Microcinema Flashback - Godzilla vs. Bin Laden (2002)

September 11, 2001 changed the world. It changed everything.

One of the more important areas which were effected were public sensibilities to the military and to mass destruction. Still healing from the wounds of the tragic events from the year before, I talk about how Hollywood would have to change with the times in order to remain relevant.

*****

Godzilla vs. Bin Laden: The Re-Evaluation of the Hollywood Blockbuster (2002) July
By Pete Bauer

I took my daughter to the local public library the other day and found that they had recently added DVDs to the things one could check out. I wasn't in the mood for anything thought provoking, I wanted some mindless drivel. It had been an extremely long work week and I needed some mental down time. So, I picked out one of the biggest, expensive and unsatisfying examples of Hollywood drivel I could find, 1998's GODZILLA.

Ever since the terrible events of 9/11 I've been wondering how that would spill into the public's cinematic appetite. Since that day, I had not seen an abundance of philosophical changes coming from Hollywood (Sum of All Fears, Collateral Damage), so I wondered if anything had really changed. I wondered if something as truly horrifying as what happened in New York and Pennsylvania last September was going to have any lasting impact on the movie-going audiences. I thought that, if America had not truly lost its soul over the past 200 years, we would, as a people, no longer need the irrelevant fluff we so eagerly purchased from the media outlets previously in order to fill our lives. That films, television and books would some how take on a more meaningful purpose. I was afraid to think that our decades of excess living in a land where generations had lived with a war-less history, that we would have lost ourselves irrevocably to the baser urges of mankind.

And then I watched GODZILLA.

It was while watching this super-fictional attack on the New City of the north that I finally noticed the stark differences between "what was" and "what is" after 9/11. There was no escapism for me in watching a monster destroy people-filled buildings, or the military flying through the city in a desperate attempt to save human lives. And the jokes of the political ramifications of a Mayor ordering the evacuation of the city now seem so hopelessly out of place... almost offensive when considering what Mayor Guiliani dealt with when real-life terror impacted his city.

What used to be found as amusement or flights of fancy, such as destroying skyscrapers or blowing up well known landmarks, are now so morally inappropriate, so misplaced, so hollow and weak that it cemented in me how the world had truly changed. Prior to that awful day we were so distant from true life horror that it took a gigantic monster destroying a larger than life city to merely whet our appetite. Now, it's almost embarrassing to think that anyone would find such a story entertaining.

Years of the consistent devaluing of human life, of adding body count for cinematic impact instead of layering the true human stories that fill each of those dead bodies, culminated in the fact that we thought of it as nothing very important to watch a monster wreak the largest of body counts, for people to be stomped on like insignificant bugs. And that the killing of men and women serving in the armed forces was somehow an effective punch line.

Oh, how things have changed.

Does that mean there should be no more monsters in the movies? Of course not. But, what I hope it means is that America, and perhaps the world, are more in touch with the substance of their existence and to expect more from their escapism... to layer the stories with a touch of humanity as well as entertainment... that we have moved permanently above the expectation that the highest we should expect from our entertainment is the lowest form of our existence.

At least, I hope so.

Microcinema Flashback - The Hollywood Recycling Center - One Man's Classic is Another Man's Paycheck (2002)

From May 2002...

Imitation may be a sincere form of flattery, but in Hollywood, I think it's simply a shortcut to payday.

*****

The Hollywood Recycling Center - One Man's Classic is Another Man's Paycheck
By Pete Bauer

When you're pounding your head, trying to think of new story ideas, does it ever feel like that you have nothing new to offer? That the idea in your head is really just a re-tread of an existing film? Don't worry. This happens all the time. Sometimes, new ideas are hard to come by, even for the most lauded of screenwriters. Take Robert Towne. Here's a guy who's written some of the most important, critically acclaimed films in the history of Hollywood. He's written or helped write such films as Chinatown, The Parallax View, Marathon Man, The Two Jakes, Tequila Sunrise, The Firm and many more. He's also written two of my favorite recent films, Mission: Impossible 1 & 2. Just a few weeks ago I rented both MIs on DVD, watched and enjoyed them both. Then, last night, I plopped in one of my all time favorite films, a film that I had not seen in years... Alfred Hitchcock's Notorious. I was stunned to find out I was actually watching the original Mission: Impossible 2. Let's look at the similarities:

The stories revolve around government agents (Cary Grant in Notorious and Tom Cruise in MI2) who are asked to get to know a woman, a non-agent (Ingrid Bergman in Notorious and Thandie Newton in MI2), whom the government wants to enlist to assist them in a critical mission. Both agents quickly fall in love with these beautiful civilian women before they are told the specifics of the mission. As part of their job, both women are asked to rekindle an old relationship with an ex-lover (Claude Rains in Notorious and Dougray Scott in MI2) and must even agree to sleep with them, if necessary. Both ex-lovers are men who were desperately in love with these women previously, to the point that their partners (Leopoldine Konstantin, who plays Rains mother in Notorious and Richard Roxburgh in MI2) fear they are clouded by their lust and love when their old flames suddenly reappear back into their lives.

Once undercover, both women agree to meet with the agents for the first time at a horse race, where the ex-lover watches them from afar, then approaches them just as the agent leaves. Both women are successful at their espionage (Bergman gets the key to the wine cellar in Notorious, Newton picks the flash disc from Scott's pocket in MI:2). However, both women make a slight, critical error (Bergman doesn't get the key back on the key chain in time, Newton slides the disc back into the wrong pocket) which arouses suspicion in the ex-lovers. Once the men verify the women are traitors, they are unable to tell their cohorts in crime for fear of repercussion (more so in Notorious than MI:2). Both women are then poisoned (Bergman by the tea she drinks, Newton by injecting herself with a virus) and both agents must come to their rescue and save them before the poison kills them. Both of the women are saved from their missions in the nick of time by the agents, whom they love and who love them. MI:2


Stunning.

If there were only a few similarities, it would be different, but the first half of both movies are almost identical. The climaxes vary widely due to the style of the directors (Hitchcock and Woo), but the storylines are identical. The only major difference in both stories is that Grant, when he finds out what Bergman must do on her mission, refuses to admit his love for her. Where as in MI:2, Cruise makes a point to tell her that he'd rather her not take the mission because of his feelings for her. Hitchcock's love story is much stronger because it adds an entirely different level to the story. Grant's and Bergman's relationship is brutal at times and you want her to know that he really loves her just as bad as you want her to complete her mission and get out of there. But, beyond that and the directorial styles, the films are nearly identical.

Even though I think we need to tell the most compelling, unique stories possible, when Hollywood recycles, it also includes their screenplays (I won't even get into the whole Casablanca vs. Barb Wire fiasco). So, the next time you come across a great idea that may not have been all that original, remember that HOW you tell your story appears to be more important than WHAT your story is about. If someone as truly talented as Robert Towne can, maliciously or not, turn Notorious into MI:2, then you can certainly turn your favorite film into something uniquely your own.

How about Raging Bull as a sci-fi musical? Or Citizen Kane as a sitcom starring Gary Coleman? Or The Sound Of Music Television. And I'm sure Towne won't mind if I turn Chinatown into Universal Soldier VIII! After all, a man has to make a living.

Microcinema Flashback - Defining Your Style (2001)

In the early phases of the microcinema revolution there were a lot of film makers who made films for the sole purpose of making them, but with no other artistic goal. I would be hard pressed to find the difference between one filmmaker and the next because most of them simply plopped their camera on a tripod and started shooting.

So, in November of 2001, I try to inspire new film makers to try not only to tell a story, but to tell an artistic one as well.

