A Look At Future Pathways

I came in to the course without a clue what I wanted to do later in life, though I was thinking of doing something film related or science based, this course has given me a bit more of an indictation. As I really did enjoy writing the script and taking part in actually filming the short, the course itself did have a "industry day" wherein many speakers from the industry came in and spoke about hoe they got into the industry, some of whom got in by climbing the ranks, others by going to university or film school.

So, it quickly became apparent that there wasn't a sure-fire way of getting into the film industry, especially when you take into account many of the major directors had to finance their own debut features to launch their careers. I had always wanted to go to university, though I hadn't been quite sure what exactly I wanted to study, but I do remember one of the speakers (Tim Murray) had remarked on the "Industry day" "after leaving university I felt like a film critic, after leaving film school I felt like I was a filmmaker".

This gave it all a different spin, I had wanted to go to a film school, but the cost had detered me, that I didn't really want to specialise on just filmmaking as I am still not entirely sure what I want to do in the future. Though the course has shown me that I really enjoy filmmaking, it has also shown me how hard it is to get in to, and I would probably need something to fall back on so as to not have all my eggs in one basket.

Review Of The Project

I think that (personally) the project went well, the film fits within all the constraints that were outlined earlier, it's two minutes twenty second long and the film itself is pretty good. It met all the criteria and after the premiere the audience seemed to like, although my little brother didn't understand it (he didn't understand any of them), but then again he doesn't really watch that many. Everyone I spoke to seemed to enjoy the film, so I quantify that as a success.

I enjoyed discussing ideas with the others in the group and the actual filming was pretty entertaining, as I got saddled with wearing the costume as another actor dropped out, so that was a bit unexpected but it was pretty good to experience what it was like act under direction of a crew. I also enjoyed working to deadlines for the group, writing the script, it forced me to actually write something instead of trying to write and dithering on what to put into it. Whereas actually writing for the deadlines made me have to be decisive and just write; though to be honest, when I had to write the script I spent six hours writer's block trying to figure out a way of getting a very visual outline into script form and last two pages whilst taking on board all the feedback, that for me was probably the least enjoyable and most challenging bit of the course: being stuck with writer's block and having to submit a script to the group. But, that was just a small part of the course, everything else was great and I enjoyed just about every minute of it.

The course helped me learn alot about the film industry and a lot about script writing, from turning your constraints into strengths and how to format your script correctly. The course also helped me actually use Facebook useful as a communicative device (as opposed to just a way of viewing memes) and has allowed me to easily share outlines and scripts with the group and get instant feedback, and in general the course has helped me work better with others and communicate much more clearly.

Looking back at my project plan, it all really went to plan, we did end up with a two minute twenty second long film that doesn't feature gratuitous violence or gore and everyone pulled their weight, it all really ran like clockwork, the only major challenge was an actor pulled out but we soon got round that (i.e. I had to fill in).

As a result of the project I now have an better understanding of filmmaking and the industry and how to get ahead in it (networking, lots and lots of networking); the product that was made (the short film) did hit all the criteria and everyone did seem happy with it, and in terms of learning new skills everyone in the group learnt alot about their specific allocated role and how to perform that role to the best of their ability.

The others seemed to enjoy the finished film and the course itself, which I can agree with as the course was really informative and a great experience that I am glad to have taken part. If I were to do it again I would probably try to write a better script or come up with a better idea, that would maximise the use of the surrounding area and the use of equipment (as with our film we didn't use any sound recording devices).

Below: Screenshots from a group review of the project, evaluating how we all managed to perform our roles.

  

Link to interview about the project

This interview is about the course, filming and my role on the project.

http://www.interviews.kinematic.tv/KyleH.mp4

Revised Version Of The Script (Post-Feedback)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#5058

 

 

by

 

Kyle Holden

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“#5058”

 

FADE IN:

 

INT.    MENTAL INSTITUTE  - DAY

 

 

The lone figure of #5058 stands over the window in a cold, white room gazing into the distance, into the unknown.

