Movies: to Score or not to Score?

The simple fact that films typically have a musical score always seems to slip right by me when I'm actually making any kind of short film or TV show myself. It's just not something that I would typically think about. Good audio? Sure. Sound effects? Yeah, why not. But never a score. This lead me to thinking, hey, who says that films need to have any kind of music or instrumentality at all? That, in turn, lead me to google, which lead me to some interesting websites, which lead me here, to this blog post.

As behind-the-scenes as they typically are, we all know the names of a few movie composers: Hans Zimmer (please click that link for your own sake), Danny Elfman, and of course, the legendary John Williams. Their scores don't just add noise to all of their respective films: they add feeling, and set a tone for any given scene or even the movie as a whole  If you need an example for a really amazing score that is spot on in terms of creating an entire atmosphere for a film, look no further Howard Shore and the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It doesn't just add tension or give scenes a certain flavor: it's music that like, I could actually see hobbits playing out on their front porches. Or whatever hobbit holes have instead of porches. Dirt clods? I don't know. 

 But what I'm curious about is if some films rely too heavily on composers and a musical score in order to fix what would otherwise be a weak script. Recently, there was a video going around the internet called "Star Wars without Williams." While it was meant to be funny, it also pointed out something pretty important: this throne room scene is super awkward without music. What was once a jovial and triumphant scene is now just echoey and weird. Don't get me wrong, I like Star Wars as much as the next guy or gal, but Audio (and script) - wise, Lucas kind of dropped the ball here. 

On the opposite side of things, however, is it possible to have a good film without any scoring at all? Sure. Just check out No Country for Old Men, The Birds, and 90% of Castaway. The key to scoring films, as I'm slowly but surely finding out, is to balance a good script with subtle yet powerful music. Emphasize certain emotions or themes that you want to have emphasized, while at the same time making sure that your film could still be successful without the music shoving those emotions down your throat. If you're looking for some more interesting info on how composers mess with our emotions, you check out a BBC article on that very topic right here.

Knock, knock. Who's there? Doctor.

Doctor who to be precise. Doctor Who has been a sci-fi phenomenon for over fifty years. The show originated in 1963 and run through 1989, totaling twenty six series (in the UK series = seasons). Then the show was revived in 2005 and is currently on its seventh series. In total there have been eleven doctors, the most current doctor is played by Matthew Smith.

The protagonist, the Doctor is the last of the Time Lords, an alien race, who travels through time and space in his TARDIS (Time and Relative Dimension in Space). Along his many journeys and adventures, the Doctor meets many companions that then travel along with him throughout the universe and time. Besides companions, the Doctor also aquires many enemies. Enemy number one are the Daleks, an genetically altered (can only feel hate) alien race that fought against the Time Lords in the Last Great Time War (in which both the Dalek and Time Lord races were wiped out). The Daleks were able to repopulate and still try purging the rest of the universe of a non-Dalek race. 

  Doctor Who will have you on the edge of your seat, laughing along with the characters, and routing for the Doctor.

It's All "Elementary" My Dear Watson

Or is it? With the fall season upon us once again, so too comes the plethora of new shows. And much like new born sea turtles, they must try their hardest to make it out alive. I guess you can consider me a hungry grubbing seagull, because I've locked my eyes on one particular aqueous babe and I'm going in for the kill.

On September 25 at 10pm, CBS will attempt to hop on the Sherlock wagon, because come on let's face it, Sherlock is a complete and total BAMF (I know I'm dating myself, I'm sorry). Though I admire their ambition to help keep the Sherlock torch ablaze, I don't think the results will be quite as they hoped. I quote straight from TV Guide (see, it's useful), "a modern take on the crime-solver with Jonny Lee Miller as Sherlock, a recovering addict and NYPD consultant. His Watson is his "sober companion," a former surgeon — and a woman (Lucy Liu)." I'm not sure all of the added elements are needed. What appeal does Sherlock being a drug addict bring to the story? Wouldn't the copious amounts of drugs have effected his intelligence? I feel it's insulting to the character and his integrity.

Next off, tackling cases in New York City? It's seems forced and inorganic. Sure the character mentions that he worked with Scotland Yard, but then why not go to some other European country? It certainly would be closer to home then a trip across the pond. An aside from my beratement, I appreciate how they've tried to modernize Watson by changing his gender. I feel as long as they don't try to pull any romance business then that relationship will work.