*****

Defining Your Style
By Pete Bauer

For any new low to no-budget filmmaker, I think there is an important question that should be asked. What makes me so special? What I mean by that is, why should anyone watch your stories? I am a firm believer that humans are storytellers by nature. We love to hear stories, make up stories, and watch stories. We see stories in paintings, in poems, in music and in sculpture. We listen to stories in gossip, in sharing memories and in relaying our hopes and goals. And filmmakers feel the instinctual urge to tell their stories with moving pictures. But, the question we should all be asking ourselves is what is going to make the way we convey our stories that much more unique and effective than the other wanna-be filmmakers out there?

This is something that I think most starting filmmakers often neglect to define within themselves. Part of this is understandable. We usually spend the early part of our "careers" learning the skills necessary by copying filmmakers we admire. We make our own personal versions of Scream or Star Wars or Indiana Jones. But, once we've grasped the basics, we should start trying to define who we are as filmmakers, how we tell stories, how we are to effect the audience, because, in the end, our primary goal as a story teller is to illicit emotion from our audience. Failing to do so means our attempt was unsuccessful at the most basic level for nothing screams failure louder to a filmmaker than a passive audience member.

Filmmakers have a seemingly infinite variety of ways to affect the audience. Some filmmakers choose a tense, realistic subject matter to illicit emotion. They'll convey stories of abuse, or drugs, or poverty or family crisis. Others choose a more fantastical way to illicit emotion, through horror or gore or science fiction. Some combine a little of all of these in thrillers and conspiracies and deception. We pick a genre that fits our strengths and our tastes and pursue making the most effective story possible. But, again, we should be asking ourselves, what makes me so special? Out of all of the low budget horror films out there, what will make mine stand out, what will make my story my own personal contribution to the genre. There are many horror directors out there, but only a few Cravens or Carpenters. There are many thriller directors out there, but only a few Hitchcocks or DePalmas.

When people think of Hitchcock or DePalma or Carpenter, the term "genius" is often attached in some fashion. But, are they a "genius" because they were born with an extra filmmaker gene or are they a "genius" because they have truly defined themselves as storytellers? And is this definition by accident, by some deep-seeded instinct, or is it, rather, because they are that much more thorough in creating their visual imagery? I think their "genius" comes from 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Hitchcock, for example, never just "filmed" the scene. Every single shot was evaluated for it's emotional impact, either on its own or how it fit within a scene. Nothing was shot just to get the shot. Every angle was chosen as part of a whole to create the maximum impact to the audience. In Dial M For Murder, for example, the scene where Grace Kelly is attacked is divided into three 30 second sections. Pre-Attack, Attack and Post-Attack. Each section is 30 seconds long, because Hitchcock wanted the audience to understand that the attack was it's own event within the entire story. Just like the overall film, he wanted the attack to have a beginning, middle and end. And he wanted it defined in 30 second segments so that the audience, on a subconscious level, would understand that this unique, important event, had it's own life.

How many of us think to that detail in order to create the maximum effect on the audience? Granted, that's a daunting task, but it's worth it if you want to be anything above ordinary. I don't think it's by coincidence that the more effective filmmakers are also storyboarders. Hitchcock, DePalma, Spielberg, the Coens, etc., they all storyboard and take the time, before hand, to define every shot, to make sure that the way that image is relayed on the screen is as potent as possible.

So, when your throwing together your next low to no-budget film, make sure you take the time to define your style, to determine what's going to make you so special? Will it be your story or your effects, your imagery or your characters? It can be anything, but make it stand out. Make sure that, when people hear about your next film, that they are immediately aware of the unique opportunity they have to view your work. The budget has many limitations, but it shouldn't impact your style. Each of us is a unique creature. Our job is to relay that individuality through moving pictures.

And, then, we will have our own cinematic voice, our own unique, defined style.

Microcinema Flashback - The Three Most Important Words A Writer Needs To Remember... (2001)

Writers block is one of the hardest things to face as a writer. Nothing is more daunting than a blank page. In November of 2001 I offer some advice for writers on how to overcome it.

*****

The Three Most Important Words A Writer Needs To Remember...
By Pete Bauer

All writers eventually face a common, simple, deadly foe... writer's block. And writer's block usually comes down to one simple problem... we don't know what happens next. We may have an idea of what we want to happen, but not how to get there. So, we sit and stir and fuss and sweat and stare at the blank page trying to figure out why the words stopped coming. And the longer we sit, the more insurmountable the writer's block becomes until it evolves into the writer's second deadly foe... procrastination. Unchecked, days and months may pass with the empty page still waiting for the next injection of creative inspiration. If never overcome, the result is another unfinished project that sits in your desk drawer, reminding you of a great idea that was never fully realized.

In order to keep myself from sliding down that slippery slope, I've tacked three words above my desk. They read ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. I have found these three words to be the most important words as a writer. Because, in reality, the blank page has no preference to what you place on it. It doesn't care. It's just a void that you're trying to fill and you can fill it with anything... absolutely anything.

Most writers will tell you that writing can often be a contradictory experience. When we start, we usually have a good idea of where we want the story to end up. But, once we begin writing, the characters slowly take on a life of their own. They become real people, with wills and attitudes and tastes and needs so when you get into the meat of the writing process, you're not so much writing as you are taking dictation from the characters who are now telling you what should happen next.

It's moments like these which are both the most rewarding and the most frustrating. You feel like you've got the wind at your back as the spirit of inspiration takes you down unplanned paths to exciting places you didn't expect. Then, suddenly, you find yourself wondering where the hell you are and how the hell you're going to get out? It's no longer the issue if this is where the story should lead... the characters have told you as much. Your job is to take it to the next step. To figure out… what happens next? If not careful, these are the moments where writer's block rears its ugly head. You can easily get stuck between your original vision of the story's path and the new one the writing process has created.

And, it's at that moment, that I look on my wall and read the words ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. And it frees me. It wipes the creative slate clean and allows me to let the story travel wherever it needs to go. Because, on the blank page, anything can happen, to anyone, at any time. It may not be the original intent, but it is what's right for the story, what's truthful to the characters, what is necessary for the fruition of the plot.

So, if you're ever faced with trying to figure out… what happens next? Remember, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. What's the most dramatic? What's the most appropriate? What's the most effective? It can be anything. And it's that freedom, that unlimited supply of possibilities, that is the greatest reward we get from this frustrating, inspiring and, ultimately, satisfying process called writing.

Microcinema Flashback - A Cry For Help... (2001)

I've always envied the horror film genre. Their fans are the most loyal and most forgiving. The market place may increase as public taste fluctuate, but they never dip into obscurity. I think you can be pretty successful if you can shoot good low-budget horror. Unfortunately, I've never really liked the blood and guts horror flicks. Just not my thing.

In this article from October 2001 I ask for help on understanding the appeal of this odd, but loyal film genre.

*****

A Cry For Help... As Blood Spews From My Neck.
by Pete Bauer

I need help... understanding... education. I have to admit something that may offend some of you... but I hate horror movies. Not scary movies, not spooky movies, not boogy-man movies, but the blood splattering, in your face, knife-plunging, decapitation gory movies. I know there are a lot of people in this world who find some sort of entertainment from such films, otherwise the local video chains wouldn't be stocked with Children of the Corn VII! But, I just don't get it... never have. And I need you fellow horror-film fans to explain it to me.

I remember when Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street and other flicks came out. I saw a few, but always found myself spending more of my time closing my eyes during the bloodfests than watching and finding enjoyment from it. Maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm too in touch with my sensitive side. Maybe I need an injection from the Wes Craven testosterone factory.

