If you told Killers from the Osage perspective, the non-Osage audience would directly identify with them.

By keeping Burkhart as the protagonist, Scorsese prevents this.

Then, using the old Cowboys-vs-Indians structure, Scorsese indicts us to show who the actual savages are. Scorsese ends Wolf with a similar accusation.

Three hours of a terrible human and here we are still hanging on every word.

Scorsese uses Leo’s charisma in both films not because Scorsese likes the character.

But, because he wants to show how easily we’d go along with it.

Alright.

Last thread.

This one is on the basics of “shot-reverse-shot”, “single shots” and “over-the-shoulder shots”.

If you’re filming a shot of a person and a shot of who they’re engaged with.

That’s called “shot”/“reverse shot”.





When you’re covering dialogue through shot-reverse-shot, you can do it in “single shots”.

Which is what it sounds like.

A single actor in frame at a time.

To me, that can cause some distance between the characters, in part, because we can’t see how close they are.

That other thread went well.

So, this is a thread on the basics of the zoom and the dolly.

A zoom means the lens moved, not the camera.

A dolly means the camera moved smoothly. But, the lens did not move.

To me, zooms change “information”.

But, dollies change “intensity”. Look at an object across the room.

Think with your eyes for a second.

Imagine that you could zoom in on it and see small details.

You’d feel like you were getting “information”, right?

But, what if you floated towards it?

As if summoned by it.

That might look “intense”.

This thread is for people who are curious about some film basics.

This is a low, Dutch angle two-shot.

That probably doesn’t mean much.

But, here’s why this image feels like it does. That image was a “low angle”.

If the camera is placed low and pointed up, it’s a low angle.

If it’s placed high and pointed down, it’s a “high angle”.

Here’s one.

It looks as if we’re high above Bruce and looking down.

As a result, do we feel more powerful than him?

I’m so baffled at how this didn’t get more attention.

But, there is a screwball noir about two young sweethearts that steal from the wrong family.

It features a hysterical Damon Wayans and a ruthless Pam Grier.

It’s fantastic, called Cinnamon (2023) and is available on Tubi. Also.

This feels like it could’ve easily worked as a Netflix series.

That said, I am truly platform agnostic.

So, if a black director makes a great film on a rock, I will find it.

But, for now, Bryian Keith Montgomery Jr. made a fun ass film and it’s on Tubi.

I went to a friend’s inaugural film festival yesterday and saw a few shorts.

There is one docushort about Jalaiah Harmon and her creation of the Renegade dance

that just plainly shows the explosive potential of black creativity when it is surrounded by deep parental love. Also saw Shayla Racquel and Janeen Talbot’s Robyn Hood (2021).

The tone changes are so well done, it felt like a smooth streetcar changing gears.

You’re in a romcom.
Then, an erotic thriller.
Then, a horror comedy.
Then, just a horror.

I loved Nope (2022) and thought it was Peele’s most personal film and felt like him wrestling with the burden of becoming an Event Filmmaker.

A film about the ethics of capturing the horrific, of exploiting one’s trauma for spectacle.

A devil’s deal with a literal Monkey’s Paw. In the film, all of the horrific consequences come from people attempting to exploit for gain.

Reminded me of where Peele got the name for Monkeypaw Productions.

A “three wishes” short story where wishes are granted but with grotesque interpretations.

Each month that goes by, I like really need the Harvard Business School case study on exactly how a small budget, coming-of-age film about a queer, black boy with no stars made $65 million, won Best Picture and set its distributor up for a multi-billion dollar valuation. This morning, I was looking at box office returns (measured against budgets) for films I really liked this year and Moonlight’s marketing and distribution strategies took a perfect film and just absolutely nailed it somehow.

I’ve been trying to understand what honestly makes me like a movie, and I realized that I like a movie when it feels like consciousness.

I’ve had a hard time explaining that. But, I’ve just found “neurocinema.”

That cinema can mimic consciousness and we respond strongly. Here’s another way to put it.

I think what makes a great director great is that they can take any idea from their head, and somehow Frankenstein it.

The film now feels like it’s alive, aware, sentient.

This is mesmerizing on a neurological level.