 

A FIGURE becomes visible through the window, across the road, but there is no mistaking that it is looking directly at #5058.

 

#5058 puts his hand up, and starts to perform a slow, unsure wave.  The FIGURE responds with a similar awkward wave, completely devoid of emotion, with all the grace of a child mimicking an action.

 

INT. CINEMA – NIGHT

 

 

The seats are all empty bar one- the middle seat of the front row, occupied by none other than #5058, who is now heavily engrossed in the film.

 

Blissfully unaware of the FIGURE sitting in the back row, watching #5058 intently.

 

#5058 leans forward curiously, still unaware of the FIGURE at the back of the cinema, although now he has moved a row closer.

 

#5058 braces himself for what is to come; the FIGURE is a row closer.

 

#5058 is becoming more and more engaged with the film shown and is completely oblivious to the FIGURE appearing closer and closer to him.

 

The FIGURE appears in the seat directly behind #5058, he turns around the see nothing but an empty seat. He turns back to watch the film only to find the FIGURE in the seat next to him.

 

The FIGURE turns to look at #5058, the light falls on his face revealing an vacant space.

 

 

INT. MENTAL INSTITUTE – DAY

 

 

#5058 sits in the middle of the cold white room.

 

FADE OUT

 

CREDITS.

Original Draft Of The Script

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#5058

 

 

by

 

Kyle Holden

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“#5058”

 

FADE IN:

 

INT.    MENTAL INSTITUTE  - DAY

 

The lone figure of #5058 stands over the window in a cold, white room gazing into the distance, into the unknown.

 

#5058 (V.O)

I really didn’t mean to do it, or that’s what I ended up telling myself, it’s just…you can never be sure can you. Did your unconscious mind set out with it’s own agenda, that try as you might to deviate from; you just end up right back in the same position. Back to square one.

 

A FIGURE becomes visible through the window, across the road, but there is no mistaking that it is looking directly at #5058.

 

#5058 (V.O) (CONT’D)

But it was around the time of the accident that I started to see things, at first it I wasn’t even sure it was even there; a trick of the light, a reflection, it couldn’t have been anything out of the ordinary. But as time went on I began to see things more clearly.

 

#5058 puts his hand up, and starts to perform a slow, unsure wave.  The FIGURE responds with a similar awkward wave, completely devoid of emotion, with all the grace of a child mimicking an action.

 

 

INT. CINEMA – NIGHT

 

The seats are all empty bar one- the middle seat of the front row, occupied by none other than #5058, who is now heavily engrossed in the film.

 

Blissfully unaware of the FIGURE sitting in the back row, watching #5058 intently.

 

Film Character #1 (O.S)

Hey, where did you come from?

 

Film Character #2 (O.S)

I’m the…plumber.

(pause)

Carole sent me; I heard the pipes were backed up.

 

Film Character #1 (O.S)

Well, if you say so, though I can’t really say I’ve had much trouble with it, but if Carole thinks there’s a problem, then there must be a problem, typical Carole “ Oh let’s not discuss this let’s just fritter money away and hope for the best”

(pause)

Right this way.

 

(The sound of a large bag of tools can be heard from the screen)

 

#5058 leans forward curiously, still unaware of the FIGURE at the back of the cinema, although now he has moved a row closer.

 

Film Character #1 (O.S)

So, what’s wrong with it?

 

(Metal tapping)

 

Film Character #2 (O.S)

It looks to something to do with the left phalanges, don’t worry though I can have it fixed in just a jiffy.

 

(Metal rummaging)

 

Film Character #1 (O.S)

Wow, that’s quick. So, did you hear about what happened at the Peterson house a few nights ago? You never think a thing like that will ever happen in your neighbourhood and then that happens, you’d think people would be a bit more diligent as to who they let in; some people are just so gullible… 

 

(pauses)

 

What is that?

 

Film Character #2 (S.O)

Carole.

 

#5058 braces himself for what is to come; the FIGURE is a row closer.

