Tyler Gibb - Writer, Director, Editor, Filmmaker

(Let’s just forget that it’s been nearly a month since my last post (it’s wild berry season, c’mon!) and just jump right in.)

When first faced with a legal document, every novice writer or filmmaker has heard the advice before: Get a lawyer. And every novice writer or filmmaker that I know, has emphatically replied: Why bother?

Well, my fair reader, I’m here to lend what cred I have to this bit of age old wisdom:

Get a lawyer.

I’ve had years of experience handling contracts myself. There are plenty of template legal docs out there for the start-up filmmaker and plenty of websites describing what everything means and what types of red flags to look out for and I think it’s prudent to read all of them. Learn as much as you can as tedious as it is. Never the less:

Get a lawyer.

Sure, it’s easy advice to give. I’m not the guy who’s going to have to shell out hundreds of dollars an hour, you are. And do you really want to shell out money on a project that you don’t even know has legs yet? Probably not, which is why so many of us forego getting proper legal counsel. And yeah, if your project dies in pre-production then hey, way to go, you saved yourself some dough by not getting a lawyer right?

No.

Here’s why: Maybe you shouldn’t have been wasting your time on that project in the first place. See, I’ve learned that the get a lawyer question is not only not a question (you should get a lawyer) but it’s a good qualifier for your project. Are you confident enough in this project to put down money up front? Are your partners? Are you going to take it the distance? If not, why not? You could even ask the lawyer - as entertainment specialists they’ve probably seen more warning signs than you and they can probably tell you if your project has a shot. And, yes, when I say get a lawyer, I mean an entertainment lawyer - preferably one from your province or state - and one who comes recommended.

Now, glorifying attorneys isn’t my point here. Ultimately they are a tool at your disposal that you should utilize. Like a dictionary. Ooh, that’s good, actually - good simile. Because like a dictionary a lawyer is going to be able to tell you literally what you’re getting into by signing any given document but what they can’t do is make the decision for you. Like a dictionary, they can show you the word but they can’t tell you if it’s right for your text. What if it’s a homonym? Hm? Those damn homonyms… You think your spellchecker’s the best thing since sliced bread when BAM: A heel slips by.

What was I talking about?

Right. Lawyers. They can’t prevent you from making a stupid decision but they will help you make the most well informed stupid decision possible.

What do you call 5000 dead lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?

A good start.

You know what else is a good start?

Getting a lawyer.

Recently I was at a bit of a family gathering type thing. I was introduced to cousins to whom I am related in ways I can never quite remember - I’m terrible at these things. Anyway, human gatherings aren’t especially within my comfort zone but with the warm label of “family” attached to this one I felt as at ease as I could in such a situation. My state of mind is important here because of the following conversation killer.

It was announced that one of the young cousins, suffering through the age of high-school, is fond of illustration. All heads turn my way. Any career advice for the young man? they asked the unemployed “artist” suffering through the age of mid-life.

This is where the state of mind becomes important. See even in the most comfortable of social situations, I’m still usually so wound up that my brain is only running on half-power. This makes for doing things like giving life advice to an impressionable teenager at the drop of hat a little stressful.

So I stalled. Collected my thoughts. Then just went with whatever came to mind second. (Because, naturally, what came to mind first was marry into money).

I told the young, impressionable and doomed cousin that nobody’s going to care about your grades, they’re going to want to see your portfolio so focus on that. But go to school anyway for the experiences and try every discipline, eventually you’ll realize what you love most - even if you never figure out why. And most important remember that rejection is not a measure of the quality of your work, sometimes it’s just not the right fit.

At least that’s what I think I said. It’s what came from my gut so I hope it’s fair advice. My theory on advice is that the adviser is only ever going to be able to speak from their own experience so objectivity is pretty much moot. But that said if you happen to hear something that resonates then so be it, its just a new perspective to consider.

Poor guy. Illustration. Yikes. Even so called fine artists think us illustrators are half-assing it.

Many moons ago I stumbled upon a podcast. An unabridged, lo-fi and hopelessly honest podcast by a pair of restaurateurs from Minnesota who moved to Hollywood with the dream of being paid to write. Earlier this month, the SyFy channel (US) and Showcase here in Canada premiered Haven.

