First Time Director - Gil Bettman

Скачать книгу

horse's head off and put it in your bed. Likeability is what makes the audience watching American Beauty root for Kevin Spacey as Lester Burnham, even though he is driven to destroy his connection to the American dream and commit an act of pedophilia in the process.

      Because they are complex characters and embody both positive and negative characteristics, Ratso Rizzo, Jake LaMotta, Don Corleone, and Lester Burnham are not only likeable, but rich. They are almost all, at different times, mean and kind, weak and strong, ugly and beautiful, righteous and debased. Since they embody both positive and negative attributes, they are not going to please all of the people all of the time. Some segments of some audiences will not be able to identify with them, in spite of their likeability. But each of these leading actors is blessed with a powerful inherent humanity that will touch almost all members of all audiences and lead them to forgive these characters for their failings.

      When the main character of a film is as rich as those mentioned above, it puts an extra burden on the likeability of the actor who must portray that character. If the likeability quotient is not high enough, the film will not draw wide audiences. If it is a big budget film, it will fail. This is why the studios prefer to make movies that feature main characters that are not so complex. It is easier for all members of all audiences to identify with such characters. The films they are featured in are more palatable, and so, more likely profitable. In Titanic, the main character, Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio) proves himself to be in all ways wonderful. His only shortcoming is that he is poor. In Batman, Bruce Wayne (as portrayed by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, or George Clooney) is incredibly brave, smart, and idealistic; his only shortcoming is that he feels a little burdened having to save the world on a regular basis. In The Graduate, Benjamin Braddock, the role played by Dustin Hoffman, is a sweet, idealistic young man who is trying very hard to be true to himself. His only problem is that he is naïve and too easily led astray.

      The first time director on his breakthrough project must do everything in his power to make sure that his protagonist and the actors in his leading roles are blessed with as much likeability as possible — the more, the better. Admittedly, by claiming that a director can successfully cast his film by homing in on likeability and richness in his actors, I have oversimplified the process to make my point. Still, likeability is absolutely crucial in your protagonist. Without it, your movie will never succeed.

      In casting the supporting roles for his film, the first time director should home in on richness of character. The audience should be intrigued by and interested in the characters playing in support of the leads. They do not have to find them likeable, because they do not have to identify with them. Richness of character enables an actor to be mercurial. If he brings this mercurial quality to the role he is playing, the audience will never be able to anticipate his next move. They will remain fascinated with him; every time he appears on screen will be a treat. If you look down the list of the actors who have won the Oscar for best supporting role, you will find that they all are quintessentially mercurial and rich in character. James Coburn in Affliction, Cuba Gooding Jr. in jerry Maguire, Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects, Martin Landau in Ed Wood, Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive, Gene Hackman in Unforgiven, Jack Palance in City Slickers, Joe Pesci in GoodFellas — all of these actors relied on their inherent richness of character because the roles demanded that they convincingly embody both positive and negative human attributes. In Jerry Maguire, Cuba Gooding is believably flawed. As Jerry tells him, he lacks heart and commitment. He is too focused on money and success. But, at the same time, he is a fighter and a loyal friend. Martin Landau in Ed Wood is self-destructive, self-indulgent, facile, and nasty, but he is professional and dignified, as well as a warm, if inconstant, friend to Ed Wood. Gene Hackman in Unforgiven and Joe Pesci in GoodFellas are both vicious and homicidal, but in addition to being a believable killer, Hackman manages to come off somehow dignified, and Pesci, when his role demanded it, seems believably childlike and light-hearted. Kevin Spacey's role in The Usual Suspects literally turns on his ability to seem harmless and yet latently lethal.

      Generally speaking, with supporting actors, a first time director should focus on their range of emotion. The greater their range of emotion, the richer their character. The richer their character, the more unexpected their behavior. This complexity will drive up the audience's interest level in them and thereby intensify the all-important transportational effect of the film on its viewers. Rich supporting characters enhance the audience's overall viewing pleasure and put the first time director that much closer to his objective of making a film which will launch his career.

      Content is everything for the first time director. His first professional gig will not become his breakthrough gig, it will not propel him into the top tier of working directors if — when it comes to content — his film is not flawless. Unfortunately, the first time director rarely has complete control over the content of his film. Inevitably, until a director has a track record of having either directed several moderately successful films or one thoroughly successful film, he will have to share control over the content of his film with those who are putting up the money for his breakthrough gig: the producer, the studio, the backers, or some sort of combination of the three. Therefore, to some extent, the first time director's fate is not in his own hands.

      As talented and capable as he may be, the first time director cannot make a breakthrough film unless his producer and the other parties he has to defer to have good judgment in script and casting. The director may know exactly how to rewrite the script so that it goes to a higher level and becomes incredibly compelling and suspenseful from beginning to end, but if the producer doesn't like those script changes, the chances are they will never get made, and the film will never become a breakthrough film. The director may have discovered the next Kevin Spacey and want to cast him in the lead for his film. But if the producer doesn't have the insight to realize that someone who looks like Kevin Spacey can be just as compelling and likeable as someone who looks like Tom Cruise; if the producer refuses to hire the next Kevin Spacey and insists instead on hiring an actor who is as handsome as Tom Cruise, but cannot act as well and lacks the humanity of the actor that the director has discovered — then the first time director's film will not become his breakthrough film.

      The first time director has no choice but to defer to his producer and the financial backers of the film because he cannot fire them. However, they will not hesitate to fire him, if he pushes them too far when they disagree over script and casting. Content is everything, but the content of the film — good, bad, or indifferent — will be meaningless if the director succeeds in getting himself replaced. It has happened many, many times to many talented, even brilliant, first time directors.

      This is all too understandable. After all, script and casting are everything. A first time director, no matter how brilliant, can make only a mediocre movie if he is saddled with a mediocre script and a weak cast. If the movie is mediocre, he will be held responsible and will be deemed mediocre, no matter how brilliant he actually is. He may be tempted to direct the film because he is impatient to launch his directing career or because he needs the paycheck. But he would be well advised not to give into these short-term concerns and to wait until he is given a script and a cast that will do justice to his talent. Otherwise, his talent may go forever unnoticed and unappreciated.

      One big reason why so many bad movies are made, year in and year out, is because producers in general and low budget producers in particular do not really know what it takes to make a good movie. As studio executives are so fond of reminding those of us who think of ourselves as artists, it is called show business or the film business, not show art or the film art. The skills and talents needed to raise the money to make and sell films are very different from the skills and the talents required to actually turn out the product.

      Most of the low budget producers whom I have met or worked with were brilliant salesmen. They could all sell ice to the Eskimos. But they understood the product that they sold in the same way that a shoe salesman understands shoes. They knew the trends. If that year, square toes were in, they knew that. “You want square toes? We got the best square toes in the world!” That was their line.

Скачать книгу