I haven't taken the plunge into Myspace yet, but I plan to for "Killing Down" (and maybe for myself showcasing my directing efforts).

I've of course known about it for quite a while, but haven't taken the leap because I used to think it was "only for teenage kids" and mainly geared towards music. While I still believe the vast majority of Myspace members are teenagers (and music folks), I do know a growing number of "grown-ups" using it and the new Myspace Film section looks interesting as well.

Anyway, I plan to have a "friend's list" soon, but in the meantime check Natalie Raitano's Myspace page at http://www.myspace.com/natalie_raitano.

She runs it in conjunction with a fan, so it's a legit deal. No 14 year boy from Ohio posing as Natalie. It's her and she replies to most postings.

-Blake

Well, I FINALLY got some more of the photos back from the after party of the movie premiere. We've had issues getting the pix from the photographers. We still actually have one photographer that is MIA - so, we'll have even more pix hopefully soon. In the meantime here are a few select shots...

Matthew and his fiance' Shauna (she plays "Lisa")
























Natalie Raitano, Jimmy, Rachel, Rey and Nat's friend (can't recall her name!)
























Oliver Tull with DP Alan Lefebvre and his wife
























Jesse Cortez and Shauna
























Natalie Raitano and Sheree Wilson
























Jesse and Natalie
























Sheree, Matt and Natalie
























Natalie and Blake (yep, on the phone at the party)
























Thanks to Jesse Cortez for getting me these pictures. As mentioned, I hope to have the last round of them up soon.

Oh, and the final version of the movie is ALMOST DONE. :)

-Blake

We're starting our final color correction and have done some test this past week.

We're doing what I'm calling an "indie DI" using FinalTouch HD at Color Cafe in Austin. Omar Godinez is the colorist (and owner of the company) and has over 20 years experience working at places like Filmworkers Club and Video Post & Transfer (both in Dallas).

Here's a quick sample of what we're doing...

Original Image:















Corrected Image:















The original was shot very flat, low contrast with a lot of dynamic range knowing we would be doing color correction.

Pretty cool process and fun seeing it "come alive".

-Blake

In the article below, Jacques Thelemaque of withoutabox.com has a different take than most today on the idea of using "stars" in independent films. He doesn't think you need them. He cites examples of successful films that didn't have them (or they weren't stars at the time).

This is all great and I really like his list of "facts" - BUT it's really all based in theory and unfortunately not the case in today's real world marketplace.

For every "Napoleon Dynamite" success with "no stars" there are literally thousands of other "no star" failures.

Do stars actually help low budget indie films? Depends. If their performance is good, then yes, absolutely. If it's not good, then yes, absolutely. Why? It's all about getting attention for the work. Do I like this? Not really. But it is a fact.

We live in a celebrity driven culture and having a "star" in your film just gives it that extra "legitimacy" that some folks need (i.e. festival programmers, media outlets, distributors, etc.).

Here's Jacques article...

TIP OF THE MONTH: Avoid The "Star" Trap

I don't know how many financing and distribution seminars I've sat in on where filmmakers were sold on the importance of putting a "name" or a "star" in a film to make it more attractive to potential buyers/audiences. The logic of this is, of course, obvious. Until you break it down. Like much of the information (and people) orbiting around the filmmaking universe, the "star" thing is a superficiality embraced by the starstruck, naive, desperate and/or lazy filmmaker that doesn't hold up to substantive thinking.

Let me clarify that I am not saying there aren't benefits to having recognizable actors in your film. There are indeed. Many people in and out of the industry, including festival programmers, are star-obsessed. They put name actors on a pedestal and reward the film accordingly. But do you really want to pander to the "cult of celebrity" mentality? Especially when you do a cool-headed cost/benefit analysis (in terms of time, money, AND energy) of doing the "star" trip.

Fact #1: Very few stars can meaningfully affect a film's bottom line. Any distribution executive will tell you truthfully that there are very few actors that will significantly impact a film's potential revenue despite the widely held contrary notion. The film needs to be the star. The film needs to work.

