“Take a one-eyed filmmaker, an unemployed engineer, and a vision for something that’s never done before and you have yourself EyeBorg Project. Rob Spence and Kosta Grammatis are trying to make history by embedding a video camera and a transmitter in a prosthetic eye. That eye is going in Rob’s eye socket and will record the world from a perspective that’s never been seen before.”

So I went to the EyeBorg site to see what was there. It opens with the short promo that he showed at the pitch. It conveys the humour, and gives you a sense of what a traditional documentary could be.

What I found in short supply from his site, was that so present at the pitch, energetic presence of Rob himself.

As one person tweeted during his pitch, “I think i’m in love with @eyeborg. ” (sorry, A, you can’t take that back now ;). Now it might have had something to do with the fact that Rob was naked for the pitch – or at least he claimed to be – we could only see a head and shoulders shot of him on screen.  But I don’t really know if women are easily impressed by nakedness (the eye-patch maybe). Maybe she was a friend, or even a seed. But for me, I think it was Rob’s character that sold me on the project. Ok, the eye-patch and the headphones might have helped.

But one of the reasons why I thought this was such a good project was because it had that hit of outrageousness that people are drawn to. He has one tag line that got attention during the pitch but since it’s not on the site I won’t share it here. But enough to say that the outrageousness was perfect for the web.

Having worked in digital marketing for several years, and dreading every time I saw “viral” listed as a tactic (I’m sorry, “viral” is not a tactic), I know that its not enough to have a good idea online to attract people to your site. And before you start accusing me of being too marketing centric, think about what you share. We share what is remarkable. If people are talking about it, that’s a pretty good measure of success.  The tag line opened up a world of discussion for me.  Which… um, not sure I can discuss.  Yet.

But the real question is, of course, how can you convey that roller coaster journey of hilarity and seriousness that would be in the EyeBorg documentary in an interactive digital environment? I am not sure I have the answers because, although I remember there being some interesting digitals initiatives pitched, I think the picture I took home from the pitch was of a linear story. And perhaps this is why it didn’t get chosen at ReBoot.

Strangely enough – because I should sure know better – as soon as I hear interactive these days, I think of a game-like environment and someone with a mouse, click, click, clicking, or typing something in, or whatever. I can’t help but think that this clickity-click is the direction that people think we are “supposed” to go in the online space with that word. But I wonder if perhaps that is a early adopter thing when value of innovation and novelty is still very high and therefor required.

In fact, I even think there is tons of potential for a game-like environment for EyeBorg. As a second tier roll out. In other words – I’d think of it the same way as I would something like merchandising. As in – after the fact. After all the tech heads and geeks have been saying, you got to see this! or creating their own avatars, even. As in – forget the game for now.  It won’t tell the story.  Ok, so there are a million other ideas.  But how does this idea live digitally?

This is the big question that is pushing into the lives of documentary filmmakers that have spent years honing their skills crafting the linear story.

For me, now that the internet can deliver such high quality video, I am moving away from the click click journey aspect of online and more towards an experience. This is purely subjective of course, and maybe a result of my television deprivation. And may be at odds with documentary somewhat because we are somewhat suspicious of documentaries that causes us to feel (think manipulation, think propaganda). A balanced view means we push out of the emotional realm and into the intellectual.

Experience doesn’t necessarily exclude interactivity, but I am not sure yet, that interactivity should be at the top level of considerations.  I am not sure yet that interactivity doesn’t impact the illusion of story telling, the same way self-reflexive techniques in film making (seeing the crew, disruptions to the editing etc.) can interfere with the suspension of disbelief we desire to make stories meaningful.

I just think we need to be cognizant of the fact that we have an audience that has access to plenty of other interesting things, including Facebook when they are on your site.  So I don’t have the answers yet.  Its an element I am currently struggling with on my own journey of creation. Perhaps I just have a biased view of what documentary are supposed to be at the moment.

But if it were me directing it, I’d like to see the EyeBorg Project more like David Lynch’s Interview Project.  (without the advertising)

Not exactly like that, because the interface of that site is pretty traditional.  But as soon as you play one of the videos, you hear that record needle, you are in the world of David Lynch.  And then David Lynch introduces the videos, and those simple introductions for me, sets the tone of how to read the video.

If it’s a single destination, I’d like to see a sparseness with the EyeBorg site.  Emblematic videos.  That David Lynch rack focus into a heightened awareness, and for EyeBorg perhaps that twitchy, awkward, I don’t know whether I should laugh or not, can’t quite believe he’s doing it, can’t believe he thinks that way without self-consciousness kind of thing.