Don't get me wrong... I love suspense movies, scary, creepy, watch-out-for-the-bad-guy-behind-the-door films. The original Halloween is one of my favorite films of all time. So, it's not that I dislike the genre, just the more excessively bloody versions of it. Halloween worked so well for me because the graphic events are more implied than visual. It made me imagine... create what's going on as we hear the knife stabbing the older sister... we only see the knife through the eyes of the child's mask and since I have to fill in the gaps with my imagination, it makes it much more real than watching some clever special effect happen in front of me.

After the initial attack on Halloween night, the setup of impending evil, the rest of the movie is really a stalker movie. He follows Jamie Lee around, standing ominously across the street in shadow or near the clothes lines... scares the living crap out of you. Even the last act, where all of the bloody mayhem ensues, is handled with restraint and is incredibly effective as we see this evil finally unleashed.

I guess my problem comes from the point of the attacks in these types of films. Cheaper versions of the genre just throw a bunch of scantily clad beauties in a central location and let the hacking begin. Obviously this works well. This standard storyline is repeated over and over again by just about every level of filmmaker and it always makes money.

But, again, I just don't get it. I get offended seeing a knife plunge into the chest of a woman who's only crime is that she's in the wrong shower at the wrong time. I get offended when I see a guys neck slashed, blood spurt out and his head fall next to his lifeless body. Part of me has attached some sort of humanity to these characters and their loss, no matter how annoying the character is, is still a loss. That's just the way I am, I guess. I don't see them as plot devices that need to be hacked into oblivion, but people being killed. And, people dying gruesome deaths offends me.

Maybe I'm just a frickin' wuss! Maybe I need to go through another round of puberty. But, that's how I react to gore-fest films. Now, I avoid them at all cost. I remember back to something my Dad said to me when I was young... "watch out what you put into your brain because you can never get it out." So, I weigh the value of allowing certain images into my head and seeing a water-logged Jason return for one more vivisection just doesn't seem a logical use of my brain... don't think I gain anything from experiencing the imagery.

Again, help me here. I'm not judging, I'm not criticizing, I'm just trying to get it. I'm trying to understand where the enjoyment is for fans of horror. Is it that you don't attach yourselves to the characters and just appreciate the effects as a fellow filmmaker? Does it tickle some dark fancy within you? Is it "just a frickin' movie" and I should get out of my cinematic diapers? Give it to me straight. I can take it. I know many of you make horror flicks, and from the response, apparently they're very successful. I'd love to see the works of Timberwolf Digital or Eric Stanze or a variety of other filmmakers out there because I LOVE low-budget films with an edge... as long as it's not the edge of a large kitchen knife with blood dripping from the end.

Hell, I'll admit it... part of me is a hypocrite. My first film was a Super 8 slasher flick where we got all excited that we were able to get a knife with blood on it to look real. So, I've been there as a filmmaker making the best effects we could with bailing wire, some chewing gum and loads of food coloring. And I envy people who can make films in the genre with continued success, on any level, not so much because of the story that they're telling, but because they have tapped into a profitable niche market. If it was in me, I'd make a billion lesbian vampire flicks and retire... but I just can't tell that type of story. It's not in my genome.

So help me out... help me understand what so many people see that I, apparently, just don't get. I'm a fellow filmmaker with a cry for help. Just educate me before you dissect me and feed me to your relatives at the next holiday gathering.

Bucco Bruce Makes a Comeback

The Bucs had an unexpected win over the Green Bay Packers this past weekend, welcoming in the Josh Freeman era as the Bucs franchise quarterback.

The Bucs chose this weekend to play in their throwback Orange and White jerseys with the famed Bucco Bruce on the side of the helmet.


Initially, I thought I would not enjoy seeing the Bucs in their old style uniforms because of my childhood full of watching bad football in creamy orange... players like Vinnie Testeverde or Jack Thompson or Errict Rhett...

But to my surprise, I really enjoyed seeing the old unis. It was nostalgic.

Where the creamscicle uniforms were once a symbol of winless football, this weekend the Bucs got their first win of the season while wearing those bright threads and while also honoring Lee Roy Selmon for putting the Bucs legitmately onto the football map.

Throwback Sunday ended up being a good time all around.

Good win, good uniforms and good memories... well, some good memories, at least.

Microcinema Flashback - Writing What You Know... Second Best (2001)

From August 2001.

*****

Writing What You Know... Second Best
by Pete Bauer

There's a common, useful theory for new screenwriters which is to "write what you know." This means to write about your own experiences instead of trying to write a space-epic-horror-musical. The purpose of this exercise is to allow the writer to learn to write without having to do a lot of real pre-writing work... since you're writing from your own experiences, you don't have to do a lot of research, character development, etc. If you've been a waiter for three years, then write a script about waiting tables. If, like Kevin Smith, you worked in a convenience store, write a script about Clerks.

And, as your experience grows, you will find your older scripts could use an injection of your newer life lessons. For example, Steven Spielberg, who wrote and directed Close Encounters of the Third Kind, stated that, now that he has been a father, he never would have written Close Encounters the same way. When he made the film, he was young and single, without any children. So, he had no issue with the main character, played by Richard Dreyfuss, deciding to leave his family to go do some intergalactic galaxy hopping with the nearby aliens. However, now, as a father and truly understanding the love and attachment a parent has for their children, he stated he could never write that Dreyfuss would leave his family. His real life experiences have taught him that it just wasn't believable. And any parent will tell you he's correct.

Like all new writers, I wanted to set the world on fire with my creative genius, but I found my first two scripts falling outside the world of believability. The first, Undetected Risk, was a script about college kids who accidentally receive a top secret satellite transmission. The second, Mirage, was about brainwashing experiments that turn average citizens into assassins. Both had enough quality substance and structure to know that I could write thrillers, however, both stories took place in a shallow world. Both took place in the only world my limited imagination could create. Since I was so young, the only brainwashing and government secret stories I had seen were on television, so most of my stories were written with those pre-fab TV worlds in mind... and in the end it meant my stories offered nothing truly original.

So, I decided to take the phrase "write what you know" to heart and wrote a romantic comedy about a drama student (me) who is dealing with the struggles of a college relationship, called A Moment In The Moonlight. It was based on all of my failed relationships I had to overcome during my college years. After writing this script I realized two things: One, that my characters were much more believable, and Two, the world they lived in was real and unique. Even though the script in its entirety is not spectacular, the experiment, the process of "writing what you know" was extremely helpful. It allowed me to grow as a writer by letting me focus on the process of actually writing 120 pages instead of struggling with trying to create characters and a world from scratch.

However, there's a serious downside to this that I have noticed more and more lately. As the proliferation of DV shorts and features stream from all of the creative minds across the nation, there are more and more stories about filmmakers. About filmmakers unable to make films. Of course, I'm certain that these were done because they were "writing what you know." But, I've got to tell you, most people DON'T CARE and CAN'T IDENTIFY with filmmakers. They see them and the process of filmmaking as uninteresting and they see filmmakers as necessary, creative freaks. So, they could care less about the struggles of a filmmaker. They only want to see the finished product... a quality film that allows them to escape their everyday lives for a couple of hours.

If I see one more story about a struggling screenwriter, actor, director or producer, I think I'll vomit. I love making movies and I HATE watching stories about filmmakers... because, who cares? So, you're having trouble making your movie so you write about a filmmaker having trouble making a movie... unless it's because your potential financiers are actually Iraqi Underworld or something exciting, then why would I want to watch a story about your struggles when I'm having filmmaking struggles of my own. And if I'm not a filmmaker, then why should I care at all? Because, the reality is that usually the writers of these filmmaker stories aren't really good enough to make these types of stories universally appealing. It's a niche market that very few people are interested in.

