|
1 How would you describe the aesthetics of your film?
I wanted to stretch the boundaries of straight reportage, which is so commonly
found in documentary filmmaking. I combined
DV footage, still photography and archival footage, both narrative and documentary. I also incorporated some quasi-subliminal messages, in essence the words "The Jewish Question" flashing across the screen
at key moments in the film to hammer home the point that The Jewish Autonomous Region was set up in response to this Jewish Question. We used a very fascinating 1934 Soviet propaganda film, "Seekers
of Happiness", that has rarely, if ever, been seen outside the Soviet Union, to provide an ironic counterpoint to the footage I shot during production. All the actors in the that film were from the Moscow
Yiddish State Theatre (under the artistic director of the famed Yiddish actor Solomon Mikhoels, who supported Stalin and was assassinated during Stalin's increasingly insane and murderous rampages). In fact,
all of these actors were purged in some fashion, ranging from repression and imprisonment to murder. In this instance, that film, as well as the life behind its creation, supported my documentarian vision.
2 Why did you choose to shoot on dv?
First, cost was a main factor.
I shot a feature film on 35mm, and the crew was enormous and there was a constant concern about not burning too much film. With d.v., I could shoot as much as I wanted to, and the crew was minimal (in many cases, it was just me, my cameraman and an assistant). But also, when subjects are willing to open up to you, the interviews can be over an hour straight without stopping. With 35mm, you have 11-12 minutes max, and reloading the camera breaks the flow of the interview. That was an equally important factor in my choice. Also, given that we were shooting in small places (a train, a car, even small apartments), a 35mm camera and it's attendant support equipment is just impossible. The dv gave us the opportunity to shoot in a tiny cauchette, where there were 6 passengers. And there would be instances where we would literally have to run to grab a shot or a subject... and you can't run with a 35mm camera. The final reason, which we anticipated and which turned out to be the case, is that we were going to shoot a film in an area where there is a great deal of suspicion and paranoia. There's no way to be discreet with a 35mm camera. But we were 2-3 people with a small d.v. camera, which to an outsider could appear to be a tourist camera.
3 What was special about shooting in dv (e.g.compared to 35mm, was it your
first time with dv or are you used to it)?
Please see my answers above regarding my reasons for using d.v.
Yes, it was my first shoot -- although not my first film shot on tape (my previous 2 documentaries, "The Last Klezmer" and "Carpati: 50 Miles, 50 Years", were shot on Hi-8 and subsequently blown up to film). In the next 2 months I will begin editing another documentary I shot on d.v. after I shot L'Chayim, Comrade Stalin".
4 Which camera and which editing software did you use?
We shot on a Canon mini-d.v. We edited on the Avid.
5 What was your shoot-edit ratio?
1-3.
6 Would you have preferred to shoot in another format? If so which?
It all depends on what the film is, and the circumstances of production. If the
film had lent itself to 35mm (not just because it's 35mm, but because of color, image and subject matter), then perhaps I would have shot on 35mm.
But because the documentary films I make are socio-politically oriented (as opposed to nature landscapes), I don't anticipate shooting in 35mm in the near future for a documentary. In fact, my next narrative feature will be shot on d.v.
7 Does using dv mean that you are considering other means of distribution
opposing the established? If so which?
No. Obviously, it lends itself quite easily to television and video exhibition,
and increasingly, theatres around the world are accomodating some form of tape exhibition. But the bottom line is, regardless of your format, it's the quality and content of the film that will dictate the
marketplace. And d.v. blows up quite well to 35mm, which is probably what we're going to do with "L'Chayim, Comrade Stalin".
8 One good word about dv (or two):
I think I've written several good words about it. But the final thought:
DV evens the playing field for the independent filmmaker, because money is not the deciding factor in who gets to make a film. Having said that, everyone thinks they can make a film. Still, only those with talent, with an ability to tell a story, can make a good film, regardless of format.
9 One bad word about dv (or two):
When you are shooting outdoors - landscapes and panoramas - you will not pick
up the subtleties as well as you would with 35mm.
You don't get the full richness of the color spectrum. Because the camera is so light, there's a danger of bouncing around, of not being aware that the shot isn't steady. With a heavy camera, you're aware of this. If it's your intent to be shaky, that's good, but if it isn't, you must take extra care with either handheld or tripod. And even with the advancements that are happening seemingly weekly with dv production, there is still a bit of a loss when you blow your tape up to 35mm.
|