![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Anticipation fatigue - only two weeks left until I see Ciro, but I've used up all my excitement and patience. I have no airport-meeting-and-afterward fantasies left; they've worn thin from overuse. I'm down to the dregs of my tolerance and oh they are bitter.
Watched parts of Moulin Rouge and Derailed today, after months of pre-1960s films; the cutting rate is so fast. Shots average under two seconds. It seemed absurd; the class couldn't stop giggling. I felt like Emperor Joseph II.
We screened the "Embers" rough cut in the afternoon, along with a few other rough cuts. It's already highly polished; it's fairly clear that "Embers" is one of the two best technically executed films. As a result, the teachers are harder on it, picking on tiny nuances of performance. Whereas the other films are criticized as student films, our film is criticized as an art film. The gloves are off. There are questions like: yes, this is a film about the stillness of grief and the impact of small touches, but is it right that it be shot in a way that is still and close? Should stylized subject matter be paired with a stylized shooting style*? Is the strong composition of the shots too beautiful and thus distancing? Romie, we would maybe like this film more if we were allowed to punch you in the face a few times?
I understand what they are doing, and that it is the right thing for them to be doing, but I also want to kill them. Not that it's much better to be so suddenly popular with the students, with whom I now have dozens of inside jokes, and by whom I am sought out for my opinion on subjects of which I have no special knowledge. Which makes it sound like I don't like the students, who I do like, and like the jokes, and I don't know why I'm bothered by everything everything everything.
I wish I could print myself on one side of a coin, and Ciro on the other, and then spin the coin so quickly that we seem to occupy the same space. I wish I was already home.
*Yes, I know. But there's no better way of putting it. The sad thing is, I don't ever set out to be stylized; it's just how I see stuff. I can't really not do it.
Watched parts of Moulin Rouge and Derailed today, after months of pre-1960s films; the cutting rate is so fast. Shots average under two seconds. It seemed absurd; the class couldn't stop giggling. I felt like Emperor Joseph II.
We screened the "Embers" rough cut in the afternoon, along with a few other rough cuts. It's already highly polished; it's fairly clear that "Embers" is one of the two best technically executed films. As a result, the teachers are harder on it, picking on tiny nuances of performance. Whereas the other films are criticized as student films, our film is criticized as an art film. The gloves are off. There are questions like: yes, this is a film about the stillness of grief and the impact of small touches, but is it right that it be shot in a way that is still and close? Should stylized subject matter be paired with a stylized shooting style*? Is the strong composition of the shots too beautiful and thus distancing? Romie, we would maybe like this film more if we were allowed to punch you in the face a few times?
I understand what they are doing, and that it is the right thing for them to be doing, but I also want to kill them. Not that it's much better to be so suddenly popular with the students, with whom I now have dozens of inside jokes, and by whom I am sought out for my opinion on subjects of which I have no special knowledge. Which makes it sound like I don't like the students, who I do like, and like the jokes, and I don't know why I'm bothered by everything everything everything.
I wish I could print myself on one side of a coin, and Ciro on the other, and then spin the coin so quickly that we seem to occupy the same space. I wish I was already home.
*Yes, I know. But there's no better way of putting it. The sad thing is, I don't ever set out to be stylized; it's just how I see stuff. I can't really not do it.