 

(A loud wet thud is heard from the screen, followed by excessive screaming)

 

With each thud #5058 flinches and swings his body around his, each movement is becoming increasingly violent as the screams carry on, but with each convulsion the FIGURE appears closer and closer.

 

The FIGURE appears in the seat directly behind #5058, he turns around the see nothing but an empty seat. He turns back to watch the film only to find the FIGURE in the seat next to him.

 

The FIGURE turns to look at #5058, the light falls on his face revealing an vacant space.

Film Character #1/FIGURE

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO MY FACE!

 

 

INT. OLD HOUSE – NIGHT

 

#5058 is looking down at the bloodied corpse of the FIGURE (off screen), his eyes are bulging and is drenched in blood.

 

INT. MENTAL INSTITUTE – DAY

 

#5058 sits in the middle of the cold white room.

 

FADE OUT

 

CREDITS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Arts Organisations

The Showroom
The Showroom is an independent art-house cinema in Sheffield that hosts events and various arts activities, including film festivals (like the prestigious "Doc Fest") and educational courses (like the "BFI Film Academy"). The Showroom hosts many festivals over the course of the year, these include: Celluloid Screams, Love Bytes, Off The Shelf, Sensoria, ShAFF, Showcomotion and Doc/Fest; Doc/Fest being the largest documentary festival in Europe and features 2600 delegates from over 60 countries. Celluloid Screams is a two day long festival in October that features both classic and contemporary horror films, along with special guests, last year's were Frank Henenlotter (director of 'Basket Case', 'Brain Damage' and 'Frankenhooker'), Lee Hardcastle (the creator of many horror themed stop-motion shorts) and Kier-La Janisse (the authour of 'House Of Psychotic Women'

 The Showroom operates a mixed economic model, as the Workstation (under the same roof) houses creative businesses, this creates a profit that is used to run certain things on the cinema side, the cinema is also working to get more activity growing around film up in Sheffield as part of the "Film Forever" scheme run by the BFI, and are trying to create a buzz that will last past the end of the scheme (2017). The Showroom is soon to be entering interesting times with the introduction of another independent cinema in Sheffield.

The cinema opened in 1993 with two screens, though over the years a further two screens have been added along with a bar, cafe and a meeting room, the cinema is well-known for screening mainstream films along side art-house films and host a diverse programme, along with specific theme nights ('Cult Tuesdays'),  film seasons, special screenings (such as the monthly 'Midnight Mauraders' screening) and events (like the monthly 'Showroom Shorts', which showcases short films).

The Showroom doesn't just show films, the Showroom houses many different facilities (as mentioned above) and caters for these by running different events with them, like the cafe, this holds food classes and event orientated dinners/meals.

http://www.showroomworkstation.org.uk/

Creative England
Creative England is a funding organisation that invests in and supports creative ideas, talent and businesses in film, TV, games and digital media. Their aim is help support talented idividuals and businesses so that they can reach their full creative and commercial potential; they also try to identify future oportunities to grow the economies and generate jobs, with offices across the country (in Salford, Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Nottingham, Pinewood and Elstree) they are a national organisation with many strong local and regional links.

They don't just invest money, they strive to create strong long-term relationships with their partners; they also provide practical support for film and television whilst organising networking events and providing mentoring and business advice. This all part of a "money plus" service they offer, that aims to combine local knowledge with national and international reach.

They do this to try to generate, profile and value within England's own successful creative industries, attempting to raise their ambitions further. They also do it to provide better access to mentoring, infrastructure, business planning, finance, markets, new ideas and wider networks to the rest of the company, as they see an inequality between the access to these services in London and the rest of the country, causing talent to be wasted and opportunities lost. They believe that the whole country should benefit from London's world status, meaning they go out of their way to provide these services to talented people across the country.

They offers many services for different projects, for example "iFeatures"-a low-budget feature scheme that tries to show a different side of England, it provides production funding fo feature films whilst working with lottery funding. They also have two talent centres in England (one in Brighton and one in Sheffield) that aim to work with emerging talent (i.e. yet to make a film with proper distribution), although they do not work with people in full time education, and they also offer short film funding and development funding.

