I have been doing some redundant thinking of late... That is what quite a few people would call it.
Is the point of creating imagery, whether still or motion picture, creating works that are technically correct or is it communication. Should we call something that is communicative in nature but does not necessarily meet the highest standards of technical perfection a good work or should we call something that is technically correct but does not say a thing, a good work?
What is the role of the camera? Is it that instrument which enables us to create images and partake in the various activities around us and where need be, say something through the work we do? Or is it "just a tool" that we can ignore in the supposedly "intellectual processing" of ourselves? I believe that the camera is that tool which enables us to communicate, stimulate a thought in another human being, or just simply make them believe in something. I can take a picture of something and make someone believe that it is something totally different from what it actually is.
In the realm of the moving image, that is films, I have always believed that the point of making a film is to say something to others. It is visual storytelling. So point is not whether one makes the perfect frame or not, or whether one crosses the Line of Action, but whether one can create the image that is necessary for the mood of the scene to be developed in the viewer. Why are low shots used to show a dominant character in films? Because the placement of the camera makes the character look a certain way. When RGV decides to shoot Sarkar from a low angle, it does create a certain mood in the viewer. In addition to that, there are other factors which affect the film. the yellow tone used in the film also adds the feeling of power and money to the film. I think it also lends it a little violent feel.
When we are in institutions where we learn art, there needs to be a freedom given to our minds from ourselves. We very quickly get drawn into a certain "herd" tendency and try and do what has been done before, better. Or else we try and be one up with our peers and do something on similar lines as they are doing. What one needs to do is find for himself what he wants to do, and then work towards that no matter who says what. When a person enjoys doing commercial work, there will be a lot of purists who will say that that is not the right way to photograph or make films. It is not necessarily that way. When one makes a Bollywood commercial film, it can still be very well shot and well conceived and a well told story. There is enough room for experimentation in the field, so no matter what anyone says, one should look to do what they really want to because the school is the only place where one can get the chance to experiment.
What I want to say is that generally we find people doing short films which have serious undertones and a serious story to tell. Rarely do we find people who try and do Comedy, or plain and simple Action films in the short films that are created in film schools. I might be wrong, but I am talking from the perspective of what I have seen till now. I hope someone proves me wrong... It will be so cool to wrong for once.... I would love to prove myself wrong...
So now, scripting time!!!
