The Twenty-Four 6 Movement - Let's challenge ourselves again

"I continue to be interested in new things that seem old and old things that seem new." 

-Jaquelin T. Robertson

In 1995, a group of Danish filmmakers started the Dogme 95 Movement, also known as The Vow of Chastity. It was a fixed set of ten rules for filmmakers to follow. The purpose of the movement was to encourage filmmakers to challenge themselves both artistically and technologically, to remember the values of cinema, such as profound narratives and textured characters portrayed by nuanced performances. The rules of the movement caused many filmmakers to utilize standard definition video cameras to capture their films, thereby becoming the first example of the inherent quality of digital video for cinema. This challenge kickstarted many promising careers for many filmmakers including director Lars von Trier (Dancer in the Dark) and cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire). Here are the rules that were laid down by the Dogme 95 Movement. 

This movement inspired me to come up with my own challenge, but for different reasons. 

While the Dogme 95 Movement was intended to encourage filmmakers to "go back to their roots" as it were, by forcing themselves to focus exclusively on story and character, part of what makes the idea so appealing to me is how it also inadvertently showcased the cinematic quality of digital video. Specifically, the video which can be described by some as "low quality." In the years since Dogme 95, digital cameras have advanced significantly. Providing more color data, exposure latitude, and resolution. All of which are incredible, but also have the potential to hamper filmmakers or even encourage laziness. 

The digital age of filmmaking has lead to many beautiful advantages in image quality, color control, and creative options. I have utilized equipment which offers such choices, and I have enjoyed using them, and still do. However, in recent years, I can't help but feel as though the advancements made in technology have been leading to unnecessary levels of hype and unrealistic expectations. To the point where filmmakers, both mainstream and independent, are spending too much time trying to do what they think is expected of them rather than doing what is best for the story they want to tell. 

Not too long ago, I shared an idea with people on a Facebook Group for users of the Panasonic GH5. An advanced video camera which I happen to own and is one of the most favored for digital cinema, mostly due to its highly advanced capture options. I suggested taking on a challenge to shoot some film projects on that same camera but utilizing some of the less-than-advanced options within the camera. Such as a format that was not as detailed or a picture profile that had less exposure latitude. The majority of responses I got from this suggested challenge were so negative and so defensive that I actually contemplated leaving the group. Users within this group were accusing me of encouraging people to deliberately hinder themselves by using "inferior" technology that had no place in modern digital cinema. Even when I clarified that this idea was an optional challenge and not a direct order, everyone continued to hound me as if I had just insulted them and their intelligence. It did not feel like an open and free artistic environment at all much to my disappointment. 

Even so, I continued to consider and draft up my own challenging movement for filmmakers. One that allows total freedom of narrative but encouraged utilizing older tech. Much like how Dogme 95 was intended to remind filmmakers of the values of storytelling, my movement is to tell people of the power of all cameras, not just those built to meet modern standards and expectations. Because when you are forced to believe that cinema can only be achieved when utilizing what is expected by others, then you are hindering yourself by not allowing the possibility of less advanced machines that might be more suited for your budget and story. 

My challenge for modern filmmakers is as follows: 

The Twenty-Four 6 Movement: 

1. The film must be captured in 1080p resolution and no higher.
2. The capture bitrate must not accede 100mbps.
3. LOG is forbidden. Using a picture profile to achieve ample room for color correction such as CIneLike D is acceptable. Also, if able, you are encouraged to create the desired color and exposure style in-camera.
4. The capture color space must be 8-bit 420.
5. The exact make and model of the camera(s) utilized must be credited. Both in the film's credits and in any and all advertisements for the film.
6. External recorders are forbidden.

In case you are wondering, I intend to put this movement to the test very soon. Come this August, I will be participating in the 48 Hour Film Project. A challenge for filmmakers to make a short film in just two days. I have done this challenge before many times and have always utilized the advanced capabilities of my GH5. This year, however, I intend to go a little old school by using an older but beautiful Panasonic camera, the AG AF100. One of the earliest digital video cameras built for cinema.

I look forward to seeing how it will all unfold. I hope you are as well. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Crawl - Wally Gator is angry

Crawl is what I like to call a "Lazy Sunday Movie." It's a simple premise about humans vs. nature starring two talented actors playing characters whos circumstances thematically linking their personal life drama and inner demons which they must now confront and resolve to survive a life-threatening situation greater than themselves. It's quick, simple, to the point, well crafted, and entertaining throughout its ninety-minute runtime. Beyond that, there's really not much else I can say about the movie other than it's an excellent film to play on a lazy Sunday when there's not much to do or while you're killing time waiting for the Lazaniga to cook. That's not to say that the movie is terrible, just too simple. If nothing else, it's a great way to fill in the time for hardcore horror fans while they wait for Doctor Sleep to come out. 

Taking place in Florida amid a massive hurricane, the story follows a young competitive swimmer named Haley (Kaya Scodelario) who is unable to reach her father Dave (Barry Pepper) and is concerned at the possibility that he hasn't evacuated from the upcoming flood. So she drives to her old childhood house in search of her dad only to find him wounded and unconscious in the basement. As she attempts to drag her dad back out to the car, she is suddenly confronted by a massive Alligator and is unable to escape. Making matters worse is once her father wakes up, she learns of his broken leg. On top of that, the water is getting higher flooding the basement, and even if they do find a way out, there's a whole family of Alligators just swimming around the neighborhood. Now, Haley must face the elements to save both herself and her dad, and in doing so, reconnect with her father and her true self. 

Setting aside the one major issue with the movie, namely that most houses in Florida don't have basements since the area is either at or under sea level, this is a solid film. It does an excellent job at maintaining tension, raising the steaks, and providing a straightforward yet compelling narrative with sympathetic characters. Jump-scares are few and far in between and utilized in the best way possible. 

What makes a movie like this work is the cast. The two leads are talented and capable actors who succeed in selling every moment. Kaya Scodelario especially delivers a compelling performance on par with the likes of Daisy Ridley, and I look forward to seeing her again in future films. 

The film gets a ton of bonus points for merely being a story set in water. Anyone who has ever worked on a movie set with tons of water can tell you that it is not an easy thing to accomplish. While general things like cast & crew comfort and safety as well as the equipment security are typical aspects of filmmaking, when putting together a movie in water, it is all made ten times more challenging. When you consider all that has to be done to prevent things like the cast getting hypothermia from being wet all day, keeping the equipment from getting wet and damaged and the hundreds of thousands of gallons of water required to flood the whole set, it becomes an ordeal just to get through a single day of shooting. Every person involved in this film gets all the bonus points for taking on this challenge, and they deserve a medal. 

While Crawl may not be the next greatest blockbuster this summer as the marketing would have you believe, it is still a decent flick that is sure to please both horror fans and anyone else looking for proper use of free time. If nothing else, it is undoubtedly a better option than seeing a complete retread of an animated classic but with a fresh coat of photo-realistic paint. 

*COUGH* The Lion King *COUGH* 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Maybe. 

Is it worth seeing in theaters? 

Maybe. 

Why? 

While it is decently entertaining, and the overall production value is admirable, I would not say that it's completely worthy of full theater price. See it at a matinee or wait for the video. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you all for reading. 

Spider-Man: Far From Home - Far from perfect but still fun

I may have mentioned once or twice on this blog that Spider-Man is my absolute favorite superhero of all time. Aside from the cool outfit and out-of-this-world superpowers, Spider-Man is probably the most human of superheroes. His relatability and sympathetic personality make it easy to root for him in most situations. Also, he's not afraid to crack the occasional joke or two, thereby providing a little levity when needed. The best incarnation of the character in recent years has to be the video game released back in September for the PlayStation 4, while the worst has to be Sony's previous attempt at a rebooted solo series (The Amazing Spider-Man films starring Andrew Garfield) before they finally joined forces with Marvel. This brand new iteration of the character both here and in the previous movie, Spider-Man: Homecoming, is...okay. It's not revolutionary, nor is it dull, but somewhere just above the middle line. At the very least, I did not feel as though my time was wasted. 