Does that mean you shouldn't write about the struggles of filmmaking? No, the experience you gain from writing about it will make you a better writer for your next story. But, for God's sake, just don't make a film about it.

Hollywood still hasn't learned this lesson. They find any story about filmmakers as some sort of satire about their own lives. But, in the end, very few of these stories actually ever make any money or rarely bring any true notoriety to the writers and directors. Now, for some reason, the average public IS still fascinated with the lives of the stars. And, trying to cash in, Hollywood decided it would be interesting to make a film about a star and the whole Hollywood-Star experience. So they made America's Sweetheart. Considering the talent on and off the screen, this thing should have been a blockbuster. However, it got mediocre reviews and luke-warm box office receipts. Because, like I said before, NO ONE CARES. Every once and a while some of these stories have enough edge to be successful, such as Swimming With Sharks, Living In Oblivion, and Misery (a writer wrote about a writer). But for the most part, these stories are not appealing.

The writer we could all learn from in overcoming this dilemma is Rod Serling of The Twilight Zone. Serling was a genius and he wrote the bulk of those classic episodes. However, when he started to get creative burnout near the end of the series run, instead of writing about writers having burnout, he wrote about burnout in general. He wrote about advertising executives or plumbers or husbands having burnout. He turned his own experiences into something everyone could identify with simply by changing the employment in which the main character was experiencing the burnout. Suddenly, we participate in the pressure and helplessness of the characters because we think they are just like us... average people who happen to be having extraordinary experiences.

"Writing what you know" is a great way of getting new writers into the writing game. But, when you decide what to shoot, please, please, please choose a story about something you know... second best.

Microcinema Flashback - My Safari to the Land of Foo (2001)

I had an idea once... after the advent of cable television and before the advent of the internet, I thought that film makers from across the country could use cable access channels as their own personal syndication option for their shorts and feature films.

Here was the concept... At that time, cable companies, by law, had to provide a channel in the lower tier (usually below channel 20) that was dedicated toward local programming. The cable companies had to make available the equipment for citizens to shoot their subjects and the channel to air them.

So, if you could get a film makers from all over the country to sign-up with their local cable access channel, we could combine our film projects into a single program and self-syndicate it throughout the country, one cable access channel at a time.

In Boston in the 90's a group of college students were already using their local public access channel to produce and showcase their own short film work in a show they called Fade to Black. The group, which called themselves Pangaea and Random Foo, were exceptionally prolific and were on the cutting edge of the microcinema revolution in the late 90's.

They made their shows available for sale on VHS tape. I purchase them and took a weekend to watch all of their stuff. Here were my thoughts...

From February 2001...

*****

My Safari to the Land of Foo
By Pete Bauer

It's official… I have been Foo-ified. I have immersed myself in the land of Foo on the continent of Pangaea and have lived to tell the tale. A few weeks ago I received, in a simple USPS box, a collection of 13 Fade to Black episodes, containing a total of 33 short films. I, like many of you, had heard so much about the ravenous filmmakers of the greater Northeast and wanted to experience what all of the fuss was about. So, I shuffled off my humble check to the friends of Foo and have watched all 13 episodes. (Episodes 14 and 15 have since been completed, but I haven't seen them yet).

First, I should state that I am of the belief that if anyone out there is capable of completing any project, no matter how long it takes and no matter what the end quality is, that you deserve a sincere round of applause. Any of us who have tried, failed and tried again, to make a short film know just how many obstacles stand between the simple idea stage to the completed film stage. Beyond that, I look for ingenuity in concept, implementation or presentation. I expect the basics (visual composition, a steady camera, competent acting, adequate sound) as a minimum and hope for more.

Now, what I'm not going to do is review each project individually, because, to be honest, I'm not that good of a reviewer… and that really wasn't the point of writing this article. But, I will share my overall experiences in my short, intense visit to the land of Foo. First, let's start with the obvious… VOLUME! These guys crank out more titles than some porn distributors! It's amazing the mere volume of work that is done by this dedicated group of people. I marvel at the fact that I'm able to complete one project a year. These guys have completed over 50 and have made available over 30 in the Fade to Black series. I know it's been said before, but that's frickin' amazing. Nuff said.

Second, let's talk about originality. Overall, the stories these guys/gals are telling are quite original in concept. Some are supernatural, some are funny and some are straight dramas. Do they all pay off as well as they could in the end? No. But most of them get pretty darn close. And with each project, the scope of the stories appear to be growing, which is nice to see. And Jason Santo seems to be the Stephen King of the group, prolific and with a non-conventional edge to his stories. And, again, the skill of the way the stories unfold has continually improved with each project, which is critical.

Third, let's talk about production value… and I'm not talking about available skin on the screen (and I'm excluding Santo shirtless). I'm talking about the quality of directing and camerawork. To be honest, in the beginning, this concerned me slightly because there were a lot of times, I thought, where shaky hand-camera work could have been replaced by a steadier tripod with no ill effect, I believe, on the shots being attempted or the time it would take to shoot it. But, more importantly, they have continued to improve in this area.

As you move up the Fade to Black food chain, the quality of the direction and camerawork steadily improves. There is more visual direction, more emotional impact created by the shots selected. And that's important to me and stems from my own personal bias. I like visual directors more than others (DePalma, Hitchcock, Bay, etc.). I like seeing style along with substance, so I tend to gravitate to projects which do the same. And the Foo camerawork has improved with each project, which has led to more effective editing and performances. If there were no visible growth in their ability to direct, then I would have been concerned. However, with each new project they seem to be expanding their horizons, raising the bar and attempting more ambitious projects. Otherwise, what's the point?

Fourth, let's talk about acting. The Foo ensemble has a nice mix of personalities. Each have their strengths and, for the most part, put themselves in a position where they can showcase what they do best as actors.

However, I must take a moment to point out the two best actors in the group, in my humble opinion – Jason Santo and Dan Gorgone. Good acting, on any level, consists of two basic things, relaxation and commitment. Relaxation in the sense that the actor relaxes into the role, you never feel like they are pushing or "acting" but merely being someone else. Secondly, commitment, which is important when portraying a normal role in an odd story or an odd role in a normal story. In order for those things to work, the actor has to commit fully to the role or situation, no matter how weird it may seem. By committing, the audience buys into it because the actors have fully bought into it. And both Santo and Gorgone succeed at both of these things. To my surprise, they are equally adept at both comedy and drama. Santo has an intensity that makes me wonder if he'd kick my ass if I ever meet him in person. Not that he'd have a reason to kick my ass, but he just might because of a bad chicken parmesan or something like that. And, I must add a special nod to Gorgone, who can be a frickin' nut in one film, a humble husband in another and then a scary stalker in the next, all convincing… chameleon like actually. He's got it all together.

