Is Filmmaking About StoryTelling Or The Gear You Use?

[Juno]

double post.

[mattias]

that's a non question. the gear is part of the storytelling.

/matt

[namke]

... but why does a film have to have a story (as I think has been mentioned before)? and as for the equipment, one person's fuzzy image is another's artistic interpretation (cf. Lomography - making an art form out of the defects!)

So. My answer:

neither

john..

[Juno]

that's a non question. the gear is part of the storytelling.

/matt

Good point. If you want the story without the gear then just use pencil and paper or a computer and write a novel! Then you won't have to worry about camera gear. Using motion picture film to tell a story means that you have chosen to tell a "visual story" and the word " visual" comprises many elements. There are many ways to tell a story but when you tell a visual story with film you have accepted certain requirements in that process.

[Juno]

... but why does a film have to have a story
john..

Another good point. As I pointed out before, some people shoot film just because they like the way it looks. They don't necessarily shoot a scripted story. They just shoot reality as it is.

[VideoFred]

It depends on what you understand by 'filmmaking'

Some people are shooting film just for the fun using real film equipment.
In this case, the story does not matter too much. Then you can film whatever you like, without any story.
But very boring for non-film-technical-freaks.

But if you go to a festival or if you watch a specific film on your TV, then you expect a story of cource. For those kinds of films the story is more important, but I agree good (used) gear is still important to make a better film of the story..

Personal, if I watch a film I like to be 'in' the story within the first 5 minutes, sometimes even from the very first scenes.

Fred.

[lastcoyote]

That's a pretty tough one. When I first buy my camera, I was boiling my blood to head, and swear to make a short film. And I went to everywhere with my camera. Filming this filming that filming the dead animal, filming the cloud, filming the rain, filming the dumped car, filming the huge dog's dropping, filming giant birds...

But then want to film a story, then I made some, some are bad... some are not that bad... never had a good one.

But everytime either buy a new camera or some cool stuffs... want to film something again.

End up have a bunch of reels that have dead animals, cloud, rain, dumped car, huge dog's dropping and giant birds... meaningless stuffs enough to make a cheap version of Jurassic Park. But I'm still vote for story making.

[VideoFred]

stuffs enough to make a cheap version of Jurassic Park.

Well... here you have your story

Fred.

[lastcoyote]

stuffs enough to make a cheap version of Jurassic Park.

Well... here you have your story

Fred.

See... exactly Fred!

[MovieStuff]

I think it is kind of like shooting guns versus collecting guns. I had a friend that used to collect guns but never really shot them. He liked the mechanics and design aspect of the guns in his collection. Really beautiful craftsmanship to behold, regardless of one's position about the usefulness of guns, etc. I also know another guy that likes to shoot and is an ace marksman but has no colllection and really could care less about the history or design of any gun other than the single one he owns to compete with in tournaments. And there are those that are into the history, design, accuracy, handling of all guns because they enjoy both the shooting aspect as well as the craftsmanship.

I used to be really into the technology of film making and the more I could surround myself with the hardware, the more secure I was, even if my end product was somewhat lacking. I think I was more of a camera collector than a camera shooter. I can remember having a really tricked out Elmo 1012 with the 200 foot mag, a bellows mattebox, external battery pack, remote cable, 8mm Magtrack recorder and jumbo fluid head tripod. I would lug that godam thing around from place to place and, while it looked really cool, it was too impractical to shoot with quickly. As time went on, I lost the mattebox, then the 200 foot mag, then the battery pack, recorder, etc. Ultimately, I switched over to a Canon 1014E with a rubber lens hood and a cheap Velbon tripod and really started cranking out footage that we just looped the sound on later. I still apprciate the technology of film making but I recognize that it is transient and always changing. I just tend to use whatever is needed for the job at hand rather than get too hung up on "owning" a collection of hardware that I end up talking about more than using.

I realize that does not answer the question posed in this thread but I will simply say that the more I learned about my craft, the less I found the need for hardware as a fashion accessory.

Roger

[VideoFred]

but I will simply say that the more I learned about my craft, the less I found the need for hardware as a fashion accessory.

Roger

Exactly!
Very often it's not the equipment, but what you do with it.

Very often less=more.


Fred.

[timdrage]

End up have a bunch of reels that have dead animals, cloud, rain, dumped car, huge dog's dropping and giant birds... meaningless stuffs enough to make a cheap version of Jurassic Park.

Haha, I'd pay to see that version!!!

[audadvnc]

This thread, and the entire Internet, is people telling stories to each other. Here, we are telling the Hero's Journey through the land of moving pictures and its mechanical/electrical denizens.

Take a look at Roger's last post - " I used to be really into ... I can remember having ... As time went on, I lost ... I recognize it is transient ... I tend to use ... rather than getting hung up on ... the more I learned... the less I found the need for ..."

He's just told a journey story, one that is familiar to many of us following similar paths. Posts by others are full of drama and conflict, the colliding viewpoints and ideas, clashing egos of titans and dwarfs, or the fond remembrances of simpler, happier times.

And it didn't cost them a dime. Writing posts on the Internet reaches hundred or thousands of people and is about the cheapest way to tell a story there is, and is certainly cheaper than shooting a film about it.

So talk on about filmshooting, it's free - and don't shoot film, it's too expensive.

[studiocarter]

Damn the expense, 24fps ahead!

[Tom Ballard]

The gear should compliment the story, but great gear isn't going to turn a bad story into a good one. If that was the case, the 400 or so films that Hollywood turns out every year would all be works of art. They do, afterall, use the finest gear available, yet the majority of their movies suck.

A good plot will keep an audience focused on the story. Plot driven stories don't ordinarily require the scope of gear that action driven stories do. Action driven stories require considerably more gear- more cameras, cranes, dollys, etc... to keep the audience moving with the film.

If you like action flicks and the action is well captured with good gear, then the story need not be so important, but the gear is extremely important.

If you like plot driven flicks, then the gear is not so important, but the story had better be damned good.

There's no right or wrong answer to which is more important- story or gear. It depends upon the type of film being made.

Tom Ballard