The story takes place a few months after the events of Avengers: Endgame. With the loss of Tony Stark, aka Iron-Man, people are starting to wonder if Spider-Man (Tom Holland) will take up the mantle since Tony had taken Spider-Man under his wing. But Spider-Man, aka Peter Parker, doesn't want to worry about that right now, as he's about to go on a vacation through Europe with his science class, where he hopes to confess his feelings to the girl he likes, Mary-Jane (Zendaya). However, things get derailed rather quickly as Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) informs Peter of a dire situation on their hands and they need his help. Turns out some strange monsters have been popping up all over the world. To combat the threat, they are joined by a new hero named Mysterio (Jake Gyllenhaal) who claims to be from another dimension where he fought these monsters before and lost. Now, Spider-Man must balance his personal desires with his responsibilities all the while having to save the world in the process. No pressure, right? 

Watching Spider-Man: Far From Home is like eating another piece of the same Chocolate Cake you have in the kitchen. It's technically the same Cake, but it's just another part of it, only differentiated by the date of its consumption and the number of sprinkles on top depending on where you sliced it. It's still very much enjoyable and tasty, but you had a piece of it just the other day, so it's not quite as nuanced as it was before. This is not to say that the movie is terrible, only too familiar. While the previous film, Spider-Man: Homecoming, was an enjoyable movie, what prevented it (and by extension, today's film) from becoming a genuinely great iteration of the character, at least to me, was how hard it was trying to be funny. Don't get me wrong, moments of levity is expected in Marvel films, and Spider-Man is no stranger to the occasional quip or apt line of dialogue when facing off an enemy, but both movies feel like they're trying too hard to up the amount of silliness. To an almost (no pun intended) ridiculous degree. Granted, Marvel has gotten better at toning it down in other movies, but one might think that after winning over audiences with the first new Spider-Man film, the guys at Marvel would feel confident enough to reign it in and do something different with the next movie. Sadly, that is not the case here. 

Despite the second movie feeling too much like the first, Spider-Man: Far From Home is still an entertaining movie in its own right. Mostly because all the players involved are just as excellent as you would expect. Tom Holland is a fantastic Spider-Man/Peter Parker, as he not only nails the look and physicality but the general personality. Holland has also proven himself recently as a genuinely capable actor, so I have no doubt that he will continue to grow as Spider-Man. Also, as you would expect, Samuel L. Jackson is an ever-appreciated presence in the Marvel movies, or indeed in any film. I can watch this man read the phonebook on stage and have the time of my life. 

However, the MVP award, at least in my opinion, has to go to Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio. Not only does Jake Gyllenhaal play the part well, but he also succeeds in being a more interesting villain in a Marvel film. As I mentioned in my review for Black Panther, the villains in Marvel movies up until then had been mostly one dimensional. Serving as little more than a means to advance the plot. It wasn't until Black Panther, as well as Spider-Man: Homecoming, that the villains started to become more textured and even understandable without really being relatable. While comic book fans will likely already figure out what Mysterio is really up to, I have to give credit to the film for genuinely misdirecting me. Also, Jake Gyllenhaal plays the role with such conviction and likable charm, that you can't help but enjoy his company and believe his story. 

While I personally would have liked the movie more if it was a little different, I still enjoyed it for the excellent adventure that it was. Maybe later down the line, Marvel and Sony will produce another Spider-Man film that actually adds some texture to the character and his world aside from how much more comedy they can try to force into any given scene, but until that time, what we have is still enjoyable as ever. Also, in case you're wondering, there are two post-credit scenes, and they are both significant. Be sure to stick around for them. 

Is this movie worth seeing? 

Yes. 

Is it worth seeing in theaters? 

Yes. 

Why? 

Even though I would have preferred a little less comedy, it is still a blast with great action, fun characters, and solid acting all around. If you need a superhero fix, this is the one for you. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you very much for reading.