In keeping with this need to show a different side of England, they also are the national agency for providing free support for filming England (outside of London), working in partnership with the British Film Commision to promote England internationally.

http://www.creativeengland.co.uk/

Arts Challenge: Review

The challenge went mostly to plan, it did help that I have written scripts before and read a few screenplays to try and attempt to counter my inability to write any realistic dialogue, though it was only through doing this arts challenge, that I managed to focus it a lot better, than in previous attempts.

Although sifting through many different sites for advice did become quite tedious, as some sites overlapped, some were contradictory to others and some were predominantly giving techniques that were only applicable for novelist. So to over come this I had to alter the search parameters to bring up results that would help with the arts challenge, and then cherry pick from that collection of sites techniques that were relevant.

It was this that took the most time to get right, due to the amount of time it took to source the information, whereas with the other section I had already done the research on these two writers prior, and had read a great deal on both (and a few of their screenplays), this allowed the writing to flow fairly easier compared to the other.

I didn't really have to make any changes to the original plan, other than I looked at a few more techniques (originally I stated that I would look at 2, though I ended up looking at 5) this was because there wasn't much I could write about them, and the other techniques seemed really useful, and so the best course of action to me was to get all them all down.

So, overall I classify it as a success, in regards to researching new techniques, although if I were to do it again I would probably widen my scope and try to get examples of writers from different parts of the world and different industries, to compare, also I'd get more techniques down and try to find out how specific writers create realistic dialogue.

An example of this new found ability to focus my writing and the employment (or attempted employment) of the techniques can be seen below, it's from the opening of film that I'm currently working on.

It hasn't been formatted correctly and it still needs a lot of work doing to it (it is a vague outline so that I can see where it's all going, so that I can build on it later), but the dialogue for it just flowed easily (once I got into it). When I got down to writing it was easier to focus myself and just write and though the dialogue in this extract (due to the context- reanimating a corpse) can't be considered realistic, the rapport between the characters and the nervous energy of the 'Doctor' does seem well developed; it does need a bit of work doing to it but most of it does sound alright when read out-loud (although the 'Clark' character's dialogue does need a bit of work).

I also got another member of the group to review my challenge, her review is shown below:

 

Arts Challenge: Writing techniques to make dialogue more realistic

I searched the internet for articles on how to improve dialogue, especially in regards to making it sound more realistic (this is the basis of my 'Arts Challenge' as I have trouble with this in my own writing, especially script writing), the results will be described below.

Every character should have it's own distinct voice
A script will have multiple characters and , like in real life, they have different voices, so when writing a script extra effort should be taken to stress this point otherwise the characters will morph into one speaking entity, which will not sound realistic in the slightest and just kill the script.

Read the dialogue outloud
This piece of advise is mentioned on numerous web sites, generally it's purpose is to make you think, in the context of the scene could you imagine this being said and is it engaging or interesting for an audience to listen to, if not then it needs a bit of work doing to it.

Abbreviate your dialogue
Not everyone speaks in standard english and neither do your characters, so try to implement this into your dialogue along with colloquialisms that are associated with the backgrounds of the characters, although you shouldn't go overboard as this will reduce your characters to simple caricatures. My favorite quote for this is "You may speak like an english scholar, but that doesn't mean your characters will" (unfortunately I can't place where I heard this).

Have others read your dialogue
This will offer a fresh perspective on what you have written and after being entrenched in writing it for a while, it will highlight error that you may have overlooked. But overall they will be able to tell you if it makes sense.

Listen to people
Another one that cropped up on numerous sites, this is to gain a good understanding of how people actually talk, so that you can mimic it in your work, though in a more engaging and interesting way that will keep the audience reading/watching.