I’d like to see a series of videos, or even a vlog with Rob. Without all the traditional explanation that you see on sites, updating you about every last detail, and making the world ordinary. I don’t want ordinariness. I want mystery. I want to see a different world, I want to experience a different reality. I want short videos.   I’d like to see his whole post of Sep 6, 2009 strung out into a series of short films.

If someone feels there should be a behind-the-scenes, let his entourage do it (create an entourage). Let Rob remain a character, a celebrity in his own world. I’d like to see someone else do a blog on him… “Rob had the audacity to bang on my door and wake me up after a measly three hours of sleep…”

But there you go. That’s my vision, not Rob’s.  If I had an eye socket I could stick a camera into, and Rob’s charisma and comfort level with attention, maybe that’s what I would do.

But EyeBorg – I’d like to know why you haven’t set up a Facebook Fan Page??

(we do crowd-sourced spelling around here – if you catch a typo let me know.  thx!)

Over the summer of 2009 we have seen funding opportunities to get documentaries made in Canada rapidly dry up as broadcasters struggle to deal with the economic times.  This has been a serious concern for Canadians as one of the things we are known for world-wide is our documentaries.

It is especially a concern for those trying to make their living as documentary filmmakers who have not made a lot of money following their passion to begin with.

The Canadian Media Fund is one avenue to apply for funding.  But now applications need to be more than a straight broadcast project.  A bit daunting for those long time industry professionals who’s focus has been on filmmaking, and not on digital story-telling.

Through ReBoot, the Documentary Organization of Canada is creating a great opportunity for select projects to get mentorship.  This is a great opportunity for documentary filmmakers who have had little experience creating cross-platform projects.

In addition, as part of ReBoot there will be a week long conference including caase studies and presentation in February for DOC members that the public will be able to follow via twitter and facebook for daily updates and insights.  More detail for the call for proposals below:

Deadline extended: Feb 4th

The Documentary Organization of Canada / l’Association des documentaristes du Canada (DOC) is pleased to announce a call for proposals for ReBoot, a 3 day project lab incorporating skills-based training, mentorships and presentations from leading experts in cross-platform production. DOC aims to assist its members in transitioning to digital documentary and to successfully position documentary filmmakers and producers in the rapidly changing broadcast environment spurred by the Canada Media Fund.

DOC is seeking proposals for cross-platform documentaries that are conceived for two or more media. Preference will be given to projects in the development stage incorporating an interactive, participatory methodology in additional to a linear/broadcast one-off or series. Selected projects will receive one-on-one mentorship from industry professionals over a one week period, culminating in an online pitch session during DOC’s ReBoot event in February. A jury of media professionals will select one project which will receive further mentorship for a three month period. The continued mentoring will be provided by the award winning team at EyeSteelFilm, as well as a group of industry professionals specializing in various aspects of new media production. Interested creators are invited to send proposals to info@docorg.ca.

Proposals should be a maximum of 2 pages and should include:

1. Name(s)
2. Contact Information
3. Project Title
4. Description of Project
5. Project Status
6. Short description of the platforms that will be explored.

Proposals should be for a multiplatform documentary and should describe the experience that a user would have on the website or digital platform, as well as a sense of the documentary or series that would be created in tandem. In writing the proposal, creators should address the following questions:

• Can your story be told in more than one way? Can it exist as a traditional documentary, as well as a non-linear story?
• Can your documentary have multiple versions? Can it be substantially different online, in theatres, and on television? How can you harness the strengths of each medium?
• Does your subject matter and approach lend itself to the opportunities of participatory / social media?
• Above all, how can your audience participate in the project? How is it an interactive experience that they can be an integral part of?

Please note that while we encouraging a linear component in addition to new media, we do not require a broadcaster commitment. DOC is actively encouraging members to produce for new platforms and new models of distribution.

Submissions are only open to DOC members. Without exception, selected applicants must be available for 2 hour sessions from February 16th to February 19th in order to participate.

Note: all participation will take place remotely via teleconference – selected candidates will require a web cam and high speed internet connection. Selected candidates should also be comfortable sharing their creative process and work in progress with the public.

Submission deadline is FEBRUARY 4th. Please send proposals to info@docorg.ca

For more information on the Reboot event, please visit here.

Supported By:

It’s fascinating how our idea of nature does not include people, isn’t it? The very meaning of the word excludes humans. And we live by that for we have come to see ourselves as the polluters and exploiters of nature. Its no coincidence in the era of green awareness that the popular series of Mad Men ended an idyllic picnic scene in a green park with the family dumping the garbage off the picnic blanket and leaving it without a second thought. Just like its no coincidence that we want to remember nature without other people polluting our captured images. We just don’t like ourselves much in association with nature – or maybe more accurately, we don’t like others so much.