Out of the plethora of stories I've watched over the past few weeks, I'd like to mention some of my favorites stops in the land of Foo (in alphabetical order):

• 51 – Nice direction, solid acting, good story. Good work.
• Friends of P – Funnier than when I saw it the first time over the internet. Goofy and fun.
• Hell Awaits – Ambitious, intense, well done.
• House Rules – when this started I was afraid… I thought it was something someone threw together when no one was home. But, I was wrong and the humor and story were so well done that I was laughing out loud. The voices were great, the humor was tremendous. Hilarious.
• Just Dessert – Funny story is infused with new, quality acting talent.
• Killing Time – Nice camerawork, story and acting. Good work.
• Marisa – Nice visuals, good direction, great implementation.
• Paths – Excellent. Nice visuals, nice story, and Gorgone spooked me. My personal favorite.
• The Quiet Day – Nice visuals, simple and effective acting, nice story.
• Sykes Tangent and the Angel of Death – Great story idea, great villain, can't wait to see where this series goes.
• Twice Upon A Time – Epic with lots of fisticuffs. Good use of combining an old film project with a new idea.
• Voice of Reason – Excellent acting, nicely directed, excellent story.
• Wordbox – Interesting, unique story, nice cinematography, good acting.

When you look at the massive work of Foo/Pangaea, you could try to focus on any number of reasons as to why this group is so successful. But, I believe the greatest thing these guys and gals have going for them is an overall sense of enjoyment they bring to their projects. You can tell that they love doing what they do. The love they have hanging around with each other, being friends and making movies. Out of all of their accomplishments, this is the one that I think most of us would envy. It's rare that you can get a project finished. It's even more rare that the experience is rewarding on a creative AND personal level. And it's even more rare that you could repeat that success with the same people over and over in a way that showcases not only your talents, but your long-term friendships. When people look at what makes Foovies so special, it's not only the volume or the consistent quality of the work, but comradery that they share on and off the screen.

So, thanks for the enjoyable trip to the Land of Foo. I look forward to the next stop on your never-ending journey.

AFM 2000 - Day 4

AFM – Day 4
2/25/00

Excerpts from Pete's personal journal.

I woke up around 7:00 a.m. and started working on the script. The only thing I had to do today (besides finish the rewrite of the script) was have lunch with a dear old college friend, Jennifer. So, in the morning I worked on the re-write while Jenni tried to schedule a meeting with the foreign investor, Showcase, our Casting Director and her and Jeff. I finished the re-write around 10:30 a.m. It did what we needed it to do and Jenni would have the rest of the weekend to tweak it more before giving it to the investor on Sunday.

Jenni and Jeff, needing to run some errands (or just get away from me – I'm not sure which) and they dropped me off at the SAG building where I was to meet my friend Jennifer for lunch. I had tried to contact some other college friends, Dave and Sunday, but their phone number was now some auto place or something. So, I made my way up to the eighth floor (eighth floor again… hmmm) and Jennifer greeted me with a big hug. She looked exactly the same. I looked fat. She had told me that she had been exercising a lot and had actually lost weight. I silently blamed her for my weight gain since our college days, knowing deep down that her fat had been mysteriously transferred to my body over the last 12 years.

We went next door and ate at Koo Koo Roos. I offered to pay (I'm serious... you can ask her) but she insisted on paying for it herself. I realized I just may get through this trip with cash to spare! But, dinner still awaited. Jennifer and I spent lunch catching up on the past twelve years of our lives, talking about writing, the film industry, family and goals for the next 10 years. It was a great lunch and I wished we hadn't waited so long to get together.

You can see the effects of
prednisone on my cheeks.
Thank goodness for Remicade.

Jenni and Jeff picked me up and we headed back to the AFM so they could meet about casting. With Adrenaline, there's a basic cost of making the film, let's say $2 million or something like that and depending on what actors you get, the budget will be effected. So, they wanted to meet to determine what actors would fit into the fictional $2 million dollar budget, which actors would bump it up another million or so, and what actors would bump it up yet another million and so on. This is all part of the plan in determining funding and budgetary needs.

So, we arrived at the AFM and I got to meet our Casting Director Harriet Greenspan, who read Adrenaline and had LOVED it! She told me that it was one of the only scripts she had ever read where she couldn't put it down and read it all in one sitting. Granted, she could have been bold-face lying to me, but she seemed like a very sincere, genuine person (yes, there are some of them in Hollywood) so I believed her. This probably makes me a sucker.

While they all met, I again strolled the halls of the AFM, taking more pictures, checking out which old TV star was starring a new disaster flick headed for Asia. As the evening wore on, we all ended up back in the lobby of the hotel. Bill Suchy, a fellow Floridian filmmaker, had flown in that morning and was going to take my bedroom/editing suite for the rest of the festival. While we waited for the meeting to adjourn on the eighth floor we talked a lot about writing, experimenting and using Digital Video as a low cost way to test our writing and directing abilities. It occurred to me, as the evening continued, that there were about five people in this entire room that were cloned to make the hundreds of people around me. There were the tall blondes with large breasts. The short brunettes with large breasts (I see a trend forming). The X-File look alikes. The hippie/European long haired guys. And the old guys who've been in the business so long they don't give a crap what they look like.

We finally all headed to Arnold S.'s restaurant, Shlotzies (or something like that), for dinner. Knowing that I'd been a total mooch since arriving and also knowing that my paycheck would have direct deposited by now, I insisted on paying for Jenni and Jeff's dinner. After we all induldged in some seriously good and expensive food, the bill came. But, it was all on one bill, I would have to charge it since I only had $4.87 cash on me, I couldn't afford to pay for EVERYone's meal and Jeff wouldn't let me pay for his and Jenni's anyway! So, I opened my wallet and threw the remaining four dollars I had onto the table as part of the tip and walked away feeling like week old pond scum.

We hurried out of the restaurant at around 9:15 p.m. My flight started boarding at 10:00 p.m. and was to leave at 10:30 p.m. Traffic was tight, I was tense and I REALLY didn't want to miss my flight home. Just when all seemed lost and the traffic was a near standstill, Jenni did some industrial strength thinking and drove around a parking structure, by-passing a ton of traffic, and exited right into the loading area for my airline. I gave her a quick hug and rushed into the airport. Jeff followed me up to the gate. I gave him a big hug and thanked him for all of his generosity. It was really great to see them after all this time. My trip into the world of filmdom was coming to an end and I appreciated the detour away from my everyday.

Flight 96, non-stop to Tampa started boarding and I was surprised how full the plane was. Every row had at least two people in it, so no one could stretch out on all of the three seats. I had a window seat, which I thought was a good idea, but I just couldn't enter that blissful slumber. Part of the problem was that I couldn't get comfortable… another was that I was anxious to get home and see my wife and kids… and another was that this small oriental gentleman seated directly in front of me continually passed gas in his sleep. Toxic gas. Intrusive, oppressive, oh-my-God-I'm-going-to-die gas. But, the guy was unconscious… what could I do? So, I turned my head and tried not to breath too deeply for the four hour trip home.

My wife and children waited for me at the airport baggage area. It was 5:45 a.m. and my loving wife pulled our kids out of bed just to pick me up. They were all glad to see me and I was thrilled to see them. On the drive home I recapped the trip with my wife as my kids fell back to sleep in the back seat. When I got home I plopped the remaining $.87 onto my dresser before diving into my familiar, comfortable bed and slept one of the deepest sleeps of my life.

I guess if there's one thing I learned during this trip is that, no matter what stage of the process you're in (pre-production, production, post, distribution, etc.), you are still your best salesman. You are still the one who has more passion and belief in your project than anyone else. You still have to keep working the film, making sure the distribution company is on the same page you are, pushing them, networking, making contacts... it doesn't appear that there is ever a stage in the process when you simply let go of the project. It's always yours. That's why it's so important that your first feature be something you are passionate about because you are going to live with it for a very long time.

Remaining Cash: $.87

Until next time...

AFM 2000 - Day 3

AFM – Day 3
2/24/00

Excerpts from Pete's personal journal.

