In addition to the new domain (austindill.net, and yes I’m aware that austindill.com is now an excellent marketplace for prescription meds, but I assure you I have nothing to do with any such transactions), updates to the website include a link in the Blogroll to my newly created Flickr, and the migration of all the short films over to Vimeo. Not only does Vimeo have better video quality, but it has the added benefit of my films not being muted every time YouTube feels the urge to comply with international copyright laws.

The more astute visitors of said page will notice the addition of a new film entitled “Beware”, which is the first project I completed in my freshman Frame and Sequence class at NYU. The class requires students to create short projects out of only 35 mm still images edited together in Final Cut. The projects include a documentary, a narrative, and an experimental; Beware was my experimental project.

Enjoy!

Superbad has left the building. The success of the Judd Apatow comedies (40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up, and Superbad) has created a new definition of the R-rated comedy. Despite such a precedent, first-time director Jon Poll, a producer on Virgin, seeks to find his own groove with the recent release of Charlie Bartlett.

The movie centers around the entrepreneurial escapades of wealthy prep-school reject Charlie Bartlett, played by 19-year-old Anton Yelchin. The movie focuses on his influence on his high school contemporaries, his overwhelmed mother, and his aging, alcoholic, and disrespected principal (portrayed expertly by Hollywood veteran Robert Downey Jr.).

In an interview with the Sharon High School Talon the freshman director reported “what I liked about Charlie is it had humor, heart, and something on its mind.” Humor indeed. The handful of critics at an advanced screening last month laughed riotously when Charlie auditioned for Shakespeare’s Henry V with a monologue about a teenage girl getting her first period.

Before this project Poll was a longtime film editor behind such successes as the Meet the Parents, and Austin Powers series, working extensively with director/producer Jay Roach. Poll said the jump between jobs went smoothly because “editing [is] a closer job to directing than being a cinematographer.” Poll expanded that “the editor’s main job is to find the moments of humanity that will register to an audience.”

Poll reflected with pride on his previous work as an editor, saying “from my point of view comedy is the most difficult, because there’s nothing sadder than being in an audience and having a joke be put up there and fail.”

Poll, a graduate of USC film school, advised young filmmakers that “no job is too small, don’t ever feel bad about getting anyone a cup of coffee… work as hard as you can, learn as much as you can…one of the beauties of Hollywood is that the guy who’s getting your coffee today, will have a script get made next year.”

Yelchin portrays a breed of teenager rarely seen in movies: one whose morals transcend the temptations offered by sex and drugs. Charlie’s principles shine through in his willingness to acknowledge responsibility. By accepting his consequences, Charlie veers away from the prototypical, pessimistic teenage caricature.

Bringing such a character to screen was writer Gustin Nash’s primary objective. Nash’s inspiration came from teenagers he met while working in the Burbank mall. The teens complained that they were misrepresented in most films, so “he set out to make a movie that showed them some respect, and that’s something that we continued all the way through” said director Jon Poll.

And that’s exactly what Charlie delivers. Those seeking a feel-good movie with backbone will be rewarded kindly with the most meaningful teen comedy to hit cinemas in recent years. All in all Charlie leaves you with a sense of accomplishment, as if you yourself have overcome the pitfalls that plague the lives of these teens. Well worth the $8.

The most recent film from Fu Manchu Films has just been added to the “Short Films” section of the site. “Step Up 2 the Streets” was shown at the 2008 preliminary round of the Massachusetts High School Drama Guild’s One Act Play Festival Competition. Enjoy.

Hollywood goes through phases. The ’60s saw Eastwood’s Westerns, the ’80s and ’90s were subjected to an endless string of sci-fi knock-offs (save The Fifth Element), the early ’00s saw the burst of myth movies (i.e. Gladiator and Troy), and the last 50 years has seen nearly every possible premise surrounding World War II. These spurts are most often prompted by one successful movie, resulting in every competing studio trying to capitalize. 2007 was no exception. We saw a rehashing of sci-fi, going from Danny Boyle’s smash Sunshine to the all you can Will Smith buffet I Am Legend. But the most exciting genre rejuvenation of the season was the rebirth of the western. With the Coen Brother’s neo-western No Country for Old Men, Brad Pitt’s latest The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and the sleeper hit 3:10 to Yuma.

Seeing Luke Wilson with yellow teeth, spurs, and with a Southern accent was one of the stranger moments in 3:10, but proved that nobody can resist a good stint on the plains. The all-star cast, ranging from Peter Fonda to the great Russell Crowe, was a cherry atop the perfect entrance point back into the wild wild west. But it wasn’t Christian Bale straying from his badass motif that surprised me, it was the newbies, Ben Foster (Crowe’s sidekick) and Logan Lerman (Bale’s son). These two were able to capture the spotlight in spite of the greats that surrounded them.