And yet, we are nature. We are – at least in my understanding of things (it occurs to me that the more religious of you may not agree) just as much part of the universe as any other living thing in it. With all of our greed, thoughtlessness, arrogance and misery (and yeah, yeah, everything else glorious, come on, I’ve seen a block buster or two).

We have evolved to this. This is what humans do. We can hold onto the past, or attempt to live the way we think humans used to, but while it might provide meaning in our lives, then is no more valid or authentic than now is.

And before this starts to sound fatalistic, I believe the requirement for positive change is empathy. Empathy for ourselves. Let’s not deny our faults, but look at them and be gentle with them. And with that we can sometimes find empathy for others.

If nothing else, the next time you get down on yourself, or you rail against someone else, remember.

Anything that a human is capable of, we all have the potential for.

Happy New Year.

With the people, this is a really beautiful, thought provoking video:

People in Yosemite: A TimeLapse Study from Steven M. Bumgardner on Vimeo.

Of course media production is primarily a business and business needs customers, and what catches customers attention, catches the attention of business stakeholders, and then business then tries to duplicate.

But now that media is going through a rapid change, and we are all looking towards the digital space. It costs very little to publish on the web. So do the same issues exist in the democratized web space? Well, I think I could argue yes and no. But I would also argue that its like comparing apples and oranges. Different challenges exist on the web.

But arguments aside, the real question is: does the web offer a glimmer of hope towards making meaningful change?

What do people think?

Last week I saw it.  And I watched Hardwood twice in a row. But even more than it being a great film, especially for an emerging filmmaker, it is a great personal film.  The openness and the generosity that his family gave to him as they talked about events in their lives and how it affected them stayed with me later.

Of course we can imagine how much easier it must be to get good close personal accounts from your family – assuming you have that kind of family in the first place.  But what I sense in Hardwood was the family embarked on a new journey and one that I can imagine only came from love for the filmmaker.

The person that resonated the most for me was Hubert’s brother as he seemed so present and open. It confirmed my belief that characters are not necessarily more “interesting” because they look good on the page, because they are marginalized, come from remarkable circumstances or facing insurmountable odds. There are great stories in all of us, even the most psychologically healthy of us.  None of us gets through life unscathed.  The challenge of course is how to bring that out in a way that feels open and real, especially knowing the camera is there.  And I wondered what it would be like as a man to talk about the kinds of family experiences that brings men to tears.  And I think what a courageous person Hubert Davis must be.

It also made me think about the meaning we take from our lives.   Some naturally do it more than others. So I wondered if the film was a healing experience for all of them.  It seemed like it from the film.  But I also know that people don’t always choose make meaning from moments of their lives even when we expect it from them most.  Each moment, no matter how much it impacts us, could just be another moment in life.  That sometimes the intimacy and the vulnerability is too much, too laden with emotions that its better to leave it aside for those moments late at night when you can’t sleep.  Or sometimes the other baggage in life is still too heavy to let those precious moments have the impact we want them too.  Too much is still left unsaid, clouding the clarity of those experiences.  What was it like for these people? Did they later choose to make meaning and heal from it?  As I thought of this after,  I recalled again how responsible we are for our own happiness.  And films that can you lead you down these paths of thought are to be treasured.

I also really wondered about the process for the filmmaker himself.  There is a unique and intimate process when you edit a film.  Hubert Davis edited this one.  That meant he reviewed the footage countless times always thinking of how it would tell a story, how real, how succinct, but inevitably he would have been reviewing it from a personal viewpoint, watching them over and over again with all the baggage and memories of the past that went with it.  He needed to sacrifice some parts for others, even if they were precious, important, because only those moments that can tell the story in a half hour can stay, regardless of how attached the subjects or even the director may be to certain material.  The chosen moments start to become raised, and change as things that stand on their own. Like viewing a photograph they becomes separated from reality, weightier as it becomes the symbol for more.

Watching the pieces he kept over and over, in the rough cut, in the fine cut, in the mix, in the score, etc., I imagine he would have seen more and more with each viewing.  Different nuances would have surfaced all though his own filter, things perhaps others would not have seen.

And then he had to sit through approval sessions with people who know little about his family except what he chose to share, and deal with criticisms and comments and recommendations.  Was he exhausted from the film later, tired of watching it, ready to put it down?  And what about his family?  Did it change their relationships?  If I had a chance to talk to Hubert, it is the meaning of this personal process that I would like to explore with him.

My only disappointment with the film is that it wasn’t longer.  I wanted to know more and I think the film could have supported an hour.  If you are downtown in TO and have a ½ hr or so, check it out at the NFB.