It was Thursday and a big day for us. First, we had the RWA screening at a local AMC theater at 1:00 p.m. Second, we got a call that morning that we were to meet with the foreign investors that afternoon after the screening. But, first, we had to get there. And on the way down the interstate we ran into one of those classic L.A. traffic jams. Fortunately for us, there is a carpool lane, which was completely empty. Apparently we were the only people in the state that actually drove WITH someone else in the car.

On the way into the hotel entrance we passed the Troma people singing and dancing and making a lot of noise. They were dressed in their Troma character costumes (Kabuki Kop, Toxic Avenger, etc.) grooving to accordion music. Only in California can you see a man dressed up in a Kabuki outfit bump and grind to a Lawrence Welk-ish tune with a mal-formed melon head and a scream queen.

We arrived at the AFM around 10:30 to meet up with some people who were going to join us at the screening. Grady Bishop, our stunt coordinator on RWA, got in contact with some of the great women from the Stuntwoman's Association of Motion Pictures and they agreed to come out and help push the film. Nancy Thurston, Elle Alexander, and Cheryl Bermeo were all there to help us out. Originally they had planned to recreate the wheelchair down the cable stunt outside the AMC theater where the screening was to be held, but due to nearby construction, this had to be called off. I asked Nancy why they were willing to assist us and she said, "The more advertisement for women, stunt women, women directors, any woman in any part of the industry, we love to support." She also stated that it's hard enough for women in the entertainment industry and that they need to help each other out as much as possible. Their generosity and time were greatly appreciated. They were going to take our poster and postcards and hand them out in the front of the AMC, so, they donned some RWA t-shirts and headed for the theater.

Before they left, however, security had come to us twice about our RWA poster. Trying to enforce the "don't flaunt your stuff" policy, they told us we had to turn our poster toward the wall or else they would confiscate the goods. We tried to explain that we were handing it to these women to take with them (which was true), but they didn't buy it. We knew they were only doing their job, but we didn't see them stop the Troma people from dancing and singing through the lobby or tell some woman with a pet monster to take it outside. The best we could figure out was that you weren't allowed to display your film (i.e. large poster), but if you dressed up wacky and people initiated conversation, then you were then allowed to hand them a postcard and flaunt your film to your hearts content. A gray area, sure, but life's full of 'em.

Chris Templeton, RWA's lead actress, arrived and we then all headed to the theater. We got there a little early. We checked in with the stunt-women who were busily handing out postcards to anyone who walked by. Jeff and I then took a stroll down the main street and headed to Borders bookstore. On the way there we ran into a little guy (a friend of the stunt women) who handed us an RWA postcard and said "hey, you wanna see a great action movie?" Jeff kindly pointed out that he produced it and I pointed out that I co-wrote it. He smiled and walked on, going up to the next person.

After a stroll through the extensive film book collection in Borders, we continued down the walk and ran into Gregory Von Hausch, who is President of the Ft. Lauderdale Film Festival. For those of you who missed that episode, the RWA showed at the '98 Ft. Lauderdale Film Fest and won the Sunshine Celluloid Award. Gregory said that some little guy pushed an RWA postcard in his hand and asked if he wanted to see a great action film. Gregory said he tried to explain to him that he showed the film at his festival last year… he was certain the guy didn't believe him. You gotta love the little guy's enthusiasm for a film he's NEVER seen!

It neared lunch and Tracy, Olga, Chris and I headed across the street from the theater to Lago's for some lunch. The menu said they had pasta and a salad bar, but after seeing the meals, I wasn't too sure what they were serving. The ladies all got the "salad" bar, which was really like some food freak show with unpronounceable names and weird tastes. I tried to order a simple dish, fettuccini and chicken, but it came out looking different and tasting slightly off. I ate it anyway because I was starving.

Our lunch was interrupted by a parade of picketing janitors fighting for the right to higher wages. Thankfully there was no mop-water spilled or stain remover shed… it was a peaceful demonstration. Tracy and Chris had to leave early because a TV crew showed up at the theater, so Olga and I had a nice meal discussing many things. It was a pleasant lunch. I tried to pay (no, really) but Olga said Jeff insisted he pay for the meal.

The screening finally neared and we made our way to the theater. Outside the Mulder and Scully buyers approached, exiting an AFM shuttle bus dressed like attendees at an FBI convention. Postcards were given out aplenty. The little guy (I really have to get his name) wanted to know if he could sit on the shuttle bus and hand out the postcards to the buyers as they entered/exited (I LOVE his enthusiasm!). We thought that may be a bit intrusive, but we agreed he could hang out where they dump the X-File look-a-likes out and pummel them with advertising.

Ned McLeod, our handy-dandy entertainment lawyer, and John and Susie Millonig some of our executive producers, were in town and showed up for the screening. It was good to meet John and Susie. They are really great people. They've spent the last 12 years building a missionary in a village down in Honduras. They are almost complete and will move to a new village and start again. Great people.

We made our way into the theater and I was deeply disappointed to find out that Snowcaps were not sold in this theater. A movie without Snowcaps? What is this, Russia? Disappointed, I continued on, chocolate-less, and sat in the back of the theater. The way these screenings work is like this… there are about 10 movie theaters that are showing AFM films during the week. Each of the films the distributors want to show gets one, MAYBE two screenings during the AFM. So, during our screening there were other AFM films showing on each of the other screens in our theater… and there are also AFM films at all of the other screens at all of the other theaters all at the same time. So, we were pleased to have about 50 people attend the screening. It's not uncommon to have people come and go during these screenings. Some may spend 10 minutes in one film, 15 in another and 30 in yet another, getting a feel for if the film could sell in their territory. If they want to view the entire film they can always get video copies from the distributor later. We were very happy to have only two people leave after the first ½ hour and the rest stayed through to the end. That was very encouraging.

After the screening the rest of the people were now hungry, so we headed back over to Lago's for some post-screening feeding. Those of us who had lunch earlier indulged in some serious desserts while the rest of them played mystery-food roulette with the menu. This was the first time I was able to meet Isaac, who plays Mo in RWA. He had just finished a gig on the new Charlie's Angels film (like society needs THAT to be a feature film). I asked him what type of roles he's been getting and he stated most of his characters were morally challenged (i.e., bad guys). We joked that, someday, he could get a role where his character yearns to cuddle.

Also, during lunch, dinner or whatever this was, I got to meet and talk with Scott Dobbie, a director who's interested in directing a script I wrote called One View Only. Jenni ran into Scott a while back at a DGA event. Scott said he was looking for a script like Silence of the Lambs… Jenni immediately thought of One View Only, sent him a copy and he loved it! He's working on getting financing and all of the other stuff that goes into getting a film made. Jenni and Jeff will produce the film if he gets the cash in place. I tried to pay at this meal too (stop snickering, I'm serious), but Jeff insisted on paying for this meal too.

After eating we headed back to the AFM and met with our would-be foreign investor who, at this point, will remain nameless. First off, you don't want to jinx a thing like multi-million dollar financing and Second, you don't want to risk pissing off a guy who may invest in your film and Third, it's just not kosher in filmdom. So, we had a good meeting with them and Showcase. They stated that they needed the re-written Adrenaline to review with his people when he goes back home and we agreed to meet the next day with our casting director to discuss possible directions we want to go in casting.

On the drive home we got stuck in traffic again. The half-hour drive took about an hour and a half. On the way home Jeff cracked the whip and said that we should work on the script changes that night so we can make sure and get him a finished re-write before the guy goes back to their country. We didn't want to delay the process of getting financing at all. We also needed to do it before I left for home, Friday night.

