11:11's plot is an inverted variation of the Dorothy Dandridge story but without quite as much melodrama.
Committing to writing and directing backwards is like tying your hands behind your back before you sit down to the task. But after it's over you get to write and shoot in a 'conventional' manner and that makes it so much easier for everyone. Convolutions of plot and dialog are suddenly much easier for your audience to follow and the obvious myriad production challenges go poof; but backwards has its own rewards so I went for it.
Cool imagery still compels, even as our screens grow smaller and smaller. As a film editor, I constantly run my footage (digital video once it's in the Avid) in many directions and speeds. The genesis of the idea emerged from a love of backwards imagery, silent movies, foreign film etc. As we say in the cutting room, K.I.S.S. - keep it simple stupid. (Good advice for a cutter but not for a politician informing international policy.)
It was gratifying watching 11:11 in a crowd. Hearing laughs in the right places and witnessing everyone snapping into backwards thinking was great. It screwed the next festival film screening though. That film was narratively challenging. It switched from past to present and from differing points of view and realities. I tend to prefer non-linear flourishes in my narratives. Good recent example - The Constant Gardner. But anyway, I heard people in the audience muttering. "I can't get this... I'm still thinking backwards from that last film."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment