/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

A FILMMAKER'S MANIFESTO

I don't consider myself to be just a writer, director, cinematographer or editor. These are all part and parcel of a much larger discipline. I strive to be a filmmaker. I want to conceive and execute the total vision of a film, not just an individual aspect.

I make films that interest me personally, and I am interested in creating content that is cerebral, visceral, and artistic.

Cerebral means that I have created an intelligent story, compelling characters, honest psychological motivation, and simultaneously challenge and respect dramatic convention. Visceral implies that the film will acknowledge the craft, language and history of filmmaking, and be thoughtful and dynamic in terms of visual convention and inherent content. Artistic means that the piece satisfies me as an artist, and has something relevant to say through story, imagery or subtext.

If I do my job, than the product of these three elements will be a film that addresses a larger superobjective: to make film that is both art and entertainment.

A small digression: there are two kinds of art: commercial and fine. My background is fine art, and I understand the role that a fine artist plays in society. A fine artist has no responsibility to any audience other than himself. It is an artist's responsibility to challenge society as a solitary voice, armed only with their self-knowledge and convictions. And a true artist will never allow issues of commerce to taint or influence their work. However, it is not a filmmaker's sole function to be a fine artist. There is that small issue of commerce to consider. The sheer act of creating film is wholly dependent upon money, since the scale of vision is directly proportional to the amount of money needed to create it. Therefore, a filmmaker's work must find an audience, and must achieve some modicum of financial success to perpetuate a career.

I am not interested in speaking to a minority. As an artist, I am more interested in publishing my thoughts to a majority. I can preach on my stump about topical issues that concern me, but words have little impact if no one is listening.

Although aspiring to create entertainment smacks of low art, let me be clear on one thing: it is the genre of film that has the broadest appeal and the largest audience, and ergo the larger return on investment. It is also the kind of film that has the greatest resonance in the public memory. To serve up message in the guise of entertainment is certainly one way of making it more palatable. And lest we forget, film and theatre were both born of the same ancient, base human need: the need to tell a story. The primary functions of storytelling are to communicate and entertain.

So although art and commerce are indeed strange bedfellows, I believe that they are not mutually exclusive. I want to exist at the nexus where art and commerce meet, therefore achieving two ends: vocalizing my thoughts to a majority, and perpetuating a career.

We are at a strange intersection in the history of film and art in general. Fine art has become almost impotent to today's advanced media consumers, relegated to interior design, advertising and cultural window dressing. Traditional outlets such as art galleries and museums catering to an elite few have little to no impact in creating movements or challenging public opinion. They preach to the already converted. The motion picture studio system industry has no noble aspirations; it is entirely about commerce. To fly in the face of this is both fruitless and career suicide. It is not enough to render “the good story well told” anymore. So, where to go?

As an artist, I have no choice. I am compelled to speak, but I want to do it in a manner that effects the most change and ensures the opportunity to speak again. I abhor postmodernism and pastiche, where lazy artists who lack vision simply re-arrange what has been done before and serve it up as new art. What is needed is a respectful deconstruction of film in general. To challenge and subvert traditional notions of what constitutes genre and language.

What is needed are films that satisfy this simple credo: be both meaningful art and satisfying entertainment filtered through a personal vision.