So, Jenni and I stayed up as late as we could and worked our way through about 1/3 of the script. Before going to bed, I got on the computer and entered the changes, then crashed.

Remaining Cash: $4.87

AFM 2000 - Day 2

AFM – Day 2
2/23/00

Excerpts from Pete's personal journal.

My mind tried to wake me up at about 3:30 a.m. PST, thinking I was back home in my own bed, ready to go to work. However, it didn't take long to convince my body that a couple of hours more sleep would do me good. I knew these next few days would be packed with events, so I took every opportunity to rest up.

I finally awoke around 9:00 a.m. and found the rest of the house still asleep. Along with Jenni and Jeff, Olga, Jenni's mother and Tracy, who worked with us on RWA, also lived in the house. I would soon learn that, in L.A., no one gets up very early and everyone stays up very late. So, I started to search the kitchen for some breakfast fixings, but didn't feel comfortable rifling through their stuff, so I plopped on the comfy couch and watched Sportscenter.

After a little while, Jeff awoke and we combined to make some delicious eggs and potatoes for breakfast. I then filled my time taking a tutorial on Final Cut Pro on their new Apple G3 machine. By 11:00 a.m. Jenni and I were out the door and heading to the AFM. Jeff would catch up with us later.


The first stop was the Directors Guild of America so Jenni could pay her dues and drop off some tickets for a Guild party. Inside I attempted to take some pics, but the Guard quickly informed me that "taking pics inside the DGA without approval was strictly verboten." The lobby of the DGA has three theaters (Video Theater, Theater One and Theater Two) and I was only able to snap a pic of the outside of the Video Theater. Even though the Guard was distracted by some workers setting up for a Showtime party in the lobby, I didn't want to get Jenni in trouble, so I put the camera away and we headed upstairs to accounting.

We left the DGA and headed, through town (not via highway) to Santa Monica, where the AFM was being held. On the way there, my EST stomach started to growl and Jenni pulled into a McDonalds so I could feed the beast. I was left with four dollars and some change. One more meal like that and I was headed to the ATM.

The sun finally broke through the clouds as we arrived at Loews Hotel about two blocks from the Santa Monica Pier. After some haggling with the valets, we were allowed to park the van ourselves and we headed into the hotel. When you enter the lobby you are accosted by people hawking industry rags (Variety, Hollywood Reporter, etc.) There are tables and tables of free industry publications that are yours for the taking. We made our way past the publication gauntlet and entered the lobby, where I felt like I had entered an X-Files convention. Everyone (distributors and buyers alike) was dressed in black, wearing long black trench coats and talking continuously on cell-phones. Mulder and Scully could have been standing right next to me and I wouldn't have noticed. Having been born without the hip gene, I was wearing color (green and tan), which made me look like a tourist. I didn't realize I should have dressed for a funeral. This is an important tip to would-be filmmakers. At ALL social events, wear black… you can't go wrong with black.

One of the first people we met was Mark Bruder from Bruder Releasing, Inc. (BRI), a domestic distributor. He had contacts with getting films into the Blockbuster chain, HBO, Lifetime, etc. We talked about the niche appeal this film has with handicapped viewers and he already knew the numbers, which was impressive. He took a copy of the film and told Jenni that they'd meet at the end of the market.

In the lobby we also hooked up with Dan Murphy, who is good friends with the Farley brothers (Something About Mary) and Jenni. He agreed to help us spread the RWA word and hand out postcards with RWAs poster on the front and a synopsis and screening times on the back. We would later learn that such overt advertising at the AFM is a faux paus. But, ignorance (no matter how temporary) is bliss, so we handed him a pack of cards and he headed into the thick lobby crowd while Jenni and I headed up to the eighth floor to meet with Showcase. In order to enter any of the floors where the distributors are located you have to have a badge with your picture (I think they cost around $400 each!) The blue badges mean you're a distributor (ours was from Showcase) and the green badges mean you're a buyer. Thankfully, I look enough like Jeff's little photo to get away with using his badge… now I'm not sure if Jeff should be offended by that or whether I should.

Every U.S. based international distributor takes one of the hotel rooms, sets up shop and the buyers strolls from one room to the other, watch videos, dvds, listen to pitches and determines what they think they can sell back in their territories. Jenni and I made our way up to 807, this weeks temporary home for Showcase, where we met with David Jackson, president of Showcase. He was a very nice, straightforward man. We talked about RWA and Adrenaline and tried to finalize a meeting with the foreign investors. He said he was having dinner with them that evening and would try to finalize a meeting with us then. He then went on to describe some of the humorous film investment schemes he had heard (diamonds for collateral, bad escrow deals, etc.) The funniest story was of a director who met with some middle-eastern "investors" who would only fund the film if they could put life insurance on the director. The director declined their offer and ran as fast as he could.

Jenni spent the rest of the afternoon up at Showcase while I strolled the halls checking out all of the distributors and films. It was amazing to see how many films were made that no one in the U.S. will probably ever see. It occurred to me that known to semi-known actors work a lot more than we realize. There were hundreds of films that fall into many of the standard formulas (action, blow 'em-up flicks and sci-fi alien-esque thrillers, sexy soft porn and horror/satanic themed films) that the average U.S. film fan will never see.

Distributors ranked from the ultra small (offering only one movie full of no-names, which were probably friends and local actors) to more "legitimate" distributors, like New Line and Miramax. And some celebrities came to push their films as well. There were a lot of actors that fit into that "oh, I know them from something somewhere but have no clue what their name is" category, a few that you knew well, but still didn't know their names (like the black guy who played assistant DA in the early years of Law and Order and the main hunk on the new Baywatch Hawaii). Then there were the ones you knew like Gene Simmons of KISS (pushing Detroit Rock City) and Jean Claude Van Damme (pushing a tender love story between a man and his injured puppy – yeah right, he was there pushing some action flick with a numeral at the end).

Other sights of interest were the plethora of silicon enhanced mammories, the hosts of calogen filled lips and the sad sight of the aging Hollywood insiders who try so desperately to look 20 and are failing miserably. The last group was truly sad and made me glad that most of the people in Florida let gravity take its course and look the better for it.

That night we drove home, slightly frustrated that we weren't able to nail down a meeting with the foreign investors, and finished the evening by eating some delicious beef stroganoff prepared so expertly by Jeff and Olga.

Remaining Cash: $4.87

AFM 2000 - Day 1

Back in 2000 I had co-written a screenplay for Jenni Gold called Ready, Willing & Able. When the low-budget film was completed we tried to sell it at the famed American Film Market, where distributors from across the world would come to see what was available for distribution in their areas and countries. I wrote a journal of the odd and memorable experience. Over the next four days, I'll share that journal.

*****

AFM – Day 1
2/22/00

Excerpts from Pete's personal journal.

Ten bucks, two carry-ons and an e-ticket were all I had as I entered the airport for my 8:17 p.m. flight en route to California. I had 13 dollars when I got there, but my wife took three of them in order to pay for the privilege to leave the Tampa International Airport parking garage. The ten left wasn't enough to survive the next three days in L.A., but was all I had, since I had remembered getting everything for this trip, except cash! I decided to see how long I could stretch out the 10 bucks before succumbing to an ATM and their exorbitant fees.

About three weeks ago, Jenni and Jeff called me and asked if I would be available to come out to L.A. in order to attend to the American Film Market (AFM) and meet with some potential foreign investors about some re-writes they wanted to make to Adrenaline. After securing some vacation time from work and some understanding from my wife, they booked me on a flight out there. This year the AFM runs from 2/23/00 to 3/1/00. Due to some family obligations, I could only make it Wednesday thru Friday, so, in order to maximize my time out there we agreed to give me the red-eyes to and from L.A.