Fact #2: Stars are hard to get. You can spend months, even years, trying to get stars interested in your project no matter how good your script is. Even if you figure out how to make contact, you are often sent from agent to manager to lawyer to publicist to dogwalker back to agent, and so on - with each one taking months to respond.

Fact #3: Stars can be expensive pains-in-the-ass. Even if you can get them to work for free (or practically free), they are still used to a certain level of treatment and perks that can wind up costing the production considerable amounts of money. Or, they just can't/won't meet the demands of your production - costing you more time, which equals money. Also, stars can often wield their experience and status to run roughshod creatively over a fledgling director and, in fact, over a whole production. Of course, there are many exceptions to this fact - known actors who are respectful and generous with their time and creativity. But there are many more horror stories.

Fact #4: Stars can upset the tone of a film. I don't know how many times I've been thrown out of the authenticity of a film by the sudden appearance of a recognizable actor - bringing with them the baggage of what we know about them from other stuff. I don't want to be lost in a film just to be pulled out when Paris Hilton shows up for a mise-en-scene-chewing cameo.

And really, what is a "star"? Or a "name"? Does it really benefit your film to have a world famous socialite or minor regular from a popular T.V. show (which is what most emerging filmmakers are lucky to have access to) in your film unless their acting ability truly benefits the film creatively? Answer: No. Instead reframe the whole star thing in your head.

First, make your film the star. Think of the film as a whole as the marketing hook that will attract investors and audiences. Your distinctive ideas and creative energy will "sell" the film. If you look at the Sundance successes over the past several years, almost none had "name" actors. From "Chuck and Buck" to "Blair Witch Project" to "Napolean Dynamite." Think of some the great films in world cinema history - DiSica's "The Bicycle Thief", Resnais' "Hiroshima, Mon Amour" or Lynch's "Eraserhead." Now, name the "stars" in them. Good luck.

Second, think in terms of casting the actor that will bring the most CREATIVELY to your film. Yes, there are plenty of "name" actors whose work you love and would be great for your film. If you can get 'em (and they won't make you pull your hair out), go for it. But always make the film, and the process of making the film, your priority in terms of deciding which actor is appropriate to cast. There are plenty of brilliant/and or perfectly appropriate actors for your film who are not "stars" or "names". Have the courage to champion them. Take advantage of their accessibility and collaborative energy. Keep your film authentic. Use them to make your film great and you will then have your "star."

Again, I completely agree with him in theory and wish it were the case. And I do definitely agree that cameos don't do much for a film. I also really like the idea of "making your film the star". But in today's marketplace it just makes sense to protect your investment by using at least a recognizable face, if not a "star", in one or more of the principle roles (if you can afford it and if the role is right for the actor).

Just use your head and don't cast the 60-year-old male cowboy "star" in a role written for a 25-year-old female lifeguard. :)

-Blake

Brian Abrams of the Fort Worth Weekly called me last week requesting a screener of "Killing Down" to do a story/review of the film. I must admit I was hesitant because the film is NOT done and I prefer to put our best foot forward when we go out to the public. But, I did screen the movie at the USA Film Festival so it is in pretty good shape - just not completely finished (mainly the score, some visual effects, color correction and some final editing tweaks).

I decided to go ahead and send it to him warts and all, primarily to piggy back off the USA Film Festival screening and the press we received from that. So I sent it and here's a link to the review (it's at the bottom of the page).

I typically don't put a lot of weight on reviews - positive or negative - filmmaking is very subjective and so are audiences responses. I tend to fall into the camp of "any press is good press just as long as you spell my name right". Of course I prefer positive reviews and in this case Brian liked the work, which I'm happy to hear.

BTW, still waiting to get pictures from the photographers from the premiere and the after party. As soon as I get them I'll post them to the blog.

In the meantime, please check out the review and remember he saw a "work-in-progress" version of the film. :)

-Blake