Overall I feel that the creators are only using the name "Sherlock Holmes" to try and gain attention, they haven't really done anything with their adaption to commemorate the character and his efforts. Don't worry though, I won't just leave you high and dry. There is a solution, Sherlock.

 From this weird pairing of the BBC & PBS, they've created a wonderful show about Sherlock and Watson in the modern day, but do so with respect to the characters and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Two series (in the UK they call seasons series) have already been produced and filming for the third begins in January. The production design, cinematography, and acting are phenomenal.

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

For Fall Break, I went to visit my friend who is studying abroad in Montreal and awkwardly tagged along with her class when they went to visit the CBC, the main broadcasting company in Canada, acting as the national radio and television broadcaster. It was formed in 1936 and is the longest running media corporation in Canada and hosts the most radio and news shows, airing in both English and French.

To start off the tour, we had to put on a fake newscast in a very realistic studio setting. They had students working in the control room and being both news anchors and reporters, the recording lasted about 20 minutes and had 5 segments. Unfortunately, I somehow got roped into being a reporter (because you can't just hang back when a frenchman calls you out) and ended up reading on camera as an automotive expert, and Shanghai reporter, Wong Lee. Complete with fake backgrounds, scripts and external video, it was a completely student run "broadcast" (Sorry for the bad quality of the pictures, they were taken from a phone).

After stumbling our way through that, we took a quick tour of the building, starting off with the main newsroom. They have approximately 200 people constantly monitoring news around the world and maintaining the CBC social media. In the same room they were filming a splitscreen for that evening between an anchor and a reporter on the other side of the room. We then went to go check out on of their main radio studios where they usually air live music and group interviews. While one of the guides played some dramatic background music on the piano, the other explained how the uneven stature of the walls prevented echos and created a very clean and quick sound. The very last stop on the tour was to their main television studio, which is the third largest studio in North America (about 6 times as large as Studio A here, minus the green curtain). They tend to film live studio shows here with an audience, but even then, they only take up about three fourths of the studio. They also mentioned that even with platforms or rugs down, the never show the floor in their studios, and thats how you tell if shows, especially soap operas, are filmed in a studio.

It was very similar to the BBC, which I toured when I studied in London, except the BBC put much more emphasis on their fiction shows, whereas the CBC is mainly news and radio. Also unlike the BBC, CBC employs commercial advertising in addition to it's federal funding, with the exception of radio. The building itself is a very prominent figure in the landscape, with a very futuristic feel to it on the inside.

An Unearthly Child, a.k.a. Ha ha! More Doctor Who!

Oh hi, everyone. You thought that Doctor Who was over, right? You figured that since series 6 ended two weeks ago, I'd be done talking about the series? No. You're wrong. Go fly into the Time Vortex. And while you're there, say hi to the Bad Wolf for me.

This is part of the very first episode of the first serial of Doctor Who. Filmed in 1963, the entire episode was shot live to tape, which means that all of the visual effects happened during filming. Most of the scenes took place in the studio, including the TARDIS shots and the junkyard. This shows how possible -- if limited -- it is to film without fancy VFX, and provides insight on how to make something so practical look so good. Because there is no room for error, every shot, every movement, and every position has to be perfect. Sure, if you look closely in this episode, there are a few glitches here and there; but that's to be expected of a show that a) had a low budget, and b) was probably going to be canned anyway. (SPOILER: It wasn't.)

What really shines here is how different the story was in the beginning. In the latest series, the Eleventh Doctor was a bombastic young man who was friendly with his companions and had a legacy that nearly killed him. The First Doctor is an old man who would rather be alone than have stowaways, stumbles over his words, and tends to work in the shadows instead of run headlong into danger. We don't know much about the Doctor or his companions or his travels yet; but it's great to watch the story unfold from here. Of course, if you watch every single Who episode from this point, it might be a bit of a trauma.

Also, you'll start hearing the TARDIS sound whenever the wind blows. (It's not fun. I'm beginning to look like a crazy person.)

Next week, we'll take a look at something different. Maybe.

The Wedding Of River Song

That's it. That's the end. This is the end of the series. You can all stop groaning at me now. ...Nah, just kidding! I could throw 26 seasons of the classic Doctor episodes at you! Muwahahaha!

I'll skip the story for this blog post. If you want to know what happened, you'll have to watch. Of course, the acting on everyone's part was impeccable. I'd expect nothing less from a BBC show that's now entering it's 49th year.