So, Tuesday night at 8:17 p.m. I took flight 1249 to Chicago. I arrived at O'Hare airport with just enough time to board flight 127 out to L.A. The flight from Chicago to L.A. was mostly empty, which allowed me to take the entire row of seats and attempt to sleep while trying to ignore the metal seatbelts digging into my back. I arrived at LAX at about 12:30 a.m. PST, which was 3:30 a.m. my time. I was exhausted, yet excited to be there. I knew this trip would allow me to forget the daily grind I left back in Florida and play filmmaker for a couple of days. It's these little moments of indulgence of doing what I want to do (filmmaking) that allow me to do what I have to do (my real job) without going creatively postal.

Jenni and Jeff got there about 10 minutes after I arrived. I was surprised to find it rainy and cold. This was L.A. after all, where it never rains, supposedly. Unprepared and without a coat, I shivered until I spotted Jenni's van approaching. Jeff was exhausted from working the past 36 hours straight finalizing a post-production gig, so he hopped in back and attempted to snooze on the ½ hour trip back to their house. Jenni and I caught up on everything and set out our plan for the week.

The primary goal of the trip was to finalize, as much as possible, the foreign investor's concerns about script changes needed to Adrenaline. Their original notes wanted a past love interest added from one of the existing characters. After some thought and a re-read of the script, I believed that this change would actually benefit the script. Jenni was more skeptical. She kept asking me "well, if they don't end up funding the film, would you still keep the changes?" I kept saying "yes" because it added a sense of normality to the group of characters and gave a more satisfying conclusion to the story.

I could tell she wasn't completely convinced, however she trusted me and we talked about our secondary goal, getting RWA sold to foreign markets at the AFM. The AFM is basically a market of middlemen. U.S. based international distributors (i.e., Showcase, New Concorde, New Line, etc.) meet with foreign-based distributors (or buyers). These foreign distributors buy the rights to the U.S. films and then try to sell it to their markets (t.v., theatrical, etc.) in their territories. RWA had a screening scheduled for Thursday at around 1:00 p.m. so our goal was to get as many buyers as we could to attend the screening.

We got back to the house after 1:00 a.m. PST, but I was feeling the 4:00 a.m. EST in me screaming to get out. After a quick tour of the house, Jeff pulled out the sleeper in a small sofa located in their front room, which doubles as an editing suite. After unpacking, I collapsed onto the bed.

Remaining Cash: $10.00

A Prediction?

During the latest debacle that is the Bucs season, my family and I were lamenting how bad they were playing. We were all feeling hopeless.

We mused that if they had to put the Bucs season on a single picture, it would be a take off of Obama's famous Hope picture.

Personally, I like Raheem Morris a lot. I think his intentions are pure and he is doing the best he can. I do question whether or not he was the right guy at the right time.

No matter who they would have hired, it would have been a tough season. Gruden left the team cupboards barren of talent. Gruden/Allen drafted horribly and Gruden didn't have the patience to develop young talent. Allen's picks were under performers or pure busts (Gaines Adams, Dexter Jackson). Plus, the Glazers appear to be in a credit/cash crunch since leveraging themselves to the moon and back to buy the Manchester United... BEFORE the economy took a dump.

We knew we were all in for a rebuilding process anyway... we just felt the new regime would have some sort of plan.

I hope Raheem and the team succeed. But, this level of play sure is a reminder of the Richard Williamson school of football. And that ain't pretty.

Microcinema Flashback - The Last Broadcast Revisited (2001)

From February 2001 I discuss how the film The Last Broadcast was a much better no-budget film than the financially successful Blair Witch Project. Since this article, I have actually been in email communication with Lance Weiler, who started a website called the Workbook Project. The WP is an "open source" website for do-it-yourself filmmakers. Lance, who has always been on the forefront of the evolving independent distribution model, used the WP website to share all of the information he and others have collected on how to best get your indy film out there.

*****

The Last Broadcast - REvisited
By Pete Bauer

This past Monday afternoon, as I recovered from an all night drive from a family event in Atlanta, I sat on my couch and watched The Last Broadcast on HBO. This film was made back in 1998 by Stefan Avalos and Lance Weiler and is an example of all that is potentially right with amateur, ultra low-budget film making.

I remember reading about it and visiting their website when the film was first completed. I remember that they spent only $900 on the film and used this new, cool technology called Digital Video. I remember reading that they were the first film digitally distributed, via satellite, to a few select art film houses across the U.S., including the Enzian in Orlando, Florida. Then, life went on and the dreaded Blair Witch Project reared it's ugly head. At first I thought it was The Last Broadcast renamed. But, later I fell for the hype and build-up of the Blair Witch Project only to go away from the theater thinking it was one of the most overly-hyped ineffective uses of my time, exceeded only by another pathetic little film known as The Phantom Menace. But I digress...

The Last Broadcast was not so effective because of its use of DV or Adobe Photoshop or any technical wizardry. It succeeded because it had a great story and they used their financial limitations as creative solutions instead of artistic excuses. There's a quote from Robert Rodriguez that goes something like this... "You're gonna come up with problems everyday on your set. You can get rid of the problem one of two ways - you can do it creatively or you can wash it away with the money hose. You got no money, you got no hose." And Avalos and Weiler formatted their film to fit their limitations. Their idea was to shoot a fake documentary... which, by now, has become all too common. But, what was so effective about it was the way they let the story unfold.

Unlike "Bore Witch," this story had a plot and every character in the film was believable and convincing. Broadcast succeeded because it treated the documentary like a mystery. If you've ever watched Nova or Front Line (yes, that means you'd have to be watching PBS), then you would see the best documentaries made today, because they don't bore you with fact after fact, they give you the problem or task of the documentary and lead you down a path that unfolds like an Sherlock Holmes tale. I mean, if Front Line can make an hour-long documentary on mathematical proofs interesting, they can do anything! And the guys from Broadcast used the same technique. They give you the end of the story, then relay the beginning, unraveling the plot slowly and effectively, leading you down one path, only to change courses and go down another, and so on.

Unfortunately, the brain trusts behind Hollywood did not deem Avalos and Weiler worthy to grace them with the winning indy film lottery ticket which, instead, went to Blair Witch. And because of the similarities of the stories and the "controversy" behind which film came out first (for the record, Broadcast came out first), these two vastly different film watching experiences will be forever linked. As a matter of fact, you can get a new DVD 2-pack with both Blair Witch and Last Broadcast!

Lucky for Avalos and Weiler, this tactic may finally expose which are the better filmmakers. I've never understood why the makers of BW have ever received accolades... I mean if the dialogue was improvised and the camera work was done by the actors then what exactly did the "directors" of this film do? But, I digress... again. My point of this rant is this, we should watch Broadcast to see what is possible with very little. It's a perfect example of how, above all else, a quality story and effective use of limited resources can create a compelling and believable film. And perhaps those Witchidiots who purchase the 2-pack will stumble across Broadcast and realize that the "B-side" is the vastly better film.

I visited the Internet Movie Database before writing this rant to discover that Avalos and Weiler have done nothing since Broadcast. I hope that, when we create something so effective out of virtually nothing, that we are treated better by those in "the know." I know most of us live in a world where we feel that if we're just given a chance to show our talent, that we'll be able to make a living at this whole movie making thing.

However, if you compare the way Broadcast and Blair Witch have been treated, you'll have to come to the unsettling realization that, though it may take talent to make your mark, you'll need a lot more than talent in order to do this for a living.