Sources:
- http://reelauthors.com/script-analysis-coverage/how-to-write-great-dialogue.php#sthash.IBv42x0v.dpuf
-http://www.steves-digicams.com/knowledge-center/how-tos/filmmaking-tips/screenwriting-how-to-write-the-dialogue.html
-http://www.studentfilmmakers.com/forums/showthread.php/5616-17-Fast-Tips-for-Creating-Realistic-Dialogue
-http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090128102939AAl89aE

4th January 2014

Arts Challenge: A Look At Two Writers

For the Arts Challenge, I'm going to look at two scriptwriters (well, they're writer-directors) whose writing I personally admire, these writers are Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith. I enjoy the writing of the two in their films, particularly Kevin Smith's realistic dialogue and sense of humour that is evident in most of his films (except the out-and-out slapstick and fantasy film, e.g. 'Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back' and 'Dogma'), and Tarantino's influence on 90s crime films after 'Pulp Fiction' came out with it's hip-talking, pop culture drenched dialogue.

Quentin Tarantino
Was born on the 27th of march 1963 in Knoxville, Tennessee (though he moved to California and subsequently LA at an early age), dropping out from high school at the age of 15 to attend acting classes full time, he soon quit (after two years) and worked at a video rental store in Manhattan Beach. He began writing and attempting to get his scripts off the ground during this time, these include 'True Romance' and  'Natural Born Killers', though he had to sell these in after it became apparent he couldn't get the projects off the ground (however after he became a well known name, both were subsequently made, albeit with different directors) but they both, especially show his emerging style of non-chronological structure and a script drenched in pop culture references (this is evident in his screenplay for 'True Romance', which was later adapted by Tony Scott in 1993, in what is a very faithful adaption, even though it straightens out the narrative and changes the ending).

He then helped co-write and direct 'My Best Friend's Birthday', although only half of the film survives after a fire in the editing room decimated the final reel, the film has never been released and Tarantino himself has voiced his displeasure at the film and having called it his 'Film School'.

However in 1992 he burst on to the scene with the dialogue centric heist film 'Reservoir Dogs', which was released to critical acclaim during the Sundance film festival, though the film gained more of an audience post-'Pulp Fiction' when Tarantino's presence became more well known. Stylistically the film features hallmarks that will feature heavily throughout his filmography, these include the use of non-linear narrative to play with the audience's sympathies and, what some would deem excessive, use of profanity.

These were used throughout his 90s crime phase, before reverting back to his grindhouse roots, shedding the realistic depictions of the LA underworld for excessive bloodbaths in the style of exploitation films he consumed while young, though with modern riffs. A prime example of this is 2003's 'Kill Bill Volume 1', a tribute to the Shaw Brothers martial arts films of the 70s (even going so far as to feature their indent in the opening) and most revenge fuelled exploitation films from this this era, whilst utilising his signature use of non-linear storytelling.

Though this "borrowing" of elements from older films has been repeatedly criticised by filmmakers and critics alike as copying, however I think that this offers fans of older films a chance to spot the references, for example the inspiration for Daryl Hannah's character in 'Kill Bill' was directly inspired by the lead character in 'Thriller: A Grim Picture' (AKA: 'They Call Her One Eye') ( a film which Tarantino has described as "the roughest revenge film") and it uses the same typography (at the end of 'Kill Bill: Volume 2'), this is fairly obscure film trivia that allows those who "are in the know" to get a lot more out of the film, and it allows those audience members to feel like they are in on a big in-joke (which to an extent they are).

This is also one of the reasons that I like his films, and his style of writing, the paying homage to older, and more obscure films which allows the modern generation to dig them up. Though he does lift elements from other films it does add to his films, giving them a collage-esque feel, this allows him to revisit and stylise a certain genre, capturing the highs , and in some cases cross pollinating it with another ( a la 'Kill Bill: Volume 2', which mixes 1970s martial arts films with the atmosphere and themes of spaghetti westerns) to create a truly wild ride.