What really stood out about this episode was how bizarre it was. Something is wrong with time, meaning that all of history is happening at once. The effects team needed to therefore find out how to put pterodactyls in a park in London. The set designers had to build a secret evil lair inside of the pyramids. Make up designers had to create a horde of the Silence using only prosthetics and body glue. So many intricate parts went into making this episode look as good as it was supposed to; but together they helped deliver a visually beautiful ending to this season.

Things to look out for as far as this episode goes: Dorium, who's all blue. The fight scene between the Ponds, Kovarian, and the Silence. Any scene where they aren't on Earth. The cinematography helps the effects as the effects help the final product. The best thing about high-profile big-budget sci-fi shows is that when they're done well, they're done really well, and everything clicks together in harmony.

Get psyched for Autumn 2012. I already am.

Doctor Who: Closing Time

What, you thought I was going to review something different?

In this episode, the Doctor pays a visit to Craig, his old friend from "The Lodger" just to say a final goodbye before his death. (This isn't a spoiler.) Instead of saying hi and leaving, the Doctor gets caught up in a nasty row with the Cybermen. Not only that, but Craig refuses to leave him alone, causing the Doctor to put another friend in danger after leaving two behind to keep them safe.

Strong writing and delivery carry this episode. James Corden, a great comedic actor, reprises his role as Craig; and he does a bang-up job, as to be expected. Quick banter between Matt Smith and Carden gives the episode a good pace and keeps the dialogue snappy and interesting. There are sentimental moments among the funny, including when the Doctor spots Amy and Rory as a successful couple out for a day of shopping. After all their adventures, all the times they nearly died, it's good for him to know that they're happy and safe. And of course, let's not forget the baby. The baby makes everything better.

As far as aesthetics and direction go, nothing was absolutely stunning; but that's not to say that it didn't deliver the same good quality that viewers have come to expect out of the new series. Everything was well rounded and worked together. There were a few moments where my trained eye caught some shot discrepancies; in one scene, River was turning her head to the right, while in another she was turning to the left. The glitch barely registered though. I bet that only a few other viewers actually cared.

Next week: The finale. Then I'll shut up for good about this. ...Yeah right. I've still got the classic series that I could throw at you.

The God Complex

After a big, emotional episode like last week's "The Girl Who Waited," it seems like "The God Complex" was in a bit of a lower key. The story was okay, but it seems like Toby Whithouse and Steven Moffat cobbled it together in order to lead up to the end, which is a major plot point in the story arc. This series has had its fair share of standalone episodes, where the story has nothing to do with the overarching plot; and that's fine. That's what Doctor Who is famous for, little science fiction diatribes that all link together.

But this story seems forgettable, if not for the ending and the look deeper into the Doctor's and Amy's characters. The technical work was, of course, beautiful; camera shots looking straight down a spiral staircase, a giant minotaur roaring down a hotel hallway, special effects giving the illusion of a creepy 80s hotel. But that's obvious from the show at this point. Technical brilliance has become a staple, much unlike the show's classic years as a low budget production.

Where the show really shines is in the subtleties of its writing. The ending and the way this episode ties into the arc is pretty brilliant, if heartbreaking. There's also a scene where the Doctor finds what scares him most; and although we don't see it, we know that it's someone whom the Doctor fears. "Of course it's you," he says, as the TARDIS cloister bell rings. This small detail blew the door open for fan speculation, and provide a piece of great writing and camera work in an otherwise average episode.

Not much else to say this week. Next time, the Cybermen make a return as well as an old friend. From the preview, it looks like it'll be a good one. See you then.

Doctor Who: The Girl Who Waited

I really want to make something like this for a Park production. Unfortunately, this is a work of art and cannot be replicated. Don't even try. Stop now.

The Girl Who Waited is a perfect example of the direction that new-Who has taken. It's less of a "monster-of-the-week" or "sci-fi" show and more of a "space opera." That's not bad by any means, of course. In fact, the fans in both the US and the show's native UK have been welcoming to the backstories of the Doctor, Amy, Rory, and River Song. While the show's main focus is still timey-wimey and spacey-wacey, it's nice to see three-dimensional characters and growing relationships.

Lots of tributes to the series here in both its classic and current incarnations. The title of the serial is a reference to Amy Pond's character, who as a child waited 12 years for the Doctor to arrive a second time. In one scene, Rory breaks the Mona Lisa over an android's head. This is a reference to the 1979 serial "The City Of Death." It's a story that will appeal to both classic and new-Who fans.

