Supporting Christian Movies

Much is made of the lack of quality in Christian movies.  This blog won't be about that.  Instead, let's talk about the lack in secular movies and television.  Maybe not a lack of production value, but certainly a lack in something that makes it far more insidious.

The old addage or anecdote-- if you want to cook a frog, don't drop him into the boiling water-- instead put him in tepid water and bring the pot slowly up to a boil.  This certainly applies today in our culture.  Our media unarguably has determined our societies moral thermometer in the last few decades.  Through mantra's like "not that there's nothing wrong with it" concerning homosexuality, even the elect are being deceived.   And this is just one issue.

I really enjoy comedies on television.  More and more, I'm having to turn them off.  Brilliant writing.  Awesome production value.  And a deceptive tactic that is evil and degenerate. 

Yes-- many Christian movies are cheesy and poorly done.  But some are pretty good.  If you want to see the quality improve... we need your help.  You need to go and buy the DVD's or the movie tickets.  Start a library.  Give them as gifts.  Don't copy them.  We need your help.

Find the movies that resonate with where you are and support them.  Talk about them.  Write about them.  Word of mouth is still the strongest method of marketing available.  Please help.

More Lighting for Directors- Chapter 2 STRATEGY

Continuing on lighting knowledge for filmmakers (not DP's)... I write this so that the Director can better communicate with his Director of Photography.

In generations past, lighting was approached through a three-point plan.  A "key" light, a "fill," and a "back" light.  You'll see this in documentary interview situations and in studio television.  But for story-telling in the narrative, or movie, lighting is approached today different.

The movement has been for a "realism" approach.  What this means is that the DP looks at the scene and determines where the natural light would come from, and then emulates that in his lighting attack.  You might ask, then, why not just use available natural light?  Because cameras, especially non-film, have needed more light than what is commonly natural to get the proper exposure.  So a whole lighting plan is created to basically copy what is there.

For instance, shooting in a room at night-- the DP might determine that there is a yellowish glow coming from the fireplace, yellow tungsten from a lamp in the corner, and blue moonlight streaming in through the window.  So he and the gaffer will use lighting instruments to recreate this.

It gets trickier when there's no natural lighting source.  The hardest is interior car scenes at night.  A few directors are heading towards shooting this the way it is naturally-- almost dark with hits from other headlights on the driver (see Michael Mann's Collateral).  What is traditionally done, is to set "dashboard" lights, usually a small Flo or LCD light on the dashboard or on the instrument panel. Also, woods on a moonless night.  At that point, real life would be shooting "radio"-- a DP's term for not seeing anything.

Bad lighting stands out when lighting is used from no discernible source.  I remember in one of my earlier movies, it's a park at night.  Problem is, we set up a big 12K, presumably a street lamp in the park, but I never established it.  Felt very forced on the lighting and it's always bugged me when I watch.

Today, with the technology constantly improving, image quality is getting better and better with lower exposures.  The Red camera has a new build that they did a promo with Leo DiCaprio-- he's in an unlighted room and illuminates himself with just the match and cigarette.  It's amazing.  Look for the trend to head this way.  Less lights, better cameras.

Very Basic Lighting for Directors - Chapter 1 COLOR

I'm not trying to make you a cinematographer or a gaffer, this post is for the filmmaker to have a basic understanding of some narrative lighting principles and techniques.  First, as always, let's start with some definitions.

A "Gaffer" is the person who actually lights the movie.  He reports to the DP (Director of Photography).  On some foreign sets, the term "Lighting Director" is used, but here, we call him the Gaffer.  His chief assistant is the "Best Boy."  And under them you will find Electricians. 

There are two primary types (color) of light (really lots more, but let's start here)-- tungsten and HMI... which basically means 3200 kelvins and 5600 kelvins.  Tungsten is the yellowish light that you get from your common light bulb.  HMI burns at the color temperature of the sun, which is blue compared to tungsten light.  A common amateur mistake is to mix these two types of light in a scene.

For instance, a new filmmaker showed me her movie.  Near the beginning of the movie, there's a interior car scene.  What her DP did was to light the talent with tungsten (3200), while blowing in from the car windows was sunlight (5600).  So to make the sunlight natural, the tungsten is now very yellow on the actors.  Or you can balance for the tungsten and blue light is pouring in.

