Earlier this year, like many others, I submitted scripts to the Curtin Film Students; three scripts proved to be of interest: Ashley Barron liked "Die Bruicke" and asked to privately develop the project further so it was taken out of contention. Christina Yiannakis was interested in "Overtime' and Annabelle Fouchard was interested in "Surf Saver". Both scripts were shortlisted and I was required to pitch them to the film-making teams.
Although the Curtin Pitch Session was run very professionally and many seemed to enjoy the process, my general view of 'pitching' is negative. I will freely admit to loathing the pitching process - I would much rather just chat to those interested and not have to run the gauntlet of those obviously not interested in the idea from the synopsis already presented in the brochure.
Perhaps tainted by Hollywood negatives, I find the whole process of the formal 'pitch' devaluing and degrading to writers and an obvious opportunity to make them squirm; another chance to reinforce the 'director/producer is God' ethic.
I would far rather send out my synopsis and talk to those interested in the concept on a one to one basis, as equals, with a small group of filmmakers. I'm not interested in converting the uninterested with a side-show of over the top performance and making a spectacle of myself.
Generally the writer is forgotten as soon as a producer or director finds the script they want to make. Understandably they run with it, but in the running, they often forget that without that script; they wouldn’t have a track on which they and their team can place one foot in front of the other to reach the finishing line together.
So I am very grateful to Christina Yiannakis for remembering me and sending the invitation and notice of the screening of the films made this year by the 3RD year Curtin Film Students of 2007 at the Astor Cinema last week.
I thoroughly enjoyed the whole session and as will so often happen at Perth student screenings; was once again very impressed with the standard of production. Generally all were acted and filmed to a high standard and I expect to see them nominated for various festivals and awards next year. It will also be very interesting to watch these names and see how they fare outside the rarified and supportive halls of university.
As a humble screenwriter, I offer the following personal and hopefully constructive comments in order of their program, from only one totally enjoyable screening:
“Amity”
Producer: Jim Tham
Directed: Eugene Seng
Writer: ??? By not naming the writer, it appears the writer is not valued.
MY COMMENTS: Generally, this production was well executed from both an acting and production point of view but lacked depth of story even though the blond and very appealing barman tried hard to engage us. Why tell it? After pitching at Curtin, I knew the high standard of stories on offer. In this screening, only three of the stories pitched were produced, this was not one of them. So I am interested in what made the unrequited love scenario stand out for this director? What was he trying to say over and above the ‘my heart is broken’ theme? As audience, I didn’t learn anything new or different about the entirely relatable characters even though we got to know them a little, I was not satisfied. This incident wallowed in the egotistical and familiar. Perhaps that was the intention; perhaps the eye candy was enough for others but I wanted and expected more.
“THE CATCH”
Produced by Kealey Nutt
Written by Kenta McGrath
Directed by Will Faulkner.
MY COMMENTS: This film was interesting and smacked of originality. Again, the acting was entirely credible with the young fisherman admirably shouldering more than his fishing line, in fact the whole film, so well done! The production values were (mostly) invisible (usually a good thing) when perhaps we needed a couple of tricks to add to ‘an eerie and surreal mood constantly lingering’ stated in the program. Unfortunately, it just wasn’t there for me until the fish appeared!
I did constantly wonder why the boy was out in the middle of no-where with a fishing rod but presumed the water was just over the hill and he was lost. Feeling unsettled and continually questioning as the story progressed because of the places it could have gone but didn’t, I found myself accepting each plot point but ready to move on ~ even though they seemed to take forever.
In my humble opinion this film would have benefitted from a strong edit (shortening the scenes- half the film-time) therefore getting to the punch-line quicker. It also needed more eeriness and surrealism added. Although, when it finally did unexpectedly arrive, it successfully shocked the audience and the reaction was tremendous!
“COME ON PILGRIM”
Produced by Chloe Donaldson
Written and Directed by Louis Legge
MY COMMENTS: Another original approach with excellent characters we as audience, grew to know and empathize strongly with. I suggest the pace of this film was excellent. To my mind, the makers took exactly the right time to tell this very interesting observation of human fragility. The pace was gentle allowing the audience to get up really close and personal. The carrot of suicide was dangled, then moved forward, then dangled, and moved forward, taking us with it, every time.
I liked how the actors were rehearsed and used clothing to illustrate a closeness which in a male environment is not traditionally obvious. There were many evocative touches in a story with stated and rightly perceived limits and timelines, making the audience feel comfortable with their expectations of a conclusion. This is clever writing and directing, which invites participation by an identified and valued viewer, paying them the ultimate compliment of acknowledgement for their participation. I would suggest this very talented writer and director should be watched closely in the future.
“THE FLYER”
Produced by Joanne Trethowan
Directed by Whitney Richards
Written by ??? (Again the writer appears unimportant.)
MY COMMENTS: A deceptively simple story told in a relatable way using the predominant theme of the night: killing - either yourself or others! Again, very well acted and filmed using some interesting angles, lingering lovingly on the young lad making for an emotive treatment. The story had enough to keep the audience involved even though the outcome was expected, it still satisfied the viewer. A sweetly poignant telling handled with tender care.
“FLOWERS FOR EMILY”
Produced by Lana Roberts
Directed by Annabelle Fouchard
Written by Leonie George
MY COMMENTS: I must firstly, declare having read an early version of the script as it was written by a friend then also say I am aware how many changes were suggested. But the original core story remained even if the final treatment didn’t always pay full value to its potential.
Having a consultant with connections to the Police on set, added a tremendous authenticity to the production and was fully utilized. Again, this was filmed and acted well but somehow, (perhaps in the pace and certain details), didn’t always ring true for me, particularly the scene where the detective friend watched the detective father attacking the suspected murderer. I am well aware my judgement is tainted by reading the original script so perhaps my expectations were skewered. And I need to remind myself these films were produced by students, because the standard was much higher than expected.
“WHY THE LONG FACE?”
Produced by Christina Yiannakis
Written and Directed by Kirsten Robb
MY COMMENTS: I have to say, this was my absolute favourite of the night. I felt for this lonely lad on his birthday and saw myself in familiar situations as the trying-hard-to-please-her-socially-inept-son mother. The whole production felt fly-on-the-wall; like we were invited but nobody knew we were there!
I particularly enjoyed these actors; all of them were strong and authentic, completely inhabiting the characters and I laughed loudly with the audience. Only a good script and a director with a clear vision can achieve such excellent performances from their cast and crew.
The very well dressed and authentic set made me wonder whose house it was and if, they would own up to it… the pink flamingos; the rehearsed scenes which worked excellently on screen, all contributed to a most enjoyable film.
Kristen, the director had complete control and kept bringing the audience back to Nathan and his feeling of isolation.
And how nice to end on a bright note! It was the only film which didn’t fit the theme of killing yourself or someone else even though I thought it might go that way when Nathan was up on the roof. But then I remembered, my brother used to like sitting up there too – it made him feel superior even though he was the youngest in the family. See how much the film involved me, as audience?
Yes, Kristen too is a talent to be watched closely in the future.
Thanks to the staff for a most enjoyable evening of watching the bright young talent flowing out of the doors at Curtin.
I’m going to the TAFE screening in a couple of weeks and if last year’s films are any measure, I know I’m in for another very entertaining, surprising and inspiring night.