I mean, I am actually on the website, thinking about ordering some rose petal pop – online.  Like, isn’t the first thing that you think about when you think of ordering pop online, is broken glass, sticky cardboard and a bunch of your smirking friends shaking their head at you?  Well, let’s just say we once ordered sea monkeys off the back of a comic book, and guess what?  They arrived.   I have faith.

What is it about this video that works for me?  The clue is probably in this one line: “I don’t work.  I just play all day long.”  He genuinely loves what he does.  Of course, good casting never hurts.

Stories that don’t need dialogue are viewed as being particularly filmic. But the fact that dialogue is absent from this one makes it seem curiously mute. But, I think it works for the nature for the characters’ struggle.

Red Rabbit from Egmont Mayer on Vimeo.

I really feel for this rabbit…

Synesthesia from Terri Timely on Vimeo.

There was a lot of classical music in my house when I was growing up and there were two records (omg, just revealed my age) that particularly had an impact on me as a young kid. One was Carnival of the Animals.  One magical piece inspired a dark film while I was in film school that turned out to be one of my favourites.  The other was this bizarre record given to one of my siblings, “Everything You Always Wanted to Hear on the Moog* *but were afraid to ask for!”

The picture of this album was particularly fascinating to me partly due the fact the conductor’s hand was backwards. A backwards hand right on an album cover. I couldn’t imagine it was an accident. It was an adult thing after all. But why? And then there was this bit that you can’t see in the picture, but when you had the thing in your hands you could see was clearly painted over. It was something that defied resolution. These are the things you mull over as a child like worrying at a loose tooth.

The album described on this site as classically bad, was apparently created one note at a time (I believe this was in 60’s). But it was the music itself that drew pictures in my head. It was probably the only version of these classics I had heard at the time and I was entranced by the drama of them.  I remember dancing around in a fantasy of impressions and complex emotion to both sides of the record, vaguely plotting one day to bring it live for other people some how by whatever illusion a six year old imagines.

When Much Music first arrived on the scene, music videos were interesting to me, but of course, it was 3am-saucer-eyed-viewing-while-waiting-for-Chinese-food-order-to-deliver-me-the-only-cigarettes–available-at-that-time-of-night kind of interesting (I quit a few years later, thanks).   In the 80’s the music videos had these huge budgets.  The videos were fascinating for their excess and randomness. And of course that they satisfyingly earned the mistrust and suspicion of older adults.  I later worked for one of the companies in the UK that made these monsters, MGMM, which later went into receivership as the 90’s approached.

But arriving later at film school there was a kind of disdain for music videos, and it’s a disdain that still lives among some of my friends and colleagues.  By then visions of music videos no longer danced in my head,  although music was still important and I developed an appreciation for experimental cinema.  But of course experimental cinema is a labour of love that would lay locked in the galleries, theatres and minds of intellectuals.

I actually have no idea what the music video world is up to these days beyond the occasional project I find online so I can’t pass judgment either way. But I can imagine those rushed production meetings throwing a few ideas around with the focus on promotion and an eye on budget efficiencies.   Not the best foundation for art.

But I just came across “Wood” (see below) and it reminded me that music videos, if we must call them that, still have the potential to actually deliver real art to the masses.  While I am not sure that “Wood” is the best example, I think people simply need a framework to understand it, and an anchor  that can make film art accessible, i.e. culturally accepted music by up-and-coming or known bands. We only need to remember how Radiohead’s, House of Card’s music video was shot without cameras or lights to put that idea into context. The band association informs the audience on how to view it.

I am not sure that the music will provide that anchor for “Wood” or not, but the music video genre itself sort of does.  The music is ok.  But even though the creators were involved in both,  I think the animation was far more rich and interesting. There is something deliciously creepy and compelling about it .

For me, it was reminiscent of the oddly disturbing graphic novel that I read years ago, called The Wild Party, written by Joseph Moncure March in 1928 that apparently made William Burroughs want to be a writer. The version I have is illustrated by Art Speigelman who was co-founder and Editor of avant-garde comics magazine, Raw, and contributes to the New Yorker.

It’s the kind of work that stirs up some excitement, and judging by the responses on Vimeo, I’m not the only one who feels that way.

WOOD from mc bess on Vimeo.

If you can stand the length of time it takes to load, what I really like about it is that it’s boiled an idea down to its essentials. It allows you to turn off/on each musician track as well as swap musician styles/instruments, allowing you to simply mix different variations of the song. It’s a simple idea, but engages our natural sense of play and allows us to take the song apart and rebuild it. At the same time it highlights the skills of each band member.

It doesn’t need to be more complicated because its all about the music. It’s a great idea for a great song that might need a few listenings to like.

Although having said that, I’m finding it hard to get the tune out of my head.
Cold War Kids » I’ve Seen Enough (Interactive Version)