His movies have been influential to a whole generation of film makers and after the 2007 double bill experiment 'Grindhouse', practically created the 'fauxsploitation' genre and revitalised an interest with exploitation films in modern audiences, including my own- as 'Grindhouse' served as a gateway to an era of film that I had previously no-idea existed, so in that respects it was fairly important for me (and I have enjoyed the many fauxsploitation films that have been released in it's wake).

After the 'Grindhouse' experiment (which undeservedly flopped spectacularly, forcing the Weinstein Company to hack the two films apart for distribution outside of North America), he moved on to his "alternative history trilogy", starting with 'Inglourious Basterds' and continues with 'Django Unchained', they both show off his dialogue writing abilities, especially with 'Inglourious Basterds', which has a script which is fantastically unpredictable with extremely well written characters with acts of violence that come out of nowhere, this all fits in with Tarantino's desire to give the audience a wild ride.    

Filmography:
-My Best Friend's Birthday (1987) (Co-wrote, directed and starred in)
-Reservoir Dogs (1992)*
-True Romance (1993) (Written by)*
-Pulp Fiction (1994)*
-Natural Born Killers (1994) (Story by)*
-Four Rooms (1995) ( Segment 'The Man From Hollywood')*
-From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) (Written by and starring)*
-Jackie Brown (1997)
-Kill Bill: Volume 1 (2003)*
-Kill Bill: Volume 2 (2004)*
-Sin City (2005) (Special guest director)*
-Grindhouse (2007) ('Death Proof' segment)*
-Inglorious Basterds (2009)*
-Django Unchained (2012)*

(All the films market with a asterisk I have seen)

My top 5 Quentin Tarantino films:
-Pulp Fiction
-Reservoir Dogs
-True Romance
-Inglorious Basterds
-Kill Bill: Volume 2

Kevin Smith
A film school drop out who maxed out his credit cards and sold his comic collection to finance his first film,'Clerks', following a day in the life of two convenience store workers as they go about there duties and debate the intricacies of life, the implications of your job and how they affect behaviour and deathstar politics. A film that really showcases his sense of humour and ability to write dialogue, displayed by the fact that the characters never feel less than real, this is almost like a fore bearer for his subsequent entries in the 'Viewaskeniverse' series of films (though realism is soon jettisoned in the fantasy film 'Dogma' and the cartoonish 'Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back', which reduces it's characters to caricatures).

Smith was himself inspired by Richard Linklater's 1991 film 'Slacker', a film commonly considered (along with a few others) to be the starting point for the independent film movement of the '90s along with reclaiming the term "slacker" from its original use as an insult to the description of  "a person regarded as one of a large group or generation of young people (especially in the early to mid 1990s) characterised by apathy, aimlessness, and lack of ambition". The film's influence is evident in Smith's debut feature (and the rest of his filmography), from the oddball characters to the hypothetical philosophical musings of the characters.

The structure of the film was originally based on the 'Divine Comedy', whereby each section of customer would be another circle of hell and alluded to via title cards(hence the protagonist's name: Dante), though this was changed at the last minute (whilst flicking through a dictionary) to sophisticated phrases, this in itself has been interpreted as part of the film's Generation X message of intelligent people being stuck in menial jobs. This almost comes across as an autobiographical statement from Smith (who at the time of filming was still working in a convenience store), voicing his disgust about a generation stuck, like himself, in menial jobs.

The film finally managed to find a distribution deal at the Sundance film festival in 1994 (after winning the Filmmaker's Trophy) with Miramax, after a fabled dinner with Harvey Weinstein which ended with the worldwide distribution of 'Clerks'. The film grossed over $3 million and received critical acclaim, thus launching Smith's filmmaking career that has lasted 20 years.

The quality of his writing stands out in his films, capturing the intricacies of life and how people actually act, this is especially evident in 'Chasing Amy', though it's the transplanting of comic writing techniques into a film environment that is interesting about his work, creating a 'shared universe' with his characters, as they make reference to events taking place in each film and even make appearances in each film (this comes to a head with 'Jay And Silent Bob Strikes Back', as a sort of send off for the series, although made new films in this shared universe as of late, and plans to film another soon ('Clerks III')).