In 1936, a 20-year-old director received federal funds to stage an all-black adaptation of Macbeth.

The adaptation was set in Haiti and premiered in Harlem.

Thousands attended.

It received rave reviews and launched the director’s career.

His name was Orson Welles. The foundational director of America cinema got his chance at prominence because of his access to black talent.

This is an American story that has repeated itself an infinite amount of times throughout this country’s history.

The end.

Michaela Coel’s advice to not be afraid to disappear and see what comes from silence, reminded me of some related things I’ve learned from Japanese aesthetic.

Specifically, the concept of Ma (the appreciation of empty space) and Jun'ichirō Tanizaki’s praise of shadows. Ma is the idea that the empty space around a thing has as much presence and meaning as the thing itself.

I always felt that this is why Solange’s wedding photos resonated so much.

They’re together. But, the empty space allowed for them all to have separate visual meaning.

Been thinking about blocking and camera moves.

Specifically, ones that don’t really advance the plot. But, add incredible moments of character.

First one that always comes to mind is this one from GoldenEye.

Pure visual communication of Bond’s essence. The other week someone posted a camera move from Spielberg’s Munich (2005).

Went back and watched it again.

Was blown away by this one.

I took out the dialogue and just put John Williams’ score on it so that the move can be truly appreciated.

A prominent person recently told me that young male actors are hesitant to do rom-coms because they want Serious Roles.

If an actor thinks this, this is the dumbest things I’ve heard.

The female gaze is a Career Maker.

If women are intrigued by you, that will last decades. I read something recently that said the male gaze is interested in women as objects, and the female gaze is interested in men as people.

Ignore if one is more morally correct.

An object’s utility is very specific and short-lived.

A person’s utility is endless and varied.

I wonder if Ronan Farrow’s friends get scared when they see he’s calling.

Bro could be calling me to see if I wanted to have brunch and if I saw his name pop up.

I’d start thinking about all the people I wronged in pre-school. 😐

It was fun tweeting with y’all.

But, I’m actually going to resign from Twitter now.

I’d also like to apologize to my sister.

In second grade, she accused me of liking a girl named Yolanda. So, I hit her and told my mom I didn’t.

That was a lie.

I’m sorry.

I thought The Suicide Squad (2021) was very, very good.

It and Cathy Yan’s Birds of Prey (2021) felt like north stars for how DC can find their footing against Marvel: colorful, funny and brutally violent.

Also, my favorite Idris performance since Beasts of No Nation (2015). It’s always interesting seeing how different directors use identical characters.

I think I went into the film expecting to see Cathy Yan’s messy, barely-holding-it-together Harley.

But, it does feel like Gunn otherwise picked up a lot of tone that Yan put down.

https://twitter.com/bittersonicsfan/status/1424493191391182850

The camerawork at this Verzuz moment was textbook perfect.

Cut to an establishing shot of the crowd and stage.

Center frame Jada to create importance. Styles and Sheek step almost to meet the Rule of Thirds.

The slow zoom grows Jada, hitting Hitchcock’s Rule of Size. The timing is so perfectly synced to the menacing notes of New York.

Then, Jada’s improvisation is so flawless.

But, I love how concepts and theories work best when they’re silently working in the background. But, still hit you viscerally without even naming them.

Fat Joe’s recap of Verzuz is so damn good.

It made me think how a lot of non-actors have incredible range and great directors are able to somehow create contexts for non-actors to showcase it.

As Fat Joe was talking, I kept seeing flashes of the great, Jon Polito. I’ve watched the film and opening scene of Miller’s Crossing so many times.

Jon Polito is mesmerizing.

Someone needs to tell the Coens about Joey Crack, lmao.

I believe whiteness can enable you to act in accordance with racial scripts you might be unaware of.

In my study of street photography, many white photographers knowingly trespass, prioritizing their right to gaze over anything else.

Mark Cohen’s audacity still shocks me.

https://twitter.com/jasminprix/status/1403078739345477639

In Cheryl Dunn’s really great documentary, Everybody Street (2013), she doesn’t ever address how race informs the photographers she interviews.

But, then, the legendary Jamel Shabazz appears and is the first to talk about consent and collaboration.