Sometimes, A Film Speaks to a Writer, Suddenly

Hey gente, 

Hope all is good in your barrios, calles, y cuadras!  Its been about two weeks since the last blog post and this time the focus isn't just on the "Flash Fiction" we looked at before. NO, this time, we get to take a trip and visit short film (which in a very direct way is Sudden Fiction, but on the screen). 

So let me give your el profe's directive for the week: 

Watch three Films 


 “Anti-Social Network” 


Watch one film not assigned.

Link the non-assigned film and write your thoughts on it, covering characterization, setting, lighting and other elements (props, costume).

You must also refer to assigned film(s).


So, let's get started shall we?

Do me the favor and view at least 2 of the films linked above - you can comment back if you liked them or not, and what caught your attention with the films. So, bueno, the film I decided to discuss is even way shorter than the three above - watch it. 


To start off with, I think what catches my attention first is the "drop zone" the film puts the viewer in - in this case, on the side of the road. A lonely road, isolated and vast- and this sets the tone for the rest of the film. It lines up both the immediate action and the setting in a way that they have to exist together, visually. In photography, this is known as texture - the photographer is able to capture many different contrasting points in the one shot and that speaks volumes. In this case the film open with a young man, alone, pondering, isolated on a lonely road, isolated, in some gloom, or some evening - and it is a long road, perhaps a foretelling of the journey the character will have to endure.  Its cleaver to start this way. The writer kills two birds with the one stone by giving as much "set up" as needed with out a plethora of exposition. 
       The same can be said with the start of the other three films - in Sniffer, the character and his companion live together and she has to bring him down from the ceiling, within the first few moments of the film,  so he won't "float off"  - giving us a recurring element that exists throughout the film. It opens in the bedroom, full of shadow, and at least in both of these cases- there is no dialog, there is just either the theme or the problem that already proceeded the viewers arrival to the film.  

   The other two films, ANTI-SOCIAL NETWORK and NATIVE start the viewer not just in setting per say, in a sequence of actions:  - the semi-control freak in NATIVE comes out of a convenience store having bought something for her self and her lover, yet her lover hadn't asked for anything. She wants to lay down ground rules as she drives, already adding to the tension from the get go. In ANTI-SOCIAL NETWORK - you get a rather comical look at the way one guy interacts with people and events primarily through Facebook. As the story opens, he is "checking in" to someone's funeral, to the dismay of the others in attendance. It is action here that gives the viewer the signal of what the overall plot points might entail. 

I think in terms of how the cinematography goes - I think each film is distinct and reps the theme very damn well. In SNIFFER - there are shadows and gloomy colors that cover the viewer, along with the synchronized moments of the day to day, people walking with weighted boots, trudging along keeping their literal "feet on the ground" but no one looks up. No one looks up, except for the protagonist, who finally unlatches his boots and floats away. 

Ok, I think gave you a bit of what my thoughts were as to the assignment and i hope you guys enjoyed the films - next week, we will pick up with events happening around the HTX and local areas.