightly to grandiose to be used in this context. Not to be applied to Breaking Bad specifically, but to the intelligence of your audience.

 "This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. Good night, and good luck." 

                                                                                                                       Edward R. Murrow

Why I want to do a serious scifi in the Red Dwarf universe.

If your relationship with Red Dwarf has been a fairly casual one you'll be forgiven for maybe missing what I'm about to tell you. The RD universe is dense, clever, and has a single through line. Ever notice all the weird creatures encountered in the series were all man made?

By the time we meet David Lister. There has already been a failed age of inter stella travel, a dangerous total emersion video game craze, the Bliss designer drug, genetic wars, and a Simulant uprising.

There are no aliens.

 "For hundreds of years ship full of Astros in stasis we hurled out of our solar system and inter stella travel enjoyed its golden age. The goal of course was that they'd encounter intelligent life. They didn't. Not even a moderately intelligent plant. Not even a stupid plant. Nothing. In all of the universe the planet earth was the only planet with any life forms. That's all there was" 

                                                                                                  - Infinite Welcomes Careful Drivers. 

This is how it goes. In the 3 million years the RD crew have been in deep space. Under the leadership of President Millhouse Nixon the sun has been killed. An ill fated mission to control the weather has cause the sun to destabilise.

The human race has to move. To a new planet in a new solar system. The Mayflower, a seeding ship, is sent to build a new home for the human race. Aboard are Androids, Simulants, and genetic cross breeds of great strength to help terraform the new world and build our cities before our illustrious arrival.   

A batch of Space Corps Marines are onboard too with the human races' most precious cargo. The G.O.D. Protocol.  The sum of all human genetic knowledge. The heart of the mission. 

Every 10 years a marine has a 3 day tour of duty. On his 4th tour LtCol Michael R Magruder (Rimmer's son by Yvonne Magruder) is tricked into releasing a batch of Simbi-morphs into the ship. The Morphs release the Simulants and take over the ship. The Marines wake from hyper sleep but they're out numbered and on the 3rd day defeated. During the fire fight the ship is damaged and crashes into an ocean moon. Eventually the survivors launch the escape pods. The co-ordinates of the Mayflower are written down, torn into sections and split between the genetic races so no-one race can return to the ship and the awesome power of G.O.D within.

In those 3 million years the Mayflower survivors have spread out amongst the stars, settled, and evolved. 

As the Red Dwarf crew head for home it begins to encounter these settlements.

There is just so much scope. We haven't even looked to alternative dimensions yet! 

Smoke me a Kipper I'll be back for breakfast.