A Gun A Body A Friend

  • cinephiliabeyond:

    Krzysztof Kieślowski photographed by Piotr Jaxa during the making of the Three Colors trilogy, courtesy of strangewood. Following his photographic collaboration with Kieślowski on the set of the film trilogy Blue, White and Red, he prepared an exhibition entitled Remembering Krzysztof  which has been touring the world since 1994.

    Our friends at Mentorless, a brilliant site for independent storytellers and filmmakers, have posted extracts from Dominique Rabourdin‘s Cinema Lessons with Krzysztof Kieślowski. Each video focuses on one specific aspect of one of the trilogy’s films and Kieślowski deconstructs for us the thinking behind his choices. A truly fascinating window into a filmmaker’s mind.


    After showing a brief sequence from Trois Couleurs: Bleu, with Juliette Binoche, Krzysztof Kieślowski explains why he decided to insert what can seem like an ordinary shot: the close up of a sugar cube getting soaked with coffee.

    This is a sugar cube about to fall in the cup of coffee. What does this obsession with close-ups mean? Simply that we’re trying to show the heroine’s world from her point of view, to show that she sees these little things, things that are near her, by focusing on them, in order to demonstrate that the rest doesn’t matter to her. She’s trying to contain, to put a lid on her world and on her immediate environment. There are a few details like this in the movie. We made a very tight shot of the sugar cube sucking up the coffee to show that nothing around her matters to her, not other people, not their business, nor the boy, the man who loves her and went through a great ordeal to find her. She just doesn’t care. Only the sugar cube matters, and she intentionally focuses on it to shut out all the things she doesn’t accept.


    In this video, Kieślowski explains how and why he changed the opening scene of White and deciding to intercut X and Y elements and create homogeneity with the three opening of his trilogy:


    In the final video, dedicated to Red, the last film of the trilogy, Krzysztof Kieślowski explains how he dropped clues for the audience, that might or might not accumulate in the viewer’s subconscious and help build the story until it reaches (in Red’s case) its first plot point:

    To tell you the truth, in my work, love is always in opposition to the elements. It creates dilemmas. It brings in suffering. We can’t live with it, and we can’t live without it. You’ll rarely find a happy ending in my work.Krzysztof Kieślowski, I’m so-so

    For more film related items throughout the day, follow Cinephilia & Beyond on Twitter. Get Cinephilia & Beyond in your inbox by signing in. You can also follow our RSS feed. Please use our Google Custom Search for better results. If you enjoy Cinephilia & Beyond, please consider making a small donation to keep it going:

  • Writing a screenplay in an uncovential place

    I have been working on a feature length version of the short film for some time. It’s one of the slower paces I have taken to write. Better, but definitely slower than others in the past.

    Some know, but those who don’t, I have been in Danville, Illinois for the last week. Living the life of someone who works the Third Watch, but sleeping on a messed up schedule.

    To the point, writing in a hotel where there’s nothing to do…not a bad idea.

    It’s quiet. No one really bothers you. Free food in the mornings. Only enemy to writing is really yourself.

    Bad side? You’re in a hotel by yourself, with family members who sleep at different times of the day.

    What has it done for me writing wise? 

    The largest benefit is time. Time seems fluid at a hotel. Never really asleep, never really awake. Especially at the hotel that I’m at now, it’s occupants arrive late at night and leave at sunrise the next day. Time and interruptions by others is a rarity at best. 

    Within that layer of time something else emerges. Something crucial to character building and that is what I like to call “The Therapy Session.”

    Why do I call it that? 

    Time for me equals thought, thought equals questions, questions equal evaluation, evaluation equals confirmation.

    Why would my character do this? How would my character react to a question by another person if they were walking a dog versus driving a car? Who does your character allow to see the raw side of them? Who will they blow up on and who will they stay constrained for? Who will pay the price for their emotional state? Who gets off scott free? Why does the other character have the right to see someone’s true state of mind? Do they find the other person weak? Or do they deem the other person the only one they can talk too…freely?

    In the end, the script is coming along. The first draft should be done soon. The budget is getting bigger, but cranking down is a necessity.

    If anyone reads this.

    Good Night, and Good Luck

    Jonathan Reyes

  • Why was it made? Pt. 1

    I wanted to create something with the theme centered on relationships. More importantly the transactions that occur between those who have a close relationship.

    DISCLAIMER: I have never been in a situation where hiding a body was necessary. 

    In my personal experience I know I have asked a lot of others. Without even thinking about what I was asking for. Why? Because they were either family, significant others, close friends, etc. 

    I would just toss this load or stress on someone. Not giving a damn about what I was doing.

    Why did I do that? Why has it happened to me?

    What is it about a close relationship that breaks down certain social norms and rules, allowing us to ask the world or something blatantly disruptive to the other person…

    And be okay with it.

    Is it the fact that we are close? We know that person wouldn’t leave our side no matter what we threw at them.

    Do we lose a sense of decency the closer we are with someone?

    Do we lose our sense of regard and thoughtfulness for the other person when we know they’ll hike that extra mile for us?