This comic writing technique has led to some interesting approaches to subject matter in his films, most interestingly in 'Dogma' which distills Catholicism into superhero lore, leading to the film having a comic book feel, though this irreverent treatment of the Catholic faith did land him in hot water with various religious groups, especially the Catholic League. Though, he did try to counter this by appearing with the protesters with a picket sign; this showed the ignorance of many of the protesters: they hadn't even seen the film.

All the controversy is fairly ironic considering Smith himself has constantly referred to the film as "a celebration of my faith", not an attempt at mocking Catholicism, but it is worth noting that the Catholic League had begun protesting before the film had even finished production.

After the controversy of 'Dogma' Smith returned to full-on slap-stick comedy, a climactic ending to the 'Viewaskewnivers' series, with cameos a plenty and a laugh-a-minute pacing, the film proved favourable at the box office opening #3 and grossing $33,788,161, though the film took a bit of flack from GLAAD for featuring an abundance of gay jokes (ironic considering they had praised Smith's earlier film 'Chasing Amy'), though missing the fact that the film was a satire targeted at mainstream teen comedies and their attitudes. It also took 3 submissions to the MPAA before the film managed to receive an 'R' rating, after initially receiving the dreaded NC-17.

After closing the book on the 'Viewaskewniverse' series with 'Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back', he got to work on 'Jersy Girl', which was critically trounced and performed poorly at the box office, before "going back to the well" (in Smith's own words) with 'Clerks II', which provides a sort of epilogue for the series, though (in my opinion) it isn't as good as the original.

Smith also works on a pod casts(SMODcast) with a fair few of the contributors to his films, and many of his newer projects ('Tusk', 'Helena Handbasket' and 'Here Comes The Krampus') have originated on there. He has also written a few comics that bridge the gaps between his films, and uses social media sites as a way of interacting with his fan base on more personal level.
Filmography:
-Clerk (1994)*
-Mallrats (1995)*
-Chasing Amy (1997)*
-Dogma (1999)*
-Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back (2001)*
-Jersey Girl (2004)
-Clerks II (2006)*
-Zack And Miri Make A Porno (2008)*
-Cop Out (2010)
-Red State (2011)
-Tusk (2014)
-Clerks III (TBA)
And as of late he is currently working on a festive horror anthology called 'Here Comes The Krampus' and the religious blockbuster, featuring Christzilla, 'Helena Handbasket'.
(All the films marked with an asterisk I have seen)

My top 5 Kevin Smith films:
-Clerks
-Mallrats
-Dogma
-Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back
-Chasing Amy

11th January 2014

25th January 2014- The Showing Of The Films

The 25th was the culmination of all the previous weeks of hard work, it was the chance to see the film on the big screen (and the all the inserts for the first time) with friends and family in the audience. The plan was for us all arrive at 10, whilst the guests would arrive at 10:30 before the films start at 11:15, this allowed us to practise a short sentence about what we had learnt during the course that we had to deliver to the audience one-by-one (we had been sent an e-mail about this the night before).

The 45 minute section between the guests arriving and the screening allowed for us the attempt to use our 'networking' skills (networking had previously been the focus of a previous workshop and has been stressed by many of the speakers as being a crucial aspect of the film making industry), though we sort of gravitated towards people we knew.

The films started at 11:15, after we all had to introduce ourselves with the practised sentence about what we had learnt, this all ran smoothly followed by a speech by Meabh on what we had been doing on the course. After which, the films started, though my group's film was shown last; every one seemed pleased with the films and the audience seemed to enjoy them (though my brother later confessed he didn't understand any of them). We were given copies of all the films with the inserts before we left.

So overall a good ending to a great course, that I will be recommending to people for next year, it has also given me a good insight in to the film industry and a great opportunity to see the development of a film from idea to script to finished film, along with all the roles that are needed. After this I will definitely be making more films and applying the skills I have learnt during the course.