Haven is a supernatural series based on a Stephen King novel and executive produced (that’s TV speak for written & created by) by a pair of restaurateurs from Minnesota; Sam Ernst and Jim Dunn.

The Sam & Jim Go To Hollywood podcast (http://ow.ly/2dtBp) contains hours of material that charts the rise of two writers for better and worse in real time. This isn’t revisionist history, or a biography; it’s a real account, spanning years, of the trials and tribulations by these guys learning as they go. What’s more, it’s full of useful insights on the industry and tips for writers by guys who went balls out to achieve their dream and succeeded.

Bravo.

Not so long ago I was the acting soundman on the production of a short. What was particularily interesting to me was that this “film” was being shot on a DSLR camera. That’s D like Digital and SLR like Single Lens Reflex. Even though DSLR cameras - as far as I can tell - have no need for a reflex device, the name remains.

I know, I’m a little late to the party on posting about the wonders of DSLR video innovations but I hadn’t actually seen the short film until recently. Two years ago, this kind of “filmic” video quality was not widely available. Now it’s the consumer norm for parents-to-be looking to upgrade from their old point-and-shoot digital which has suddenly been rendered unworthy to photograph their impending offspring. The quality is actually pretty damn awesome.

I would encourage everybody getting geared up to shoot their next no-budget indie, not to buy one. “Not” because surely, 18 months from now, an even better technology will be built into wristwatches or something and we’ll all want to shoot our next short on that.

What’s particularly remarkable about the DSLR technology is the response to low-light levels. Now, I’m not terribly well versed in anything photographic since 35mm film but it’s always surprised me how crappy video is in low light. You’d think, I don’t know, my digital camera could print to the flash card what I see on the LCD viewfinder instead of stopping it down by five points… But I digress. I guess camera manufacturers wanted to preserve the authenticity of traditional photography by including those most irritating aspects of film technology such as crappy low light response. Regardless, it doesn’t matter any more, because finally these DSLR badboys are finding the light in those dark places. This short I was working on was lit with nothing but a flashlight and my radiant smile.

What was my point with all this? Oh, right. I’ve got some nighttime shots to coordinate for an upcoming project and I was thinking about low-light. Being that we’re not all expectant parents looking to upgrade our point-and-shoot digitals for the latest space technology optics, I’ve been thinking about shooting day for night. Never done that before. I usually hate it when I can spot it in a film but who knows how many times I haven’t spotted it, so yeah, I’ll be sure to report back.

This has been a pretty slipshod post. Sorry about that. It’s a long weekend. Which means substantially less when you don’t actually have a 9 to 5, but oddly enough, it seems to affect my brain in the same way.

Conclusion, if you’re looking at cameras, look at the new DLSRs. If you’re stuck with an aging two year old buick, maybe day for night will work better?

I heard an interesting interview with Nicholas Carr recently on CBC radio’s Spark. A little nugget from the discourse that stuck with me was about our human predisposition to having a lack of concentrated focus. From a prehistoric perspective, it doesn’t suit survival very well to be too focused on any one thing. Because, as Carr was saying in the interview, you’ve got to be on the lookout for predators and make sure you don’t “overlook that nice berry bush”, so we’re constantly distracted.

I like this notion. Especially during days when I find my focus to be a little off. It’s a good excuse. Roaming through a bunch of ideas in my mind and not being able to decide which one to focus on can feel a bit like a failing. But I suppose in those instances I just haven’t found the nicest berry bush to work on.

What interested me more about Carr’s notion was actually the flip side to this. I began thinking, if our natural state is to be distracted, that just makes times of extreme focus - like, say, actually writing a screenplay - all the more astonishing. And I don’t like feeling distracted. I like bringing everything home to the fine point of focus it takes to write… Man, I would have been eaten alive in the jungle!

I wonder if the more focused you are when you’re focused, the more disorientating the distractions when you’re between periods of focus. It can sure feel like that. But maybe that’s what it takes to stumble on a new idea. Extremes over mediocrity. Maybe.

I’d contemplate this some more but it requires more focus than I can spare at the moment. I need to go gather some berries… And sprinkle them on my cereal.