Now an experienced Gaffer will sometimes break the rule of not mixing the two, but it's by design because he wants a blue hint or a yellow feel.  But as I always keep saying in the seminars, I think it's best to break a rule because you choose to, not because you're ignorant.

One cheat that is employed on a regular basis, when faced with shooting in a sunny room, but you still need lights and HMI's are out of the budget, is to gel the tungsten with a light blue gel.  This color corrects the light giving the appearance of the same color of light.

I tell all of you new directors this info, because when you choose a location, it doesn't hurt to have a basic knowledge of what the resources it might take for your lighting department to pull off your vision.

Some principles for color-- the higher the definition of your acquisition footage, the more latitude you'll have in post to color it.  So it's not a bad strategy to play it safe on the set and don't color your lights too dramatically.  You can achieve a lot in post.  Remember, blue is cold, yellow/orange is warm.  Green is sick.  (Notice this in uncorrected florescent lights).

And speaking of florescents (flows), they used to be some sickly mid-range color for the purposes of film.  But now, they have a whole line up of various colored flows and over the last fifteen years, flows have become a common way to light scenes.  The don't burn hot.  You can make really small ones to put on top of the lens to punch up an actors face.  You can bank them together to give you some pretty serious light.  They're soft light, not hard or harsh.  So you can see why many DP's are using flows more and more.

I'm sure you DP's reading this will want to correct/comment etc.  I'm just trying to give director's an overview so that they will understand what you are trying to do.

1979

1979.  Jimmy Carter is nearing the end of his presidency.  Us teens are wearing bell bottoms and funky color combinations.  As a church-going teen, I'm listening to cassettes and records (never had but a few 8 tracks-- hated songs being broken up in the middle) from Amy Grant, the Imperials, Dallas Holm and Praise to the harder stuff-- DeGarmo and Key, Petra and even a little Rez Band.  A friend at school introduced me to Keith Green's music and he quickly became my fav over the next year.

A quick side note-- Dana Key of DeGarmo and Key passed away a few days ago.  He produced a lot of music at Ardent Studios in Nashville and we were fortunate to use some of that music on "A Promise Kept."

So the Christian Music industry was at the first stages of massive growth.  Within the next few years after 1979, the record sales, as a genre would overtake Jazz/Blues and start being taken seriously in Nashville.  After 79, it wasn't just a fad that would die out.

So Big Record Business (BRB) took note and jumped in.  Large secular labels started buying the small independent Christian labels.  Budgets became bigger, quality improved.  But Business kills the Ministry aspect and today, it is hard to find (not impossible).  But back then, you had Sparrow being run as a ministry first (thank you Billy Ray) and other labels like "Lamb and Lion" and even Keith Green's own label "Pretty Good Records."

Christian Film is in 1979 right now.  Sony has been buying up some of the key Christian film companies on the distribution side of things.  Fox created Fox Faith, but they've struggled as their strategy of playing it safe by mainly making adaptations of Christian best sellers hasn't exactly worked out.  But Hollywood, like Nashville in 1979, is seeing big dollar signs in the church audience.

So for all those who lament the quality of Christian movies-- don't worry, that will begin to change.  But expect safe messages and production in those movies.  Edgy is going to go away (or be mainly ignored because the indie filmmakers who make it will have no money to do it and will not get any help finding an audience).

I believe you'll start to have some Christian Movie Stars emerge, just like Amy Grant and Michael W. Smith did back then.  It might be the actors, and it might be the filmmakers.  Alex Kendrick is one already.  Rebecca St. James is making strides in crossing over from Christian Rock Star to Christian Movie Star. 

But what worked in 1979 was the engine behind these names.  You might have the odd viral hit, coming up from a groundswell.  But for the most part, the stars of the Christian Film industry might look like a naturally occurring phenomenon, but you'd be surprised how calculated it just is.

You see, even right now, there are huge marketing firms, who look like viral web entities, that make their money by getting paid to promote this Christian movie or that Christian movie star or filmmaker.  Doesn't matter if a film is really good and special-- if that film doesn't hand over some bucks, they won't be pushed in a large organizations Facebook status.  Which is all okay-- it's good business strategy.

I guess the troubling thing is the deception-- pretending to be all about Christian films, but more accurately-- all about the Christian films that have paid to be clients. 

Welcome Christian Film, to the eighties of Christian music.