Technically, it shines. The cinematography and lighting are obviously great, so no coverage is necessary. What really stands out is the CGI in both the landscape and most of the characters. The Handroids, the main antagonists in the episode, were costumed actors whose faces were removed in post-production and replaced with sinister looking medical equipment. The landscape wasn't WYSIWYG; it was a mixture of tight set design and 3D. What comes out is a threatening facility with a sprawling labyrinth of halls and corridors.

Karen Gillan's older appearance was also a defining factor in this episode. Instead of using an older actress to play the part, Karen herself offered to play the part in prosthetics and aging makeup. This created a believable 60-year-old Amy Pond once it became mixed with Karen's subtle acting quirks and choices. It not only brings out the best in the show's production, it's a bright moment for Karen, who's becoming a big star with the success of the programme (alongside Matt Smith and Arthur Darvill, the latter of whom is doubtlessly the show's best male companion in years.)

This will be a memorable episode of this series, and maybe even of the Eleventh Doctor's reign. Next week: The God Complex, which involves more child nightmare shenanigans and perhaps a look into the Doctor's eventual fate... let's just hope the characters don't almost die again.

Night Terrors

Let's talk about what worked with this about. And really, there wasn't much that didn't work. So let's just talk about Night Terrors. This is not only classic sci-fi writing at its best, it's a wonderful piece of televised cinematography.

On the Mohs Scale of Science Fiction, which ranks believability on a scale from 1 to 6 (with 6 being the most believable science fiction,) this episode ranks a 4. Most good Doctor Who episodes fall in this category. A 4 on the scale means that there are only a few minor changes in reality that do not affect normal human life (or otherwise.) This ensures that the story won't be marred by wacky "facts", technobabble, or other elements that may confuse the viewers.

In Night Terrors, the story centers around a young child's fears and closet which he locks them away in. His plea of "Save me from the monsters" reaches the Doctor, Amy, and Rory, and the Doctor decides to make a "house call." But once they reach the child's flat, they realize that these fears are spiraling out of control, and that -- in true TARDIS fashion -- nothing is as it seems. The story is not too bizarre and not too boring; the resulting happy medium is just as exciting as it is creepy.

The cinematography really adds to this episode. The lighting is spot on, matching the scene of a child scared of the dark. Shots are blocked beautifully. The first shot after the intro of the TARDIS materializing in the puddle is perfect; CGI, color, and the atmosphere of the shot all work together. This theme continues throughout the episode. It keeps you on the edge of your seat; or, rather, behind your seat, as you might be cowering in fear of the dolls that turn you into one of them. As far as non-CGI makeup goes, the doll costumes were certainly effective at causing viewers to pee their pants.

This is a classic Who episode, hands down. Next week looks like a Doctor-lite episode set in a futuristic world. All I know from the preview is that Rory smashes the Mona Lisa over a robot. Nice.

Sherlock

In the BBC miniseries Sherlock, Sherlock Holmes is presented as a modern day consulting detective, utilizing cell phones and the internet to solve his crimes. The first season is edited into three 90 minute episodes, ending with the introduction of Jim Moriarty, played by Andrew Scott.

In their own version of Doyle's The Final Problem, Holmes and Moriarty finally come face to face in the third and final episode of the first season. However, Moriarty has commonly been portrayed as a posh old man, the shows creator took some liberties and made Moriarty into a flamboyant man boy with some psychotic tendencies. Often in remakes, fans will be disappointed by how their favorite heroes and villains have been portrayed. They had an image in their minds, which don't usually line up with the direction that the movie or show takes. Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, the producers, took a different route then how Moriarty will be shown in the upcoming Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, where he is played by Jared Harris. When you think of a villain, someone more along the lines of Alan Rickman or James Earl Jones comes to mind. There is an image of a a large, intimidating man with a deep voice standing over us. Which is why I find this portrayal of Moriarty so interesting. Here we have a small Irish man with a high-pitch voice threatening the death of the beloved hero, almost completely reversing the well known role of the Professor.

Game of Shadows comes out later this year and Sherlock is hopefully returning in early 2012. It is amazing how one series of books can manifest itself into two separate remakes coming out at the same time almost a century later. They are even following the same individual plot line of the case against Professor Moriarty. But it's the simple act of changing the location that strings these two stories into completely different re-imaginations.