What was most striking about Lerman’s character was his unflinching coldness towards his down and out father. He separated himself from the common angst-ridden kid, taking his role to a new level of teen defiance. He does not follow his father to protect his family from loosing their patriarch, instead he tags along with the simple belief that he is more competent than his father. These feelings are communicated delicately to the audience, through subtle hand motions, the coolness of his retorts, and most of all, in his expressions. His face remains constant, both revealing his emotion and protecting it simultaneously. It’s his final act of humanity, telling his father that he’s succeeded, that seals the transformation from revolt to regard for his dying father. And then, with a flip of a switch his coolness returns towards Crowe. It’s Lerman’s ability to communicate so effectively with so few actions that cements his character, and sets him apart from your garden variety emo 15-year-old.

Foster’s character can be seen in many ways. A son, trying to prove himself, a child in the midst of an idol, or even a love interest who cannot seem to let go. The way that he dresses, in colorful, clean, and matching leather, sets him apart from the rest of the outlaws, who appear to have just rolled off the garbage buggy. His love and admiration for Crowe is unflinching, prompting him to kill anyone who comes between them. In preparation for this role Foster studied Shakespearian actors, classic villains, and as a result given new life to the sidekick motif. His walk is calculated, his speech is premeditated, and his stares are all-together intentional. His character is a movie in and of itself.

The work of these two newcomers, in conjunction with the expected performances of the oldies, bring energy to the old west. James Mangold’s simple and dynamic direction creates an entertaining expose that infuses excellent acting with gun-slingin’ action. Such a revolution in westerns hasn’t come since the days of Sergio Leone.

Coincidently enough, this week the Boston Globe ran an Associated Press story about the new movie Atonement. The story discusses the implications of a 5.5 minute tracking shot that unfolds during the British Army’s retreat at the battle of Dunkirk.

The reactions highlighted are contradictory, namely the outrage from Ty Burr of the Boston Globe. His position on the matter is that director Joe Wright has not yet earned the right to take such a bold risk when it comes to shot selection, but Wright defends the shot as not so much choice as necessity. He claims the only way to finish the thousand-plus extra scene was to go with one long shot.

The article continues to turn the spotlight on many other notable long shots in cinema history, including the accomplishments of Welles, Antonioni, and Hitchcock.

To see the story, visit the Boston Globe Online here.

In this day and age the style of movies like the Kingdom prevails. While I’ll not hide my secret love for Jamie Foxx, or my very apparent appeal for Chris Cooper, the movie lacked substance. After all, there was only one shot in the entire thing that employed more than a shoulder for stabilization (when they are looking into the blast crater and Chris Cooper is spewing off bomb facts faster than Jason Bateman’s quips).

And while I’ll admit, the movie did keep me entertained for an hour and a half, it didn’t leave me with anything. Even Bad Boys II left me with the desire to watch it again…and to become a narcotics detective.

But the antithesis to the Kingdom complex of frequent zooms and nearly unrecognizable shots is lesser known in today’s cinema. For some reason, directors today are hooked on to the idea that action can only be captured hand held, even the Coen Brothers succumbed to the temptation in No Country for Old Men (when Tommy Lee Jones approaches the motel).

But this theory is not showcased in every movie. All 2 hours and 18 minutes of the Shawshank Redemption are stabilized and stylized to perfection, and yet the viewer is kept in firmly planted in his seat. While watching Tim Robbins crawl through sewage is not as bone jarring as Jaime Foxx hunting terrorists, seeing the prison fight scenes does get your heart beating, and they don’t need quick cuts or screaming guitars to do so.

It’s in these camera movements that Frank Darabont is able to propose a contrast, as the graceful movements of the camera contradict the harsh crimes occurring on screen. Such choices prove that quick editing and quicker movements are not required to portray violence. A single, directly overhead shot can capture the essence of a fight, and through its simplicity allow the viewer to digest the situation. Instead of trying to comprehend what’s going on behind all the cutting, the watcher is able to watch the action, and comprehend its significance. Such processing is not possible in movies like the Kingdom, as the watcher must focus his energy keeping up with the editor.

Many see the use of longer shots as shying away from the task of editing. Such films as Children of Men and anything from Kenneth Branagh can be seen as cop outs, opting to shy away from the editing room. But I disagree. These shots require a higher level of skill than any editor could reproduce, and while these shots might only be appreciated by a small minority, it proves that action can be captured in different ways and still be effective.

It’s nice to see that directors are branching out these days, that directors like Alfonso Cuaron and Paul Thomas Anderson are ignoring the quick cutting trend, and sticking to their visions. While quick editing may be the current craze, it’s good to know that directors are still getting creative, and mixing the styles together. Who knows what the Kingdom 2 will hold.

Welcome to Fu Manchu Films, the production company started by film student Austin Dill.